Hi folks,
after few research on the forum it appears that there is nothing about the famous Loudness War.
So, here is few infos about it. Giving a nice 360° view of where it from, why and lets open the debate, but please guys let's be constructive.

Here a great video explaining the facts and causes by B.Katz

another YTvid:

an article wrote in SOS, by a friend of mine, which gave a huge debate there, but very interesting point of view:
'Dynamic Range' & The Loudness War



Cheers

 

*grabs pop-corn*

pointless debate... really

mac vs. pc
nazis vs. communists
cdj vs. vynil
ableton live vs. logic pro
nike vs. adidas
plague vs. cholera
vhs vs. betamax

 

Why not debate? They aren't the same thing!

 

set your soundcard rate at 48kHz for best result.

on a youtube video. yeah right.

 

He he ! You 're right, he push the thing a bit too much maybe, but without that, all these infos are interesting even if you are disagree with.
At least for who is newbe in music making, producing, mixing and for who is enough curious about the story of the sound quality, the way of pros are disagree with this or this, the way of consumer take it, the gear evolution and her impact etc …

 

Excellent presentation. I haven't seen this one before.

To me, both of those masters he presented sound too limited as the chorus have not enough punch in both of them IMO. However, at least the better one doesn't distort so much so it doesn't cause such ear-fatigue.

I myself have always mixed at -18dB RMS average levels of tracks, with a VU meter calibrated to -14dB RMS [like the tape machine] on the master because I know the madness and bad taste will have to come to an end at some point. I also don't have to worry about any of the peaks clipping my DA converters as they never pass the -6dB to -3dB full digital scale point. Never. So I actually never look at the peak meter at all, just the VU meters on tracks and my hardware VU calibrated meter on the master out. I mix everything, every style this way and there's no harm done as it can always be pushed to the "max" in the end because when the mix sounds nice it is easier to push it, too, and my mixes are future proof. ;) I am a fan of hard sounding electronica by the way and most of what I do is industrial electronica all the way to synth pop, but when I need to get, say, drums to sound really loud I limit the drum buss but I limit it at -18dB RMS and lower the volume of the track/buss as needed. Peaks usually peak from between -12dBFS to -6dBFS that way. I don't pay attention to peaks at this point, just to the sound of it. So I use the limiter when needed, for artistic purposes, to get "that sound", because "when it sounds good - it is good".

Since I've been a fan of bands like Depeche Mode, Front Line Assembly, Nine Inch Nails, Skinny Puppy, Nitzer Ebb, Underworld even Rammstein for decades, I like to use their albums as a reference since they all reflect this loudness war perfectly since they've all been in this business for over two decades. For example, just listen to the old Depeche Mode "Violator" and compare it to the "Ultra" or newer Depeche Mode albums. The new albums sound distorted and lack punch. I don't like to listen to them too much, but I can listen to the "Violator" or "Music For The Masses", or "Black Celebration" the whole day long without ever feeling the listening fatigue. I often use DM "Violator" as a reference synth-pop album, Front Line Assembly "Tactical Neural Implant" and Nine Inch Nails "Pretty Hate Machine" for harder, industrial electronic sound. Both FLA and NIN used SSL consoles on these albums. I really like the sound of it. I also like to use some older Underworld albums as a dance electronic music reference. They have great sounding production, especially their late 90s albums. I wonder what mixing consoles they used at the time. I heard they use TL Audio console lately. Beautiful console... :P

I'd give the "none believers" who will say "baaaaah" to all of this one advice, or a tip, so they could hear for themselves what a limiter is doing to your songs/tracks. Take a ToneBoosters Barricade limiter and put it on the master. Even the freeware Barricade CM will do. Now pick a "CD MAster" or "DVD Master" preset and turn on the "monitor" button. What this monitor button does is that it normalises the loudness constantly as you push the mix louder. Start your song/track and hear what happens when you push down the threshold... You will be able to properly hear all that happens when you push the mix louder, because there will be no "louder is better" effect. Pay special attention to the transients as the drums begin to sound flabbier and lose punch. I hope this test will be am ear opener, or a mind opener for some. There will still be those who will say "baaah", and frankly I don't care if you don't care. What I've just written is then not for you so just move on.

Cheers!

 

The discussion of excessive limiting is outdated. There are much more efficient methods of obtaining loudness than limiting.

 

Hey I didn't say I disagreed!

I think these engineers are pushing this debate too far.
And some of their is defeating itself.

- Peak limiting : it started in the 90's with CD autoradios? nope , it started with 33rpm records to avoid the needle jumps.

- "Master of Puppets" or "...And justice for all" is a much better master than Death Magnetic? Just listen to the record, regarding mastering or mix... Death Magnetic is louder, and RMS is narrow. It sounds good, much better than the 80's records.

- His point actually make sense on the album to single tendency. French chill pop songs are A MESS. I don't think a voice/guitar track should try to compete to a Kill The Noise big room track : actually it does, the voice/guitar/strings wins flawlessly. It sounds like crap, but it wins.

- I like some tracks to be super loud, unnaturally loud. Really, to me it's ok. If it make sense toward to song itself.

- I'd love some track to be released unmastered. DSP is cheap now. As geeks we can decide when we want/need/try peak limiting (or expanding).


Taking part on the Loudness war is just like hating on Justin Bieber : it's time consuming, vain, and counter productive.

There's no war anymore, who listen to radio/watch MTV now? it's all on Youtube, and everybody has an hand on the mouse (to tune the volume for example).
Suckers listen to piratebay/youtube/... they aren't real client anymore anyway. Why did we lose the "radio edit" (shortened and overcompressed)? they made sense. (best example imho is Home by Dream Theater on this matter, radio edit/album)

 

LOL you totally missed the point. LOL Sorry, I just had to say it... aaargh

 

Really interesting video and arthicle.

We have here the demonstration that the man on the mixer is totally involved in the composition process, cursors and knobs can be used in a creative way to speak the musical language

Thanks Davea, This post will help to fight the retrograde dogma: "sound engineer is not a musician"

 

But there are definitely benefits from having a different mastering engineer, not having sound engineer also master the album, Woofer Destroyer. However, if one likes to be both, having a time-off between mixing and mastering can be very beneficial and it's perfectly doable.

 

Really? I think making a record loud and not ruining it by limiting is what separates a skilled engineer from a mediocre one. I heard many good music ruined by using limiters in the mastering process but I know mastering engineers who can save a bad mix and make it loud on top of that.

The so called 'loudness war' will end at some point but not because of this kind of 'activism' but because of the change of medium (CDs are almost gone, the headphone listening is predominant etc), and because of the change of mainstream genres. These aside, a good engineer will always know to deliver.

 

I agree with that. I missed your point, actually. I thought this was a thread against loudness wars and that's why I said it. Absolutely, some mastering engineers will do a better job and get a less distorted, better quality sounding result using different techniques to achieve the master that is louder, otherwise there wouldn't be any perceivable difference between the sound quality of various productions.

However, the point is that no matter what you do to achieve just a miserable 2-3dB of dynamics in a song, it is always a destructive process and you always get a flat, without any excitement, without any transients, muddy sounding track in the end. The main difference in quality is really the amount of distortion in it, which is the main factor of when something sounds more fatiguing to the ears or less. There's no way you can preserve the transients or even more important - dynamics, between the verses and choruses without having at least 8-12dB of dynamics left in a track. These few decibels on top of the 2-3dB really mean a lot to achieve a really nice sounding master and especially with dynamic and/or acoustic songs. Of course, some tracks will still sound good with less dynamics and some will sound better with more dynamics. The ultimate judge should be your ears, not loudness envy, as the author of this video eloquently put it.

 

As you said in the end of your previous post it depends a lot on the genre. Electronic genres are like made for sounding loud. I received tracks for mastering that could be pushed to insane levels without breaking apart, but indeed, it would be crazy to make an acoustic song loud.

 

Interesting topic,makes me think of Type O Negative - World Coming Down,that album is so loud and clear. Kinda makes me wonder what techniques & fx were used on the mixing and mastering.But yeah this was an interesting watch,makes ya kinda look at the progression in the last 20 yrs.Take heavy bass in rap music for example,listen to bass from 90's rap or even bass tapes from that era (Dj Magic Mike,Bass Patrol,etc) the 808's and sine tones,etc they were using were really impressive at the time,but nowadays the sub sounds are much louder and present.I can definitely see the whole loudness war thing across pretty much every genre in the last 20-30 yrs.In the examples I kinda liked the one that wasn't as compressed more than the other,but I can see how one is more desired I guess,I also agree with SineWave,neither seemed to have enough punch in the chorus,but that could just be my tastes,I like it to kick in a lil extra in the chorus.I myself am guilty of pushing things a lil too much sometimes,but in my opinion compression,maximizing etc is all fine and good if it's used right,it's when it starts hurting the mix or messing with the dynamic balance too much that it's a problem. I've heard a lot of mixes that were good but far too blown up for my tastes,like it was already loud then they put the waves L3 on it and moved the threshold way too far down

 

Ah yes the good old loudness wars.
The "war" started back in the age of vinyls (the 7"). Given that the vinyl is an analogue storage medium, it had its physical limitations. For example, put too much sub bass frequencies into a song and you risk the needle jumping off the grooves of the record, make the song too loud and you risk similar consequences. The cassettes had similar limitations although not as constricting as vinyl. Then came the compact disc and digital formats, which meant that you had a set maximum peak level, however that didn't mean that you could't get more loudness just because you hit the peak amplitude of the CD. Thanks to compression and EQ you could still make things louder after they've peaked by increasing the RMS (average loudness). The downside of all of this of course is distortion and clipping, some like the sound, others don't, in the end it's all up to personal taste and genre. Standards like the L system were introduced the standardize loudness for radio, and you can certainly use the system as a guide but again, it's all about taste and of course you want your tracks to be competitive with what's on the market.

There are a ton of different methods to achieve more loudness and reduce distortion, shockingly compression is not the most important of these methods and neither is limiting, it's actually gain staging and EQ, it's all about getting things balanced, and then controlling peaks. Also keep in that sometimes compression and limiting can be part of sound design, and not just dynamic range. Different compression techniques impart different styles to the sound, so you can incorporate these techniques into your music, again, experimentation and taste. From my experience, an RMS of -9 is a sweet spot when it comes to striking a balance between loudness and dynamic range, again depending on your genre, but it's up to you to play and explore

 

Fuad, always moderate in his opinions and rarely really subjective. That's a good way to avoid the discussion and make nobody hate you.

Unlike me.

I always welcome my clients in my S/M suit with a whip, chains, and a huge dildo in my hand, not to mention candles, incense sticks, and "intriguing" posters on the wall. "Welcome!" in Vincent Price's voice. "You want to discuss it? Welcome!"

I'm joking a little bit there, of course.

But The dildo part is true.

 

hahahah...hey i may be moderate in what I speak...but you never what's hidden behind my back

 

I always think a bit of, unfortunately for some, dark humour is welcome to brighten up some usually bad situation. Most of the people like it, some don't.

Hell happens. But not to other people. That's the Murphy's law I mostly encounter.

I love you all, guys. Never think otherwise. I'm used to discussing things being vegan and a communist sympathiser. I'm used to being alone. Keep posting thoughts and problems on this. It's interesting to hear what people feel after being so long into this raping of music production quality.