Music Into Noise: The Destructive Use Of Dynamic Range Compression

I guess "fluid and varied" is the wrong term, I mean more like "democratic"

and re: movies and television: you forgot Youtube, which I think follows the same trends that you're describing about CD->mp3

Eh, posted a reply to the Guardian piece ("ColleenMoore"), much good it'll do, probably.

Why couldn't he just rip the songs, listen to them later, and delete them (or just not listen to them) later if he didn't like them?

I asked him that, and he basically said "if something I hate comes up in shuffle on my ipod I have to reconnect it to get the mp3 off again so why not just save time?" I tried to explain that there's a lot of music you don't like the first time you hear, and he said 'this isn't art music, you like pop or you don't'. He considers himself a real music-head as well, I was shocked at how little having an intact copy of the album seemed to mean to him.

funny thing is all the songs he unchecked are the ones I usually skip as well

anyway sorry to digress but for all the talk of engineers being forced to overdrive, I've also heard a few records where the final mastering's overcompression was absolutely a part of the aesthetic of the entire record, it wasn't inflicted. it's exhausting to listen to these records all the way through, but the quality of the distortion is unlike any music I've heard before -- as modern as it gets (as one engineer put it once, "who cares if the mix sounds good, does it sound new?"). so though there is a trend here, it's just as dangerous to speak in critical absolutes when there are a few people doing creative (if brutal) work with this sound.

make no mistake, I think what's being done to records with mastering these days is mostly a crime, that's why it's important to fine tune the argument especially now that conversation seems ready to break on a wider level

and re: movies and television: you forgot Youtube, which I think follows the same trends that you're describing about CD->mp3

-- Curt1s Stephens, Tuesday, June 5, 2007 11:09 PM (21 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

yeah that's a good point, but at least most people i know tend you use youtube more for dicking around at work, watching funny videos, etc, or maybe using it as a last resort for something they couldn't find otherwise....like i watched the office finale on there because i missed it, forgot to record it, and then realized NBC didn't have full episodes...most people i know are still upgrading to hi-def TVs and everything w/good surround sound systems, it's not like youtube is replacing that...

great reply Pashmina!

a few thoughts. 1. this issue needs some of that ole Frank Luntz magic, i think. the term "loudness" - however accurate it is from an engineer perspective - is infelicitous, inviting mental images of old codgers bemoaning the rambunctious music of the youth. maybe "flatness" would do the trick? 2. why is it always 30+ writers who bring up the "you're just old and grumpy: the kids looove this stuff"-argument? 3. i totally disagree with those of you who claim that heavily compressed music sounds comparatively better through headphones. i have the exact contrary experience.

The Guardian is the worst.

I think "flatness" is the perfect term Jeb - it captures people's instinctive understanding of the problem. "Loudness" is more techincally accurate, given that the main issue is the reduction of headroom and the squashing of transients, but flatness makes more sense to frame it. And - as you say - it doesn't let the problem get confused with other stupid shit.

As far as Milton's nephew - I do that too when I'm in a record store going through vinyl at the listening station. I'll skip through, giving each track a few seconds in it's middle, and if it doesn't grab me it's history. There's just so much to get through to narrow it down to the few excellent things.

PS: also, yes, that Guardian blogger is fail

great illustrative video here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Gmex_4hreQ

That Guardian article was crap. Nick, your article was getting passed around on the Tape Op message board recently. The video that Johnny links to was posted there as well, and I agree that it's good.

But I would caution folks against being too quick to blame everything on the mastering enginners. I know a lot of mastering guys these days get handed projects that have already been heavily compressed during tracking and mixing. And once something has been compressed, there isn't much you can do with it. It's sometimes possible to uncompress, but it's difficult. And lots of times the band are the ones asking for it, too. The idea that something doesn't "sound like a record" until it's been squashed flat is going to be difficult to shed completely.

But I think awareness is building, little by little...

Aye, one of the things I was keen to point out in my article, and that I mentioned on my blog (titled after this thread, in a backwards manner) recently and in the 65dos interview, is that it's not evil mastering engineers or even evil record company people - it's stupid musicians doing this, a lot of the time.

Also, the over-riding effect of over-compression, beyond things like clarity and spatial placing of instruments and that 'serious audiophile' stuff, the real deal-breaker (or maker, depending on your angle) is the fact that it makes music boring and monotonous - a big part of the reason Coldplay are boring is because their songs don't change, for instance. Same with Keane. It's the reason the latest Bloc Party album is so fucking dull.

nick's article is interesting - i can't say i've noticed this at all, certainly not to the blanket extent nick has; i do get annoyed at poor sound quality but this is usually either a) crap mp3s or b) ironically enough, old cds which aren't loud enough. and though i'd like to be one of the ADD-riddled kids who makes decisions based on 10 seconds alone - this strikes me as a rigorous and entirely admirable approach to music - the fact is that i DO listen to albums (cos that's the format stuff gets sent to me on), and to music generally for hours at a time, and i don't feel any of the nausea described.

i have noticed the 'flatness' you describe at times obv but assumed it was down to me not liking the music - stars, for instance. and yr point about coldplay songs being dull because they don't change - they would be dull even if they were mastered like you want! but the point about wine buffs hit home.

this, however:

I think music journalists have a responsibility to listen to records on at least half-decent equipment

would you like to buy me a top-of-the-range hi-fi system, some expensive speakers and headphones then? i dunno, i think that's a fairly obnoxious thing to say.

also, i think it was eppy who said somewhere that a lot of modern hip-hop and r&b sounds great precisely because of blocky compression, which makes the spare beats and vocal out front sound even better.

and really, i do suspect that this is a problem you'd only notice on expensive equipment. i - and MOST PEOPLE - don't own expensive audio equipment, and nor am i likely to in the foreseeable future. maybe a better solution would be for you audiophiles to listen through computer speakers more?

and i think the grau piece is perfectly fair because my immediate reaction was also "well, i can't hear this at all", and it still is to an extent.

I think most of what you've just written is pretty obnoxious, but there you go, Alex. This, for instance, just boggles my mind - i'd like to be one of the ADD-riddled kids who makes decisions based on 10 seconds alone - this strikes me as a rigorous and entirely admirable approach to music.

You don't need 'scary expensive equipment', either, that's a myth. A pair of Koss Portapros will set you back probably less than £30 and are absolutely terrific headphones. This isn't just an audiophile issue; like I said above, the main concern isn't so mcuh loss of clarity (although that is a conern too, obv, for me), it's loss of movement, of dynamic, of excitement. In the original piece when I said 'half-decent equipment' I'm not talking about £10k's worth of hi-fi; I'm talking about a £300 Denon mini system or a £60 pair of headphones. Once you tune in to what compression sounds like you'll notice it everywhere on almost any equipment.

Film critics, as I said, would be laughed out of the building if they reviewed films based on Youtube viewings.

x-post - you can't hear it cos you don't know what you're listening for yet. You quite like Electrelane, yes Alex? They're a fucking tremendous example of an uncompressed sound (or a 'not-over-compressed' sound). Play some Electrelane back-to-back with some Coldplay, as distasteful as you find Coldplay, and the difference is in the quiet bits, the loud bits, the fact that you can hear the instruments.

i do think electrelane are 'well-produced' (though sadly it doesn't stop their new album from being unlistenable) but most things i like are also well-produced - this is why minimal techno and r&b appeal to me so much, because so much care has been taken over the production in comparison to people like coldplay or simian mobile disco.

re ADD-riddled kids - there is too much new music to take in otherwise and too limited hard drive space, as it is i still feel honour-bound to listen to the entire track before making the delete/keep decision. 10 seconds would make it all so much more efficient.

also i am not spending £300 on a hi-fi

You terrify me, Alex, and I mean that with utter sincerity.

actually look upthread i posted a waveform of a track by ame, who i think lex likes. anyway, look how much space there is compared to the indie rock tracks.

ame are fucking incredible

I mean, I can't fathom the ten-seconds thing because' it turns music into Burger King, but that's beside the point almost. I cannot fathom why anyone who 'loves' music would find it objectionable to spend £300 on a stereo to play it on, why anyoine who loves music wouldn't want to experience music as well as possible; it's a really exciting, sensual, indulgent thing to do and it's wonderful! Unless it's not listening to music you're into but rather 'having listened'; casting judgement. Which I'd think goes against your ethos?

Double X.

From a technical point, the more minimal music is, the more you can compress it without losing much clarity or space or excitement - I'll draw a diagram on MSPaint later to show what I mean, but I have to go out of the office now for a bit.

also i am not spending £300 on a hi-fi

-- lex pretend, Wednesday, June 6, 2007 8:48 AM (10 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

really? ffs you're a music critic! i spent that much when i was fucking 16 years old! i'm no way near as much of an audiogeek as southall but you really don't have a clue what you're missing.

£300 isn't very much.

today on the current our local public station which plays mostly indie rock, they played some band called the Fratellis (sp?)

it struck me just how horrible it sounded.

possibly the most obvious set-up of all time.

well decent headphones would do the job, no?

how on earth did you have £300 when you were 16?! this is like when students in my year spent all year whining about how broke they were, then buggered off in the summer to go travelling. i can afford £300 easily now but all the years of that being a ridiculous sum to spend on anything are far too ingrained now - i have a workable and decent hi-fi, it's not a shitty plastic all-in-one thing, as long as it works i'm not replacing it.

and really i'm not even at home enough to justify it, i review most things off headphones-listening.

how on earth did you have £300 when you were 16?!

paper rounds, childminding, weekend work... i had more disposable then than since rly :/

well decent headphones would do the job, no?

-- 696, Wednesday, June 6, 2007 9:16 AM (11 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

not w. dance music & so on surely?

The comment-box beatdown in that Graun space-filler is encouragingly righteous.

There's headphones, and there's headphones...

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v236/njsouthall/Headphones%20and%20hi-fi/IMG_6751.jpg

i have no idea what headphones i even have. there is no point in me getting expensive ones b/c i will inevitably break or lose or tread on them within three months anyway. i do know someone who absent-mindedly cut his headphones in half with scissors, though, i have never done that.

The ones on the left cost me £28 and come with a lifetime guarantee; you have to send them to America, but they'll repair or replace. They've also got the kind of bass response that I imagine would tickle your fancy muchly.

it's not about the quality of the headphones -- i just don't think you can feel music properly through them. i say this as someone who atm only listens through headphones, via a computer.

I'm split 50/50 between whether I prefer headphones or speakers; they're very different experiences.

tbh the music listening i most value is on headphones because it's then, when i'm commuting, that i give my undivided attention to the song - i notice and realise a lot more about the music then, as opposed to on my better speakers at home when i'm usually doing something else while listening.

I've almost given up listening to music on the train for the opposite reason - I can't concentrate on it. Sometimes it's OK, on an Intercity with some damping, but on a local sprinter train there's no point unless I use my Shures and I've gone off them. I prefer to read or, at the moment, play Animal Crossing on Nintendo DS...

you can play computer games on trains???

i have a convenient 45mins/1hr unbroken commute which would be unbearable without music. there's nothing else i would want to concentrate on!

1hr! i didnt know you lived so far out! thats the same time as my commute

books

Animal Crossing hardly constitutes 'playing a computer game'. Wander around, steal some apples, talk to an anthropomorphised duck so that it cries and stamps its feet, pay your mortgage. It's not like you need reflexes.

My train journey's only twenty minutes, but door-to-door my commutes between 45mins and an hour.

It could be that much of what Lex likes...I would hesitate to say "benefits from"...but isn't perhaps quite so ill-served by hard-limiting and heavy multi-band compression as the sort of stuff Nick likes.

I'm thinking of guitar-bass-drums combos, for whom the recording techniques were honed in the late '60s/'70s and for whom hyper-compression and flat dynamics don't really work. If you take away the space and contrast from recordings of guitar-rock you tend to eliminate the illusion of liveness, which I think is part of its appeal.

The different listening environments is another factor too, of course.

True. And the dance / electronic stuff I'm into is mostly of a more maximalist than minimalist bent - Orbital being the starting point. Basically, the more elements, the more space is needed; less elements = less space = hard limiting not so bad. Also the idea of the 'psychedelic', climbing inside music, needs space and dynamism, and again that's what I'm into.

ha, well, my favourite dance music is minimal, and my favourite r&b is minimal! one of my favourite songs this year = 1x808 bleep + r&b babydiva singing 1x note + bare ghost of beat. and that's it.

1hr! i didnt know you lived so far out! thats the same time as my commute

your commute is about 10mins shorter.

I like lots of elements, lots of texture and timbre, and lots of little sounds. I like to hear horsehair, fingers on strings, rattling wires in a snare drum, the hum of the electricity in a sequencer.

(I find I'm shelling out an extra £6/week just to enjoy the sleek, quiet new Southern trains and avoid the noisy air-con/engine cooling system/whatever on the bus so I can listen to music on my MP3 player [£60 + £30 headphones]. The £I-can't-bear-to-say-how-much stereo doesn't get the use it deserves these days. Bloody kids.)

ha, well, my favourite dance music is minimal, and my favourite r&b is minimal! one of my favourite songs this year = 1x808 bleep + r&b babydiva singing 1x note + bare ghost of beat. and that's it.

You should still hear it through Chord amplification and a pair of ATC monitors before you die, Lex.

Whoever said the new Bloc Party is a good example of the current trend of over-compressed, badly- mixed albums is OTM. It's unlistenable - everything forced into a loud, flat plane where all the details are lost.

Why can't people let records breath a bit - why be afraid of having a bit of space in the mix. Right after I listened to Bloc Party I listened to the Rezillos ' Can't Stand The Rezillos' from 1978. It's a bare, functional production - just the band playing pretty much live with few overdubs, but it LEAPS out of the stereo and grabs you by the nuts whereas the Bloc Party just drones on unengagingly.

And that leads me into another issue - why can no-one record guitars any more? On the Rezillos album you can hear every nuance of Jo Callis's playing, you can tell it's a Telecaster from the first note. Just listen to a Generation X or Televison or Rain Parade record, or Led Zep II - that's how to do it. Today something like the Artic Monkeys is just an over-compressed sludge-wall with too much gain to allow any kind of articulation to come through. Partly it's production and partly is the guitarists' choice of sound, but together the combination is pretty hard to listen to.

Similar comments apply for drums - I want to hear wood, not a fucking crispy crackle.

The last New Order album had great material, great arrangements, but sounds distorted on every device I've played it back on. There is too little dynamic range - I'd love to hear what Martin Hannett would have made of that material.

^^ isnt it you that disapproves of hannetts production on bummed?

Yes gareth it was me, but by 86/87 Hannett was pretty fucked - everything sounded like it was recorded in an aircraft hanger e.g Bummed, the Stone Roses stuff he did.

I still kind of feel though that the problem with Bummed is actually with me and that I'm still missing something. It's been nearly 20 years though, so it ought to have worked its magic by now! Maybe I'll have a listen this afternoon.

http://i13.tinypic.com/5zf8pw9.jpg

(not mine, found somewhere else)

that jpg just about nails it

I think lex's comments are, as usual, not only terrifying but very succinct and dead on. you don't notice what's being done to the dynamic range if you don't have a halfway decent stereo or quality headphones, and most people don't! the audiophiles are in the minority here, and the argument needs to be very carefully put so's to not sound all moonbat. lex's comment "i have noticed the 'flatness' you describe at times obv but assumed it was down to me not liking the music" is about as close to a sympathetic response as you can expect from most music fans who've only owned basic level consumer gear and literally take offense when you tell them they should spend more money if they really love music