Album Volume Levels

[LenWhite]

My own observations listening to recorded music is generally the higher the album recording level and consequently the level of volume attenuation I must use to obtain a natural sound level is proportional to the quality of "dynamic contrasts", or how well nuances are reproduced with varying competing instruments on an album.

On my audio system I find there's as much as 12 - 15 db's between the recording levels of many RBCD's and SACD's. And even within each type of media I find significant differences in recording levels. It does appear to me most classical albums are recorded with a lower recording volume, perhaps in part because massed instruments are harder to properly record.

I've read many pop/rock albums are purposely recorded with high volume levels to attract attention much in the same manner as commercial TV ads. But lately I'm also finding relatively high volume levels on jazz RBCD's and even some SACD's.

I can't understand why there appears to be no industry standards to facilitate good sound reproduction on albums, particularly non pop/rock albums. I'm not saying the album sound is unlistenable because it's the emotion of the music that's most important. But it seems to me it could be so much better on average if recording and mastering engineers would simply adhere to some industry standards.

 

[Bruce B]

That is the problem... there are no industry standards. Some years ago Bob Katz tried to implement the "K-system". Though mainly meant for Pop/Rock, it can be applied to jazz and others as well.

There are also different techniques in recording as well. SACD of mostly classical are recorded in DSD. DSD has been said to have better sonotity when recorded at lower levels. That's why you will see most SACD's having a lower RMS value than other commercially released material. You are correct in that most Pop/Rock CD's are a problem behind the "loudness war".

Overall volume and RMS levels are determined by the driving force behind the product... $$$$ Whoever has the most money, has the say so in what the final product will sound like. In larger labels, it's the suits that make the decisions. You might want to read an article I wrote for Stereomojo about this same issue.

 

[stevekale]

Also see the Loudness War here http://dynamicrange.de

 

[Bruce B]

Or this one:

Bernie Grundman

None of us like that. In fact, some of our producers and artists push us to do things like that to the recordings. Again, when I say it’s the sobering part, they come in here and a lot of them are pretty idealistic. It’s “Oh, we really love the recording. We like the dynamics and what we got and we don’t want to mess with it too much.” I’ll say, “Great. That’s terrific. It’ll sound more natural with less processing.” Invariably, the next day, they say, “How come mine isn’t as loud as so-and-so’s?” It’s the common complaint. We’re constantly bombarded with people saying, “It’s got to be louder, it’s got to be louder.” I’ve been in this business 45 years and it’s never been different. Everybody wants theirs louder than somebody else’s recording, or at least as loud as somebody else’s that they’ve heard. It’s been this constant trying to push these things as far as we can and still keep them musical.

 

[Andre Marc]

My own observations listening to recorded music is generally the higher the album recording level and consequently the level of volume attenuation I must use to obtain a natural sound level is proportional to the quality of "dynamic contrasts", or how well nuances are reproduced with varying competing instruments on an album.

On my audio system I find there's as much as 12 - 15 db's between the recording levels of many RBCD's and SACD's. And even within each type of media I find significant differences in recording levels. It does appear to me most classical albums are recorded with a lower recording volume, perhaps in part because massed instruments are harder to properly record.

I've read many pop/rock albums are purposely recorded with high volume levels to attract attention much in the same manner as commercial TV ads. But lately I'm also finding relatively high volume levels on jazz RBCD's and even some SACD's.

I can't understand why there appears to be no industry standards to facilitate good sound reproduction on albums, particularly non pop/rock albums. I'm not saying the album sound is unlistenable because it's the emotion of the music that's most important. But it seems to me it could be so much better on average if recording and mastering engineers would simply adhere to some industry standards.

You know, this is a major pet peeve of mine. I have just about had it. I have had it with crushed, loud remasters like the Stones Some Girls and the Queen catalog, and new releases like Coldyplay's last album which was mastered comically loud.

I am also fed up with conflicting stories. We hear about artists who say "Why is my record not as loud as ABC..." then we hear stories about artists and producers who claim it is out of their hands.

Enough already. Some sanity must be restored. Do top chefs say " I want my food to be as salty, greasy, and overpriced as the guy down the block"?.

The Sept issue of Stereophile has an interview with Rush. Alex Lifeson laments how horrible and loud Vapor Trails, their previous album sounded and blames Howie Weinberg, who he says "blew it". He says the end result was out their hands.

I find that hard to believe for a band that controlled every aspect of the recording process, album artwork, and distribution.

Lifeson goes on to say that they had to master their new album knowing that many would listen to it on an iPod.

As I said..I have had it with this loudness ****.

 

[rockitman]

Or this one:

Bernie Grundman

None of us like that. In fact, some of our producers and artists push us to do things like that to the recordings. Again, when I say it’s the sobering part, they come in here and a lot of them are pretty idealistic. It’s “Oh, we really love the recording. We like the dynamics and what we got and we don’t want to mess with it too much.” I’ll say, “Great. That’s terrific. It’ll sound more natural with less processing.” Invariably, the next day, they say, “How come mine isn’t as loud as so-and-so’s?” It’s the common complaint. We’re constantly bombarded with people saying, “It’s got to be louder, it’s got to be louder.” I’ve been in this business 45 years and it’s never been different. Everybody wants theirs louder than somebody else’s recording, or at least as loud as somebody else’s that they’ve heard. It’s been this constant trying to push these things as far as we can and still keep them musical.

These it's got to be louder people need to pick another profession.

 

[GaryProtein]

I have little to add about the complaints that have been raised. The industry does need a standard for maximum volume or a zero dB level on CDs. What falls below that is what gives dynamic range.

As a listener, it is unfortunate that we have been made to suffer the consequences created by ill-informed, unknowledgeable self serving recording engineers who compress music to kingdom come.

In my office, I use a computer and iPod for all my music which I ripped entirely from my CD collection, and the degree of volume disparity from disk to disk is appalling. I have some disks that are just right in volume when I set it, and that causes others to be inaudible over the background sounds in the office, which I use the background music to help camouflage.

 

[treitz3]

....It’s been this constant trying to push these things as far as we can and still keep them musical.

Much like our Government, they keep pushing the envelope until one day it bursts. For audio, I am personally looking forward to the day the bubble bursts because what is coming out now is generally NOT musical. IME, few recordings today push the envelope of good sound. As we all know, loudness isn't a part of the equation with regards to good sound. To put it bluntly, that's why the volume knob is there. If only the powers that be understood this.

If they do?

Then make the exceptionally well "end result" and offer another to the convenience crowd. It can't be that hard to increase the volume for the convenience crowd, can it? I mean come on....they listen to it on devices that don't really perform in the first place. They want tunes. Audiophiles want music.

Tom

 

[Andre Marc]

Much like our Government, they keep pushing the envelope until one day it bursts. For audio, I am personally looking forward to the day the bubble bursts because what is coming out now is generally NOT musical. IME, few recordings today push the envelope of good sound. As we all know, loudness isn't a part of the equation with regards to good sound. To put it bluntly, that's why the volume knob is there. If only the powers that be understood this.

If they do?

Then make the exceptionally well "end result" and offer another to the convenience crowd. It can't be that hard to increase the volume for the convenience crowd, can it? I mean come on....they listen to it on devices that don't really perform in the first place. They want tunes. Audiophiles want music.

Tom

I hate to get political..but you opened the door. How about substituting "Much like our Government, they keep pushing the envelope until one day it bursts" for "Much like our Financial Services Industry, they keep pushing the envelope until one day it bursts"?

Back to audio..recordings with acceptable DRM values, easy on the ears sonics, and high quality texture are now in the great minority and it is a fact we have to live with. The worst part about all this are the jerk offs who are remastering the albums I grew up with and trying to make them sound as loud as the rubbish that all the hipsters on the subway are listening to on their $5 Apple ear buds.

 

[Bruce B]

Back to audio..recordings with acceptable DRM values, easy on the ears sonics, and high quality texture are now in the great minority and it is a fact we have to live with. The worst part about all this are the jerk offs who are remastering the albums I grew up with and trying to make them sound as loud as the rubbish that all the hipsters on the subway are listening to on their $5 Apple ear buds.

So what ARE acceptable DRM levels? For what genre? I've got several songs I like that have DR levels of "only 12dB.... so you certainly can't pin great sonority on DRM levels.

 

[Andre Marc]

So what ARE acceptable DRM levels? For what genre? I've got several songs I like that have DR levels of "only 12dB.... so you certainly can't pin great sonority on DRM levels.

To be honest, for me DRM is not about a number, or importing a track into Audacity. It is a CONCEPT. I have never, ever done a DRM reading with foobar etc. I KNOW when an album has been mixed and mastered at the CORRECT level. It is a feeling.

To give hard examples, the Ludwig Stones remasters from 1994 are spot on as far as I am concerned. On the opposite end of the spectrum, the Exile on Main St remaster from last year by Stephen Marcussen is totally unacceptable on any level. And the same goes for the Nirvana Nevermind Ludwig remaster from last year. Deplorable.

For a new release, Coldplay's last album, as I mentioned is so freaking loud it is almost like a bad joke.

 

[Bruce B]

To be honest, for me DRM is not about a number, or importing a track into Audacity. It is a CONCEPT.

Try to get that concept past the objectivists!

For the AES to step in, you need hard fact/numbers. I certainly on your team,. I know what you're saying, but for the loudness war to end, you'll need hard guidelines for everyone to follow.

 

[John P]

I think a standard for average RMS levels would go a long way toward solving this problem. Actual dynamic range would still be a choice, but not for the purpose of pushing everything to the max. At a standard, reduced overall level, tracks with their dynamic range compressed would pale in comparison to high DR tracks.

 

[Andre Marc]

Try to get that concept past the objectivists!

For the AES to step in, you need hard fact/numbers. I certainly on your team,. I know what you're saying, but for the loudness war to end, you'll need hard guidelines for everyone to follow.

I just don't think you can regulate this issue. It is an artistic choice.

It is like trying regulate how pathetic reality tv shows can be or how inane
putrid Steve Carell, Will Farrel, or Adam Sandler movies can be.

Garish and downright mindless choices by the entertainment industry is not something I think we do anything about except speaking out. Our culture has been dumbed down to no and in every category.

So why are we surprised about the deterioration of good taste in recording and mastering?