Wed Jun 27, 2007 10:17PM EDT
See Comments (521)
Never mind that today's factory-produced starlets and mini-clones just don't have the practiced chops of the supergroups of yesteryear, pop in a new CD and you might notice that the quality of the music itself—maybe something as simple as a snare drum hit—just doesn't sound as crisp and as clear as you're used to. Why is that?
It's part of the music industry's quest to make music louder and louder, and it's been going on for decades, at least since the birth of the compact disc. Click the link for a nice little video, a mere 2 minutes long, which explains it in detail, with audio cues that you'll be able to hear in crisp detail.
The key to the problem is that, in making the soft parts of a track louder (in the process making the entire track loud), you lose detail in the song: The difference between what's supposed to be loud and what's supposed to be soft becomes less and less. The result is that, sure, the soft parts of a song are nice and loud, but big noises like drum beats become muffled and fuzzy. But consumers often subconsciously equate loudness with quality, and thus, record producers pump up the volume. Anything to make a buck.
The bigger problem is that this is all unnecessary. Stereo equipment is more powerful today than ever, and last time I checked, every piece of music hardware had a volume knob.
Don't take my word for it: Pop in the first CD you bought and play it at the same volume level as the most recent one you bought. You might be shocked by what you hear.
Anyone still wondering why the music business is suffering?
LINK: The Loudness War
Join in the discussion. Here you'll see the comments in the order they were posted.
I have noticed that while driving in my car. When certain songs come on (I play them through my i pod) the bass shakes the car even though I have the bass turned down and the volum is not up that high. Other older songs don't do that.
b/c everyone has an iPod or mp3 player & only downloads things & doesn't buy cd's, which skip & carrying around all that stuff isn't fun
As an artist and a budding engineer, I have been trying to fight the "loudness" warriors. One thing about overly compressed files is that they may initially grab a listener but they can create "ear fatigue," which I think adds to the disposable nature of modern music. Another benefit to not over compressing is that resulting MP3s sound better. It's true that the differences aren't always obvious but I think it works on a subtle level to encourage repeated listenings. It's hard to convince people of this, even my own band wasn't sure we shouldn't be "as loud as the radio." cisco@phantompowers.com or meow@catscientist.com
I've noticed that from the differece of my father's music and my own. I'd had to turn his CDs up and mine would just be "racket". Right now, I hear drumming and no precise chords. (I think I broke the record player...) Ask Bill Gates to help!
Volume in modern recordings is equivalent to visual advertising: make everything as in-your-face as possible to make sure it can't be ignored. The collective volume goes up (visual or audible) in a game that never ends. And the loser is the art. It used to be that there was a physical limit to volume...and things like "too much bass" b/c of format limitations. Vinyl albums would "skip" and cassette tapes would distort. Now that the format limitation is gone, people think they can do what they please, sonically, with no regard for the laws of physics. But while the traditional limitations of format have been more-or-less removed, that doesn't mean things sound any better (or as good) as they used to. I've been dealing with this for years as an audio mastering engineer. The good news is that artists are realizing that a critical mass has been hit and they're less concerned about being the loudest than they used to be. The bad news is that the world is just getting louder in every regard and people are losing their sensibility for sonic detail.
The new White Stripes album on cd really suffers from the "loudening" factor. The popping and crackling of the bass drum is apparent on almost every track. I now have to buy the album on vinyl for $30 to listen to how it was intended to be heard.
If anyone out there understands digital music the quality has always been weak. Digital music has a very small spectrum in the hertz range, I believe it is somewhere from 750 Hz - 44000Hz. In the days of vinyl it was approx. 300Hz - 90000 Hz. Each of the sounds were very clear, and easy to pick out which instrument was playing. Most people could care less on the spectrum of sound produced.An artist would have to be good to play with a group and have it sound good. Now all you have to do is transpose the vocals, smooth out any peak in the voice, and voila a perfect singer. Digital music is not all that bad ( couldn't tell by my writings But what the heck ). It does make it more portable, but the quality is lost,( Ah, to have vinyl again)And problably not to be gotten again.So in`closing all need to pray somehow that music may go backwards to where it had once come from.
I agree with that. I've bought a couple CD's from amazon.co.uk namely Justice "+". It actually sounds horrible, bit it's dirty house and French electro.
It's all part of the RIAA's conspiracy plan. Not only is the quality of the recordings bad, but the talentless acts they are promoting lack musical ability as well! Today's top recording artists are making recordings and money, but not music. The RIAA is a money machine. They know that if people will buy brainless mono-syllabic chanting to digital samplings and rhythmic record scratching, then they won't have to hire any real studio machines, who demand real money for sitting in on recording sessions. If you ever wonder why you don't have a favorite new song or a favorite new artsts, these are the reasons why.
Part of the problem is that alot of todays music purposely includes distortion on things like drums, which was normally a no no in the old days of audio fidelity. The effect of squeezing the dynamic range to make it louder overall is called compression. It's used in most recordings, but over use leads to the squashed sound. All things come back around. Just wait a few years.
boycott CD's and stick to vinyl!!!
Its not the Producer ruining these, its pressure on the mastering engineer from the labels. The producer and engineer do not want the audio messed with after the mix(to an extent). I am not a big Iron Maiden fan, but the didnt master their newest CD because they felt the product was best right out of the studio. It still has all the dynamics that they intended on. Yeah you have to turn it up to 9 instead of 6 but who cares, the dynamics are there, quiet is quiet and loud is loud.
Here's an idea... listen to a band called the alarmists and you'll see that not all current records are made by money starved producer lunatics... great sound can be achieved through careful mixing and mastering, great recording techniques don't hurt either
followup on several posts: Mikkel--ya right for the most part--wav and au files are older than some of the posters here and go back to the earliest daze of browsing pre-Netscape Mosaic and Compuserve (go ancient!) dooomsdaydave11--the low bitrate of of downloaded filez such as you speak of are like removing the brain cells that allow you to hear anyway. Your friend's Honda that sounds like artillery of steroids means you probably can't tell anyway. REPENT, before Pete Townsends signs I told you so... red... video did nothing of the sort. The pwners of the video channels killed the video star after Clinton helped group ownership kill radio. Snake eats itself. sillygirl... not really silly. Even Death Metal sounds better un-bungled. We are not nOObs
It's also good to note that many profeesional studios are converting the master mix to a lossy compression format like AAC to save space and turn over cd compilations faster. They also do this because of the wide spread trend of digital music like iTunes or Napster. By creating one mix it saves the recod company time and money and sacrifices the sound quality that most listeners wont complain about. Im not saying that old recordings or analog reordings are better, but that the technology and algorithms that are popular today in digital lossy compression are not yet up to par. If you want to make a difference write to Apple and Microsoft and the record labels of your favorite bands, and tell them that you expect better and are not going to purchase anymore music(you probably dont anyway)or products until the quality improves. As far as records being louder, it's true but theres more to the story. Soon the makers of portable media players are going to find themselves in a bind when people try to pin liabilty on them for hearing damage. Caution!!!! Science ahead!!! Remember that you're safe under 90 db for any amount of time most pros will tell you, some will say 85. the point being is how loud is that on my iPod or Zune or whatever it is you have? you dont know and the added volume is destroying the hearing of people literally by the second. the standard is 90 db for 8 hours. for every 5 db up the time cuts in half to be safe. a simple radioshack db meter is not going to give you acurate results from your little white earbuds or youre earmuffs. call up the Apple people and Microsoft and ask them what youre volume should bew at to be safe. Hint!!! They cant tell you because they dont know. every "mp3" is different. Ask them why their products were pulled from the shelves in Franced in 2001 and not in the states. They wont tell you. to be safe stick around half the volume and any player and invest in some good headphones that will block out the outside interference or noise. this will let you turn the music down and still have it be loud enough to rock out. quick example. when youre driving with the windows open and the music on, it doesnt seem loud until you come to the light and its screaming loud. the music hasnt gotten louder, you just took the noise away. if not then do yourself a favor and invest stock in companies that are doing research and develpment in hearing aids. Youll be rich in 20 years!!!!!!
As senior editor at All About Jazz.com, I'm listening to dozens of new CDs each week. The only digitalization I've heard that is truly a revelation is Columbia/Sony's remastering and reissuing of "Ellington at Newport," truly a masterpiece of the meeting of music and techology (it's even the first time the recording has been heard in authentic stereo). Otherwise, I'm constantly depressed by "remastered" reissues that are little more than a boosting of bass frequencies--to the point that the pitches of the string bass are often indistinguishable. I go back to my LPs for the natural sound of acoustic bass and often piano. Unfortunately, in the postmodern era, "live" music copies the the synthesized, artificial version. It's not uncommon to go to a concert featuring a female jazz vocalist with a rhythm section including a bass player so insistently loud as to ruin the performance. With electric basses it was "loudness." With acoustic players, it's the combination of loudness and volume. The combination of a hot pick-up (not mic) along with a leviathan-sized bass speaker along with "sound engineers/mixers" who are often tone-deaf gearheads driving all of these already over-amplified sounds through their own P.A. arsenal is enough to make many of us swear off music. There was a time when bassist Ray Brown could play huge auditoriums with the Oscar Peterson trio unmiked! We could hear him fine and never had questions about balance or amplification. When I caught Ray with pianist Monty Alexander in the early 90s, he was using a pick-up and large amp, which unfortunately was in front of me, spoiling a trip to Chicago to hear one of my favorite pianists.
What is the obsession we have today with loudness all about anyway? Maybe it's because I am a classical musician by training (who likes popular music too, btw), but I find different dynamics, from the softest whisp of a pianissimo to the most thunderous fortissimo, to be equally thrilling and by all means essential because without it all music eventually becomes BORING. Also, I am sick of people playing their music extremely loudly, especially in cars (and especially outside my house at night). As a society we are becoming less and less respectful of each other. Keep your music to yourself and I promise mot to blast you with my latest opera CD. Lastly, you only get one set of ears. Take care of them. Exposure to high decibel sound, even for relatively short times on a regular basis, will erode your hearing. If you're deaf, you can't listen to anything, you know.
What ever happened to 8tracks?
If the music buisness is suffering I think its mostly because now many people share music and download it illegal from file sharing programs. People probably aren't buying as much music. Im just sayin.
Please enable your browser's cookies to activate the My Tech column.
| Computers | Home Office | Wi-Fi & Networking | Phones & PDAs | Cameras & Camcorders | TV & Home Theater | Portable Audio |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
66 Posted by dekefinley on Thu Sep 3, 2009 3:40PM EDT Report Abuse
This is funny because I’ve been noticing the difference lately and now I understand why it is. I just assumed that it was louder because of better quality recording. I prefer it louder because you will hear less feedback threw the speakers at a lower volume. The higher the volume of the stereo the more static feedback you will hear. So chose your poison, in my opinion the louder the better.