|
Post by drbill on Apr 12, 2018 12:02:34 GMT -6
"and hoping for a grand return to your favorite times and experiences isn't likely to happen. "
This is almost certainly the truth. No one wants to be the first to back down.
|
|
|
Post by svart on Apr 12, 2018 12:41:48 GMT -6
"and hoping for a grand return to your favorite times and experiences isn't likely to happen. " This is almost certainly the truth. No one wants to be the first to back down. All I see are the same types of arguments over opinion we've always had in music, which always boil down to... "I can't wait until this fad dies off so we can get back to the way I like MY music". And it never does. Time moves on. Music moves on. Every generation says "today's music sucks" after growing up hearing their parents say the same thing to them. Today's generation will be saying it to their kids, etc, ad nauseum. It's nothing new, yet people still seems to be shocked and angered that time has left their favorite stuff behind. People are just salty that the music and styles they defined their personality on have become unpopular.
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Apr 12, 2018 12:49:14 GMT -6
I'm not interested in riding the volume knob when listening to music.
|
|
|
Post by happychap on Apr 12, 2018 13:27:51 GMT -6
And despite the reality that FM radio stations use both compression and expansion, if your track is not reasonably 'loud,' you will be embarrassed when it comes on the radio. Not that I have first hand experience ... That actually is not true at all. The only place loudness has ever counted is in a programming meeting. I'm talking about when the music is playing on the air and you're driving along and lo-and-behold, your track is not loud enough. You can tell me it's not true, but I can name the station and the road I was driving on when it happened. Perhaps KVNF doesn't have the kind of expanders that other stations have, I don't know. And having been a DJ at 3 different NPR affiliated public radio stations, I can tell you first-hand that riding the faders is a big part of the job. The expanders only do so much (same for compression- you can clip the signal). Perhaps I was the victim of a lazy DJ, but if the track were as loud as the one previously played, then no worries.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Apr 12, 2018 13:43:18 GMT -6
Normally they turn the volume down on everything and let their processing set the level.
|
|
|
Post by svart on Apr 12, 2018 13:49:21 GMT -6
That actually is not true at all. The only place loudness has ever counted is in a programming meeting. I'm talking about when the music is playing on the air and you're driving along and lo-and-behold, your track is not loud enough. You can tell me it's not true, but I can name the station and the road I was driving on when it happened. Perhaps KVNF doesn't have the kind of expanders that other stations have, I don't know. And having been a DJ at 3 different NPR affiliated public radio stations, I can tell you first-hand that riding the faders is a big part of the job. The expanders only do so much (same for compression- you can clip the signal). Perhaps I was the victim of a lazy DJ, but if the track were as loud as the one previously played, then no worries. I've heard my own mixes on one of the big stations around here and I can tell you that they do indeed have a lot of compression, EQ and something else going on. What I heard was very different from what I sent the band. Thankfully I had been very careful to make sure the finished mix was very balanced, or else it could have been a hot mess.
|
|
|
Post by jazznoise on Apr 12, 2018 14:02:25 GMT -6
Very compressed mixes will always sound worse on radio stations as there's a fair amount of clipping and limiting before the transmitter.
I like some of the top a modern mastering chain can add but there's a limit. And of course, in the old days, cheap records were distorted to bits. Lots not kid ourselves, bands had to fight labels for good vinyl releases ed. Even The Beatles.
The real irony is really compressed recordings sound quiet to me, like they're stuck in a box they can't get out of. I've done some loudish stuff but the few times I've really heard audible clippingng on a master of a track I did I've been annoyed. Why even bother?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2018 14:07:35 GMT -6
Dude, if it sounds bad, it is bad...
|
|
|
Post by svart on Apr 12, 2018 14:45:43 GMT -6
Dude, if it sounds bad, it is bad... But who gets to judge if something sounds "bad"?
|
|
|
Post by happychap on Apr 12, 2018 15:00:30 GMT -6
Normally they turn the volume down on everything and let their processing set the level. At pubic radio stations, if a fader is down, then you git no sound.
|
|
|
Post by nick8801 on Apr 12, 2018 15:11:53 GMT -6
There is a happy medium between loud full and punchy versus squished and distorted, and much of that comes from the mix. I’ve seen several online mixing tutorials where the engineer is using parallel compression on almost all busses, plus one or two extra master busses to blend in. At that point what can a mastering engineer really do? Put a light eq curve on the tune? In the end I don’t think the totally pummeled mixes actually sound that much louder than the ones that are left with some dynamics. It’s like the distorted messes are there to compensate for poor mixes. Just my 2 cents. Plus from a personal perspective, I’m an audio elitist, and I want to listen to quality music. If it’s too distorted, I can’t do it.
|
|
|
Post by hasbeen on Apr 12, 2018 16:05:39 GMT -6
Sorry guys, I say that times have moved on, loudness is what music is today, and hoping for a grand return to your favorite times and experiences isn't likely to happen. I somewhat agree about the times. But not 'loudness is what music is today' . There are still some who prefer dynamics including a growing number of vinyl releases with a return to retro high fidelity . Maybe we will see a choice at purchase with a variety of listening checkboxes. This could even be a business opportunity. Vinyl,CD, reel to reel, cassette and all the digital formats.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Apr 12, 2018 19:01:52 GMT -6
Can't say I agree with you Svart about each generation saying "today's music sucks". I didn't love my father's music, but I liked it, and grew to appreciate it more over time. Hank Williams, Hank Snow, Patti Page, Harry Belafonte, Miles Davis, Dave Brubeck were all on heavy rotation. What I see happening that's different today is a lack of originality in the mainstream. When the Beach Boys, The Stones, The Beatles, Bob Dylan and their contemporaries came out with a new record, they often broke new ground.
The amount of repetition of sound and musical structure now is astonishing. You can practically just exchange vocalists on 7 out of 10 Modern Country songs, because you wouldn't hear any difference in style, sound, musical construction or production.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Apr 12, 2018 19:06:41 GMT -6
Exactly, it's literally focus-grouped Muzak.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Apr 12, 2018 19:09:30 GMT -6
If people are buying it that must mean they like it.. so why not do it? Who buys music anymore?
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Apr 12, 2018 19:09:48 GMT -6
Normally they turn the volume down on everything and let their processing set the level. At pubic radio stations, if a fader is down, then you git no sound. It's turned down AFTER the console faders.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Apr 12, 2018 19:13:44 GMT -6
That actually is not true at all. The only place loudness has ever counted is in a programming meeting. I'm talking about when the music is playing on the air and you're driving along and lo-and-behold, your track is not loud enough. You can tell me it's not true, but I can name the station and the road I was driving on when it happened. Perhaps KVNF doesn't have the kind of expanders that other stations have, I don't know. And having been a DJ at 3 different NPR affiliated public radio stations, I can tell you first-hand that riding the faders is a big part of the job. The expanders only do so much (same for compression- you can clip the signal). Perhaps I was the victim of a lazy DJ, but if the track were as loud as the one previously played, then no worries. Expanders? what are you talking about? radio stations do not and never have use(d) esxpanders - they use compressors, limiters, and levelling amplifiers, not expanders. Expanders are probably illegal - anything that might cause a station to generate a signal level that exceeds a legally specified maximum is. Being a DJ is one thing - being an engineer is another.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Apr 12, 2018 19:28:39 GMT -6
Can't say I agree with you Svart about each generation saying "today's music sucks". I didn't love my father's music, but I liked it, and grew to appreciate it more over time. Hank Williams, Hank Snow, Patti Page, Harry Belafonte, Miles Davis, Dave Brubeck were all on heavy rotation. What I see happening that's different today is a lack of originality in the mainstream. When the Beach Boys, The Stones, The Beatles, Bob Dylan and their contemporaries came out with a new record, they often broke new ground. The amount of repetition of sound and musical structure now is astonishing. You can practically just exchange vocalists on 7 out of 10 Modern Country songs, because you wouldn't hear any difference in style, sound, musical construction or production. I think it may be time to post a couple of my tunes with vocals.
|
|
|
Post by Quint on Apr 12, 2018 19:32:29 GMT -6
I don't at all buy the argument that we should just accept "loudness" as the way things will be going forward. That's like saying that mistakes of the past should continue to be made simply because it's too "hard" to swim upstream. The ones that choose to swim against the current anyway always eventually prove everyone else wrong when they finally reach the opposite shore.
To use a food analogy, the long brewing argument against preservatives, processed food, etc. has finally culminated in a cultural recognition of the ills of such things. As an example, certain fast food chains didn't start offering apples as an alternative to french fries out of sheer chance. Consumers were educated over time and eventually started demanding those options.
These kind of things are always an uphill battle, but that in no way means that it's not a fight worth having. Why give up? Screw that.
If there's one group best equipped to lead the charge on doing away with loudness, or rather the degradation that comes with it, it's the people who are recording and mastering music. I refuse to accept that it's a lost cause. Actually, I think things are finally poised to begin swinging the other way.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Apr 12, 2018 21:12:01 GMT -6
There is a happy medium between loud full and punchy versus squished and distorted, and much of that comes from the mix. I’ve seen several online mixing tutorials where the engineer is using parallel compression on almost all busses, plus one or two extra master busses to blend in. At that point what can a mastering engineer really do? Put a light eq curve on the tune? In the end I don’t think the totally pummeled mixes actually sound that much louder than the ones that are left with some dynamics. It’s like the distorted messes are there to compensate for poor mixes. Just my 2 cents. Plus from a personal perspective, I’m an audio elitist, and I want to listen to quality music. If it’s too distorted, I can’t do it. Nobody ever learned to MIX from online tutorials. And those who believe they do are, for the most part, lazy idiots, looking for "secrets" and "shortcuts" that don't exist. Mixing is something that you learn by DOING, and by LISTENING to what you do. It's a long, hard, evolutionary process. You have to be able to undertstand what the music is. Sometimes horribly distorted is exactly the ticket. Sometimes it's disaster. The Misfits' early recordings are a brilliant mess, if they had been recorded "correctly" they would never have succeded. But that approach on, say, Tom Petty, would have been horrible. The approach I take with my current retro country music is vastly different that the approach I took doing punk rock in the '70s and early "80s and both were quite different from my approach doing metal in the '80s. None of those would have been appropriate on the gigs I did with Mary Wells, Sun Ra, Nico, or Robert Fripp. You have to undertstand the artist and the music.
|
|
|
Post by svart on Apr 12, 2018 21:25:08 GMT -6
I don't at all buy the argument that we should just accept "loudness" as the way things will be going forward. That's like saying that mistakes of the past should continue to be made simply because it's too "hard" to swim upstream. The ones that choose to swim against the current anyway always eventually prove everyone else wrong when they finally reach the opposite shore. To use a food analogy, the long brewing argument against preservatives, processed food, etc. has finally culminated in a cultural recognition of the ills of such things. As an example, certain fast food chains didn't start offering apples as an alternative to french fries out of sheer chance. Consumers were educated over time and eventually started demanding those options. These kind of things are always an uphill battle, but that in no way means that it's not a fight worth having. Why give up? Screw that. If there's one group best equipped to lead the charge on doing away with loudness, or rather the degradation that comes with it, it's the people who are recording and mastering music. I refuse to accept that it's a lost cause. Actually, I think things are finally poised to begin swinging the other way. I think you make my point. You're going into this with the opinion that your viewpoint is automatically "correct" in that loudness is bad and the only reason that people accept it is because it's a mistake that people perpetuate. You've assumed that your view is automatically correct, simply because it's your opinion. I disagree that an opinion can be taken as fact in any case, and that those who "reach the opposite shore" only have a new vantage point to view their opinion, but still cannot be right or wrong on a matter of taste. Instead, I say that people perpetuate it because they like it and that people's viewpoints can be neither correct, nor incorrect, just popular or unpopular. Clearly it's popular. Doesn't make it right or wrong though.
|
|
|
Post by nick8801 on Apr 13, 2018 5:03:51 GMT -6
There is a happy medium between loud full and punchy versus squished and distorted, and much of that comes from the mix. I’ve seen several online mixing tutorials where the engineer is using parallel compression on almost all busses, plus one or two extra master busses to blend in. At that point what can a mastering engineer really do? Put a light eq curve on the tune? In the end I don’t think the totally pummeled mixes actually sound that much louder than the ones that are left with some dynamics. It’s like the distorted messes are there to compensate for poor mixes. Just my 2 cents. Plus from a personal perspective, I’m an audio elitist, and I want to listen to quality music. If it’s too distorted, I can’t do it. Nobody ever learned to MIX from online tutorials. And those who believe they do are, for the most part, lazy idiots, looking for "secrets" and "shortcuts" that don't exist. Mixing is something that you learn by DOING, and by LISTENING to what you do. It's a long, hard, evolutionary process. You have to be able to undertstand what the music is. Sometimes horribly distorted is exactly the ticket. Sometimes it's disaster. The Misfits' early recordings are a brilliant mess, if they had been recorded "correctly" they would never have succeded. But that approach on, say, Tom Petty, would have been horrible. The approach I take with my current retro country music is vastly different that the approach I took doing punk rock in the '70s and early "80s and both were quite different from my approach doing metal in the '80s. None of those would have been appropriate on the gigs I did with Mary Wells, Sun Ra, Nico, or Robert Fripp. You have to undertstand the artist and the music. I never said anything about learning to mix from online tutorials. I was simply referring to many videos I have seen where modern pop country mixers explain their process. I thought it was appropriate because the original post was about pop country, which I also find to be a big culprit in the “too loud” music scene.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Apr 13, 2018 7:17:11 GMT -6
It's the knob labeled 'Volume'. Turn it up more. That is, unless your (generic, not YOU) system doesn't have the gain necessary.....which many now don't....they rely on the dynamic range being crammed to achieve listenable levels. Modern speakers (if anyone uses them) have such over damped low sensitivity they hardly reveal real dynamics anymore....put those chainsaws on truly dynamic speakers and they are excruciating....they clearly sound flatlined. ......it's all about what people are used to, and whether they've ever had a chance to hear the difference. A lot of these loud records sound like a rotting corpse festering in the sun, about to burst and spray all bystanders, even at very low levels. They sound 'too loud' at very low volumes. They all sound like a commercial.....which the Reagan administration approved could be louder than the programs people were watching....for the first time in broadcast history...... But I like how these things sound before I turn it up. I like the punch, the energy and the clarity at all times. And I turn it up as well. Every time one of these threads pops up, we get dogpiles of folks patting each other on the back for being on the "right" side of the argument, and maybe a few of us looking up at you (generic, not YOU) on your soapboxes and say to you "but what you're arguing is about TASTE, not facts" to which we're then subjected to quips about "volume" knobs and other assorted insinuations that there's a simple solution, to go back to the good old days of soft recordings for delicate ears and the rest of us on the "wrong" side of the argument can just make due by some means, like using the volume knob. Sorry guys, I say that times have moved on, loudness is what music is today, and hoping for a grand return to your favorite times and experiences isn't likely to happen. I don’t disagree - but everything has its limits. That song at -5 objectively sounds worse. I agree that even at -9 or even -8, stuff can still sound good...but there is a threshold. That song had either lost all of its bottom end or had it mastered out just to get louder. Just because I think songs should be mastered for listening on monitors and not earbuds doesn’t make me old.
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Apr 13, 2018 7:30:30 GMT -6
Can't say I agree with you Svart about each generation saying "today's music sucks". I didn't love my father's music, but I liked it, and grew to appreciate it more over time. Hank Williams, Hank Snow, Patti Page, Harry Belafonte, Miles Davis, Dave Brubeck were all on heavy rotation. What I see happening that's different today is a lack of originality in the mainstream. When the Beach Boys, The Stones, The Beatles, Bob Dylan and their contemporaries came out with a new record, they often broke new ground. The amount of repetition of sound and musical structure now is astonishing. You can practically just exchange vocalists on 7 out of 10 Modern Country songs, because you wouldn't hear any difference in style, sound, musical construction or production. This is the opposite of what svart is saying. I would guess that your father didn't like this stuff when you were playing it...
|
|
|
Post by viciousbliss on Apr 13, 2018 7:33:07 GMT -6
I always thought the Misfits stuff sounded quite good. Especially Collection 1. It might've sounded horrendous on a DAW with plugins. If I'm not mistaken, the old methods were a lot more forgiving when it came to loudness. Getting that same sorta glue out of a DAW seems much tougher. I definitely don't hear it on modern releases by classic bands. Maybe the only famous release that is known for not riding the loudness war trend is Chinese Democracy from Guns N Roses. I've yet to hear anyone complain that it isn't loud enough(though members did say they recorded real loud as can be evidenced by some bad distortion on songs like Street of Dreams). Plenty of people complained about Death Magnetic's loudness though. To the point of petitions and widely popular Guitar Hero remixes. Dynamic releases still have plenty of loud sounds and plenty of brickwalled releases sound as if the music has nowhere to go. It was mentioned earlier in this thread about quantization. To me, it sounds wrong. Going back to Guns, I think people are most fond of Appetite and Lies because they have Adler drumming. Even his supposedly "pieced together using every editing trick under the sun" drum tracks on Civil War from Illusion 2 sounds infinitely more natural than the stuff Sorum did. While I still enjoy Sorum's work to some extent, it always sounds a bit robotic and he's playing too many notes. Sort of a precursor to what engineers would eventually do with Pro Tools.
I don't think it's a coincidence that legacy acts like Guns are the biggest touring draws for the most part. It's hard to say how modern stuff will hold up over time because I think users will end up with all the control eventually. The software out there today that works to fix loudness war mixes will evolve into stuff that is capable of recreating music in many different ways tailored to the users taste. Someone did something where they 1985ized a Bieber song pretty convincingly. I have no idea what their method was, but it's a taste of things to come. One thing I tried that worked was turning down the volume on the last Foxes album, converting the files to 96k, and then running them all through Peacock in Pro Tools. While it still retained some of the loudness war stamp, it was a completely different experience that didn't sound worse. You could hear different things and the music had more room to breathe. What's funny is the wife didn't even notice anything changed compared to the regular cd. She just thought it was the same disc despite it not being anywhere as loud.
Artists could offer different masterings. I don't see why it's so hard just to bounce things once with loudness war settings and then do another bounce with different settings.
A lot of tutorials are misleading I think, particularly the "gear doesn't matter" stuff put out by people like Graham Cochrane. Novatron, Azure, Seventh Heaven Pro, Phoenix, and the Weiss set definitely tell me gear matters. There is stuff that I think is objectively bad in audio. That 1997 Iggy Pop remaster where he wanted everything cranked into the red horribly. Loudness is like a high spot in wrestling. It's designed to wow people in the moment. That's the only purpose.
Anyone know any other well known albums released in the last 10 years that rejected the loudness war?
|
|