Music Loudness

Williams 728
Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
betarhoalphadelta

betarhoalphadelta

Supporting Member
HBT Supporter
Joined
Jul 2, 2011
Messages
7,946
Reaction score
9,959
Location
Mission Viejo
I've grown to hate the "loudness trend" in music production, but I was listening to the radio today and found what IMHO is a particularly egregious example.

The song was "Say Something" by A Great Big World feat. Christina Aguilera. I was listening in the Jeep, with the top down, on the freeway, and even then I could tell how much they'd crammed the tune into the top of the range. Because I had it turned up to deal with all the wind and road noise, the demands it was placing on the speakers was easily discerned. I tried a few other songs alongside it without changing the volume, and the distortion and strain on the speakers was absent.

But what makes it so egregious is that this song is an acoustic piano and vocal track. Aguilera is an amazing singer. If you want a song to really show dynamic range, this is an excellent example. But no, they pushed up the loudness and compressed everything into the top of the range.

This needs to stop.
 
I hear ya. I don't listen to much of the popular music these days. I think the actual sound engineering being performed by most of the pop music producers is garbage. I hate to sound like an old man, but many sound engineers could take an example from Pink Floyd, to name one. Now I know the style of music is different, and there could be difficulties in producing an album with pop music audio and trying to give it the clarity and separation you'd find in PF, but I think the principal is the same.

Then again, maybe that sound is what they are trying to achieve? Make it sound like it's cranked up too loud even when it's not? I don't know.

Once in a while I hear a modern pop song that was actually recorded well and produced to give decent audio quality (I am NOT an expert, BTW) but they are seemingly fewer and farther between these days.
 
Exactly. I think it's bad practice when you're dealing with general pop, but I understand why they do it...

But an acoustic piano and vocal track? Why, for the love of musical integrity, why?!
 
bwarbiany said:
I've grown to hate the "loudness trend" in music production, but I was listening to the radio today and found what IMHO is a particularly egregious example.

The song was "Say Something" by A Great Big World feat. Christina Aguilera. I was listening in the Jeep, with the top down, on the freeway, and even then I could tell how much they'd crammed the tune into the top of the range. Because I had it turned up to deal with all the wind and road noise, the demands it was placing on the speakers was easily discerned. I tried a few other songs alongside it without changing the volume, and the distortion and strain on the speakers was absent.

But what makes it so egregious is that this song is an acoustic piano and vocal track. Aguilera is an amazing singer. If you want a song to really show dynamic range, this is an excellent example. But no, they pushed up the loudness and compressed everything into the top of the range.

This needs to stop.
Click to expand...

I wholeheartedly agree with you. Unfortunately the major labels (it's mainly majors) think they know better than mixing and mastering engineers. If the engineers (especially mastering) refuse to crush the song the producers and major label execs pay someone else who will. They believe if a song is louder than the previous song a person is more prone to purchase the loud song.

Rush actually fought their label in court over this very thing. They won and now have complete creative control over their own records in every step of the process. Most of the indie labels do not crush their music in this manner.

Dynamic range is not the devil.
 
You made me laugh Zuljin, I thank you for that! I have to agree with OP. I've been sitting here this afternoon listening to Robert Johnson, Blind Willie Johnson, Howlin Wolf etc. Not a matter of volume. It has to do with the quality of the music. Suddenly I sound like my father. To each man his own i guess.
 
It's why commercials on Spotify are annoyingly too loud. I guess they think that everyone is listening to their music IN THE OTHER ROOM! Schocks da Schit outta me every time they play those commercials between songs.
 
Homercidal said:
It's why commercials on Spotify are annoyingly too loud. I guess they think that everyone is listening to their music IN THE OTHER ROOM! Schocks da Schit outta me every time they play those commercials between songs.
Click to expand...

That's exactly it, and why many cable channels have their commercials louder than the actual show. If it's a little louder, you're going to pay more attention, and remember it

Remember, too, that most pop music is marketed towards younger teens. They're the big spenders in the industry. They're also stupid, and their tastes change with the wind. They don't know the difference between a well mixed and mastered song, and one that isn't. So if a label can make their song a little more noticeable by cranking it up over the rest, they'll sell more.
 
Yes it is an appalling trend. The high compression together with clipping also has bad psychological effects. It tends to make people edgy or trigger aggressiveness in those prone to it.

Since no radio station wants to be perceived as weak the stations themselves compress the already highly compressed music to the max. The resulting dynamic range is typically less than 6 dB!

Pop/rock stations are leaders in this race. In the car I prefer to listen to classical (we are blessed to have one such station and it is commercial free), CDs or iPod.
 
SSBrew 300

Latest posts

Back
Top