Skip to main content ↑ ↓

Notice

Please note that most of the software linked on this forum is likely to be safe to use. If you are unsure, feel free to ask in the relevant topics, or send a private message to an administrator or moderator. To help curb the problems of false positives, or in the event that you do find actual malware, you can contribute through the article linked here.
Topic: Is a dynamic range of 10 or higher considered good for Pop and Pop Rock? (Read 6840 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Is a dynamic range of 10 or higher considered good for Pop and Pop Rock?

Hi,
Is a dynamic range value of 10 or higher considered good for Pop and Pop Rock albums? It's usually the dynamic range of the albums released during  the 80s and early 90s. I think below 10 compression starts to appears. Am I right?
 I listened to some albums that had a dynamic range as low as 6 or 7 and they were too loud but those are usually the ones released in late 2000s.

Re: Is a dynamic range of 10 or higher considered good for Pop and Pop Rock?

Reply #1 –
Quote
s a dynamic range value of 10 or higher considered good for Pop and Pop Rock albums?
Maybe...   It depends on how it's measured and what you like.     You can't really represent it with a single number.   There are short-term dynamics (loud drum hits or accented notes) and there are longer term dynamics (a song that starts-out quiet and ends-loud, etc.).

The crest factor (peak to RMS ratio) doesn't correlate that well with perceived as "dynamics".   For example, compressing to MP3 or cutting a vinyl record can increase the crest factor without affecting the way the dynamics sound.      IMO- EBU R128 Loudness Range (LRA) is a better measure of dynamic contrast but it's still just a "hint".

Quote
I listened to some albums that had a dynamic range as low as 6 or 7 and they were too loud
If it's too loud turn-down the volume control!   ;)    You can also use Replay Gain (or similar) so they are not louder than your other recordings.  Dynamic contrast is only indirectly related to loudness.     Compressing the dynamics allows you to make it digitally louder, or to get more volume with a smaller amplifier.

Re: Is a dynamic range of 10 or higher considered good for Pop and Pop Rock?

Reply #2 –
I just saw this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Gmex_4hreQ which says a lot. Turning down the volume is just part of a solution, it doesn't fix the fact that the audio was compressed. I'm okay with it because most of my CDs are from 80s, for newer albums I will probably look into collecting Vinyl instead in the near future. At least Vinyl records still maintain the good audio dynamics.

Re: Is a dynamic range of 10 or higher considered good for Pop and Pop Rock?

Reply #3 –
Quote
Turning down the volume is just part of a solution, it doesn't fix the fact that the audio was compressed.
Correct.   The volume control doesn't affect the dynamic contrast, but your complaint was that they are too loud.

Quote
for newer albums I will probably look into collecting Vinyl instead in the near future. At least Vinyl records still maintain the good audio dynamics.
That's not universally true.  The rumor is, most modern vinyl is made from the same master as the CD (sometimes with additional processing).    That information is not widely published.   You might have better luck if you can find a "high resolution" digital version, but these are often made from the same master too so that doesn't guarantee a more dynamic copy either.

Compression was used in the vinyl days but analog compression wasn't as "good" as modern digital compression so most older recordings are less compressed than modern recordings.   And some CDs made from these older recordings were not re-compressed but additional compression is often part of re-mastering.

But like I said, the vinyl cutting/playing process often increases the crest factor making it measure more dynamic without sounding more dynamic.   A lot of people are mislead by this.   And of course, CDs have more dynamic range capability.   The noise limits the dynamic range of records.    

P.S.
Dynamic contrast is only one factor in audio production.    There are many things that affect sound quality and your enjoyment of a particular recording.    And obviously, the record companies produce music that sells so most listeners are choosing "over compressed" music.    If highly-dynamic recordings were selling big and winning Grammys everybody would be copying that style...

The composition and performance are also a factor.   We've had a couple of generations of musicians growing-up on highly-compressed music and that's probably what they want to play.

Re: Is a dynamic range of 10 or higher considered good for Pop and Pop Rock?

Reply #4 –
Quote from: DVDdoug on
You might have better luck if you can find a "high resolution" digital version

Yesterday I downloaded Parallel Lines from Blondie.
On top you have HDtracks SHITtracks 24-bit/192 kHz version, on bottom you have CD from 1985.



Dunno about you guys, but I never, NEVER had any luck with modern remasters...

Doug is right. It is pretty much guaranteed that vinly was made from overly compressed digital master.
We are pretty much stuck to listening to music from the early 90s and before.
gold plated toslink fan

Re: Is a dynamic range of 10 or higher considered good for Pop and Pop Rock?

Reply #5 –
I tossed out all my HDTrack purchases and replaced them with the older 1st press versions a few weeks ago.

Re: Is a dynamic range of 10 or higher considered good for Pop and Pop Rock?

Reply #6 –
It’s not possible to cut vinyl from a CD master, FYI. The vinyl necessitates a unique master. Whether or not it’s better is up to you. Also, dynamic compression is now SUPER transparent, you’d be very hard pushed to ABX between the two when level matched correctly.

Don’t worry about dynamic, pop music isn’t classical.

Re: Is a dynamic range of 10 or higher considered good for Pop and Pop Rock?

Reply #7 –
Quote from: Markuza97 on
Yesterday I downloaded Parallel Lines from Blondie.
On top you have HDtracks SHITtracks 24-bit/192 kHz version, on bottom you have CD from 1985.


Dunno about you guys, but I never, NEVER had any luck with modern remasters...

Hybrid Multimedia Production Suite will be a platform-indipendent open source suite for advanced audio/video contents production.
Official git: https://forart.it/HyMPS/

Re: Is a dynamic range of 10 or higher considered good for Pop and Pop Rock?

Reply #8 –
Quote from: forart.eu on
Quote from: Markuza97 on
Yesterday I downloaded Parallel Lines from Blondie.
On top you have HDtracks SHITtracks 24-bit/192 kHz version, on bottom you have CD from 1985.


Dunno about you guys, but I never, NEVER had any luck with modern remasters...



Just like spectrals do not show the quality of a lossy codec, waveforms do not show the audio quality of any type. In fact, if you ask me that lower display is in desperate need of some dynamic compression.

Re: Is a dynamic range of 10 or higher considered good for Pop and Pop Rock?

Reply #9 –
Quote from: NateHigs on
Quote from: forart.eu on
Quote from: Markuza97 on
Yesterday I downloaded Parallel Lines from Blondie.
On top you have HDtracks SHITtracks 24-bit/192 kHz version, on bottom you have CD from 1985.


Dunno about you guys, but I never, NEVER had any luck with modern remasters...



Just like spectrals do not show the quality of a lossy codec, waveforms do not show the audio quality of any type. In fact, if you ask me that lower display is in desperate need of some dynamic compression.
True, but out of experience when a waveform looks like that then it usually does sound compressed. I'm yet to hear an actual remaster where they haven't butchered the audio. I haven't heard the Parallel lines comparison here, so I can't really comment whether that one sounds compressed.
Looking at the dynamic range database I'm really skeptical whether the the HD Tracks versions sounds acceptable at all:
https://dr.loudness-war.info/album/list?artist=Blondie&album=Parallel+Lines

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by 'desperate need of some dynamic compression'. Isn't this something that can be done afterwards?

Re: Is a dynamic range of 10 or higher considered good for Pop and Pop Rock?

Reply #10 –
Quote from: LithosZA on
Quote from: NateHigs on
Quote from: forart.eu on
Quote from: Markuza97 on
Yesterday I downloaded Parallel Lines from Blondie.
On top you have HDtracks SHITtracks 24-bit/192 kHz version, on bottom you have CD from 1985.


Dunno about you guys, but I never, NEVER had any luck with modern remasters...



Just like spectrals do not show the quality of a lossy codec, waveforms do not show the audio quality of any type. In fact, if you ask me that lower display is in desperate need of some dynamic compression.
True, but out of experience when a waveform looks like that then it usually does sound compressed. I'm yet to hear an actual remaster where they haven't butchered the audio. I haven't heard the Parallel lines comparison here, so I can't really comment whether that one sounds compressed.
Looking at the dynamic range database I'm really skeptical whether the the HD Tracks versions sounds acceptable at all:
https://dr.loudness-war.info/album/list?artist=Blondie&album=Parallel+Lines

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by 'desperate need of some dynamic compression'. Isn't this something that can be done afterwards?

I absolutely agree with you, but in general new masters sound different because they are supposed to. It’s mainly EQ I hear in them. Morden dynamic compression (when intended to be transparent) does an amazing job.

I may prepare some test files actually, if anyone is interested?

New masters baffle me, I’ve never met anyone who likes them nor anyone who wishes to hear their favourite album but “sounding different”.

I used to like the new Miles Davis masters, technically fabulous. But most of the original releases have this smokey density to them which is just wonderful.

Re: Is a dynamic range of 10 or higher considered good for Pop and Pop Rock?

Reply #11 –
Here's a link you can try and ABX (I've not done it yet)

short sample of jazz, compressed/limited at -6dB (and the original does peak at 0.1dBFS). Interested to see/hear results

https://bassdress.com/compression.zip

Re: Is a dynamic range of 10 or higher considered good for Pop and Pop Rock?

Reply #12 –
Quote from: NateHigs on
Here's a link you can try and ABX (I've not done it yet)

short sample of jazz, compressed/limited at -6dB (and the original does peak at 0.1dBFS). Interested to see/hear results

https://bassdress.com/compression.zip

Code: [Select]
foo_abx 2.0.6d report
foobar2000 v1.5.3
2021-08-29 15:45:06

File A: compressed.wav
SHA1: f0da64b5faec5ae3ec0320f9bb3a72c72e3857c8
File B: original.wav
SHA1: de77495f9ab0c52254614286773e8fe9c9c45df6

Output:
DS : Primary Sound Driver
Crossfading: NO

15:45:06 : Test started.
15:45:44 : 01/01
15:46:02 : 02/02
15:46:16 : 03/03
15:46:30 : 04/04
15:46:42 : 05/05
15:46:56 : 06/06
15:47:12 : 07/07
15:47:42 : 08/08
15:47:57 : 09/09
15:48:13 : 10/10
15:48:33 : 11/11
15:48:53 : 12/12
15:49:07 : 13/13
15:49:26 : 14/14
15:49:43 : 15/15
15:49:59 : 16/16
15:49:59 : Test finished.

 ---------- 
Total: 16/16
p-value: 0 (0%)

 -- signature -- 
b20f77e59ba17e0ca4f244c2dbffddb0188e92df

Re: Is a dynamic range of 10 or higher considered good for Pop and Pop Rock?

Reply #13 –
I added two samples from Blondie if somebody wants to test them.
HD version sounds like mono recording compared to original CD.
gold plated toslink fan

Re: Is a dynamic range of 10 or higher considered good for Pop and Pop Rock?

Reply #14 –
Some statistics from the Blondie files...

Measured with GoldWave -

HD version
Peak Amplitude L = -6.105 dB,  R = 6.094
Loudness = -14.31 LUFS
Loudness Range = 5.19 LU

CD version
Peak Amplitude L = -0.957 dB,   R = 0.889 dB,
Loudness = -14..06 LUFS
Loudness Range = 6.13 LU

------------------------------------------------------------
With TT Dynamic Range Meter -

HD
Peak  L= 6.11 dB  , R= 6.09 dB
RMS  L = 14.2. dB R= 13.7 dB
Dynamic Range L = 6.4, R = 6.3

CD
Peak  L=  0.96 dB , R= 0.89 dB
RMS  L =13.9 dB.   R= 13.6 dB
Dynamic Range L = 11.2, R = 11.3


Of course these numbers can be altered by MP3 compression, especially the peaks.   The "new" peaks affect the DR meter's dynamic range calculation, but in my very-limited experiments it has little or no effect on the EBU R128 Loudness Range.

Quote
HD version sounds like mono recording compared to original CD.
When Death Magnetic was released (which I don't own) there were complaints of over-compression and "sounding like mono".    When I thought about it, I realized since compression pushes everything toward the same volume it's going to screw-up the panning (except for sounds that are hard-panned).  

In this particular recording there are some hard-panned sounds and I can still clearly hear stereo on headphones in the HD track, but other than that I didn't listen carefully to the "soundstage".

Re: Is a dynamic range of 10 or higher considered good for Pop and Pop Rock?

Reply #15 –
Quote from: LithosZA on
Quote from: NateHigs on
Here's a link you can try and ABX (I've not done it yet)

short sample of jazz, compressed/limited at -6dB (and the original does peak at 0.1dBFS). Interested to see/hear results

https://bassdress.com/compression.zip

Code: [Select]
foo_abx 2.0.6d report
foobar2000 v1.5.3
2021-08-29 15:45:06

File A: compressed.wav
SHA1: f0da64b5faec5ae3ec0320f9bb3a72c72e3857c8
File B: original.wav
SHA1: de77495f9ab0c52254614286773e8fe9c9c45df6

Output:
DS : Primary Sound Driver
Crossfading: NO

15:45:06 : Test started.
15:45:44 : 01/01
15:46:02 : 02/02
15:46:16 : 03/03
15:46:30 : 04/04
15:46:42 : 05/05
15:46:56 : 06/06
15:47:12 : 07/07
15:47:42 : 08/08
15:47:57 : 09/09
15:48:13 : 10/10
15:48:33 : 11/11
15:48:53 : 12/12
15:49:07 : 13/13
15:49:26 : 14/14
15:49:43 : 15/15
15:49:59 : 16/16
15:49:59 : Test finished.

 ---------- 
Total: 16/16
p-value: 0 (0%)

 -- signature -- 
b20f77e59ba17e0ca4f244c2dbffddb0188e92df

Very nice. Were they volume normalised?

Edit: just realised that if the application doing the ABX test can show VU meters then this test is invalid. Not accusing you Doug, I’ve not even listened to the files yet, just food for thought.

Also, what one did your prefer?

Re: Is a dynamic range of 10 or higher considered good for Pop and Pop Rock?

Reply #16 –
The compressed version of "Heart of Glass" is muffled, with less "tsk-tsk". I usually get this impression with compressed music, unless it also has a treble boost to compensate. The loudest sections sound congested: "lo-o-ove", "to fi-i-i-nd", "behind".

LRA has a longer integration time and mesaures a different kind of "macro" dynamic, which the listener can identify as distinct mixture of quiet and loud sections. If they are too far apart, I would need to adjust the volume. It's undesirable on radio/TV for which the LUFS measurement was created.

Let's take "Independent Love Song" by Scarlet. LRA is 15.7 dB. You might think this song can be crushed a lot. But the DR of the loudest sections is about normal, only 9-10.

Re: Is a dynamic range of 10 or higher considered good for Pop and Pop Rock?

Reply #17 –
Quote from: NateHigs on
Very nice. Were they volume normalised?
Not sure if that helps much. Even if the files are volume matched:
Code: [Select]
]$ sox original.wav original_norm.wav gain -0.9
]$ loudness.sh scan compressed.wav original_norm.wav
  Loudness
-13.7 LUFS, compressed.wav
-13.7 LUFS, original_norm.wav
you can always select a short range, which will have significant volume differences:
Code: [Select]
]$ sox original_norm.wav snip_original_norm.wav trim 15.75 0.4
]$ sox compressed.wav snip_compressed.wav trim 15.75 0.4
]$ loudness.sh scan snip*
  Loudness
-10.9 LUFS, snip_compressed.wav
 -9.1 LUFS, snip_original_norm.wav

Re: Is a dynamic range of 10 or higher considered good for Pop and Pop Rock?

Reply #18 –
Quote from: NateHigs on
Very nice. Were they volume normalised?

Edit: just realised that if the application doing the ABX test can show VU meters then this test is invalid. Not accusing you Doug, I’ve not even listened to the files yet, just food for thought.

Also, what one did your prefer?
foo_abx does not show any VU meters for the audio being tested, unless you somehow pull the files out of the test and compare them, although the temporary streams are raw float, and also kept locked for the duration of the test. I think they're normalized by the tester prior to testing, but I'm not sure how this works.

Re: Is a dynamic range of 10 or higher considered good for Pop and Pop Rock?

Reply #19 –
Quote from: kode54 on
I think they're normalized by the tester prior to testing...
I've always had to manually normalize them before opening the ABX utility in Foobar. It does have the option to use ReplayGain info. But even with that checked, if the ReplayGain scan has not been done on the tracks, it won't do anything.
Processed audio in java and python.