What is Digg?308 Comments
- theone3, on 10/12/2007, -1/+50Here's a great illustration of what's happening.
http://www.cdmasteringservices.com.nyud.net:8080/loudnesgraphic.htm
According to the article, the issue became critical when in 2002, it was common to have digital clipping in music cds (reaching/surpassing maximum volume). Perhaps if the recording industry actually wants to fight digital sales, they should increase the dynamic range of their music to provide a decent quality product and force a requirement for higher quality rips. - prkchpsndwiches, on 10/12/2007, -5/+50Hehe. Your not an old fart. I'm only 21 and what do Ilisten to mostly? Rush, Metallica, The Beatles, Led Zepplin, The Moody Blues: all people who were making music before I was born. Although I do listen to some of todays artists, I just never find my self going back to listen again and again. (with the exception of Rage Against The Machine, and maybe Mars Volta, and a few others) I can't stand to listen to the radio anymore either. All rap is becoming the same. Even though I've been getting into some country lately, it's still all the same sound, hell even rock is starting to sound the same. Everything that comes out has that Puddle of Mudd/Nickelback/Godsmack type sound. None of it is exciting to listen to.
- naich, on 10/12/2007, -3/+41Interesting article, and I can see (or rather hear) what he's on about, but I can't see it being the sole cause of the decline of the music biz. I think it's more to do with that fact that modern music is more crap than it used to be. It's soulless mush being churned out to appeal to the lowest common denomenator. Or maybe I'm just turning into an old fart?
- JQP123, on 10/12/2007, -1/+33Speaking as an old fart, something has definitely happened to the quality of music. In the old days, people set out to become good musicians/songwriters and to express themselves and their imagination through music. A few became "stars". Nowadays, most seem set on becoming a "star" first and foremost. The musician thing is just something they have to sorta wade through in order to get there. And as far as expression goes, all too often what comes through is simply trivial minutia from a pampered upbringing Nothing I'm willing to pay to hear.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+27As a recording artist i can say that I agree with the article in many ways. The dynamic range is far gone, instead we have this fake digital thickness in the sound. We've come to understand and benchmark that sound as a "professional recording" whilst losing track of the real issue. The real issue is of course the music...the song...how its meant to come out and portrayed...rather than a thick radio ready soup of noise.
For example compare some of the early motown recordings, put that next to led zeppelin III and then place it next to the last Creed/Alter Bridge/Audioslave. Now forget about the musical differences, just listen to the recording technique and sound textures. Indeed not much dynamic range...just a ***** of compression. Now I admit some music is perfectly suited for that and needs it, the more heavy metal/rock. Even A perfect circle felt too compressed and dead. Thats my problem with a lot of music today, its over produced in that way and made far to compressed, killing the life of the music itself. Maybe thats why audiophiles prefer listening to older recordings, jazz music, well at least music with a lot more dynamic range. I sincerely hope that my band wont fall in the same trap next month when we hit the studio. Thanks for that great artcle theone3. And indeed dont fall into that "radioready" jargon, unless your music is purely intended as a lifeless product without soul. - davestar, on 10/12/2007, -1/+26"...it was common to have digital clipping in music cds..."
This is my biggest problem with the ever increasing compression in modern music. You can't even claim, "I listen to underground (fill in your genre here), which doesn't get radio play, so clipping/compression is not a problem for me." Digital clipping crops up everywhere. Even bands who don't bow to popular trends wind up with albums that contain horrible digital clipping.
I happen to listen to metal. 90% of the bands I like have zero chance of getting on commercial radio (excepting channel 27 on Sirius, I suppose). However, each new album that I put in my CD player has me yelling "What the hell is wrong with my tweeters?!? Oh wait, it's just the sound of horrendous digital clipping. Sweet." - rabbitfighter, on 10/12/2007, -4/+28He obviously hasn't heard the recordings of Apples in Stereo, Ariel Pink, Belle and Sebastian, The Sights, 16 Horsepower, White Stripes (they're mainstream as all get out for god's sake), Destroyer, Grandaddy, Richard Swift, Smog, Magnolia Electric Company...
Come on, Jack White continuously derides the use of modern recording equipment. In my opinion the buying public simply refuses to recognize good music unless papa Clear Channel gives them the "OK". I know there are people on this forum that absolutely love at least one of the bands listed above--call it what you will; indie, alternative, good--there's a music industry out there that continues to thrive thanks to open minded souls like us.
And baseless, there's no reason for your band to hit "the studio" next month. You clearly have a pretty good knowledge of music, so why don't you record yourselves? If you go into a studio, chances are all they're going to do is run you through your session so they can get to mixing your tracks down as fast as possible and send you on your way. You're not Coldplay or Creed, my friend (at least, please god, don't be). That's what's selling. My advice to you is spend the money you were going to spend on a recording session on a decent mixer and a reel to reel--or, if you don't want to go anologue, and nobody can blame you, tape is scary, you can get a decent multitracker for a computer on the cheep and then you can spend all the time in the world recording tracks and getting them to sound as thick and reverb soaked as you can. Then, when you're done, find a vinyl pressing plant in your area and work out a deal with them. No labels, no schmarmy recording studio engineers, no troubles. - SeanFL, on 10/12/2007, -0/+21I took the song "Owner of a Lonely Heart" by Yes and made a sample of the original and a version with loads of limiting to bring the average level in line with how today's music is produced. There's also a graph showing what it looks like on a waveform.
www.caldwellfamily.com/yes
If someone wants to host it, I can post up some high quality mp3 bits of other songs showing what it would sound like. It sure is louder...but is it better? Would you want to listen to music like that all day? It hurts my ears after a while. I like to listen to my music loud from time to time, but not if it has no dynamic range. If ten billion digg users start downloading it I may have to pull. Hope I don't get the digg effect. Sean - vann, on 10/12/2007, -2/+18Although this is an interesting hypothesis, it would be more interesting if he backed it up with data. What sort of correlation is there, actually, between dynamic range and album sales?
Still, interesting for the new perspective, so I'll digg it. - Genius16, on 10/12/2007, -1/+16everyone turns into an old fart (myself included. and im only 22) but i must agree, most of todays "popular" music sucks and doesnt sell.
but music is always a matter of opinion. as far as the decline in record sales, my opinion isnt because of dynamic range (which from a musician standpoint i dont believe has much, if any, effect on wether or not someone will buy a cd) its because of all the crap bands that are out there. people dont buy crap music, people buy music they like. it so happens theres alot of bands being produced and managed not because the "suits" believe they are good musicians, but because the "suits" believe it will sell.
the suits are the old farts who dont listen to music, just look at demographic graphs and judge music via a more mathmatical formula rather than what comes to the heart. - RexKwando, on 10/12/2007, -4/+18Pop culture relies heavily on mass marketing. As we become older, as I can see most of us are post teens, we are less influenced by marketing strategies implemented by the big 5. The younger people, unfortunately, steer the direction of our music. So let's smack some taste into our younger bretheren!
- socket, on 10/12/2007, -3/+16I guess with 30+ million people voting for American Idol contestants this has to be true.
- ksgant, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12That's certainly true. There is WAY too much over producing in music today to where it's almost a flat signal and a big bass drumline.
Gone are the days like on Led Zeppelin 1 where they recorded and produced the entire thing in 3 days! I would have thought you'd start seeing more back-to-basic stuff but it's getting worse and worse out there. - m.sandstorm, on 10/12/2007, -3/+15Props to you man. You are definately not the only one. I'm 24 and was a long time hip-hop and reggae fan. Hiphop has lost a lot of its quality since the industry realized that ignorance sells music. I find myself listening to all genres of music and going back to the old school Bob Marley. There are a few artist coming out now that are bringing the quality and uniqueness back to music, Matisyahu gets a honerable mention.
Yeah I think that one reason behind the drop in cd sales is the fact that people just don't enjoy modern music. There are awesome artists out there but you gotta
digg ;) to find them. - ,,|,_, on 10/12/2007, -4/+16Nico - "i don't mind seeing Jessica Simpson shake her ass on my TV nor do i mind any other hot female dancing around"
That's the problem. Is it to much to ask that our recording artists be talented musicians? If you want to see ass shaking, go to the strip club, I'll take Ben Harper playing a lap steel, Stevie Ray picking a Stratocaster, or even Mix Master Mike tearing up some vinyl... - p3ngu1n, on 10/12/2007, -7/+18i think your spelling is "teriable"
- jasoneisen, on 10/12/2007, -3/+14"Everything doesn't have to be Mozart or some super underground real ***** to be entertaining"
Everything doesn't have to be ass shaking to be entertaining. - charlescheese, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9I'm a recording engineer, and this is a huge problem. Every band comes in and wants it to be LOUD, which means destroying any and all dynamics to the music.
Another reason for this is because CD's are only capable of producing 16 bit sound files. 16 bits is not enough room to make quality quiet recordings. The louder the signal is, the more of the bits you use, the more detailed the sound file is. If your music is really quiet, like classical music, then you end up using only 10 or 12 of the bits of resolution, which is a MASSIVE reduction in sound quality. If we could get people on dvd audio (24 bits) this wouldn't even be an issue anymore. MP3's only make the problem worse... - pixelpounder, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9There's another side to this. When I listen to movies (DVD's) on my relatively high end system (a 7-channel receiver that goes for about a grand), even with the compression option on, movie soundtracks often go from "I can hardly understand some of the dialog" to "so loud it'll annoy the neighbors." For background music, at least, if the dynamic range isn't so wide, I can set a level and forget it. Not all music listening is that of a fanatic sitting in the sweet spot, children locked in the back room, dog in a muzzle, hardware all tuned to perfection. Probably not even a decent majority of music / sountracks are listened to that way. Some of us just want to hear some tunes or watch a movie with the sig/other, no particular critical mental mode engaged, no cops at the door telling us to turn it the heck down, etc.
I do wish that my stereo had a MUCH more effective compressor. If it did, CD's and DVD's could be mastered for realistic dynamic range and I could properly override that when I wanted to (which would be most of the time, I'm afraid.) The trouble is, you can't do it the other way: Once dynamic range is gone, it's flipping gone. Expanders don't put back what was lost. They just don't. - SmeRndmGy, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11That and the fact that songs about "Hos frontin on da cheddahz fer shizzle" only appeal to the stupidest of stupid people.
- fitchmicah, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Yes, and if you reduce dynamic range, "softer noises" become louder and "louder noises" become softer. YOU don't know what you're talking about. Have you ever actually used a compressor before? What for?
- bloobloo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7It may not be accurate to say that it's killing record sales, but it's certainly an interesting explanation of the perils of overprocessing.
- SpeedyG, on 10/12/2007, -1/+820 years ago they called "American Idol" Star Search, and could squeeze at least two young singers, two adult singers, and a couple of comedians into an hour. So it's not like this is a new idea.
American Idol is just the adult singer competition from Star Search with a knockout format. - MrUnderbridge, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7You're right, he doesn't back it up. But I agree with him, and I can say that for myself (sample size=1), this is one of the reasons I won't buy new music *regardless* of style. Even old records that have been remastered suffer from this. You can't hear any of the detail because they've destroyed it. I first noticed this in about 2002 after buying a remastered CD, which was the first "new" CD I'd bought in about 6 years. I realized that 1) it was very loud, 2) it was very distorted, and 3) I couldn't hear details I'd heard in the original recording. I also realized that the entire song was at the same level - there were no louder/quieter parts anymore.
At this point I pretty much realized what they'd done, but I fired up the scope on XMMS to confirm. Sure enough, the moron engineers had releveled the whole thing, killing the dynamic range.
I've bought 1 new CD since then, from a guy who doesn't do that crap to his music. - felis, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8hey, you just can't polish a turd (and man, have I tried.) If you compress the crap out of a turd, you have a compressed turd. As much as this fidelity issue is on target, we seem to be overlooking that the music itself is pap as a rule, generated by beancounters trying to score a quick buck off the backs of consumers and "artists."
There are plenty of great bands & albums out there that utilize a great dynamic range, but you're not going to hear them unless you look actively for them. Not every studio owner believes in squishing everything to 0dB. - SwampYankee, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9Naw, I'm an old fart too (46) and I like new stuff if it's good. The new Arctic Monkey's record is just plain good. NEver though to listen to the sound quality, too busy listening to the music.
- SeanFL, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7This article does show a serious issue...I've been saying this to producers and record labels for a while. Just as loudness wars started in radio in the 60's and 70's with the invention of the volummax and other automated leveling devices and continues with the 6 band digital omnia or optimod today...the volume war broadened to the original source material. Each artist or producer (usually not the engineer) wanted their CD to sound louder then another. And with tools like the Waves L2 and Finalizer within reach of even crappy mastering houses or even home studios, everyone could raise the average level. But there is a tradeoff...you lose the dynamic range. I DO much prefer to listen to things from the 70's and 80's before this took place. Our eyes like variety and so do our ears.
There is a certain fatigue that takes place when you're listening to music that's had the dynamic range reduced too far. It's the wall of sound and your brain doesn't like it.
It would be like a car designer that designs the car for speed and nothing else. There are other factors to consider: handling, acceleration, braking, etc. I can't stand much of today's current music because it's all so smashed and in your face. If you have time, look at the waveform of a song from the 70's, 80's, then something from today. Very different...it's obvious to see all the limiting/clipping taking place through the 90's and 00's. My ear doesn't like it, and it does sound worse on the radio.
Sean - Capta1nA, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6People always talk about how music today sucks. Popular music basically does suck, but there is no shortage of great music just not intended for the airwaves. Dugg because it's a good discussion issue.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9clear channel has to share some of the blame, force feeding us crap that the riaa paid them more to play.
- ,,|,_, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Record sales aren't the end-all, be-all barometer for music popularity. Let's talk ASCAP royalties which account for downloads and play on radio, in restaurants/bars, and the trendy shops in the mall the author mentions.
- ,,|,_, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9When are record labels going to wake up and realize we can only take so much pasteurized processed crap like Jessica Simpson and Staind?
- vann, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7I actually noticed that, too, with remastered CDs. I owned a remastered copy of The Who's "Who's Next" and gave my friend a cassette version I came across which wasn't remastered. One day we were in his garage listening to the cassette and I thought to myself: holy *****, some of these songs sound totally new to me! Of course, I soon realized that it was the remastering which destroyed all the lovely detail in Pete Townshend's guitar work and that what seemed "new" was actually what was on the original.
'Twas a shame. - blatt, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7there are stations that are doing that with the 90's. the "modern rock" sound is creeping into to classic rock stations. Nirvana, Live, Soundgarden and Pearl Jam (circa Ten and Versus) are all border line classic rock bands at this point.
- Salisme, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8Interesting article. I'm one of the people that knows very little about compressions, dynamic range, and codecs. I have mp3s that sound like crap and I still listen to them. I always assumed why there wasn't anything "new" being played at the malls, radio, whatever is just that the product was horrible.
I'm still a metal to classic rock fan, and the radio stations here in NY are playing the same stuff from 10-15 years ago. If I happen to hear a popular new song, 90% of the time its a remix or complete remake of an old classic. If it is new, I can't dissertain the song from another because they all sound the same to me. It may have something to do with "dynamic range", I have no idea, but I can tell you that my reason for not listening to it is it all sounds the same, and it sounds like something I don't want to listen to. Call it what you want.
I haven't bought a media CD/DVD in almost 8 years now, and its not because of downloading. There is nothing to download that I want.... I feel plain and simply its not the audience that has listening problems, its the artists suffering from lack of creativity. I do know I don't like what I'm hearing.
Garbage in...garbage out.
And to add insult to injury, my lastest media addition was not from the "music industry" it was actually the sound track from Rome:total war. Pretty pitiful if you ask me that I need to rely on video games for music. - vann, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10Well, sure, I realize sales aren't everything. But this article amounts to nothing more than anecdotal evidence. There's no concrete correlation, let alone causation as the submitter's title implies.
- jasoneisen, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9If you listen to music because other people don't listen to it, you are letting them influence you.
- mikeod, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Maybe it's because of all the music on the radio today is a remake of something that was already produced. The same goes for movies. Nothing is new anymore.
- mistshadow2k4, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7It's not just you. I can hear this same flatness even in music being put out these days by people I always liked, such as Clapton. Definitely over-produced and over-mixed. By contrast, music put out by far less know blues bands, such as Robert Randolph and the Family Band, sounds much more lively and, well, dynamic; one can easily figure out that it could be that Randolph hasn't achieved enough popularity to warrant a high-end modern recording studio like Clapton (and thank God for that). Some would say that it has something to do with his age, but I don't think so - I've got a DVD of the Crossroads concert from 2004 and Clapton sounded as dynamic as ever live. But on the original cd of his newer songs everything sounded flat.
- RobotCitizen, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5The common consumer doesn't know or care what clipping is. The article is an interesting read, but the submitter is way off if he thinks clipping has any impact on the music market. Normal people don't care about what tech enthusiasts care about. For most people, AJAX is what you clean your tub with.
- aMillionAndNine, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Yeah, if you look for music on the radio. That is the LAST place to find good music.
- SFBay, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6lol .. I've known many idiots who've said this, and not a single one could distinguish between a modern 192khz mp3 and a AIFF direct from CD when I actually tested their claims.
In other words, BS you can tell the difference. - 5blocksfree, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Personally, I can't believe this show has become as popular as it has. I've watched only a few minutes, only once - mostly because I think it's more of the same tired crap, where the music industry controls the package from start to finish, and the voting is merely a way to make consumers FEEL like they have a choice.
- genrebusters, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5as a recording artist and admirer of music, DR is REALLY important, and the lack of range in music these days is frightening.
For example I have been listening to a lot of Neil Young, David Bowie and Pink Floyd the last few weeks - three masters of dynamic range, not just from song to song, but within the different parts of the songs themselves. This has always been something I strive for when recording my own music. Take a listen to these masterful albums: Harvest (Young), Ziggy Stardust (Bowie), Meddle (Floyd) and also Let It Be (Beatles) and then compare these recordings to new popular bands. The amount of dynamic range and how it affects your ears and enjoyment will be crystal clear.
It's not that new bands are not recording and writing music worth listening to these days - its that the actual recordings themselves aren't very good - and this has nothing to do with "digital vs. analog" format - it has to do with producers and marketing - make everything LOUD so people hear it! In today's noisy world, things tend to just be LOUDER when oftentimes, quietness is more shocking. Look at how movies are scored now compared to the 1970's. Films back then used music sparingly, and we were not bombarded with constant wall-to-wall scores - for a prime example see THE FRENCH CONNECTION - now that's how to score a ***** film - brilliant. The Japanese are also masters of sparse scores, often relying on very little music at all - but when it does come in, it means more because it is used minimally. Music in films these days TELL the audience how to feel, rather than reinforcing the emotions from the film itself. - SFBay, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5What the hell are you talking about? Do you even know what dynamic range is?!
The textbook definition of a compressor is a process to intelligently reduce dynamic range. The author's far from being a moron, but I think you're getting pretty close. - ek3s, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6I remember when MTV was cool... Now it makes baby Jesus cry.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7Yeah...seriously...not listening to pop music does NOt mean you have BETTER tastes that those who do. Just different.
I can't believe anyone older than 16 and not an emo MySpace kid would actually imply that their tastes are better becuase they listen to music that mot people have never heard of.
Yet several people above me did just that. - Sippi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Personally, this is a reflection of how all those boy bands, and teen divas are tweaked in the sound studio to the point they all start to sound the same. Today, almost every band uses this method and causes everyone to sound alike. Perhaps, in the future "truly talented" artist(s) will relay on talent and skill instead of being altered/layered/filtered in the studio.
- Sirocco, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4The emergence of "hot" CDs (i.e. CDs that have been mastered improperly) is a problem in terms of diluting the quality of the music that is coming our way, but there is also the ever-present problem of pop music placing too much emphasis on beat while ignoring important elements such as melody and pacing. If you compose a track with a semi-catchy beat and you jump into the chorus continually because there's nothing inbetween... congrats! You've just made a track no one will remember in five years, much less want to listen to.
- scarolan, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5I think it's more likely that the managers of all these stores and establishments are in their early to mid-30's, and therefore they like to play music from their generation. Having grown up in the 80's - guess what music they pick to play in the stores and malls? It has nothing to do with decibels or dynamic range.
- jamesey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Thanks to the internet, people have much more choice in what they're exposed to. The "popular" stuff isn't as popular anymore. Bands that would have gone unheard of in previous eras get exposure. It turns out that the stuff record companies forced down our throats wasnt the stuff everyone wants to hear.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 304 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is