how can you tell which record companies over compress? [Archive]

View Full Version : how can you tell which record companies over compress?

Gmanuk101

31-01-2012, 10:25

morris_minor

31-01-2012, 10:29

Hi Graeme,

I've no idea which companies to avoid, but my guess would be that if its been on the radio it's almost certainly compressed (at least pop stuff is . . ).

Bob

dave2010

31-01-2012, 10:38

Hi,

This may sound like a daft/silly/noob question, but from picking up a CD in say HMV, how can you tell is the recording has been overly compressed?

I say this as I wish to avoid anything compressed so much it looses that special depth of field.

Any companies I should avoid?

Thanks

GMight depend on the kind of music you want to listen to. A lot of pop stuff is heavily compressed, and in any case it's pretty heavily edited.

Classical music is also often compressed, or recorded with "spotlighting" - where individual instruments are zoomed in and out (possibly discretely) for solos, or simply to adjust the overall balance.

Some recording companies make a thing of doing minimal or no tinkering. In the classical field I'm thinking of BIS and Telarc, to mention two. I've seen CDs with warnings about the dynamic range on, and how if you listen loud you might blow your speakers, from companies such as these. Probably the warnings are over hype to get the CDs to sell though.

Delos also have done some with wide dynamic range - for example Depreist's version of Fountains of Rome - with the Oregon SO. DE3287.
DISASTER - this may now only be available as an MP3! :doh: Yuk!

The Grand Wazoo

31-01-2012, 20:08

Is it not more often down to the producer than the label?

The Vinyl Adventure

31-01-2012, 20:15

Just buy the music you like, of it's compressed so be it ... That's what I'd do anyway ...

Ali Tait

31-01-2012, 21:52

Is it not more often down to the producer than the label?

Not sure you can blame the producer, I reckon mostly they are just doing what they are told. After all, they can't ALL be that cloth eared!

Gmanuk101

01-02-2012, 12:10

cheers all, moral of this story is you can't really :(

Ali Tait

01-02-2012, 12:44

I'm sure there's a program that can tell you this, only problem is you have to buy the disc first.

Ali Tait

01-02-2012, 12:45

Audacity perhaps?

Alex_UK

01-02-2012, 15:57

Yes, Audacity would certainly let you view the waveform Ali. But as you suggest, you would need to have a copy first. It is pot luck, really Graeme - I think it definitely affects modern pop the worst, though.

Welder

01-02-2012, 16:09

I think you'll find it hard to find recordings that haven't had compression used at some point.
Audacity may be able to give a rough indication of whether a recording has been limited but it wont tell you anything about the compression used in the recording of individual instruments.
Some of the remastered recordings in particular that some audiophiles say sound excellent have had subtle compression applied to bring up certain aspects; drum sounds in particular often benefit from some mild compression in the mix.

Like any tool, i don't believe compression is bad in itself, it's how its used that makes the difference.

Ali Tait

01-02-2012, 16:35

Aye, agreed, if it's used right.

Gmanuk101

02-02-2012, 10:53

I can feel a Sony Soundforge experiment coming up!

lovejoy

02-02-2012, 16:12

Ali Tait

02-02-2012, 17:18

I don't think you can blame the engineers really. It's more down to record companies wanting their recordings to be as loud as possible so they stand out on the radio.

Miraboy

14-02-2012, 15:47

Hi

Noob to the board, but if you really want to know the dynamic range of any recording, then there's plug in for Foobar2k which scans the files and tells you the DR for each track and stores the log in a txt file.

HTH

M

RichB

16-02-2012, 20:38

I dunno how you'd tell, it might be that some things arent that compressed but sound it if you get me.... I guess its down to what you like, for me most stuff broadcast on Radio 1 is all shouty and 'boosted', i just cant bear it... Jazz FM's DAB presentation is quite agreeable on the other hand.

btw I'm using those Mission stands i picked up for you... I dont think you'll be disappointed when you finally pick them up.

Stratmangler

17-02-2012, 09:18

Mastering engineers are the ones to look out for. What we need is a rogues gallery. It depends on the type of music you're listening to, but if your CD/LP bears the names Vlado Meller or Bob Ludwig (at least with recent releases) then it's best avoided. Vlado Meller is the most extreme example I can think of but just do a search for some reviews of the latest Red Hot Chilli Peppers album and you'll see what a dog's dinner it is (not that the music is that great either though).

I think you're possibly being unfair to name the mastering engineer - they have to work to the client's brief, and if the client wants it to be maxed out on volume, with little or no dynamics, then that's what the client gets.

Bob Ludwig has been around a long, long time now, and knows how to do his job properly - a quick spin of Steely Dan's "Gaucho" tells you that.
That and a whole multitude of albums that are very widely regarded as classics.

lovejoy

21-02-2012, 16:40

Maxing out volume and compression is one thing, which is bad enough. Purposefully running a recording against the ceiling to the point where it is clipping is quite another and rather serious crime against music and the perpetrators deserve to be named and shamed.

As an example, take (if you can bear it) Stadium Arcadium by Red Hot Chilli Peppers. The CD was mastered by Mr Meller - It's pretty poor. There are no dynamics, everything is right in your face and the CD from start to finish is up against the ceiling. Now listen to the same album on vinyl - Mastered by Steve Hoffman. It's a completely different experience. It has depth, it has excellent dynamics and it actually makes for an interesting and enjoyable album.

Completely agree about Bob Ludwig, his name is on many excellent recordings that I own and his skills are beyond question. So it's a question of ethics. As a mastering engineer, would you be comfortable with taking a recording that has been painstakingly captured by a competent recording engineer and not only flattening the life out of it, but actually distorting it beyond retrieval? As the artists who have created the music in the first place, it must be soul destroying to hear the CD that comes out the other end. Clearly some bands care, others don't. I always wondered where the 'unmastered' version of RHCP's 'Californication' came from that has been doing the rounds on the internet. I'd like to think it was the band themselves putting this out having been unhappy with the mastering, but then that begs the question of why the same mastering engineer gets used for the next 3 albums.

There's an excellent white paper on the loudness war here:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/62547245/Loudness-War