Slashdot Mirror
Mastering Engineer Explains Types of Compression, Effects On Today's Music
Stowie101 writes "Today is Dynamic Range Day, which is an event to educate the public about the 'Loudness Wars' that are compressing and harming the quality of today's music. Ian Shepherd, a mastering engineer and founder of Dynamic Range Day, explains why music lovers should avoid MP3 files. 'The one that springs to mind is to avoid MP3, especially if it's 128 kbps. Apple uses a more advanced technology called AAC, but if someone can get lossless files like FLAC that's a better place to start.' Shepherd says it's actually harder to make a good 'lossy' encode of something that has been heavily musically compressed. Very heavy dynamic compression and limiting makes MP3s sound worse, so the loudness wars indirectly make MP3s sound worse."
I've been a musician for many years, and I have a nice studio set-up so that I can hear music as clear as possible. Yet I have amassed... umm, through various ways thousands of mp3s as well as flacs and oogs. Do I like the quality of lossless files better, yeah. But does that make me want to get on some flac-only crusade and not listen to mp3s? Not at all. Maybe it's because I'm of that age where I remember scratchy records, or pressing a transistor radio against my ear to hear the latest Jackson-5 or Stevie Wonder cut that was playing on the radio. For me it's the notes, melody, rhythm, lyrics that matter, that's the true musical information. From my music collection I have grown in my musical sensibilities immensely. I don't think it would be possible to have the library I have if everything was lossless just from the standpoint of space and perhaps download time.
So of course, lossless is better than lossy by definition, but mp3s still bring me to where I want to me in terms of getting the music the artist wanted to convey.
I don't think the engineer is working with musicians.
It's not just the musicians, it's the listeners, especially because of so many listening through earphones. If you listen to music with dynamic variations in an open area, a room, or through speakers, you pay more attention to the softer passages. If you listen through headphones, as often as not, you turn it up to have a constant volume in your ears.
Some people say that it started with the Wall of Sound, where everybody wanted that massive effect on everything, regardless of whether it was right for the album or song or not, others say that it started later, with boomboxes, but in any case, we've lost one of the most powerful ways to create musical tension and drama. Now there's pretty much only abrupt changes in tempo, which doesn't work for music where you need a constant beat, or suspensions, which only work for a while before they get too self-indulgent.
Hey! Get off my lawn!
It is unfortunate that the same term is used for two entirely different things. The article does a pretty good job of conflating the two.
Anyway, the loudness war is over. Digital players, as opposed to CD players, now routinely apply SoundCheck (Apple) or ReplayGain to normalize levels from track to track, so mastering a digital track into saturation no longer makes it "louder" than the next track on the player. Most streaming services do the same. The advantage, if there ever was any, is gone.
It's not surprising that there are still some producers who still indulge in mastering at saturated levels. It's also not surprising that RHCP are still turning out such recordings; they were among the worst offenders at the peak of the loudness war, 13 years ago, and they are probably superstitious enough to believe that it still has some benefit.
I think what audiophiles like TFA just don't seem to get is exactly that, the crap speakers we've been using since the turn of the last century. VERY few people have systems that would even qualify as low end audiophile, most are frankly just barely above crap if not crap. My home system is a 1980s cheap Korean home stereo with a couple of 10 inchers, does anyone REALLY think I'm gonna miss something by not using FLAC? or on the shitty earbuds on my MP3 player or that $30 2.1 system I use at work?
Then there is the other elephant in the room, how so many of us have listened at ear bleeding levels and gone to rock concerts and frankly just don't have that great a range left anyway. I've been playing bass for 30+ years now, guess where they always stick the bass player? Right next to the crash. Between that and my love of powerful bass amps i doubt i could hear the difference between FLAC and MP3 if you put a gun to my head.
Oh but I think you're wrong about FLAC because for 99.99% of the users out there MP3 is "good enough" and the whole point when you give away songs is that you want them HEARD and most people don't know WTF FLAC is or what it will play in, but MP3 is universal, it'll play in anything from that $10 thumbstick MP3 player at the checkout of the Walgreen's to the most expensive audio decks. if folks want better they are welcome to buy my CD, at $10 for 14 songs its not like we gouge on the things.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.