Quote adam miller:

---

For the sake of clarity, when you say 'square wave compression' I'm taking it to mean brickwall limiting and digital clipping- is this correct?

---

Adam, he means what he says, not some alternative meaning you are trying to superimpose on his words.

I can compress the hell out of say a distorted guitar and record that sound and make it sound good in a record. All at the analogue stage. Analogue distortion in its place is harmonic, pleasing, and useful. Start doing that stuff after the A/D converters and it is brutal, ugly, noise.

As for pandering to short attention spans, until around the mid-1960s record labels seldom released any song exceeding about 2m 30s, believing nobody could listen to the stuff for much longer (and of course playing to a radio market).

Don't confuse radio compression for mastering compression/limiting. They are quite different. I could do a completely uncompressed master of a delicate acoustic number, and what radio 1 would do to it is make it sound as "loud" as the hip-hop number they played next to it... because they have to, to retain their audience in noisy cars on motorways etc. They will do this regardless of what the ME does, so a decent ME will serve the song, not the putative broadcaster. There's no such thing as a "radio-friendly mix".


There's quite a few people contributing to this thread who seriously know what they are talking about. You could learn a lot if you opened your mind and stopped trying to defend the indefensible from (as far as I can see) a position where your technical armoury in support of your case is non-existent... and always will be.

Edited by Steve Hill (19/07/08 01:20 PM)

Quote adam miller:

---

Why is Radio 1 smashed to within an inch of its life, Radio 2 less so and 3+4 barely at all?

---

Where do most people listen to the radio? In the car, a noisy environment. So a decreased dynamic range makes sense for this.

Correct me if I'm wrong but I'm pretty sure if you transmit a signal which has a larger rms (louder) you don't need to use so many transmitters, and therefore save cost.

I've always thought this was the reason for Radio 3 having awful reception.

What really winds me up in classic fm listeners, they think they know classical music, but that station is just a pop channel really. The compression is ridiculous, dynamics in classical music are hugely important.

--------------------
P.I.G.L.E.T - where is polly?

Quote 0VU:

---

There's so much more to the whole discussion of people's shortening attention span, 'dumbing down', devaluing of culture (and many other things) and disposability of just about every aspect of modern life and how they all affect music, art, culture, consumerism, manufacturing, design, etc., etc., than can ever be covered in one discussion, let alone in a single forum thread. The reasons for so many people perceiving music as free/disposable/valueless are far more wide ranging and complex than just simple stand alone things like generational differences, cost of manufacture/distribution, talent (or lack of), etc.. The whole loudness game and increasing disposability of music are just parts of the much wider changes in society/lifestyles. I don't like music becoming throwaway and the associated devaluing of the skills, talents and years of accumulated experience but I don't see any one person or group changing it no matter how loud they shout.

---

You are absolutely correct. Singling out over-compression, and using it for a starting point for an entire argument about current popular music, is pretty futile. As we've seen, some people actually like that sound and find it aesthetically pleasing, and nothing is going to convince them otherwise. It all boils down to taste. Personally, I haven't bought a charts-topping album in a very long time, simply because there isn't anything around I haven't heard done better, 20 years ago. The fact that many modern productions sound harsh, scratchy and lack dynamics, fades into insignificance, given their apparent lack of artistic substance. I would include my own productions in this critique - I'm not sure I would pay money to listen to my own music either.

Every decade some spotty yoofs pick up the available technology - carefully engineered to produce a pristine sound - and say 'cant you make it louder / or you know 'less clean'?


"One can have to much of a good thing - still more a loud"

- on the reception of Beethovens Fifth symphony.

--------------------

Then why 90% of the time I play a squashed to hell version of a mix side-by-side a logical RMS one to a band [played to equal levels of course] they choose the un-distorted one?

Quote archdake mkII:

---

Then why 90% of the time I play a squashed to hell version of a mix side-by-side a logical RMS one to a band [played to equal levels of course] they choose the un-distorted one?

---

It's the 10% we're talking about - I think.

--------------------
Dynamite with a laser beam...

Great the way that the boring old gits shouldered everyone who didn't agree with them out of this thread. Go moderators!

--------------------
Stuff what I done

Quote Sle:

---

Great the way that the boring old gits shouldered everyone who didn't agree with them out of this thread. Go moderators!

---

Would you care to explain that remark? Preferably without resorting to any more insults.

Quote Sle:

---

Great the way that the boring old gits shouldered everyone who didn't agree with them out of this thread. Go moderators!

---

I typed out a really witty response to this, but after re-reading it, on balance, I decided against posting it.

It was really quite funny though. And not even slightly boring...

If you read the first/second pages, Gelled_Fringe and a few others were making a case for the other side, and were basically shouldered unceremoniously out of the way.

If people take light-hearted ribbing like "Old git" and some references to prog-rock worship that seriously, it comes across as a bit odd to me.

I remember reading the review of the L3 in SOS http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/aug05/articles/wavesl3.htm , and while some doubts were expressed, objectivity was kept throughout..

That's just my opinion though, and clearly it seems I must apologise for my offensive remark.

EDIT: Review of the L3, I mean, not the L2..

--------------------
Stuff what I done

Edited by Sle (19/07/08 07:03 PM)

I see it as a case of people whose arguments were comprehensively demolished, and chose to stop posting.

Maybe you have some problem with other people contributing to a discussion who might have a different opinion to you?

--------------------
Dynamite with a laser beam...

Slightly on-topic..

My friend has recently been mastering some of his mixes for Myspace (for his clients) - and he was saying that he was getting his mixes up to 0db.

Surely he means Peak and not RMS?

I thought the average indy / modern rock band was around -6dB RMS - or have things got worse?

--------------------
Mac user; Logic and ProTools systems.

Quote 0VU:

---

There's so much more to the whole discussion of people's shortening attention span, 'dumbing down', devaluing of culture (and many other things) and disposability of just about every aspect of modern life and how they all affect music, art, culture, consumerism, manufacturing, design, etc., etc., than can ever be covered in one discussion, let alone in a single forum thread. The reasons for so many people perceiving music as free/disposable/valueless are far more wide ranging and complex than just simple stand alone things like generational differences, cost of manufacture/distribution, talent (or lack of), etc.. The whole loudness game and increasing disposability of music are just parts of the much wider changes in society/lifestyles. I don't like music becoming throwaway and the associated devaluing of the skills, talents and years of accumulated experience but I don't see any one person or group changing it no matter how loud they shout. Only time will tell which trends are with us to stay and whether listening to bursts of distortion and square waves will be an embarrassing blip in musical history or, depressingly, the shape of things to come.

---

This is precisely why I pointed Tui towards Adorno- people had the same concerns about the commodification of music, the decline in listening skills and the banality of modern music years ago. The scapegoats change (clearly Adorno wasn't talking about digital clipping), but the arguments remain startlingly similar.

Quote Steve Hill:

---

Adam, he means what he says, not some alternative meaning you are trying to superimpose on his words.

---

Sorry Steve, I haven't come across the expression 'square wave compression' before- I'm not trying to superimpose anything on Zukan's words, just to ensure we're talking about the same thing.

Quote Steve Hill:

---

Analogue distortion in its place is harmonic, pleasing, and useful. Start doing that stuff after the A/D converters and it is brutal, ugly, noise.

---

What if the music I'm making is brutal, ugly and noisy? I'm familiar with the sound of these digital processes- i just believe that like analogue distortion, their use in the right context and in the right hands can work in sympathy with the aesthetic of certain productions (and in a way that can't be achieved in the analogue domain).

Quote Steve Hill:

---

I could do a completely uncompressed master of a delicate acoustic number, and what radio 1 would do to it is make it sound as "loud" as the hip-hop number they played next to it... because they have to, to retain their audience in noisy cars on motorways etc.

---

And Radio 2,3 etc don't? Broadcast multiband compression doesn't just make the thing louder, as I know you're well aware- in a critical listening environment I find it far more offensive than the digital limiting and clipping processes used in mastering. Different stations have a different sonic fingerprint to fit with the intended demographic- and the same is true of music mastering.

Quote Steve Hill:

---

There's quite a few people contributing to this thread who seriously know what they are talking about.

---

I completely appreciate this Steve, and believe it or not I agree with the majority of opinion that smashing the dynamics out of music for the sake of it is a mindless, negative thing to do. By the same stretch, I have to reconcile it with the fact that I love the sound of many records that have been smashed into the digital end stops- and I believe that they'd sound inferior for their intended purpose without having been through that process. Given the sound of a great swathe of current releases, I'd have to conclude that many engineers, producers, musicians and ordinary punters feel the same way.

Quote Steve Hill:

---

You could learn a lot if you opened your mind and stopped trying to defend the indefensible from (as far as I can see) a position where your technical armoury in support of your case is non-existent... and always will be.

---

I don't really see this as a technical issue, but an aesthetic one. My opinion might appear completely unpalatable to you, but if the sound of contemporary popular music is anything to go by, I'd hope it's not one I hold in isolation.

Quote adam miller:

---

I don't really see this as a technical issue, but an aesthetic one. My opinion might appear completely unpalatable to you, but if the sound of contemporary popular music is anything to go by, I'd hope it's not one I hold in isolation.

---

It's not. Without getting all worked up about other peoples preferences I share your sentiments about the aesthetics.

To me compression, limiting, distortion, MBC etc is more about a sound than perceived loudness and I'll put that in front of any technical issues anyday. On indivudual instruments as well as a full mix I'll sacrifice dynamics for energy,aggression and attitude anyday if I feel it gets me where I want to go.
Do I care about what others do? Not really. If I don't like it, I simply won't bother listening to it. Dynamics or not.
and I do believe the same goes for the average music listener. Fatigue? The average listener walks around with crappy earplugs and 128 Kb/s mp3s on full blast and they aren't exactly complaining are they? They either like it or they don't. Simple.

--------------------
Phatcat Studios--"I love the smell of Genelecs in the morning"

This thread is pointless, its argument and tension for the sake of it.

You would argue even if you agreed on some points.

Some people in this thread I've got a great deal of respect and time for, I'm more than happy to challenge their points of views and idea's, but I know they are built on a considerable amount of experience and expertise. At the end of the day, you can't argue about that. Some of these people have being doing this for quite a while.

As an observer I just think Its a bit sad to be honest,

Even if you don't agree with someone, you can always learn from them.

L

--------------------
P.I.G.L.E.T - where is polly?

Quote Celsius:

---

28 Kb/s mp3s on full blast and they aren't exactly complaining are they? They either like it or they don't. Simple.

---

Odd how nearly all illegal downloads are via things like bit torrents; they are VBR 196kbps+ mp3s. The Digital to Analogue convertor is going to have a larger bearing on the sound than, the mp3 in question.

--------------------
P.I.G.L.E.T - where is polly?

Yup.I agree. Not much point in discussing personal preferences. As for myself I'm not really too concerned about arguing any "points".Certainly not the ones I agree with. Just my personal opinion based on my own experience and observation and last but not least, my own personal preferences.

What's sad? That people disagree? When it comes to music people will always disagree.

--------------------
Phatcat Studios--"I love the smell of Genelecs in the morning"

I think it's time everyone who's contributed to this thread so far gives the person sitting next to them a hearty slap on the back.

The last three pages have been great reading and show the intelligence (and entertainment value!) of some of those who frequent this forum.

WELL DONE YOU!

My small contribution is... look at all the kids playing music on their mobile phones on speaker-phone. Now apart from only not confiscating their phones because I like not being all stabbed, this shows how much of a minority issue the whole debate is. Despite my interest in music and recording, I know few people who place importance on a decent playback system. Maybe I should get new friends...

Quote Celsius:

---

What's sad? That people disagree? When it comes to music people will always disagree.

---

Agreed!

--------------------
I'm All Ears.

Quote Pete (Conz) Connelly:

---

My respect level has hit rock bottom with this geezer!!! Here are some quotes from a recent SOS interview with Demacio 'Demo' Castellon, the git!!!

"The mastering wars? Haha! Tim and I are partly to blame for that! We made some records that were clearly very loud and this became a bit of a trend-setter"

"Of course it can cut the dynamics on some records, and you definitely get fatigue listening to records that loud for a long time. But it's what people want to hear."



Cheers,
Peter

---

It seems many are getting worked up about one production technique out of many. Anyone remember Hugh Padgham and the gated drums of the 80s? Never was my cup of tea but that was one style among many - and many engineers/producers used this technique. Gradually new innovations in technology and new production values meant there was no place for it anymore in most compositions or mixes.

I feel the same way about brickwall limiting but I think its important to keep the nature of contemporary music in context. Never has there been such a crossover of acts and fans from one genre to another. Sure, you still have you hardcore niches but there's also the kids who listen to Hip Hop as much as Rock as much as Dance. This is unprecedented and perhaps by increasing perceived volume, a degree of consistency can be maintained across the genre spectrum.

I myself despise it for all the reasons you mention but especially because I am often forced to use it when a client decides the mix isn't as loud as what's being played in the charts. And I do agree with some that compression and limiting can be used effectively as an effect but that's besides the point for me.

ken

--------------------
I'm All Ears.

Yeah, diversity of opinion isn't a strong point amongst the wielders of power here though, it has to be said. Other viewpoints, unless extremely eloquently and carefully put, are railroaded out of existence in a lot of cases.

The magazine itself does NOT fall into this trap at all, as demonstrated by the link in my previous post. People should be able to come here and debate, not fight against a prevailing mindset that represents none but a few "old hands".

Again, I must state that this is purely my own opinion and is not intended to cause offence..

--------------------
Stuff what I done

Ah yes, but with age comes experience (wisdom is debatable ). I'm very grateful the members of this forum are here to assist me when I have technical issues because I know many on here have been in the situation once, if not many times before. They will have troubleshot the problem to death and can therefore speak on authority.

If an argument gets heated, I just always try to remember to write as if I was there in the room with that person, asking them for their time.

ken

--------------------
I'm All Ears.

Quote Sle:

---

Other viewpoints, unless extremely eloquently and carefully put, are railroaded out of existence in a lot of cases.

---

What's wrong with eloquence, or placing one's words carefully? How would you like it if, conversely, the "old hands" were to refer to the younger audience as "pea-brained, drugged-up yobos", and to budding electronic musicians as "Little losers who sit in their mum's basement and play around with cracked copies of Cubase on beige Pentium 4 boxes"? Would you like that better?

Read the start of the thread. Sychophancy is annoying at best.

--------------------
Stuff what I done

Quote Sle:

---

If you read the first/second pages, Gelled_Fringe and a few others were making a case for the other side, and were basically shouldered unceremoniously out of the way.

---

I have as you instructed reread the start of this post, and the first thing that struck me as anything other than either a joke or a well put point was this:

Quote Gelled_Fringe:

---

every time i log in to this forum i see the same old tired reactionary rants from decrepit mike oldfield worshippers. this is MODERN MUSIC and it is MADE FOR CLUBS grandad!

---

which is not exactly the way you quote him above.

This guy was clearly up for a barney, and I don't think you need to worry that he was 'shouldered out of the way'.

--------------------
Anto mo Ninja, Watashi mo Ninja

The interesting thing is the body of work that's behind some of those who are voicing their opinions. Call it sycophantic if you will, but there are people here that have rather more experience in multiple genres rather than a Bebo or Myspace page and their work speaks volumes. It doesn't mean their opinion is worth more, but it's based on a solid foundation of dealing with the artists and labels that are possibly aspirational for at best for others.

"Body of work"

Come on then? What is it?

I'll stand by my music, though I don't try to tell other people I can produce theirs.

--------------------
Stuff what I done

After posting 1040 posts, you still haven't noticed that some people here have sold millions of albums, of just about any genre, in just about any country? Blimey.

Quote Tui:

---

After posting 1040 posts, you still haven't noticed that some people here have sold millions of albums, of just about any genre, in just about any country? Blimey.

---

Excuse me, I think you're a little confused.

--------------------
Stuff what I done

Quote Sle:

---

Quote Tui:

---

After posting 1040 posts, you still haven't noticed that some people here have sold millions of albums, of just about any genre, in just about any country? Blimey.

---

Excuse me, I think you're a little confused.

---

No, he's not. Reading between the lines in posts by these people would give you an indication of the kinds of people / bands / labels they've worked with. A high post count would usually indicate that a user may have been around long enough to see some.

Quote Aural Reject:

---

Reading between the lines in posts by these people would give you an indication of the kinds of people / bands / labels they've worked with. A high post count would usually indicate that a user may have been around long enough to see some.

---

We are not worthy!

--------------------
Stuff what I done

All well and good but it's still a matter of opinion and if body of work and merits should count as any kind of validation one need only look at the most successful releases and you have the same support for the opposite view. IOW it doesn't matter how many albums you've sold or how loud you shout. From a technical standpoint it's not rocket surgery either. It's pretty obvious what the brickwall limiting does to the signal. So you really don't need to be a platinum selling producer to understand it.
What's strange is the fact that some people find it difficult to accept that others are doing it by choice, and not because they have to.

There really is no point whatsoever throwing technical arguments on the table if someone is doing it for the sound.

Of course dynamics has it's place but it's only part of the picture. The way I see it, it's just the natural evolution as a consequence of new tools and new techniques like any other element in the production process.

--------------------
Phatcat Studios--"I love the smell of Genelecs in the morning"

Quote Celsius:

---

All well and good but it's still a matter of opinion and if body of work and merits should count as any kind of validation one need only look at the most successful releases and you have the same support for the opposite view.

---

Absolutely.

The thing that irks me is the apparent post further up the thread that thinks this is all about old school tie and shouldering other perspectives out of the way...along with the (admittedly fairly mild) insult.

I have no problem with whichever side of the 'loudness argument' people want to sit - I like both 'loud' stuff and material that retains it's dynamic range, although my personal preference is very much in favour of the latter.

The thing I do have an issue with is an apparent lack of respect.

Quote:

---

What's strange is the fact that some people find it difficult to accept that others are doing it by choice, and not because they have to

---

Agreed again - it really depends on what it is you're doing.

Again, a lot of the people that have voiced opinions are involved in engineering or production projects for other people. It's a simple demarcation to make when you're doing things for yourself. You do what you want to do. If you're a paid employee, then you've two choices - you either do what people are asking you to do and pay the mortgage (which, of course, has two subdivisions in it viz you like it or you don't) or you vote with your feet and work for people who're more aligned with your own musical sensibilities.

Quote:

---

The way I see it, it's just the natural evolution as a consequence of new tools and new techniques like any other element in the production process.

---

IMO evolution isn't necessarily the right word as it implies a bettering by a natural selection process. It may be a consequence of said tools and techniques....but, as Darwin would've said, eventually it'll be down to the survival of the fittest

There's room for all of it, it just depends on how you like your tea.....

Quote Aural Reject:

---

IMO evolution isn't necessarily the right word as it implies a bettering by a natural selection process. It may be a consequence of said tools and techniques....but, as Darwin would've said, eventually it'll be down to the survival of the fittest

---

totally OT i know, but evolution is nothing to do with survival of the fittest, and Darwin would have vehemently rebuked such a statement - it was coined by a publicist who knew nothing of the theory. evolution is a process of change - not toward any end other than more change.

i like being a pedant late on a Sunday night...

--------------------
hourglass | random thoughts | doubledotdash!? collective

Quote onesecondglance:

---

Quote Aural Reject:

---

IMO evolution isn't necessarily the right word as it implies a bettering by a natural selection process. It may be a consequence of said tools and techniques....but, as Darwin would've said, eventually it'll be down to the survival of the fittest

---

totally OT i know, but evolution is nothing to do with survival of the fittest, and Darwin would have vehemently rebuked such a statement - it was coined by a publicist who knew nothing of the theory. evolution is a process of change - not toward any end other than more change.

i like being a pedant late on a Sunday night...

---

We could always add in the probability aspects that go with it...and if something evolves into something weak then it'll (usually) be fairly transient....not strictly Darwinian, it's true, but if something's crap eventually it'll run it's course and go away....

...or gain a cult following

Other moderators can speak for themselves, but I would say that this thread amply demonstrates that there is plenty of room for opinions and nobody need be afraid to express them.

I have waved a yellow card at one poster only, not for his opinions (which I respect) but for a combative stance which, arguably, was unnecessarily hostile and likely to get in the way of an interesting discussion. And he to his credit has apologised.

Apart from (possibly coincidentally and possibly unusually!) posting personal opinions which happen to be on the same "side" on this particular question, there's no "official moderator line" being taken here, no plan agreed behind closed doors, and no conspiracy. We have views too, and are entitled to post just as forum members. IF anyone posts in a moderator capacity it's usually evident.

On the narrow topic of this thread it is perhaps appropriate for one or two old lags to advise an audience including people starting out, or doing courses, that what is being commended (by some) is not good practice, or will lose you marks in an exam etc etc. There may be half a dozen people on the planet who can use the "effect" creatively; there are thousands who can't and the evidence is there for all to see.

--------------------
Dynamite with a laser beam...

Quote PWGLE:

---

Is it really a war?

---

The 'war' is between producers trying to make each record 'louder' than the other's.

--------------------
gentle robot - chapel hill rock band

I wonder if Demacio browses this forum??

In today's day and age it needs to be done and the "war" doesn't bother me. The bad thing is people who want it pushed far too much where it becomes noticeable to the average listener. If used properly you can limit it to a respectable comparable level to most commercial music and still have it sound really good. Just because most people on here are experts and have very good ears and great setups and can notice the effects and problems with it doesn't mean it is wrong. That also doesn't mean it is the right thing to do as far as quality goes because it isn't.

Music has changed and a lot of genres simply sound better with it and simply just need it, it has been started and is here to stay...at least for awhile. I mean if it isn't loud I crank it up to damaging levels anyway so the fatigue argument doesn't jive with me..when I don't want to listen to it loud, I turn it down to where it is not fatiguing.

Find the positive, if the trend goes the other way think of all the material that will need to be remastered and remixed. Lots of business. Problem is most if not all of you will be six feet under by then...