Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: Navigating the Loudness War (Read 4727 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Navigating the Loudness War

Hi Tekkies. All too unqualified audiophile in budding here.

When buying CDs, what kind of information do I need to look for that will ensure that it is a high quality recording? I am specifically wary of albums mastered during the advent of the CD which, I've read, sounded inferior to their vinyl predecessors at the time due to poor sound engineering. The "Loudness War" phenomenon is another thing to worry about. Am I missing anything?

The only navigational guideline for the former that I have encountered is to avoid CDs that were produced in the early 80s. I find this to be too vague to be effective. As for the latter, I don't even know where to start.

Is there anything apparent on an album itself that will give clues about the quality of the recording? Are there any databases that could assist this process?

Navigating the Loudness War

Reply #1 –
Regarding loudness war, of course no music label would mark their CDs as defective by design, so there is no label on it. Though clues like "Produced by Grammy Award winning producer Rick Rubin" are probably not intended to, but very useful to identify horrible CDs. Some music shops (if they still exist) allow you to listen before buying, you might identify bad production by that. In general, try-before-you-buy would be a good approach, as you would do with any product which has known oft-occuring defects. You might also refer to the DR-database, since the dynamic range as calculated by them is a sign of brickwall mastering, which is one of the most apparent signs of bad production.
It's only audiophile if it's inconvenient.

Navigating the Loudness War

Reply #2 –
IMO the most dynamic and natural CD reissues of older material are from approx. '89 to '93. Maybe extend that to '95. After that the Loudness War kicks in gradually.

XLD // ALAC // OGG VORBIS

Navigating the Loudness War

Reply #3 –
The DR database has the advantage of providing an objective measurement that's more or less reliable [citation needed]. CD's from the 80s also usually sound better, because the loudness war hadn't really started yet. For everything else, it's just word of mouth stuff, but then that's entire subjective.

In my experience, most remasters are just the original content with aggressive compression applied (Run-DMC - Raising Hell comes to mind), but there are exceptions, like the Doors Remasters from 2007 (DR11 on average) or the Jethro Tull - Aqualung remaster (DR13) from last year (they sound incredible, though they weren't just remastered, they were remixed as well). Some artists also make it a point of properly mixing and mastering their work, like Steven Wilson (who remastered Aqualung) or John Frusciante (listen to The Empyrean, DR11!). So I suggest that you spend some time on music boards and collect opinions about everyone's great finds.

Caveat about the Dynamic Range Meter: it doesn't always work properly on vinyl rips, allegedly because of clicks and pops that artificially inflate the DR score. The most recent example of that is the vinyl release of Random Access Memories by Daft Punk (~DR12 IIRC), which I (successfully) ABXed against the CD, and also compared in Audacity. The vinyl sounded like it had some high frequency cut-off, and despite it's largely superior DR score, it didn't sound (nor look) like it had more dynamic range. The CD sounds really good, despite its lowish DR score of DR8 (I recommend it).

Navigating the Loudness War

Reply #4 –
Quote from: Kohlrabi on
Regarding loudness war, of course no music label would mark their CDs as defective by design, so there is no label on it.


Conversely, there's the Turn Me Up label, but I don't remember ever seeing it on a CD.

Navigating the Loudness War

Reply #5 –
Thank you everyone for taking the time to respond. I've posted the same topic on other forums before and the replies were never as thoughtful as the ones from hydrogenaudio. You guys really know your stuff.
 

Navigating the Loudness War

Reply #6 –
Quote from: skamp on
Caveat about the Dynamic Range Meter: it doesn't always work properly on vinyl rips, allegedly because of clicks and pops that artificially inflate the DR score. The most recent example of that is the vinyl release of Random Access Memories by Daft Punk (~DR12 IIRC), which I (successfully) ABXed against the CD, and also compared in Audacity. The vinyl sounded like it had some high frequency cut-off, and despite it's largely superior DR score, it didn't sound (nor look) like it had more dynamic range. The CD sounds really good, despite its lowish DR score of DR8 (I recommend it).


Thank you very much. I had been wondering whether the results for vinyl rips on that site were correct, as it didn't seem right that each version would ALWAYS be made from different masters, especially on that particular album. I had the same feeling as you but didn't have a proper rip of the vinyl version (and time) to test. So thanks again.

On topic, don't know if the OP has been there already but on the Steve Hoffman Forums they usually discuss different album releases with emphasis on the sound and which one "sounds better". Proceed with care though, as their claims tend to be unjustified... Yet they may point in the right direction.

Navigating the Loudness War

Reply #7 –
Quote
Caveat about the Dynamic Range Meter: it doesn't always work properly on vinyl rips, allegedly because of clicks and pops that artificially inflate the DR score.
There was also some discussion in another thread about what happens with the RIAA pre/post equalization and the electrical-mechanical conversion effects effects of the cutting head & playback cartridge.  You effectively get an all-pass filter which shifts the phase differently at different frequencies while keeping the overall frequency response flat (or as flat as is possible with analog vinyl).

The all-pass filter ends-up affecting the peaks, basically making half the peaks larger and half the peaks smaller. This does not affect the sound, loudness, or perceived dynamics, but some peaks are higher (up to 6dB, I think).    So apparently, you can get a 6dB "improvement" in measured dynamic range with no change in the sound of the dynamics.  i.e. If the peak of one "wave" (one cycle) in a file is increased or decreased by 6dB, your ear/brain cannot hear it....    Your brain sort-of takes a short-term average and a longer-term average....  Making some peaks "randomly" higher and other peaks lower doesn't change the short-term or long-term perceived loudness.

This "false" increase in dynamic range on vinyl only happens when the original is compressed.   It's related to how the various frequency components are limited together when you compress.    If you shift some of the frequency components around in phase (and time), the average will be the same but some peaks will be higher and some peaks will be lower because different frequency components are compressed/limited at (very-slightly) different times.

Navigating the Loudness War

Reply #8 –
Thanks for the explanation. Could that "false" increase in dynamic range be corrected in some way? Perhaps applying another all-pass filter to compensate? I'm just curious now...

Edit: I'm afraid this is going kinda off-topic. Apologies to the OP. Perhaps a moderator could split the discussion...