Announcement

**johnf** · 02-06-2006, 11:02 PM

Loudness

Hello, You Wanted To Boost Loudness On Total C.D. There is a xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx plugin

I Never Tried
It But It Sounds Like Something You Might Want To Check Out.

johnf

**Craig Maier** · 02-06-2006, 11:10 PM

Many CD's that are commercially released are intentionally compressed to make them sound louder. There are two features in Diamond Cut which allows you to do this:

1. The Dynamics Processor operated in Compression Mode.
2. The Punch and Crunch Multiband Processor operated in Compression Mode.

Although these features will make your restoration sound louder, they do not necessarily make them sound more natural when operated as compressors. So, it depends on your ultimate goal as to whether or not you want to use these. Perceived loudness does not necessarily make for good fidelity - - - but it is really a matter of taste. Personally, I go the other direction and use expansion to improve the dynamic range of the material. This makes the signal sound weaker on an overall basis but improves the dynamics of the material.

**Dan McDonald** · 02-07-2006, 07:09 AM

Yes - I always thought it was a shame to have a medium like CDs and then compress the sound so that you don't take advantage of the dynamic range. I guess it's marketing versus art.

Dan

**DougMac** · 02-07-2006, 08:20 AM

Hot CD's

Here's some interesting reading: http://www.geocities.com/mjareviews/rant7.html

This is so obvious I hate to mention it, but Rick, are you going to CD prep and gain normalizing the files?

Gain normalization brings up another point. When I restore an LP, I gain normalize the entire side before chopping it into individual selections. In many cases, part of the original intent of the artist is how one song relates to another, including volume. By gain normalizing the the entire side, I retain the artist's intent. Of course, if it's a collection of unrelated songs, say an anthology of 50's oldies, I chop, then normalize.

Doug

**Dan McDonald** · 02-07-2006, 08:56 AM

that's pretty much what I do also, Doug. Individual songs are gain normalized individually; groups such as an album or concert are gainnormalized as one file.

Dan

**sus4chord** · 02-07-2006, 10:43 AM

I agree that a wider dynamic range is preferable when listening to music, and that works great when I actually have an opportunity to spend some time in my own study just listening to music with no other distractions. Unfortunately, I usually find myself listening to music in my car (and with a 4 cylinder engine, it can get pretty loud), listening on a CD walkman on the commuter train, or just listening quietly through my computer speakers at work. Without the compression on CD's, we would be constantly adjusting the volume to either hear the soft parts or to turn down the loud parts.

Back when we were only listening to vinyl, well, you were kind of stuck in your living room or music room and (except for maybe a barking dog or crying kid) didn't have to compete with all the external noises of cars, trains, etc. But the convenience of portable music almost demands that it be compressed to at least a certain level.

My $.02 worth.

**Craig Maier** · 02-07-2006, 10:45 AM

Doug,

Thanks for pointing us towards that article. It is excellent and, in my opinion, a correct assessment of the situation. Everyone on this forum should read it. It is sad to take a media capable of 96 dB of dynamic range and compress it down to almost no dynamic range whatsoever (around 10 dB) just to make it sound louder than the competition.

Do you folks remember the good old days when the CD first hit the market and Telarc produced DDD discs having no compression whatsoever? IMHO, that is the correct goal of high fidelity sound. Today, sound card technology produces 24 bit resolution, theoretically capable of 144 dB of dynamic range. But why bother if you are going to compress the signal down to 10 dB of range? All that one is doing is consuming extra hard drive space using that technique.

I guess that I feel pretty strongly on this matter! Sorry if I sound like I am ranting, but I love a crescendo that sounds like one.

**Audyossey** · 02-07-2006, 11:39 AM

Originally posted by sus4chord

...Unfortunately, I usually find myself listening to music in my car (and with a 4 cylinder engine, it can get pretty loud)...

It's been a long time and I could be entirely wrong, but as I recall the CD standard originally included a flag for compressing the audio in the player. In other words, the full dynamic range would be recorded but a player could take care of compressing it when that was desirable. I believe the first one or two Sony CD players for cars were capable of reading the flag to solve the problem you mention. Thereafter it was dropped and no other manufacturer ever accommodated the flag nor, for that matter, did anyone I ever heard of make CDs that enabled it.

Originally posted by Craig

Do you folks remember the good old days when the CD first hit the market and Telarc produced DDD discs having no compression whatsoever? IMHO, that is the correct goal of high fidelity sound....

At the time I had a cheap 3d party radio in my car. I was driving along trying to listen to WGBH, a station which didn't and perhaps still doesn't, apply any compression to its signal. Unfortunately, GBH was off the air. Or so it seemed. As it turned out they were playing one of those Telarc CDs which included a long and very quiet passage. My radio didn't have enough oomph to get anything up above the road noise.

The dynamic range of CDs exceeds any real-life live acoustic music experience when you factor in the ambient noise. Performers naturally adjust to their environment. The dynamic range of the typical record is about right for listening in a home in the city. If you live in grand isolation you can hear some advantage in wide range recordings, but many highly-acclaimed concert halls can't match the dynamic range available on CDs or even palatial private estates. Fortunately, if that isn't enough you can enjoy the dynamic superiority of the high-resolution audio formats. Surely that's a more sophisticated way to ruin your hearing than going to a lot of ear-numbing rock concerts or joining the Army and firing off mortars.

That said, it's certainly worthy to have a state-of-the-art reference as an original source. If there are practical reasons to "degrade" the sound after the fact, then at least future engineers can undo or redo it to subjectively superior ends.

HB

**Craig Maier** · 02-07-2006, 12:05 PM

Maybe manufacturers should put the compressors in the playback hardware rather than on the information recorded onto the disc. That way, everyone is happy. Flip a switch if you want compressed audio. Turn a dial and compress it to any ratio that you please - - - just like the "ratio" control on the Diamond Cut Dynamics Processor or Punch and Crunch effects.

I know - - - I can see it comming already - - - some of you are going to say - - - why not put the expander in the hardware for folks like myself who want the wide dynamic range and leave the CD's compressed? But, I have an answer for that one. It is much easier and more accurate to get rid of information than to re-create it. Besides, the natural state of 16 bit audio is wide and not low dynamic range.

So, player compression, not expansion would be the way to go. Maybe this is a new business oportunity for someone?

**Dan McDonald** · 02-07-2006, 01:02 PM

It would be great if someone would do it, but it would cost an arm and a leg because they wouldn't sell enough units for it to be cost effective. With all the lossy music being sold over the internet, a whole generation is growing up without even knowing what high fidelity means.

Sorry... I just got kind of crotchety.

Suschord said:
"Back when we were only listening to vinyl, well, you were kind of stuck in your living room or music room ...."

Yes, but I remember seeing a few cars with record players on the back shelf. .. Must of been great when you crossed over railroad tracks!

**Craig Maier** · 02-07-2006, 02:13 PM

Well, I guess people like myself are going to have to keep on "ripping" their CD's and re-processing them through the Punch and Crunch Expander effect to add back some of the dynamic range. It may seem strange, but that is what I do to a lot of purchased CD material these days.

It seems to me that 8 bit audio would more than suffice for 99 percent of the mass audio consumer market today. That way twice the number of songs could be applied to a given disc without using lossy compression like MP3.

Why anyone is making 24 bit, 192 KHz sampling rate sound cards is beyond me. I guess they do it just because it can be done - - - no other reason. Imagine - - - you master in 24 bit audio with 192 KHz sampling rates and then ultimately burn a CD having about 10 dB of dynamic range.

It certainly seems strange to me.

**Audyossey** · 02-07-2006, 02:14 PM

Originally posted by Dan McDonald

...Yes, but I remember seeing a few cars with record players on the back shelf. .. Must of been great when you crossed over railroad tracks!

I think it was Chrysler/Plymouth which had an in-dash 45 RPM record player. It never got anywhere. Well, yes, it got to whereever you were driving. But you know what I mean.

HB

**DougMac** · 02-07-2006, 02:57 PM

Originally posted by Audyossey

I think it was Chrysler/Plymouth which had an in-dash 45 RPM record player. It never got anywhere. Well, yes, it got to whereever you were driving. But you know what I mean.

HB

See http://www.imperialclub.com/Repair/A...Way/invent.htm and http://ookworld.com/hiwayhifi.html.

When I was a teenager I worked at a TV station as the audio man for the news broadcasts. Some commercials would come in so compressed that the needle would barely move. That's when we'd get phone calls complaining that the commercials were too loud. I quickly learned to decrease the volume on these commercials to prevent complaints. Kind of defeated the intent of the advertisers, huh? Too bad.

Doug

Announcement

Loudness

Loudness

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment