+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 17 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 164

Thread: Dynamic range of vinyl recordings

  1. #11
    Join Date: Oct 2017

    Location: Kingston

    Posts: 30
    I'm Winston.

    Default Pop-Music on digital media - biggest casualties of the 'Loudness-Wars'

    Quote Originally Posted by magiccarpetride View Post
    I've been doing a little bit of comparative listening between my digital tracks and the same tracks on vinyl….. Simply put, my turntable playback appears to be giving more dynamic range to my ears compared to my digital playback. Hence many of my LPs sound more pushy, more aggressive.
    Now, that doesn't make any sense, because from what I understand, one of the most severe limitations of vinyl playback is exactly the dynamic range!
    Anyone else noticed this discrepancy between what the specs say and what the ears hear?
    Great question!!! Great topic!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by Macca View Post
    The technology is capable of it, the recordings placed on it are often not mastered to take advantage of it. The reasons being:

    Recording companies know that people listen a lot on portables or in cars where, with a recording that has high dynamic range, the background noise will drown out quiet passages unless you ramp up the volume; and if you ramp up the volume to hear the quiet bits over the background noise the peaks will take your head off.

    Recording companies also know that a lot of music is listened to through cheap radios or televisions that do not have sufficient clean amplifier power or capable enough speakers to do the peaks properly with a highly dynamic recording. In other words, they will distort badly.

    So they use a lot of overall compression and master for 'punch' rather than fidelity.

    Great explanation there, and those factors certainly do come into play.

    However, the root cause is more sinister. Also, the practice of seeking to produce the loudest recordings started long ago from the days when recording companies sought to have the loudest recordings in jukeboxes and on radio-stations. And this was with vinyl, decades before the advent of digital audio. Nevertheless, there was only so much that they could do in that regard with vinyl. But digital now affords the opportunity to take this practice to ridiculous extremes.

    The following in italics is from a piece written elsewhere - actually from the book below in my signature (just google the title).

    The main problem for pop-music CDs, especially, is one of abuse, where engineers compress the music and limit dynamic range in order to produce the loudest music to gain an advantage in grabbing listeners’ attention over the competition. The practice has been common-place in the production of popular music for decades. It’s called; “The Loudness Wars” – and it’s killing the music. That’s one of the main issues holding back the digital format today, in the opinion of many in the know.

    Analogue media (such as vinyl and tape) remain largely immune to such extreme abuse, ironically because of their more severe limitations in the recording process. These limitations require more moderate recording levels and thus prevent them from similar levels of abuse and, therefore, ensure better quality recordings with more dynamic-range than what obtains with the more severely abused digital versions.
    Last edited by curry49; 03-02-2019 at 16:22.
    Main system: Lenco L75, Thorens TD-125, Technics SL1700, ReVox A77 two-track 15 ips, Sony PS-1, Dell laptop, mxr, eq, Audio-Research LS-3, UREI 6150, DIY two-way speakers with Altec 802/811 & Goodmans 18” midwoofers.
    Author of; “HIGH-END AUDIO on a BUDGET”

  2. #12
    Join Date: Dec 2008

    Location: East Riding of Yorkshire these days

    Posts: 4,779
    I'm Shaun.

    Default

    I always found Pink Floyd's DSOTM album to be a classic case of over the top compression. The track 'Money' is so obviously ruined when Gilmour's solo comes in on a big crescendo but nothing actually gets any louder. No matter what system I have heard this on, the studio compression completely buggers it up. The SACD remix/remaster is just the same. Nothing on this album actually gets any louder, the whole sound is just squeezed into a cacophony of compression. OK so it is a 1973 recording. Excuse..? I'll accept it as such.

  3. #13
    Join Date: Aug 2009

    Location: Staffordshire, England

    Posts: 37,786
    I'm Martin.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Haselsh1 View Post
    I always found Pink Floyd's DSOTM album to be a classic case of over the top compression. The track 'Money' is so obviously ruined when Gilmour's solo comes in on a big crescendo but nothing actually gets any louder. No matter what system I have heard this on, the studio compression completely buggers it up. The SACD remix/remaster is just the same. Nothing on this album actually gets any louder, the whole sound is just squeezed into a cacophony of compression. OK so it is a 1973 recording. Excuse..? I'll accept it as such.
    http://dr.loudness-war.info/album/li...de+of+the+moon

    Unless you count the blu ray quad mix average DR is between 9 and 11. Ignore the vinyl ones as they're pretty much meaningless. Best standard version is the original cd release with an 11 (no surprise). I have the 2003 remaster which scores a 9. Still better than the cassette version it replaced though.


    So looks like there are no versions with a high dynamic range.
    Current Lash Up:

    TEAC VRDS 701T > Sony TAE1000ESD > Krell KSA50S > JM Labs Focal Electra 926.

  4. #14
    Join Date: Oct 2017

    Location: Kingston

    Posts: 30
    I'm Winston.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by magiccarpetride View Post
    I bumped into used vinyl record (Paul McCartney "Band on the Run") at a yard sale yesterday. The LP was in pretty bad shape, didn't even have inner sleeve, but I got it for one dollar. I then remembered that few years back I bought the "Uncompressed Audiophile 96kHz/24bit" hi-res download of the remastered album (http://www.hdtracks.com/band-on-the-...d-uncompressed), so I decided to compare the LP with the hi-res remaster.
    I was sure that the hi-res remaster is going to destroy the old vinyl (I had strong expectation bias). I was stunned when I played both formats side-by-side to hear how LP sounded much, much better than digital remaster. Especially knowing that the LP is old, abused, warped, not in the best overall shape.
    Previously I wasn't surprised when I was comparing CDs to LPs and when I heard that vinyl beats the red book format. But I always thought that hi-res digital must have an upper hand compared to vinyl. Listening to both formats on "Band on the Run", I couldn't help but conclude that remastered hi-res digital sounds like a joke compared to the old school vinyl. I'm still in the state of disbelief...
    https://theartofsound.net/forum/show...gital-remaster
    Thread entitled: Comparing vinyl sound to hi-res digital remaster

    The above is from a similar thread to this one, started by the same OP, with one respondent jokingly calling into question the quality of the OP’s digital gear. Several posters faulted the remasterig process. Another suggested that analogue guys usually use expensive TTs ($5k and above) to compare with less costly digital gear ($1k) with the implication being that this may be the cause of the disparity in quality. Also, in both threads, we seem to focus on individual digital recordings with a view to indentifying the really bad ones as against the ones that aren’t as bad (though mostly still not as good as they could be).

    But I wonder if, by focusing on such things, whether we’re not missing the forest for the trees.

    One poster in that other thread made the point that master-tape dups ripped to digital media on his modest Pioneer CD-Recorder are awesome and much superior to LPs on his much more expensive La Platine Verdier TT. This illustrates a point we should all be aware of; which is that there’s nothing so wrong with the digital format itself - and that it’s absolutely capable of sounding as good as any analogue source (almost identical).

    So the quality of digital gear is not the problem either.

    The problem is the abuse of digital media by the tactics employed in the Loudness-Wars.

    With all due respect, perhaps this is where our focus should be. As audiophiles, we should perhaps be partaking in fora like these which would perhaps serve to enlighten the guilty in recording-industry of the fact that we’re not pleased with their butchering of popular-music.

    But this won’t happen if we’re not all aware of the real source of the problem – ‘The Loudness-Wars.'

    Incidentally, I stress the effects on popular-music genres because of the fact that the Classics are scarcely affected by the Loudness-Wars.

    If you were to look at my signature, you’d come away with the impression that I’m a very big fan of analogue in general and vinyl in particular. But the reality is that this is so only because the Loudness-Wars cause vinyl to be still relevant to me, with the best and most realistic and dynamic recordings of music in the popular genres of music to which I mostly listen. For now, digital is secondary for me – and this is solely because of the general lack of dynamism wrought by the Loudness-Wars. Were it not for that, I’d be fully digital long ago, instead of using merely a PS-1 as my foremost digital source (actually preferable to my ailing elderly Sony CD-P 610ES, but that’s another story). There wouldn’t be a TT in sight. And I’m sure I’m not alone, as there must be several others motivated in this way. (And it would also be nice to hear from them too).

    I’ll bring this long post to an end with another excerpt (in italics) from the book previously mentioned: https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B07J5TVS7Z

    Because of the ‘Loudness-Wars,’ the same recording on vinyl will sound better and more dynamic than it does in any of the digital media. This makes vinyl extremely relevant today and absolutely the best choice in relevant circumstances.

    Outside of that, then it’s digital all the way.

    So, again, my advice would be this:

    If you listen exclusively to the Classics and especially if you favour large and dynamically explosive Classical musical works and similar, then go completely digital, exclusively.

    If you listen exclusively to most popular music genres - which are severely compromised by the ‘Loudnness-Wars’ - then go completely analogue, with vinyl and etcetera, exclusively. (That is unless you prefer to endure the reduced quality for the convenience of digital here, or if you endeavour to buy your popular-music like Jazz only or mostly from the premium labels which don’t engage in the ‘Wars’).

    However, if you regularly listen BOTH to popular-music AND to the likes of explosive Classical works, then go BOTH analogue AND digital – and for all the reasons stated above.

    Food for thought, perhaps!
    ---------------

    [Evidence of the ‘Loudness–Wars’ can be found here;
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loudness_war
    https://www.yoursoundmatters.com/vin...-loudness-war/
    https://www.arrow-av.com/news-review...-unfortunately
    http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/thread...leases.701375/
    Perfect Sound Forever?]
    Last edited by curry49; 03-02-2019 at 20:49. Reason: The problem lies with the 'Loudness-Wars' - nothing else
    Main system: Lenco L75, Thorens TD-125, Technics SL1700, ReVox A77 two-track 15 ips, Sony PS-1, Dell laptop, mxr, eq, Audio-Research LS-3, UREI 6150, DIY two-way speakers with Altec 802/811 & Goodmans 18” midwoofers.
    Author of; “HIGH-END AUDIO on a BUDGET”

  5. #15
    Join Date: Sep 2013

    Location: North Island New Zealand

    Posts: 1,757
    I'm Chris.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by curry49 View Post
    Great question!!! Great topic!!!




    Great explanation there, and those factors certainly do come into play.

    However, the root cause is more sinister. Also, the practice of seeking to produce the loudest recordings started long ago from the days when recording companies sought to have the loudest recordings in jukeboxes and on radio-stations. And this was with vinyl, decades before the advent of digital audio. Nevertheless, there was only so much that they could do in that regard with vinyl. But digital now affords the opportunity to take this practice to ridiculous extremes.

    The following in italics is from a piece written elsewhere - actually from the book below in my signature (just google the title).

    The main problem for pop-music CDs, especially, is one of abuse, where engineers compress the music and limit dynamic range in order to produce the loudest music to gain an advantage in grabbing listeners’ attention over the competition. The practice has been common-place in the production of popular music for decades. It’s called; “The Loudness Wars” – and it’s killing the music. That’s one of the main issues holding back the digital format today, in the opinion of many in the know.

    Analogue media (such as vinyl and tape) remain largely immune to such extreme abuse, ironically because of their more severe limitations in the recording process. These limitations require more moderate recording levels and thus prevent them from similar levels of abuse and, therefore, ensure better quality recordings with more dynamic-range than what obtains with the more severely abused digital versions.
    Having listened over many years to both vinyl and digital, digital IMO remains true to the original recordings dynamic range, whereas vinyl has far more variance. The exception is
    a few Three Blind Mice Lp's and Thelma Houston's Pressure Cooker,that are the equal of their digital counterparts.

    To notice this your audio system must have the ability of creating silence when music is not playing and for no audio losses with its attenuation and subsequent amplification.

    The secrets to good audio are to minimize distortion in attenuation and amplification, this includes very simple audio signal paths, and to have speakers capable of adequate dispersion
    to minimize reflections. If on the other hand your audio system has obvious faults, then correcting those first is advisable before blaming the medium of the recording.

    There is also wisdom avoiding purchase of recordings that are artificially compressed. A standard reference would be to have a copy of Anouar Brahems " Les pas du chat noir "
    to compare recordings to, as it is just natural and one of ECM's best I think ( most ECM's are pretty good )

  6. #16
    Join Date: Aug 2009

    Location: Staffordshire, England

    Posts: 37,786
    I'm Martin.

    Default

    I don't listen to any classical but all my listening is on CD.

    I don't find overall compressed recordings to be too much of a problem, I look for the versions with the highest DR. Usually earlier releases. I rarely buy current music. I find the compression has to be pretty bad before it ruins things. Also whilst vinyl might sound 'more dynamic' that isn't the same as having actually having a wider dynamic range on the vinyl record.


    Added to that most pop and rock recordings don't need much as much dynamic range as classical.


    But I agree that in principle the record companies should cater to the people like us who want to listen on proper systems and offer less compressed versions where possible.
    Current Lash Up:

    TEAC VRDS 701T > Sony TAE1000ESD > Krell KSA50S > JM Labs Focal Electra 926.

  7. #17
    Join Date: Feb 2013

    Location: W Lothian

    Posts: 99,005
    I'm Grant.

    Default

    Don't really think there is a major problem personally. Modern pressings on vinyl or CD seem fine by and large. You always get a few but most are acceptable. A lot of perceived issues are due to the way much music is being mastered for headphones, as that is now the main way music is listened to
    Regards,
    Grant .... ؠ ......Don't be such a big girl's blouse

    I've said it before and I'll say it again: democracy simply-doesn't-work
    .... ..... ...... ...... ................... ..... ..... ..... ..... .....
    FIIO K7 BT, M11 PLUS, BTR7, KA5 - OPPO BDP-103D - PANASONIC UB450 - PANASONIC 4K ULTRA HD TV - PIXEL 6 - AVANTREE LR BLUETOOTH - 2* X600 SOUNDCORE - HEADPHONES INCLUDE, FIIO, NURAPHONES', FOCAL, OPPO, BOSE, CAMBRIDGE, BOWER & WILKINS, DEVIALET, MARSHALL, SONY, MITCHELL & JOHNSTON - 2*ZBOOK'S- MERCURY BD ROM, ROON, QOBUZ, TIDAL, PLEX, CYBERLINK, JRIVER - MULTI HDD'S -

    Oh my god! There's nothing wrong with the bidet is there?

    “Nothing discloses real character like the use of power. It is easy for the weak to be gentle. Most people can bear adversity. But if you wish to know what a man really is, give him power. This is the supreme test. It is the glory of Lincoln that, having almost absolute power, he never abused it, except on the side of mercy".

    “You see these dictators on their pedestals, surrounded by the bayonets of their soldiers and the truncheons of their police ... yet in their hearts there is unspoken fear. They are afraid of words and thoughts: words spoken abroad, thoughts stirring at home -- all the more powerful because forbidden -- terrify them. A little mouse of thought appears in the room, and even the mightiest potentates are thrown into panic.”

    "You don't have free will. You have the appearance of free will.”

    “There's a war out there, old friend. A world war. And it's not about who's got the most bullets. It's about who controls the information. What we see and hear, how we work, what we think... it's all about the information!”


    ***SMILE, BE HAPPY***

  8. #18
    Join Date: Aug 2009

    Location: Staffordshire, England

    Posts: 37,786
    I'm Martin.

    Default

    Compilations or best of albums by very popular mainstream acts are the ones to avoid if they are post 2000. I've got a Bee Gees 'best of' that is practically unlistenable.
    Current Lash Up:

    TEAC VRDS 701T > Sony TAE1000ESD > Krell KSA50S > JM Labs Focal Electra 926.

  9. #19
    Join Date: Oct 2017

    Location: Kingston

    Posts: 30
    I'm Winston.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Light Dependant Resistor View Post
    Having listened over many years to both vinyl and digital, digital IMO remains true to the original recordings dynamic range, whereas vinyl has far more variance.
    Fascinating that you'd express such a view even in the face of ample evidence of the Loudness-War and the effect it has on popular music in digital media, with even mastering engineers articulating on the issue and acknowledging the detrimental effects on whatever popular music you listen to on the digital media you refer to.

    Have you actually read about what is happening to the music? Have you not heard it yourself? And how would you explain the multitudes of reports on the effects of the Loudness-Wars, saying exactly the same things I've said? They're all wrong?

    Have a look here:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loudness_war
    https://www.yoursoundmatters.com/vin...-loudness-war/
    https://www.arrow-av.com/news-review...-unfortunately
    http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/thread...leases.701375/

    On a separate but related issue, you also mention, "digital IMO remains true to the original recordings dynamic range, whereas vinyl has far more variance."

    Amazingly, that's the very same point I've been making, along with all those articles on the subject you haven't read. If you look at a previous post of mine, you'll see me highlighting the very same fact that digital audio is absolutely capable of mimicking any sound-source, including analogue master-tape or any other analogue source. But if you were to actually stop to think really, you'd realize that that is not the issue.

    The issue is all about the drastic curtailment of dynamic-range in digital recordings of popular music, due to the Loudness-Wars. This issue is widely acknowledged by the players in the recording industry (and admitted by many who actually engage in it). So for you to deny what the industry-players have admitted and acknowledged actually boggles the mind.

    As to vinyl's "variance" or limitations, I've also pointed that out along with the fact that; were it not for the the effects of the Loudness-Wars on digital (Pop-music) vinyl would be irrelevant (to me, at least). Whether or not you recognize that vinyl is less affected by the loudness-wars (due to its limitations) and therefore more dynamic than CDs mutilated by the effects of these 'Wars (acknowledged by the engineers who actually do it) that's less important than whether or not you recognize that the Loudness Wars has a detrimental effect on digital recordings of popular music.

    Unless you recognize what the whole recording-industry acknowledges, then there's not much point in a game of 'trivial-pursuit' - literally.

    Thanks for the critique, though.

    Cheers
    Main system: Lenco L75, Thorens TD-125, Technics SL1700, ReVox A77 two-track 15 ips, Sony PS-1, Dell laptop, mxr, eq, Audio-Research LS-3, UREI 6150, DIY two-way speakers with Altec 802/811 & Goodmans 18” midwoofers.
    Author of; “HIGH-END AUDIO on a BUDGET”

  10. #20
    Join Date: Sep 2013

    Location: North Island New Zealand

    Posts: 1,757
    I'm Chris.

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by curry49 View Post
    Fascinating that you'd express such a view even in the face of ample evidence of the Loudness-War and the effect it has on popular music in digital media, with even mastering engineers articulating on the issue and acknowledging the detrimental effects on whatever popular music you listen to on the digital media you refer to.

    Have you actually read about what is happening to the music? Have you not heard it yourself? And how would you explain the multitudes of reports on the effects of the Loudness-Wars, saying exactly the same things I've said? They're all wrong?

    Have a look here:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loudness_war
    https://www.yoursoundmatters.com/vin...-loudness-war/
    https://www.arrow-av.com/news-review...-unfortunately
    http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/thread...leases.701375/

    On a separate but related issue, you also mention, "digital IMO remains true to the original recordings dynamic range, whereas vinyl has far more variance."

    Amazingly, that's the very same point I've been making, along with all those articles on the subject you haven't read. If you look at a previous post of mine, you'll see me highlighting the very same fact that digital audio is absolutely capable of mimicking any sound-source, including analogue master-tape or any other analogue source. But if you were to actually stop to think really, you'd realize that that is not the issue.

    The issue is all about the drastic curtailment of dynamic-range in digital recordings of popular music, due to the Loudness-Wars. This issue is widely acknowledged by the players in the recording industry (and admitted by many who actually engage in it). So for you to deny what the industry-players have admitted and acknowledged actually boggles the mind.

    As to vinyl's "variance" or limitations, I've also pointed that out along with the fact that; were it not for the the effects of the Loudness-Wars on digital (Pop-music) vinyl would be irrelevant (to me, at least). Whether or not you recognize that vinyl is less affected by the loudness-wars (due to its limitations) and therefore more dynamic than CDs mutilated by the effects of these 'Wars (acknowledged by the engineers who actually do it) that's less important than whether or not you recognize that the Loudness Wars has a detrimental effect on digital recordings of popular music.

    Unless you recognize what the whole recording-industry acknowledges, then there's not much point in a game of 'trivial-pursuit' - literally.

    Thanks for the critique, though.

    Cheers
    The thing is, I deliberately avoid all the music you attribute to loudness wars, rather I purchase music which exhibits faithful replay of dynamics.

    One such recording that exhibits dynamics correctly and as natural as you can I think possibly get is as I provided in my earlier post
    Anouar Brahem's "La pas du chat noir" ( translates as The black cats paw ). I listen to a lot of piano music, but many other artists as well
    all carefully chosen for faithful replay.

    I also referred to the very careful choice of replay equipment that is needed to accurately reproduce the dynamics and essence contained in music.
    that if not chosen correctly distracts severely from what is actually possible within digital replay.

    My main system presently consists of Marantz CD52Mk2SE , Yamaha CDRHD1500, Stereo Coffee LDR attenuator, Quad 306 x2
    and JR149 loudspeakers.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 17 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •