Too much master buss saturation

[djadalaide]

They failed anyway, far too loud! Its distorted like "Tame Impala - Elephant" but twice the volume

Just to make clear: it is not too loud (Spotify auto levels everything) it is too much compressed/brickwall limiting.

It has been mastered too loud, thats why it sounds like that

[Marco Raaphorst]

Holy schmoly, the Big Balloon track excerpt clips big time. It's distortion you're hearing.


Screen Shot 2018-06-05 at 4.49.58 PM.png

Dutch.png


And just for fun, it has a dynamic range of 5. This wins the loudness war!


Screen Shot 2018-06-05 at 4.56.03 PM.png

I see that the audio in your example is peaking at 0 db but in Spotify it is not peaking at 0 db. I measure peaks around -7 db.

I see this (not full track, intro, 1 couplet and 1 couplet):

peaks-balloons.jpg (89.88 KiB) Viewed 2368 times

BTW I can't find hard clipped bits, no shopped off peaks, no 3 samples flat. I guess soft clipping must have been used (sounds like tape saturation to me).

[selig]

Just to make clear: it is not too loud (Spotify auto levels everything) it is too much compressed/brickwall limiting.

It has been mastered too loud, thats why it sounds like that

RANT, history, and hope for the future...

This exchange highlights the problem I have with the term “loudness”.

On stage and in the studio, we used to say if you’re too loud, turn down. It was a term related to SPL, not to DR. We called it “over compressed” or would say “you’re hitting it too hard” when referring to dynamic range and artifacts related to reducing dynamic range.

I believe the “loudness wars” actually comes from the broadcast world’s loudness wars starting in the 50s to 60s, because they had a hard stop of 100% modulation to deal with (similar to how digital mediums have a hard stop of 100% sample levels) and they had to deal with the “law”, and like digital they could not go “over” (over modulate) or in their case they would pay a fine.

So they developed all these clever ways (devices) of staying under the bar but pushing everything up to that level, with the goal of sounding comparatively “louder” than the last station you were listening to (when scanning stations). They also listened critically (the better CEs) to be sure they weren’t totally destroying the music!

Even in the 1980s-90s they were using multi-band limiting, and I remember seeing a 10 band limiter at Z100 in NYC (where by brother was chief engineer) in the early 1990s. Broadcast was leading the way in the “loudness wars” using all sorts of cool analog devices, long before digital limiters became popular and mastering engineers began to abuse them. In fact, some of the older (and way cool) devices are now becoming popular in software form (and yes, I have eventual plans for something to come from a collaboration between my brother and myself in the future).

But before “mastering” became the new “broadcast” (before the loudness war spread to the recording world), things worked out OK if you sent your mix to radio, and the FINAL thing done before the listener heard it was that limiting. In fact, some folks (my brother, for one) from the broadcast world say it should return to that approach (with a twist), where the music/studio folks mix as they see fit and don’t do any heavy limiting etc., leaving the “loudness leveling” to the final device in your home so that ALL sources sound equal to the end user.

This is one step further than leaving it to the streaming services, which in this scenario would stream at the highest resolution possible rather than doing any adjustments themselves. This of course cannot happen unless and until some standardization takes place on the “player” end, which is unlikely to happen anytime soon. So for now it’s a dream - but I also remember folks like my brother dreaming about having EVERY song at their fingertips (back in the 1970s), and that dream has just about come true today - so dream big, and dream on!



Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk

[Marco Raaphorst]

also do check out the vocals. that's not coming from brickwall I think, the rest of the instruments are cleaner than the vocals.

[Marco Raaphorst]

Talking about limited dynamic range. A lot is between 3 and 4 db. Even older stuff like Miss Elliot Supa Dupa Fly which sounds totally killer.

This has an even smaller range:

But it also sounds fantastic imo.

As does the very old Blue in Green by Miles Davis. But that one has more dynamics. It's all reference stuff for me.

Interesting, you can't make a rule out of this. It sounds good if it sound good

[selig]

Talking about limited dynamic range. A lot is between 3 and 4 db. Even older stuff like Miss Elliot Supa Dupa Fly which sounds totally killer.

This has an even smaller range:

But it also sounds fantastic imo.

As does the very old Blue in Green by Miles Davis. But that one has more dynamics. It's all reference stuff for me.

Interesting, you can't make a rule out of this. It sounds good if it sound good

I can only assume you’re not using your ears to determine dynamic range, but using some numeric algorithm? Because the Latin Playboys has so much space between the notes, while the original example has none, that I cannot hear them as being in any way similar. What am I missing here with comparing these two examples?


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk

[Marco Raaphorst]

Talking about limited dynamic range. A lot is between 3 and 4 db. Even older stuff like Miss Elliot Supa Dupa Fly which sounds totally killer.

This has an even smaller range:

But it also sounds fantastic imo.

As does the very old Blue in Green by Miles Davis. But that one has more dynamics. It's all reference stuff for me.

Interesting, you can't make a rule out of this. It sounds good if it sound good

I can only assume you’re not using your ears to determine dynamic range, but using some numeric algorithm? Because the Latin Playboys has so much space between the notes, while the original example has none, that I cannot hear them as being in any way similar. What am I missing here with comparing these two examples?


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk

Yes metering. Latin Playboys is very much compressed. 3 db range.

[normen]

One relatively new factor is (or rather was) also accelerating this: People started to listen to music on completely underpowered devices (laptops, phones etc). Having 6dB more dynamics is a serious cut for the maximum average SPL in that case. And as people usually want to listen to the music and not the sound turning it up by squashing it became even more normal. Heck, even some bluetooth/USB/whatnot speakers limit constantly just because of this. Or to put it another way: Some people turn off iTunes' auto-LUFS-leveling because their speaker doesn't get as loud anymore.

[selig]

I can only assume you’re not using your ears to determine dynamic range, but using some numeric algorithm? Because the Latin Playboys has so much space between the notes, while the original example has none, that I cannot hear them as being in any way similar. What am I missing here with comparing these two examples?


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk

Yes metering. Latin Playboys is very much compressed. 3 db range.

What do you mean by “3 dB range”?


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk

[Marco Raaphorst]

I guess modern music is so balanced, this causes less dynamic range straight away. No one is doing the sudden peak thing anymore I guess

[selig]

One relatively new factor is (or rather was) also accelerating this: People started to listen to music on completely underpowered devices (laptops, phones etc). Having 6dB more dynamics is a serious cut for the maximum average SPL in that case. And as people usually want to listen to the music and not the sound turning it up by squashing it became even more normal. Heck, even some bluetooth/USB/whatnot speakers limit constantly just because of this. Or to put it another way: Some people turn off iTunes' auto-LUFS-leveling because their speaker doesn't get as loud anymore.

Before all of these were:
Walkman, transistor radios, portable turntables, etc.

When I was a kid in the 70s we had the CHEAPEST stereo you could get from KMart. Probably had a few watts of power at MOST!

All to say, this trend of listening on underpowered systems MAY be accelerating (I wouldn’t know), but is hardly “new”.


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk

[Marco Raaphorst]

Yes metering. Latin Playboys is very much compressed. 3 db range.

What do you mean by “3 dB range”?


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk

3 db dynamics, between lowest peak and highest one.

[Marco Raaphorst]

One relatively new factor is (or rather was) also accelerating this: People started to listen to music on completely underpowered devices (laptops, phones etc). Having 6dB more dynamics is a serious cut for the maximum average SPL in that case. And as people usually want to listen to the music and not the sound turning it up by squashing it became even more normal. Heck, even some bluetooth/USB/whatnot speakers limit constantly just because of this. Or to put it another way: Some people turn off iTunes' auto-LUFS-leveling because their speaker doesn't get as loud anymore.

most modern music is less than 6 db of dynamic range, 3 db is common I guess.

[selig]

What do you mean by “3 dB range”?


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk

3 db dynamics, between lowest peak and highest one.

That’s not dynamic range, because in the LP there is audio far lower than 3 dB below the highest peak, no?



Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk

[normen]

One relatively new factor is (or rather was) also accelerating this: People started to listen to music on completely underpowered devices (laptops, phones etc). Having 6dB more dynamics is a serious cut for the maximum average SPL in that case. And as people usually want to listen to the music and not the sound turning it up by squashing it became even more normal. Heck, even some bluetooth/USB/whatnot speakers limit constantly just because of this. Or to put it another way: Some people turn off iTunes' auto-LUFS-leveling because their speaker doesn't get as loud anymore.

Before all of these were:
Walkman, transistor radios, portable turntables, etc.

When I was a kid in the 70s we had the CHEAPEST stereo you could get from KMart. Probably had a few watts of power at MOST!

All to say, this trend of listening on underpowered systems MAY be accelerating (I wouldn’t know), but is hardly “new”.


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk

Sure but whats new is that you can add a limiter without any added cost as theres most probably some kind of FPGA or DSP chip in there anyway. Same for laptops and computer speakers. Most devices like the PlayStation etc. let you choose if you play through the TV, through headphones or through a stereo system - and thats for a reason. It just becomes a normal approach and so the sound of it gets more normal. Or to yet again put it another way: Back in the transistor days you probably wouldn't have thought about making the MUSIC louder, you would have tried to make the AMP louder

[selig]

Talking about limited dynamic range. A lot is between 3 and 4 db. Even older stuff like Miss Elliot Supa Dupa Fly which sounds totally killer.

This has an even smaller range:

But just LISTEN to the two examples, the Latin Playboys compared to the Dutch Uncles. Which one is more dynamic SOUNDING?

I don't care about some LUFS value, it's just a number. I'm talking about dynamic range, not peak to peak values.
Dynamic range can be seen here in this side by side comparison of the two tracks mentioned above, Latin Playboys first and Dutch Uncles second (as if I had to tell anyone which was which):

Screen Shot 2018-06-06 at 8.32.06 AM.png (441 KiB) Viewed 2348 times

Or just use your ears: one is far more dynamic than the other IMO!

[Marco Raaphorst]

3 db dynamics, between lowest peak and highest one.

That’s not dynamic range, because in the LP there is audio far lower than 3 dB below the highest peak, no?



Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk

I am using Youlean Loudness Meter and refer to Loudness Range for dynamic range.

[selig]

Before all of these were:
Walkman, transistor radios, portable turntables, etc.

When I was a kid in the 70s we had the CHEAPEST stereo you could get from KMart. Probably had a few watts of power at MOST!

All to say, this trend of listening on underpowered systems MAY be accelerating (I wouldn’t know), but is hardly “new”.


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk

Sure but whats new is that you can add a limiter without any added cost as theres most probably some kind of FPGA or DSP chip in there anyway. Same for laptops and computer speakers. Most devices like the PlayStation etc. let you choose if you play through the TV, through headphones or through a stereo system - and thats for a reason. It just becomes a normal approach and so the sound of it gets more normal. Or to yet again put it another way: Back in the transistor days you probably wouldn't have thought about making the MUSIC louder, you would have tried to make the AMP louder

True dat…

[selig]

That’s not dynamic range, because in the LP there is audio far lower than 3 dB below the highest peak, no?



Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk

I am using Youlean Loudness Meter and refer to Loudness Range for dynamic range.

And you can see how pointless those values are in practice…


I'm curious how the two tracks I compared "measure" according to these tools?

[jimmyklane]

Tame Impala is using tape saturation via cassettedecks.

Tape is odd harmonics, clipped bits are odds as well. In a way it's like tape with more upper harmonics.

Cassette decks are a really fun way to get compression and distortion. I still have a cassette deck in the racks, and I’ve modded the machine to record/play at 4x it’s normal 1.875 IPS....which is going to completely destroy the heads sooner rather than later, but it sounds really cool on synths when you record with Dolby A on and playback with it off! Cassette tends to give my outright distortion on drums, which, when done in parallel sounds really good....however, cassette tape transport systems simply have too much wow and flutter to make a parallel path feasible (for me)...

[selig]

Tame Impala is using tape saturation via cassettedecks.

Tape is odd harmonics, clipped bits are odds as well. In a way it's like tape with more upper harmonics.

Cassette decks are a really fun way to get compression and distortion. I still have a cassette deck in the racks, and I’ve modded the machine to record/play at 4x it’s normal 1.875 IPS....which is going to completely destroy the heads sooner rather than later, but it sounds really cool on synths when you record with Dolby A on and playback with it off! Cassette tends to give my outright distortion on drums, which, when done in parallel sounds really good....however, cassette tape transport systems simply have too much wow and flutter to make a parallel path feasible (for me)...

Cassette recorders often have a really cool limiter though, which never wears out - I've got a producer friend that always records the output from an old crappy cassette recorder when tracking drums. The device usually just sits on the floor by the drums and sounds like the end of the world - mixed in a low levels it's an impressive effect (but you didn't hear that from me!).

[Marco Raaphorst]

It has been mastered too loud, thats why it sounds like that

RANT, history, and hope for the future...

This exchange highlights the problem I have with the term “loudness”.

On stage and in the studio, we used to say if you’re too loud, turn down. It was a term related to SPL, not to DR. We called it “over compressed” or would say “you’re hitting it too hard” when referring to dynamic range and artifacts related to reducing dynamic range.

I believe the “loudness wars” actually comes from the broadcast world’s loudness wars starting in the 50s to 60s, because they had a hard stop of 100% modulation to deal with (similar to how digital mediums have a hard stop of 100% sample levels) and they had to deal with the “law”, and like digital they could not go “over” (over modulate) or in their case they would pay a fine.

So they developed all these clever ways (devices) of staying under the bar but pushing everything up to that level, with the goal of sounding comparatively “louder” than the last station you were listening to (when scanning stations). They also listened critically (the better CEs) to be sure they weren’t totally destroying the music!

Even in the 1980s-90s they were using multi-band limiting, and I remember seeing a 10 band limiter at Z100 in NYC (where by brother was chief engineer) in the early 1990s. Broadcast was leading the way in the “loudness wars” using all sorts of cool analog devices, long before digital limiters became popular and mastering engineers began to abuse them. In fact, some of the older (and way cool) devices are now becoming popular in software form (and yes, I have eventual plans for something to come from a collaboration between my brother and myself in the future).

But before “mastering” became the new “broadcast” (before the loudness war spread to the recording world), things worked out OK if you sent your mix to radio, and the FINAL thing done before the listener heard it was that limiting. In fact, some folks (my brother, for one) from the broadcast world say it should return to that approach (with a twist), where the music/studio folks mix as they see fit and don’t do any heavy limiting etc., leaving the “loudness leveling” to the final device in your home so that ALL sources sound equal to the end user.

This is one step further than leaving it to the streaming services, which in this scenario would stream at the highest resolution possible rather than doing any adjustments themselves. This of course cannot happen unless and until some standardization takes place on the “player” end, which is unlikely to happen anytime soon. So for now it’s a dream - but I also remember folks like my brother dreaming about having EVERY song at their fingertips (back in the 1970s), and that dream has just about come true today - so dream big, and dream on!



Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk

Now with streaming everything is balanced in loudness perception (LUFS). The more compressed stuff sounds more compressed but the super dynamic stuff sounds just as loud. And often way better than the compressed stuff.

So compression/limiting is now only a sound decision.

[Marco Raaphorst]

Cassette decks are a really fun way to get compression and distortion. I still have a cassette deck in the racks, and I’ve modded the machine to record/play at 4x it’s normal 1.875 IPS....which is going to completely destroy the heads sooner rather than later, but it sounds really cool on synths when you record with Dolby A on and playback with it off! Cassette tends to give my outright distortion on drums, which, when done in parallel sounds really good....however, cassette tape transport systems simply have too much wow and flutter to make a parallel path feasible (for me)...

Cassette recorders often have a really cool limiter though, which never wears out - I've got a producer friend that always records the output from an old crappy cassette recorder when tracking drums. The device usually just sits on the floor by the drums and sounds like the end of the world - mixed in a low levels it's an impressive effect (but you didn't hear that from me!).

yes but Tame does it in a way it sounds super saturated. and artistic choice.

[selig]

Now with streaming everything is balanced in loudness perception (LUFS). The more compressed stuff sounds more compressed but the super dynamic stuff sounds just as loud. And often way better than the compressed stuff.

So compression/limiting is now only a sound decision.

As long as you listen to ONE streaming service, this can be true.

However, many of us listen to TV, then to our music collection, then to internet radio (Go SOMA-FM!), then to streaming services. And they all can sound very different! That's my point - there is a gap in the market right now for a solution to achieve a balanced listening experience across ALL sources, and the best way to achieve that is not at the source or at any intermediate stage, but rather at the destination.

[selig]

Cassette recorders often have a really cool limiter though, which never wears out - I've got a producer friend that always records the output from an old crappy cassette recorder when tracking drums. The device usually just sits on the floor by the drums and sounds like the end of the world - mixed in a low levels it's an impressive effect (but you didn't hear that from me!).

yes but Tame does it in a way it sounds super saturated. and artistic choice.

Doesn't sound like you're responding to my post - wrong quote maybe?
I'm talking specifically about artistic choice above…