TOO LOUD CD'S, TOO SQUASHED SOUND?

[delphypop]

my latest client was doing some music for soundtrack andinsisted on testing the tracks on his car stereo. Kept coming back to me and telling me he couldn't hear this intor bit and that middle quiet bit while he was driving. Making me squish the dynamics out of this full orchestra arangement. They're a lot flatter than I would want but he's happy. they sound clear on a car stereo now, they won't be that good in a surround sound cinema but these thank god are just the demos.

Audio is an art form and you can't get upset if there are a whole bunch of people who simple don't have the education to appreciate the subtlies of a well mixed and mastered recording.

Some of these records are the equivilant to a chocolate box illustration or a levi's billboard. Sure they're pretty but they're not fine art.

so the bulk of the population can't understand the intracacies of afinely constructed mixed and mastered work, hey, there loss
cheers etc

rob

[Kris]

Hey now... lets keep Shania out of this!

[dBHEAD]

Hey, Disco_Doctor, believe me, I'm not dissing the 70s. There were some absolutely BRILLIANT records in the 70s, mainly because they had learned how to use stereo effectively.

When I say "overproduced," I'm talking about some of the records that came out between about 1976 and 1984 where the producer tried to give the band a distinct sound for marketing purposes by putting in extra stuff. Stuff like horns or string sections that really didn't enhance the music at all and in some cases ruined a perfectly good song.

I'm not saying nobody had ever done that before or that nobody has done it since, but it was quite a noticeable trend during that period.

Julian, I think hip hop is okay to record loud and squashed, because it sounds that way live. But it seems like they record EVERYTHING that way these days and I personally don't think it's the right approach for many projects. Just because something sells well doesn't mean the recording technique used is beyond criticism. You get a great song and musicians who can pour tons of feeling into their studio performances, you'll end up with a great disc even if the recording was mediocre. Or innappropriately loud.

To be sure, some stuff is very intense recorded loud and squished. But with some stuff, when you lose the dramatic increase in volume (whether sudden or gradual) that you would hear in a live performance, the music loses its edge.

Anyway, that's my opinion, for what it's worth.

[coaster]

test

[delphypop]

I think you can keep the effect of dynamic change in your music while still having it running really hot.
Take forexample thesoundof a hushed human voice,up close and intimate, but loud.
It gives youthe feeling of quiet, regardless of volume.
a guitar played softly turned up real loud. The same feeling of dynamic intamacy.

in the real world context these sounds would be lost below the noise floor of road noise and background murmour, but in the compressed world of recorded audio they are artificially squished up to be audiable at all times.

I've got my CDs to equaland beat many out there in volume, but I still manage to keep it dynamic, or more to the point, if I get the time to work on it I can do both. I reckon a lot of the CDs you mention as sounding bad actually do sound bad. They were done by big name peoplewho may just be getting paid a lot of money for knowing no more than you or I. But ain't that the case in a lot of the music industry. Ever gotto work with a name producer/ engineers and found out they don't know S h i t. I worked with a few and they can't even mic up drums properly.

I fuind that maxim usedwell can really help my mixes by removing the inaudiable transient spikes that suck away my head room.

It's only theextreme useage that bugs me and those cases are bad usage.

A bad engineer makes a bad track.

My reply to a client that wants me to mess up a track is,it can't be done,

feed em a bull**** line bout how it's introducing distortion, or it will cause dropouts or and other DFA line you can come up with.

then do it your way

cheers

Rob

[[Benjamin]]

"What do you mean you don't get the absolute maximum number of bits? About the only way you're going to use more bits is if you print a brick wall limited burst of pink noise through an L1."

-Hey, man, I agree. Not the other way around..

It's nice to see that so many of you seems to agree that CD's are getting too squashed. Thanx.

------------------
[HYPERSONIC]

[Danny Caccavo]

This is what destroyed 45's way back when. You ever hear any of them from Bell Sound? It got completely out of control. Producers wanted their records to be the hottest on radio and jukeboxes.

Nowadays, with the occasional mastering job I still do, I get "it's gotta be as loud as the others on the radio and clubs". Well, of course, most radio stations compress the hell out of the signal anyway, so it doesn't matter. And club DJ's just set the level so it's right. The levels vary so drastically anyway between CDs....it makes having a carousel changer a living hell...<g>.

It's amazing to me. No one learned from history, and now they are repeating it...

DC

I challenge you list a few "distroyed" 45's!

How bout..

Dancing in the streets (distorted)
Honky tonk woman (bitchin!)
Good vibrations (overloaded)

Err?

All these came blasting out the radio and juke boxes. You can't argue with a producer wanting to do the same thing with new productions!

There will always be a place for audiofile pristine productions like Ry Cooder, Donald Fagin and now it apears Natalie Merchant (yawn, ZZZzzzzzz).

Others will continue to scream "look at me!" "dance you f**ker!"and "tap your foot to this"

People are making a big effort to re create the sound of an overloaded juke box, it was exciting, have you forgotten?

Jules

[This message has been edited by Julian Standen (edited 10-30-99).]

[Danny Caccavo]

People are making a big effort to re create the sound of an overloaded juke box, it was exciting, have you forgotten?

Jules

Well, no, I haven't forgotten. You want to create that? Go back to analog tape and vinyl. And some compression that pumps, not this multiband "just make it loud" sound.

Remember the Raspberries? <g>

The thing is, back in the '60s, 45's were played on jukeboxes, radio, and lo-fi changers. Sounded fine on those. The problem is, play one of those on a good hi-fi, and...OY!

And I've heard plenty of rockin' 45's that were NOT cut at outrageous volumes.

Are you defending the loud volumes and massive peak limiting going on? Just curious.

dc

[This message has been edited by Danny Caccavo (edited 10-30-99).]

[Stratman]

This whole concept of mastering your record so it is louder than everyone elses has become absurd. If you are a NIN fan and also love Led Zep 1, guess what you do when Zep comes on....you turn it up, and start doing air GT and drumming, and that's what common folk do at home if they love the music.....they do not say, "NIN sounds 8.7 db louder that this old Zep record so I guess I'll only listen to NIN".

The latest Black Crowes record (By Your Side) is not the loudest record you ever heard, but when you put it on the apperent level combined with the dynamics is incredible> check it out!

[This message has been edited by Stratman (edited 10-31-99).]