The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Vote on the solutions to the loudness war.... Dynamics Plugins
View Poll Results: Vote on Loudness Normalizatoin
No LN, over my dead body.
143 Votes - 41.21%
I want LN, with a consumer option to defeat.
137 Votes - 39.48%
I want LN required and undefeatable in all consumer gear.
28 Votes - 8.07%
No opinion, whatever will be will be.
39 Votes - 11.24%
Voters: 347. You may not vote on this poll

Old 18th November 2009
  #31
kjg
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by bob katz View Post
It can and should be dynamic between movements. Default the loudness normalization to ALBUM. I believe the current situation with CD Changers is much worse. Back in the day I could put a bunch of albums on the record changer and have a party. Try that with old and new CDs today. Which idea makes more sense?
The idea to just use the knob makes most sense. Or hire a good dj, with ears, to do it for you.
And also, the idea to not moderate everyone's music with arbitrary standards makes sense. But if you do, don't say it is in the name of freedom of expression. Say that it is because you know what is best, and will make that the default, overruling what artists freely chose for.

I can see why you want it, but your reasoning is flawed. You cannot moderate art to give artists more freedom.
Old 18th November 2009
  #32
Lives for gear
 
24-96 Mastering's Avatar
A potential downside to enforced LN is that it might cause a development that we've seen in advertising that has to pass a loudness meter: Adjustment of sound content for maximum effect while maintaining a given overall loudness. Like cinema ads are often automated, mixed, sound-designed and even scripted to grab your attention in the beginning, then drop down and give a crescendo on the end. Imagine songs were written, arranged, mixed and mastered specifically to 'fool' the loudness meter.
Old 18th November 2009
  #33
Elk
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderTow View Post
Agreed, The poll is flawed by design. The results are meaningless.
It's a tool for discussion. It has many other design flaws, such as a limited sample pool, self-selected participation, etc.

The average consumer using shuffle play or a play list across albums is frustrated when the next song is "too quiet". They want them to play at a similar perceived volume.

Turning down the squashed track to play at the same loudness as the better recorded non-squashed track would encourage music producers to compress less and allow consumers to hear the difference.

Bob is right that a default setting of on would be more effective. I just can't get past the idea of yet another default setting on a player I need to switch off.
Old 18th November 2009
  #34
Gear Guru
 
UnderTow's Avatar
 

Verified Member
PS: The POLL results ARE already flawed as you can see in post Nr 2. Someone voted for option Nr 2 but actually wanted the non-existing option.

The results of this POLL are already meaningless.

Alistair
Old 18th November 2009
  #35
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Imagine songs were written, arranged, mixed and mastered specifically to 'fool' the loudness meter.
I actually thought the same.

After all, the lobby of music industry must be convinced,
what if they are not convinced at all? Suddenly their releases can be fairly
compared to older releases, maybe not in their interest.
Old 18th November 2009
  #36
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by bob katz View Post
Interesting. That's the idea, actually! Does the LN thing (Soundcheck) influence them to pick a record based strictly on its musical merits?
Didn't you say it includes some form of compression?
I don't like having my mixes and/or masters being ****ed up by some default algorithm.
But actually I didn't mean the LN-thing, but the 'sound enhancement'-slider (don't know what's it called in the US-localized iTunes)
That sucks..

And the people I was talking about pick a record on it's business-merits, not sound..
Old 18th November 2009
  #37
Lives for gear
 
47radAR's Avatar
 

This seems to be based on the assumption that overcompression is ALWAYS perfomed as a perceived need. In the event that it's done for artistic purposes (and it often is - reguardless of weather or not you like it), what then?
Old 18th November 2009
  #38
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by beanface View Post
I'm all for it. I keep on limiting the output of my missus ipod so she wont go deaf, but she keeps on removing it and having a go at me for putting it on. Going deaf shouldn't be anyones option, it will just end up costing the NHS (taxpayers) more money that we will end up having to front.
Well I´m all for protecting people´s health but I´m not for the gov controlling everything.

I think the best would be to find a way to reduce the will and need for competitive volumes and at the same time educate people about the loss in audio quality and the danger of very loud music.
Old 18th November 2009
  #39
Lives for gear
 
Waltz Mastering's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Some albums sound great mastered loud... I'm a fan.

Some albums sound like ass mastered loud... Mostly because the ME didn't know how to achieve the optimal level in a convincing way or the music sucks anyway ... Not a fan.

People can make choices with what they want to listen to, however they want to listen to it and release there music however they see fit, and that's how it is, should be, and stay.

Seems everyone with a limiter and or clipper is gunning to be the next TJ but don't have a clue.
Old 18th November 2009
  #40
Lives for gear
 
47radAR's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Waltz Mastering View Post
Some albums sound great mastered loud... I'm a fan.

Some albums sound like ass mastered loud... Mostly because the ME didn't know how to achieve the optimal level in a convincing way or the music sucks anyway ... Not a fan.

People can make choices with what they want to listen to, however they want to listen to it and release there music however they see fit, and that's how it is, should be, and stay.

Seems everyone with a limiter or clipper is gunning to be the next TJ. He's one of the best at what he does.
+1

I can't help but feel that this whole idea is just a way of forcing one's POV of the so-called "loudness war" on everyone. Is this really a situation that requires intervention?
Old 18th November 2009
  #41
Lives for gear
 
Edward_Vinatea's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elk View Post

Turning down the squashed track to play at the same loudness as the better recorded non-squashed track would encourage music producers to compress less and allow consumers to hear the difference.
No, you are not.

Conversely, the consumers that listen and buy your record are not the ones crunching the life out of mixes. Educating and making them aware of these differences is useless. All they will do is accept the sound of a songs as what it is. They will not write letters demanding the artist and producers to lower the loudness to increase the dynamics. Only educating the artists, the producers and making them "accountable" will put an end to this bad practice. {keep on LOLing KJG}

{EDIT} FWIW, I do believe like Tom that some mixes sound better a bit squashed, so this isn't a black or white issue to me. Just freedom to express oneself and making good judgment calls.
Old 18th November 2009
  #42
Lives for gear
 
24-96 Mastering's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trell Blaze View Post
This seems to be based on the assumption that overcompression is ALWAYS perfomed as a perceived need. In the event that it's done for artistic purposes (and it often is - reguardless of weather or not you like it), what then?
Nothing is stopping you from mastering the album loud and then dropping it by a few dBs. That's not to argue against your point or arguing in favour of LN, just pointing out that sound and level don't have to be connected. I think that's pretty much the idea of LN: Decoupling sound choices from playback level.
Old 18th November 2009
  #43
Gear Guru
 
UnderTow's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elk View Post
It's a tool for discussion. It has many other design flaws, such as a limited sample pool, self-selected participation, etc.
True but this particular poll is flawed by design.

As for the discussion, everything was pretty much said in the other thread. Maybe you missed that. Bob just wanted to be proven right...

Quote:
The average consumer using shuffle play or a play list across albums is frustrated when the next song is "too quiet". They want them to play at a similar perceived volume.

Turning down the squashed track to play at the same loudness as the better recorded non-squashed track would encourage music producers to compress less and allow consumers to hear the difference.
I don't think anyone is disagreeing with that. What people are disagreeing with is the idea that it should be the default setting.

Quote:
Bob is right that a default setting of on would be more effective. I just can't get past the idea of yet another default setting on a player I need to switch off.
Same here. I am all for Replay Gain being implemented in every player. I mentioned it in the other thread. I am against it being the default behaviour just as I am against default loudness EQing in players.

Bob does not find your or my view valid. He left out our preferred options in the poll. I don't even believe his intention was to find out what people want or to encourage discussion. His mind seems pretty much made up already.

Alistair
Old 18th November 2009
  #44
kjg
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trell Blaze View Post
This seems to be based on the assumption that overcompression is ALWAYS perfomed as a perceived need. In the event that it's done for artistic purposes (and it often is - reguardless of weather or not you like it), what then?
then you can't.

neither can you be quiet if you want to.

EDIT: well, you can compress. but you won't be loud.
Old 18th November 2009
  #45
Lives for gear
 
dcollins's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by kjg View Post
yes. they should be punished.

before you get your license to make music, you have to take an oath, and when you break the oath you will be punished. in the name of artistic freedom!
Put Bob in charge. He knows what's best for us.


DC
Old 18th November 2009
  #46
Lives for gear
 
Edward_Vinatea's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by dcollins View Post
Put Bob in charge. He knows what's best for us.
Are you nominating him for first President of the new Consumer Audio Affairs Committee? CAAC
Old 18th November 2009
  #47
Lives for gear
 
Franco's Avatar
 

Verified Member
I voted for option "4", not because I don't care, but because the reality is that the majority of consumers don't care about putting something in place that will make music sound better.

I bet 98% of people who own an iPod and use iTunes would rather have the 80's compilation album they just bought in iTunes sound just as loud as the latest Kanye West CD and be able to do that without doing much thinking, and don't really care about making the music more "dynamic". The same goes for lossless audio; when it comes down to it, people (again, probably 98%) would rather have the ability to cram as much audio into their iPods at lower kbps rates than lossless which would mean "less music" on the go.
Old 18th November 2009
  #48
kjg
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by dcollins View Post
Put Bob in charge. He knows what's best for us.


DC
BK never said they should be punished. I was just joking with Edward.
Old 18th November 2009
  #49
Gear Nut
 

I'm somewhat in favor of I want LN, with a consumer option to defeat.

I have a lot of misgivings though and it centers around them never proper "nailing" the design of the loudness control. Maybe the traditional "loudness" control, (that contol on older systems that adjusts the amount of bass depending on the position of the volume control) can be reworked to include LN, and be consumer activated.

But I do think that it a default "on" LN could help reduce the amount of oversquash that occurs in the name of loudness (i.e. loudness war) which could be more important than having a perfect design.
Old 18th November 2009
  #50
I told NO, although I felt as I DO NOT CARE. Here's WHY:

We got a Problem, almost any new release deals with crushed dynamics,
something that was related to metal only before the 90s. This trend has
been justified by the fact that many iPodders stumble on dfegaditunes
and get their music there.

It is a earplugs issue because - they say - people buy tracks from itunes
- NOT ME -
Sorry but I HEAR a Problem: Quality sucks on new releases, so...
Please Producers AVOID Crushing Loudness, Thank you.
Old 18th November 2009
  #51
Lives for gear
 
Edward_Vinatea's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by kjg View Post
BK never said they should be punished. I was just joking with Edward.
I never said that either, did I? Being "accountable" means that when {and IF, of course} the Loudness War is over or has subsided {insert a date} those who made those HORRIBLE LOUD sounding records are going to run for cover and take responsibility for their actions. Sort of like the 'Nuremberg Trials'. And their "punishment" will be a life of listening to the criticism and scorn from peers and the buying public. The lucky ones will be already dead. Like ostriches shall they hide their heads under the ground. I know BK has good intentions at heart, but only a consumer revolt might shake things up. LN's are no solution. Bob: ask people to stick their heads out of windows and shout: "I am sick and tired of loud squashed records, and I AM NOT GOING TO TAKE IT ANYMORE!!"

Regards,
Old 18th November 2009
  #52
Mastering
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderTow View Post
No Bob you did not. You explained why having the LN default to OFF would be pointless but you did not in any conceivable way mention or explain why it would make the POLL meaningless.

The idea of a POLL is to find out what people think. Removing one very obvious option from the POLL makes it utterly meaningless.

Bob, you are confusing having and honest POLL and and pushing your own personal views.

Alistair
I think it's strictly a practical view. Do you know that a great deal of A/V receivers default to the Dolby Night option (night compression). Do you know how many consumers get the wrong impression from that?

Here's the syllogism:

1) Consumers like plug and play
2) Consumers will not use menus to select options
3) Therefore if you are in favor of LN in order to encourage producers not to overcompress, then you would not want to make LN an option in receivers.

The vote options are not biased in either way. They are simply framed so that those who are in favor of LN get the option they would prefer and those who are not in favor can equally express their disfavor! Like the health-care debate there is no namby-pamby middle ground on this that would be acceptable to either camp. Without LN as a default you might as well not even consider it.

As I mentioned above, this is like the health care debate in the U.S.. Here's the argument: A bill without a public option has no beef, what will happen is insurance companies will continue to get fat and greedy.

So if you are in opposition to the LN argument, vote in opposition, but don't emasculate those who wish to have LN by making turning off the default, because consumers will never know it's there nor turn it on. If you wish to try another poll to see if it gets different results, then wait till this poll settles down and make another. But I've made it quite clear why I chose not to leave this option and why this poll is entirely fair to both sides of the argument. An LN which is not the default in consumer gear might as well be no option at all!
Old 18th November 2009
  #53
kjg
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edward_Vinatea View Post
I never said that either, did I?
no. that's why i said i was joking. which worked. for me at least, as i was laughing...

sorry if you weren't, please don't take offense (or not too much, a little maybe)

Old 18th November 2009
  #54
Mastering
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by UnderTow View Post
His mind seems pretty much made up already.

Alistair
My position is clear, so yes, my mind is made up, but I wouldn't have phrased such an enticing poll option as "Over my dead body" if I didn't sympathize with the naysayers! Give me a break :-).

I've explained why "Default to Off" will have absolutely NO effect on the loudness race to I decided to put this to a realistic vote. You're welcome to disagree, but not in my poll :-).
Old 18th November 2009
  #55
Mastering
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by kjg View Post
then you can't.

neither can you be quiet if you want to.

EDIT: well, you can compress. but you won't be loud.
Which seems a lot fairer to me than: "Well, you can compress and be louder than anyone else"!

If you want to be quiet, just make sure you have one loud song on your album and use ALBUM-BASED LN. Nothing is perfect, but it's good to shake up the status quo when you think the status quo is untenable. It's entirely unprofessional to have 16 dB loudness difference between pop CDs! LN will take those and make them equally loud. Wouldn't that be an interesting world?
Old 18th November 2009
  #56
Gear Maniac
 
Stereophonic's Avatar
 

Verified Member
My vote is for 2 as long as the option to enable /disable is as simple as pushing play. (no menu diving). I think this will give artists and engineers more freedom -- they can dial in a great sounding master with the option to slam if and when in shuffle mode.

Plus I can't wait for the influx of end users who will start calling themselves mastering engineers once this button is discovered!


edit: could and would it have the reverse effect and reduce the volume of a hyper loud unlistenable track? Would advanced settings give the user an option to set a min / max threshold?
Old 18th November 2009
  #57
Lives for gear
 
Edward_Vinatea's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by kjg View Post
please don't take offense (or not too much, a little maybe)
heh

Alright, it's now time for me to go work for a living.
Old 18th November 2009
  #58
Lives for gear
 

Actually I would like to see option 3, because my old CD player
will rise in value on Ebay after introduction of LN.
Old 18th November 2009
  #59
Gear Addict
 
K. Evan Hodge IV's Avatar
 

I think it is a horrible idea to force anyone to limit/or reduce volume or do anything with their record. That is the whole point......that this is their record. What's next, are you going to tell Picaso that cubism isn't round enough? Or stop middle aged men from buying a shiny new red camaro?


If a record sucks its going to suck. If someone wants to blow their eardrums out then they are going to blow their eardrums out. If someone has a problem with their performance then let them by viagra.


At some point the idea that you (not you specifically bob) know better than I do so you have to intervene on my behalf is either going to blow up as a huge failure, or enslave us all.


Oh wait..........it already has.


K
Old 18th November 2009
  #60
Lives for gear
 
just.sounds's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by HomeProducer View Post
I still don't understand how this LN should handle classic music.
There can be a very loud orchestral part followed by a quiet part.
So for this type of music, LN should be switched off. I have the
feeling, such an algorithm would make things just worse.
EBU TECHNICAL - Group details

This board has found a pretty nice solution there algorithm gates the really quite parts out of the measurement And takes the average level of everything above the minimum gated out level this works really well with movies that contain a lot of silence and dialog.
The dialog is not normalized to really loud levels. So i guess this will work on classical to.

So far the results they came up with where promising and hopefully this will be the european rule for television loudness. Maybe the music industry will follow as video clips will also be affected by this rule.
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
ianshepherd / Mastering forum
18
Quad / The Moan Zone
4
kenjkelly / Mastering forum
7

Forum Jump
Forum Jump