Back in the early days when Transistor amplifiers began competing with the original Tube based amplifiers, many consumers claimed that 'Tube sounds better' since a tube amplifier gradually distorts as it is being overdriven unlike a transistor amplifier which results in unacceptable distortion very quickly as it is being overdriven. This means that a Tube Amplifier sounds more powerful than a Transistor amplifier of the same wattage.
Like Tube vs. Transistor, CDs have a hard volume limit unlike tapes and vinyl that gradually taper off. As most consumers are less likely to listen to a quiet CD in a CD changer, the labels figure that if loud means good, LOUDER IS BETTER. Over the years, labels have been trying to force mastering engineers to make their music 'louder' to compete with other labels.
As a result of the CD's hard volume limit, another technique to increase volume has been to dynamically amplify the music and dampen the peaks, which results in a further average volume rise. Repeat this process over the years and what have you got: music that is pretty much a constant volume from start to finish, resulting in lost 'punch' since the music sounds pretty flat (louder instruments such as drum beats are drowned out) or noisy as what the older generation may say.
With most music sounding fairly flat, it does not take long for many consumers to realise that most modern music is sounding all alike and thus they lose interest. This is likely just another reason why the sales of singles have been falling over the last few years. As the recording industry still believes that piracy is the main culprit of sliding sales, it is pretty clear that labels still go by 'Louder CDs is better'.
|
Quote from Home Recording Connection: As music as progressed so has the way it has recorded and mastered. You can see this by popping in a favorite CD of yours from 5-10 years back and putting a new CD in and you can see the older CD you might have had to turn up the volume, and on the newer album you may have had to adjust the volume (or if you have a rockin system in your home or car you may have had to tweak the entire EQ because the album seems to be over powering). This is the effect of the "Louder is better" theory that has become more and more common in the music industry, especially with Rock and Pop music. The question: "is Louder better?" The answer is more a matter of personal preference. Here is an example to help explain how this "louder is better" technique works. YOU HAVE PRODUCERS AND SOUND ENGINEERS MASTERING THE RECORD, THE CUSTOMER (WHICH IS THE RECORD LABEL NOT THE BAND) HAS ONE THING IN MIND AND THAT'S TO SELL ALBUMS, WHO WANT'S TO BE THE BAND WITH THE QUIET CD IN THE CD CHANGER. All right, I typed everything in caps to prove a point; it's harder for the brain to read and disseminate writings in all caps, you can't determine the tone of the writer and plus it can just get annoying and hard to read period. The same applies to making the tracks louder, after a while of listening to the CD your ears and brain get tired either turn the music off or tune it out. Well why does the main engineer stand for this? It's a hard decision to make when it all comes down to it, do you want to be know as the guy who won't "play ball" and then get negative feed back from the industry, no matter if buy increasing the volume of the CD ruins the sound scheme of the band, also remember the client is not the band that is being recorded it is that major label that is normally paying the bill. A good example for the "louder is better" deal is with a band I've come to like over the past 8 to 9 years and that's the Foo Fighters. You can take there first self titled CD and put it in a CD play and it is very low in volume (lower than most studio albums, it has a bit of a demo feel to it), and then Put in there 2nd CD,"the coulor and the shape" and see a nice difference (to me out of all there albums this one sound aver all the best). Then you take a look at there latest Album "One by One", nice bunch of songs, a decent arrangement, growth as a band over all a good album, but……it sounds like crap. The volume as a whole has been push to the max (and in some part you can hear tracks clipping), there is distortion of the signal at low listening volumes, which goes to show you it is result of the mastering. More and more common this is, just as the effect when you are listening to a song and the instruments drop down in volume (some times a drastic drop) when the vocals come in, and once the singer has paused or has stopped singing the volume jumps back up. This volume jump is not a natural thing that happens live why is that it happens on a studio recording? I will end my little rant about now, but remember when mixing and mastering, having the loudest CD in the pile isn't always the best, try and have a nice balanced mix instead. Click here to see a detailed article on modern vs. older music. |
cgenman
Probably the best example to see this volume rise in action is to pull out a few albums from the 80's and early 90's and compare the music with that released in the last few years. I did not believe this loudness issue until I loaded up a few songs in a sound editor and seen it for myself:
Most music from the late 90's to the current charts has a fairly maximised graph. This 5 second clip to the left is just an example from 'Hello' by 'Oasis'.
With older songs, the rhythm is clearly visible in the graph. This 5 second clip to the left is an example from 'Country House' by 'Blur'. While listening, the beat clearly 'jumps out' unlike in the above song.
Source: Slashdot.org - Music
Top news
