OK Things we should all know in regards to loudness and compression

[mrlindeman]

So after months of study, pracitce and getting info here recently I have put something together. Compression on a final mix is to be used to subtly mend the mix creating a more full and smooth sound. Some limiting can be used to bring the master mix to a more pronounced listening level. On the other hand recently music has been taken to a horrible level of compression and limiting on the market. Giving artists the impression that more dinamically sounding mixes seem to quiet. Nonsense!!! There are plenty of bands and musicians out there alike that do not smash the shit out of their songs and are selling millions of songs. How do they do that when its not as competitivly loud as new music? Put quite simply, it sounds better. You can still hear the subtle qualities, being that little chime in the backround or the soft to powerfull buildup for a chorus. Whereas on a smashed new track that we are seing more nowadays its all lound and there is just noise everywhere. Its ok to have a track that averages at -3 or even peak at -03 db and not be earcrushing loud as long as the mix sounds great. People want to hear the differences in the instraments and the build ups. I know this post may seem lame but I wanted to share. Here are some interesting inks on the subject as well. One of them is a video showing the progression of ironmaiden before and after they decided to not feed into the loudness war. And even if you dont really like thier music, you have to apreciate the fact that they stood thier ground for the most part. First one is a good example of a remastered direstraits song.
YouTube - Why I Don't Buy "Remastered" CDs.
YouTube - Iron Maiden - Fighting the loudness war

The Death of High Fidelity : Rolling Stone

[garageband]

The YouTube of the first wasn't working but there was this charmingly naive comment I had to clip:

Record companies aren't in business for true music fans anymore.

I suspect I'll chuckle about that one the rest of the evening.

[mrlindeman]

It is true though that alot of new bands have the mastering houses at the table with this issue though. Said band sais hey I want this mix loud like that other guy on the radio, the mastering house does it. The music makes ears bleed and babies cry, and the rest of the bands jump like lemmings for the loudness cause folks dont want to adjust volume levels on thier I-Pod while they are walking thier dog down the road lol. I like what I found in the article on how people used to buy the best stereo in thier home for the ultimate music experience. Those days are fading fast I think. I would love to learn mastering and turn that into a career but I know that would cost tons of cash and I would have to deal with crap like loudness over quality.

[Danny Danzi]

Actually, I can explain this a little for you Mr. L. There's a bit more to it than most people know. I'll share what I know for what it's worth.

Years ago, there was a guy at a radio station that was a bit of a gear head. He pretty much lived at the station creating cool new things for them to have that other stations did not. One day while messing around with an audio editor, he processed audio in a way using compression and limiting that made the audio so loud, it was just incredible. Radio stations have had loudness wars for many years. The object is to switch to their station and be enticed to stay due to how loud they would be.

So this dude made what they called at the time a CRT which was a program file used in radio that triggered songs, commercials etc. He compiled the stations most played songs and processed them with this compression trick and turned his boss onto it. The boss was amazed and knew without a doubt they would have the loudest station in the area. So, they implemented this guy's little trick and processed all their material so it would be super loud on air. That along with the station compressors and you really have ear-bleeding levels. Also, keep in mind that a radio station has to stay within a certain band-width when is sends. This means that they are limited as to how much signal can be sent. With the use of massive compressors to keep them within their band limits, they can increase volume by about +6dB.

So anyway, this guy was being asked by friends of his that worked at other radio stations, how he was doing what he was doing. He of course never let the cat out of the bag. The other stations wanted in, so they approached him silently and offered him loads of cash to do the same for their stations. The next thing you know, this dude was processing audio all over the country and no longer had a job with one station. He was a free agent that worked for everyone.

Now, while this was all going on and he was enjoying his riches, other stations were curious as to how this was happening so they would have their people experiment. Sure enough, others figured it out and this dude was no longer needed when they saw how easy it really was. Now, enter in the labels into this and they wanted in as well. Record labels of rock/metal have always had little friendly battles with what label put out the loudest album of the year. So when they heard about these possibilities, they were foaming at the mouth.

From there an all out war was on and the thing that was fitting about it was the bands whos material was always crushed, were never really great dynamic bands anyway for the most part. The aggressive bands found out that this over-compression and squashage actually complimented their style really. This became part of a bands make-up in reality. Those of us who favor dynamics over loudness will differ that point, but the fact remains that most of the bands that went this route never had much in the way of dynamics anyway.

That said, it is not the bands choice at all times. Most times it is the label that demands this. The artist sometimes doesn't have a say depending on who they are. It is also very rare you'll hear a band in an interview state "we wanted to have the loudest record on the planet". True artists would never talk like that and lets face it, even those we may not consider true artists have enough sense to know how important dynamics are in a song. And you're right, record companies aren't in business for true music fans anymore and this is because most of the founding members are either deceased or retired. The young blood gets in there and alters things to keep up with the times and they wind up ruining everything. There was a time when truly talented people got record deals. As a matter of fact if you didn't have talent...true talent, you couldn't get a deal to save your life.

These days, the word "unique" has been used in place of the word "greatness" and the masses buy into it because the record companies ram it down their throats via mass marketing, radio marketing and all the ploys that guarantee them success at some level. A good, old record company president wouldn't sign "unique" unless it was something truly spectacular, yet unique. In today's times we see way more "image" and "agression" than we see true talent. Remember the phrase "garbage in, garbage out"? If the massive squashing and compression were not there to hide some of these bands flawls, people probably wouldn't buy into it. Then again, if 2 dudes farting in harmony gets the right financial backing and promotion, it will sell too...so I'm not sure it really matters. We come to find out more and more, that bands suck live these days due to not being able to play what they recorded and the lack of processing has painted false pictures to everyone. I've never heard in all my life, so many complaining about big bands that sell well....about how horrible they sound live. The reason being....anyone can sound good in the studio these days, but you can't hide that stuff live unless you cheat and use computers running in the background....which many are using today as well.

So at the end of the day, you can also say that many bands are hiding behind this mess we call squashing or over-compression. The key to it these days in my opinion, is to get things as loud as they are yet maintain dynamics. Here's a prime example for you....2 actually.

Like these bands or hate them, they have a good grasp on what loud and dynamic is supposed to sound like in my opinion. The new Alice in Chains tune "Check my Brain" which can be heard on their site when it opens, is a great candidate for loud yet dynamic. Another is the new Creed song called "Overcome" which will open if you visit their site. Great production, extreme volume yet dynamics are kept in check. I think things are changing...we can only hope. I have no problems with extreme volume as long as dynamics remain in a tune. As soon as they are gone and it sounds like one lump of extreme loudness with no change, you get ear fatigue as well as the need to hurl.

[TonyB]

Good summary.

As a father of twin sons in a rock band, they have become accustomed to overcompression and squashed songs. They intentionally want "that sound."

Yes, in some cases they're covering up, but in other cases they intentionally want "that sound." Listeners in the pre-teen to 20's are also accustomed to the sonic quality (for lack of a better phrase - lo fidelity? harsh mid-hi freqs?) of music via MySpace through earbuds.

[mrlindeman]

Good Good points all around. Its good to look at it from both sides.

[burnyourflags]

theres also another point i think is missing and thats is that most people record digitally now opose to analog2" even adat there was a ****er sound and i think we used more of an ear for mixing and mastering in the past then now,now we sit in front of spectrum the whole time were recording. and def,myspace has changed music in a lot of ways.for the good and bad.i personnaly make dif.mixes and masters of the same songs,to put on myspace,a home stereo,and my local radio station.and i dont here much of a dif,on the radio with my stuff.but, i dont really think there taking extra time to fix songs for a sunday local radio show. its also in the writing of bands now.as well.there isnt really a lot of dynamics,even with technical bands there still following a grid.there isnt a lot of seperation as individuals in bands,so of course the guy up there that wrote the really long and very informative response is right.its easier to crush it and it sounds better when there isnt a lot going on.i personally use as least amount of compression as possible well and that im not very good with limiters either.

[burnyourflags]

Originally Posted by burnyourflags

theres also another point i think is missing and thats is that most people record digitally now opose to analog2" even adat there was a ****er sound and i think we used more of an ear for mixing and mastering in the past then now,now we sit in front of spectrum the whole time were recording. and def,myspace has changed music in a lot of ways.for the good and bad.i personnaly make dif.mixes and masters of the same songs,to put on myspace,a home stereo,and my local radio station.and i dont here much of a dif,on the radio with my stuff.but, i dont really think there taking extra time to fix songs for a sunday local radio show. its also in the writing of bands now.as well.there isnt really a lot of dynamics,even with technical bands there still following a grid.there isnt a lot of seperation as individuals in bands,so of course the guy up there that wrote the really long and very informative response is right.its easier to crush it and it sounds better when there isnt a lot going on.i personally use as least amount of compression as possible well and that im not very good with limiters either.

why doesnt" ****er" show up right on here?

[burnyourflags]

Originally Posted by burnyourflags

why doesnt" ****er" show up right on here?

that wierd man **** **** huh!?

[Danny Danzi]

LOL burn, if you search the forum...the site owner has banned that word due to how many people have different explanations for it. As an example, you read about a piece of gear or an amp that is W a r m yet when you get it home, it sounds harsh and brittle....one person's definition of the word could be another mans curse if they take them at their word. Thus, the word has been banned on this forum....which in my opinion may be a bit extreme, but the reason behind why it was banned due to this being an educational forum, I agree with 100%.