My illustrated take on compression and the "Loudness Wars"

Ratio 2:1 or 2:1.5
Treshold 10db
Attac 50 ms
Release 15 ms

If the source is already compressed (looks like a brickwall) leave it as it is.

 

Much better. The first thing I noticed when I played the CTR disc was that I had to turn my volume control up quite a fair amount. But in doing this you are rewarded with a much purer sound which is easier on the ear. You can actually hear the definition between the instruments. What a nice change.
I thought this must be a mistake. Best Rainbow sounding release out there.

 

Ok, for a change, let’s take a small quiz (see the weaveform pic below):

-What would you say about this CD?
-What year is this CD likely from?
-What do you think about the work of the mastering engineer on this one?
-What do you think, how does it sound: great/good/bad/terrible?

 

That's probably one of Steve's CCR titles, redbook layer.

 

Nope, it's none of Steve's works.

 

That's really good to know.

 

Ooh, I'll take a crack at it, even though I'm far from an expert on this stuff. Certainly I'd say it's from the last fifteen years or so. Judging from that quieter track and a few other places where the sound isn't off the map, I'd guess that these tracks aren't limited or compressed too badly. If they were, the top of that track would be flat instead of bristly. Of course, we can only make an inference about the other tracks based on the one. Anyway, the main thing is that this album is mastered way too loud, which means the peaks of the waves got lopped off or smooshed against the ceiling, however you want to look at it. Chances are, this gives the recording a hard quality when you listen to it. Past that, there's a lot you can't tell from looking at the waveform. It could be bathed in noise reduction and bad EQ, or it could be like what a lot of folks say about the new Jimi releases: otherwise good sounding, but mastered too hot.

That's based entirely on what I've managed to pick up from these boards. Hope I'm not too far off...

 

The last fear years I have stopped buying any rock except Grateful Dead releases, they seam to be the only ones concerned about SQ. It is a real shame. The Black Crowes new live album was an exception, it was nicely done.


When will the music industry wake up? I understand that even artists who care have to reliquish their rights to the mastering in order to get a contract.
It is a crying shame what is happening, the only solution is boycott. I would love to see some organized boycott.

 

That mastering is post 2000.

I think the mastering engineer either has poor judgement, or got some serious pressure from the record company to "make it louder".

I would imagine it sounds pretty bad.

 

Well, there's only 9 tracks and it runs over 50 minutes with some pretty long songs...

If you have an 80's mastering of this title, compare the two files. Apply a
-6dB or so to this album trying to match the loudness between this one and the 80's mastering (if it exists). When loudness is about the same, compare the sound and decide which one you like better. Some like the mega compressed sound because they claim to hear more into the music (magnifying glass effect of the quiet parts?). Others prefer the no-added compression during mastering for a more open natural sound. Either way, I believe there is compression during recording to funnel all that sound into the limits of the analog source. Personally, I think the more compression used, the less desireable it sounds. It's like trying to walk around the city looking through a magnifying glass only.

 

2005 Bod Ludwig

Wait for it, wait for it . . .

 

Hi trucker,

That was very good, indeed. See, you've learned a lot in these forums.

Ok, I think I better break the "secret" now. (Before we get into troubles... )
It was...

Mastered by Bob Ludwig at Gateway Mastering & DVD, Maine. Mixed by Chuck Ainlay at British Grove Studios
Year 2005 remaster (of the well known 1985 best album of all times)

Well, who would have thought that?

Sounds absolutely great to my ears, by the way.

That is to say, don't judge the book by the cover, don't judge the sound by the look of the waveform!

 

It's the redbook layer of Dire Straits' BROTHERS IN ARMS SACD. I thought that thing looked familiar. Guess I've got a new skill.

 

Hey, you gave before I guessed.

 

Pinknik, Very good! (You were faster than I could read the thread responses.)

You've won the quiz!!!

 

I really did think that was it, but I imported the disc just to make sure. I don't know what the waveform of the SACD layer looks like.

 

Oops, wrong info.

 

Crazy. My first/only guess was something off BIA. I figured it might be "One World", but then I pulled up the waveform, and it was close but not quite as compressed as what you showed.

So which track was it?

For the record, I think the SACD stinks. I first reported on the nasty compression way back here:

http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showthread.php?t=53814&page=9

Post #175

 

Sam, it's the whole album.

 

Ah, that would explain it!

FWIW, I think the Who's "Tommy" SACD is compressed too.

 

Steve's Al Green CD looks like the one in the little quiz. Some of the songs came off the tape that way.

He did a compilation a couple of years ago but it doesn't have his name on it. I suspect that is because someone with authority wanted it louder, so he didn't want his name on it. That's just a guess.

 

Whaaa? No it doesn't. What song are you referring to. I'll post a waveform if needed, but Grant I don't know where you get this idea from.

 

Load it up in an editor. I did when I used it to make a CD- comp. The limiting you see on a couple of songs, like "Here I Am (Come And Take Me)" were natually limited, so it has what resembles an almost "buzzcut" wave. I never said that Steve used limiting.

 

Here is the way it comes off the CD:

 

Here is how it would look if he had pushed it up to FS 0: