Commodore Remix

Hey folks. Take a look at this waveform

http://picasaweb.google.dk/incrediblesh ... 1376554018

I know you shouldn't judge music from visuals but the visuals do not lie and tell a certain truth. The truth of compression (note this is not a 10 minute long song, it's close to 3 minuttes long). I know this piece is "rocky" / rockish, but to me it sounds somewhat overcompressed, at least when I hear it on my stereo. So I opened it in wavpad and saw what you see on that picture.

Am I being too picky or do others share my sentiment? At least the compression means I cannot really appreciate the music. Musically it's cool, but the sound kills it for me. As I've said before, over-compression is somewhat of an epidemic. That's how I feel it.

I just hate to see "bad" sound kill good music.

The effect of too much compression and clipping is that my ears almost start to hurt.

There's a new site up (just up) which I plan to support. It's called SongView.

http://www.songview.org

I (seriously, no joking) intend to use it as a tool in my buying decision-making (I am the decider) for new music so as to see if the music is clipped/over-compressed. Music that is over-compressed and clipped will be put lower on my list.

As the above is a free remix, given away to the joy of this community, it is not a criticism at all of Juha's work - it is musically great. It is meant to get some attention of the general state of affairs and perhaps to inspire some to try a different path - not entirely, but to just try and put a little less "salt on the food".

Radio people use compression very often, bc when you switch between the channels without changing your volume, the loudest channel will make the best first impression, most dynamic, full sound and stuff, so especially young people can be influenced to stay there. But if all stations already send their signals at 100% (or 0 dB) level, you cannot amplify it further without clipping, so the only way is compression. Compression sounds better than clipping, but when over-used, it can also awfully distort the sound and completely spoil it.

So in my opinion, you're absolutely right, compression makes the sound less genuine and thus worse and worse, the higher the compression level gets. I don't like that either. The expression "compression" is actually the short form of "dynamic compression". The dynamics of the signal are squeezed together to a smaller scale, so the signal becomes less dynamic - which is bad. Music needs dynamics!

Today everyone uses compression and maximizers to the max to get the music as LOUD as possible. There is no dynamic what so ever in the music today like it was before.

It might be good in some music styles like club music and such...

I say, let's crank it DOWN a few.

You're right omoroca. It's called dynamic compression. Naturally the dynamic range decreases as the "floor" is raised and perhaps the "roof" lowered - it reduces the range of expression and fine emotions disappear. It becomes a monotonic wall of sound that can hurt the ears and really make you want to not listen to the music.

I'm also aware of the radio playback issues and loudness adjustments. There has been quite some discussion of it the places I visit. Some of the explanation can be found in poor playback systems used by the masses.

I really don't understand why creators of high quality playback equipment don't use put pressure on music companies, in the end, it will take away any inentive to buy such systems. This is not a matter of being elitist but it's disheartening to see high quality material crushed and flattened to play back a little bit better on poor systems. It is a negative spiral of ever lower fidelity. Again, I'm not against dynamic compression, but I'm for a balanced use of it which doesn't cater to the lowest common denominator.

There are some weak signs appearing that record companies will value quality again. I can't remember the page but one record company is beginning to produce more vinyls, SACD's and DVDA's - and these formats are worthless with overuse dynamic compession - why bother. They are also DRM'ed and better copy controlled than the broken CC on non Redbook CD's. So there may be part of the answer there. I think part of the (relative) popularity of vinyl stems from the lower use of dynamic compression rather than inherit advantages of the medium itself.

exoskeleton wrote:Naturally the dynamic range decreases as the "floor" is raised and perhaps the "roof" lowered - it reduces the range of expression and fine emotions disappear. It becomes a monotonic wall of sound that can hurt the ears and really make you want to not listen to the music.

While I mostly agree from a artistic point of view, technically this is not right. Dynamic compression means that signals above a certain threshold level are lowered by a specific ratio - so at first compressing means the signal making more quiet. Then you have the possibility to raise the level of the signal again by a certain amount without catching clipping.
Don't forget that dynamic compression is nothing bad at all, it's one of the basic tools for reaching a rich and full sound, even if the main mix is not compressed at all. You need it in all stages and tasks during music production on individual instruments, on vocals while recording, for forming and manipulating sound of guitar, bass etc.
To come to a point, yes, I think Slayradio uses a wrong compression settings making the sound worse. )
And like everything it sounds worse than before when used wrong, such as wrong filtering/eq-ing, which is practised much more often IMO.

exoskeleton wrote:The effect of too much compression and clipping is that my ears almost start to hurt.

1st of all, compression has nothing to do with clipping.
Clipping occurs in digital domain when the singnal exceeds the dynamic potential of the used media (usually, limited by a 16bit range in domestic cds). Clipping is the result of bad mixing/mastering, not of compression (but i think that nowadays it's *impossible* to have any cd with clipping, if not intentional).

As Romeo said, compression (as well as LIMITERS/Brickwalls [wich are the tools most responsible for "images" as the one you posted]) are just tools, and as every tool you can make bad or good use of them.

To say that modern music is "overcompressed" is just like to say that today there are too many computers; means nothing (or everything) at the same time. It's just a way to better exploit a (dated) technology (eg: 44.1Khz 16bit recorders). A god master (or, better, pre-master) is a process done with respect to the matherial wich is being mastered. Of course you can't master classical music (or, to say just one, Progressive Rock) the same way you master the last Scooter track. Each track has his different master, that's is. It may be good or bad, it all depends on 1) the skills of the guy who makes the master 2) the skill of the guy who makes the mix.

Many time even the most perfect premaster is nullified by the "in house" mastering (wich is something that may *somethime* occur) done by the guys at the press factory.

I have never said dynamic compression = clipping. The point is not really which method is used, but rather that the dynamic range is overall reduced. That's the way I mean it, anyway. Perhaps I should have said dynamic range reduction. And my point is not that dynamic range reduction should not be used at all but rather to use it less and with more care. This analogous to enhancing a digital photo with color saturation. It may make the photo look more beautiful, but it can also cross a certain line. I stand by my words saying that dynamic compression and dynamic range reduction is overused (clipping does still occur, I've seen several examples, some people seem to want it) but we can change overused with misused, if you want, DHS; saying dynamic range reduction is overly misused.

I'd like more "god" masters too, DHS.