＞＞＞＞......it's like those artificial Korean beauty, all with same look......!!!!＞＞＞＞＞

It has to be the best description I read for a long time.

最後修改時間: 2013-08-11 16:51:44

NAR hing,
the use of limiter/compressor is an essential part of mixing technique, but when it's abused to narrow down dynamic range of a music piece, it's like those artificial Korean beauty, all with same look. The recorded music then have a narrower range than the real music instruments and no longer can produce the same impact like live performance.

Note: When compressor is used wisely, they bring sweet music to our ears, our hearings welcome moderate sound compression. i.e. LPs production usually embedded compression during production to overcome the physical limitation to the phono cartridge to track the groove of LPs properly. Compression added to LPs is in fact a benefit.

Open reel tape recorders also cannot record music at extreme dynamic range when comparing to 24 bit digital, however, when dynamic range exceeded its threshold for an open reel recorder, sound will go into saturation, this in a way is like soft limiting, sound compression at peak level. While this can tolerate some moderate over peak signal without any ill effect, however, for the absolute purist, tape saturation = distortion.



最後修改時間: 2013-08-11 10:16:01

I wonder how many mastering engineers really adhere to the guideline ITU-R BS,1770-2 (International Telecommunication Union - Radio communication - Broadcast Service) in setting maximum loudness during mastering or they simply exceed this loudness by throwing everything they have into the song like "there is no tomorrow" and then try to comply the broadcast standard by reduce the overall level of the song during mastering process using their DAW to reduce the level just like turning down the volume control of a pre-amp without any concern what they did to the dynamic range of the music?

One problem with high dynamic range products, they are usually low in volume in comparison to the normal commercial recordings, many of the sound system and the not quiet enough listening environment are simply incapable to reproduce those recording successfully without constantly turning the volume control up and down. Therefore, compression is found to be the only solution offered by many mastering engineers. The compressor is used to :increase the sound level of low level sound signal and reduce the level of loud signal (works like a extremely fast respond automatic volume control). - After music is compressed, we can find lots of headroom for further increase in overall level, this is what we called loudness. This is when music gets louder and louder in the so called 'Loudness War'. The evil of using compressors and peak limiters.

There are situation when compression must be used without any other choice, a good mastering engineer must set compression in such a way which is mostly transparent (people mentioned about those quite instrument has become more revealing, this is the result of compression ). Compression should be added without adverse effect such as boosting the loudness to an unacceptable level (This is hard to do).

People will find a lot of classical music recordings claiming no compression was used during production, this is true provided the music recorded do not have a great deal of dynamic range therefore when no compression is applied, it would not make any difference to the music.

For the truly dedicated mastering engineers who really care about the way music should be presented at the highest possible integrity, many of them uses further refinement tools to check the loudness in their project which can meet parameters within ATSC A/85; EBU R128 or TR-B32, the tools also show the dynamic range of the song.

Time is money in record production, there is a limit to how much time the engineer spend on a project. Whether this is a factor which influence the quality of music we purchase is remained unknown to us (the consumer).

*****************************************

For those who like to find out what ITU-R BS,1770 is all about, here is the link

http://www.itu.int/dms_pubrec/itu-r/rec/bs/R-REC-BS.1770-2-201103-S!!PDF-E.pdf


最後修改時間: 2013-08-11 09:54:39

Thank you for this write up, as least I have a little bit more understanding why vendors are doing this now.

Brother Kei,

Before we consider whether mastering engineer apply compressions to a track we should understand whether this approach is necessary, [note: excessive compression applied to a track is another issue].

I refer to the peak file in post #62, the file had been compressed and the peaks were hard limited. However, the vertical scale of this wave display from the software used should indicate in dB level (i.e. dBFS - dB full scale) rather than [-1 to +1 scale] which is meaningless, however we get the general idea according to the wave peak display.

Generally, some smaller speakers are incapable of produce the fundamental low frequencies that existed in the track. Sometimes, mastering engineers need to rework those tracks to cater for smaller speakers by enhancing some of the harmonic components to mimic those cannot be heard fundamental frequencies from smaller speakers. As a result, some of those mastering do not sound absolutely great in large speakers because of the manipulation.

It is difficult to find those one disc which can sound great on all existing systems.

Often vox compression on some individual mic pick up such as solo vocal is needed during mixdown because the producer wanted the voice to have maximum clarity, this is often applicable to some of the classical music recording as well. The compression should be applied at moderation and sensibly.

Recording drum tracks without compression to individual mic tracks usually sound horrible. Again, it depend on the experience of the recording/mixing engineer to make drum recording sound great and without rough handed using compression.

In mastering pop music say, it is the mastering engineer's job to ensure the level of each track on the disc match the adjacent tracks of each other if at all possible. Sometimes, track arrangement need to be swapped in order to meet such criteria. [Note: This is not applicable to classical music mastering]. However, for tracks which need to be loud to very loud i.e. drum tracks, the engineer need to make sure the loud track stand out from the rest but without distortion. Often, compression and hard limiting is applied if the engineer has decided to take the easy step (or short cut). ---

In referring to Post #62 posted by Brother Kei. - It may be the level of the rest the songs on the disc were made at a loudness suitable for most sound system, but the drum track need to standout and sound louder from the perspective, and therefore, compression and hard limiting is needed to make such contrast. Surely, there are many better ways to master this drum track instead of sending it into distortion extravaganza!!! (as said) - the wrong approach in mastering!!!.



最後修改時間: 2013-08-10 12:09:37

Loud and compress.
I found many K 2 disc like that too.

When will the Loudness War just END???

I was pleased to hear that Warner/EMI hired Abbey Road Studios to remaster some of the classic local albums, and I bought a few of them with great anticipation. Result? Please see the screen capture below (of 射鵰英雄傳).

In Track 6, the kick drum became the sort normally heard in Heavy Metal album - distortion extravaganza!!

I don't understand why they must make back catalogue albums so freaking LOUD. Since they won't get heavy airplay anyway, there is no need to make the music super loud in order to compete.

icefox Hing,

Thanks for bringing up one of the links. That is why music mastering through analogue processes had always been my preference over digital. On the other hand, doing the job digitally is quicker and easier but somehow at the expense of ultimate sound quality when comparing to analogue. Then again, people are listening to MP3 and iPod anyway these days, the distorted and compressed sound produce by those 'things' are for the mass public and definitely not what we, the minority people (the audiophile) can put up with.

cy05 hing,

I think the link you have kindly suggested in your post #56 had explained very well already.

I use classical music as an example:
If you have the original first generation issue, take a look at the wave display of the song files through some DAWs, or even some free wave editor software. Then take a look at the display of the re-issue wave pattern again, the fatter display of the pattern has indicates something had been done through remastering.

Please remember, it is not always bad to have reissued releases if this represent an improvement in sound quality to the music. However, majority of audiophile do not own big speakers and powerful amplifiers and do not have a lot of space in the listening environment. A suitable compression added during mastering benefit majority of audience by making music more enjoyable to listen to. Those with smaller speakers may benefit from some of the re-issues using extra compressions and EQ. However, the latest trend is, there are lots of re-issues had put on too much compressions and EQ which becomes noticable to me, I am sure some audience may find them pleasing, however, I prefer less is better in my own view. Many musicians told me they noticed the balance of the overall sound in classical music may be altered from originally intended due to the fact soft sound were made louder and the lack of ultimate punch at the loudest and in fact some of them felt as if they have the pumping effect at the highest level. Its has all to do with too much compression used. compression makes softer sound louder and louder becomes softer. Also, when compression is insufficient to control the peaks they use limiters to level the peaks so that the level will never exceed 0dBFS digitally, this sometime creating the pumping effect. I personally do not like any compression at all, on the other hand, many audience may benefit from issues with moderate compression. It is up to the individual to judge which re-issue or remastering are good or bad. Note: not every re-issue or re-master are bad, some are actually sound better than original
[note: the signal from most LPs are moderately compressed anyway to allow proper tracking for phono cartridges, so I can accept moderate compression level simular to LPs or may be a touch less is preferred by me for my own listening].

***********************

Pop music, (a quick reference).
Take a listen to the chart hits such as Lady Gaga, Born this way. The mastering engineer has compressed the mix to vastly excessive level and very distorted. However, people love this kind of compressed sound or had they been 'BRAINWASHED' into accept such sound even though they are listening to distortion?? For this, I do not want to comment whether this is right or not.

But for classical music, we do not need loudness war, plain uncompressed music will do fine for me.
Note: open reel tape recorder: when signal level reached a certain level near or over 0VU, the tape begin to saturate anyway instead of clipping into distortion like digital recording and mix. Tape Saturation in analogue recording is like a peak level limiting, sounded compressed in a way but it is not offensive in anyway. A lot of engineer these days they add a layer of open reel sound in modern digital mix in order to make the mix sound more interesting than plain old 'DDD' on their own.

I wrote this roughly, I hope what I wrote make sense to you.

最後修改時間: 2012-03-10 11:09:17

nar hing

how can we distinguish reissue compressed cd in the market?

Loudness War?? The producers can go out and win all the wars they want. They won't get my support.
For me,I preferred none of those compressed music. Its about time producers start giving what we want without destroying the music by compressing into shear distorted loudness.

interesting material



http://www.digido.com/loudness-war-explained.html

This has been an interesting and very informative thread although I personally have no insight into the recording industry.

Nor do I listen to CD that much as I tend to listen to vinyl although some recent issues I bought having the same "Loudness War" effect as I found out.

Being a keen hobbyist in photography with both analogue and digital may I express my alternate view?

When people started using digital photography the first thing we knew was that digital photography didn't have the extensive dynamic range as film. Many would just take it as the "characteristic" of digital photography but a few would figure how to improve.

There were many keen and influential photographers advocating this issue publicly and DSLR makers were quick to notice and take this seriously.

I just wonder if this could happen with regards to this "Loudness War" phenomenon?

最後修改時間: 2012-01-28 09:36:44

icefox hing

I think in a commercial world, the incentives must be $$$ driven

We are still willing to pay $100++ for a CD, meaning there are still audiences looking for some better quality than they can freely download from free internet sources, or from the radio.

After all, the market and sales dictates everything. If new CD releases gets louder and louder at expense of losing the original "musical feel" and the majority of audience refuses to buy, then the producers may investigate what really goes wrong...

For the multiple CD re-releases with new technologies like XRCD, LPCD, AMCD, SHMCD, HQCD,etc, etc...., we could be very picky. The general trend is that they sound louder than the old CDs. Yet there are still some outstanding presentations.

To me, they are just like different flavours of the same dish. It is nothing wrong, as even the highest end equipment could have their unique signature sound. But I will be forced to give up if the flavour is too strong and unbalanced...

最後修改時間: 2012-01-28 08:58:07

Folks, thanks a lot for this interesting and educational thread. There are some very thought-provoking comments too. I love that Bob Katz U-tube, thanks Brother Kei.

Can we sum this up as, the seller of music want us (or try to educate) to take LOUD music while in a while back we all INHERENTLY love DYNAMICALLY more CONTRASTING music? Now, everything is just LOUD, LOUDER and LOUDER but LESS contrast?

To improve the situation, we need to somehow tell the record company, we want our contrast in music back instead of all those nasty plays on the variants of the respective so-call "new" carrier/media, like glass CD or LPCD crap.

最後修改時間: 2012-01-28 08:19:20

It is real nice CNY gift to have very healthy and informative discussion in this thread, and the C-Hings are so willing to share their thoughts and professional experiences.

NAR C-Hing has precisely explained that for pop music, there are so many possibilities to mix, to enhance/manipulate, and maximum flexibility for the engineer to present the music in a specific way. We , as consumers only have the choice of either to trust the engineeer/CD company that they are doing the right job, or simply give the "NO BUY" signal.

As a music lover, i am always a bit positive and support nice CD recordings. I believe there are still good fellows like NAR and Vili keeping up with the good work in a niche market and pushing to new frontiers.

It is also no doubt that Classical recording is a different story. The complexity and dynamics with classical music is making it extremely difficult to pack it into CD format without a bit of compression and manipulation. Even with the highest end gears, it is simply "no match" with live performances. The only key is to do it SMART - then nice classical CD recordings could still bring us unlimited joyful experiences.

To side-track a bit, for classical music the dynamics mainly originates from the music nature and the performances with less dependency on technology. That is why we could have very impressive recordings from the mid 50's (the start of "STEREO" era) that i suspect the technical dynamic range in the recording may be less than 70db. Try to experience with 1) Rimsky Korsakov/Scheherazade/Thomas Beecham/Royal Philharmic/EMI 1957, or 2) Saint Saens Symph. No 3/Charles Munch/CSO/RCA 1959 . They are absolute amazing (top performances+ conductors+ recording engineers) but require pretty nice playback equipment.

I am an "outsider" and no expert in the recording industry, so pls comment and correct if i am wrong. Happy listening and nice weekend.....!!!

最後修改時間: 2012-01-28 06:34:00

Brother Kei & Vili, I agree with you guys wholeheartedly.

Hi TISvili11 c-hing,

＞ 系某個特定音响及音壓下，Artist認為系佢要表現既作品。其一
Yes agreed!

＞ 系D公司為左超越對手，推大到Engineer都嗌收手。其二
Yes agreed!!

＞ Loudness War最終輸贏系唱片公司自已負責
Yes agreed!!!

We cannot blame the engineers completely, if they are forced by their clients to do so. That's why we need to pursuade the record company executives and artists as well. Though sadly, I think the number of these personnel in HK who care about sound or be able to get the whole picture is limited. I think they just followed the worldwide trend.