Loudness Wars and database featuring Dynamic Range Compression stats...

[cmalak]

I came upon this web site that features a database with dynamic range compression stats for many recordings. You can also upload tracks and the site's software will analyze the DRC characteristics, rate the track/album you upload, and add it to the database. I have not done this yet but at the very least you can search the database and see how music you own rates on this characteristic and compare it to your own listening impressions. Also you can check it for music you are thinking of buying. It's interesting for example that the new Beatles box set release shows that the Mono version rate slightly better (i.e., have slightly less DRC) than the Stereo version. Here is the link to the site: DR Database

[2112]

Very cool

Thanks

.

[PHC1]

Jim (Stillone) is not going to like this.

Thanks Cmalak, very cool.

[cmalak]

Here's the Agon thread on loudness wars where one of the posters on the thread pointed to this site: AudiogoN Forums: Loudness War (for those interested in the topic it's not a bad thread to read although it does veer off topic every once in a while)

One of the interesting points made on the thread and you can kind of trace it on the DR Database website above is the quality of recordings (at least in terms of dynamic compression) from different periods. Clearly music from the 1990s onwards is usually much more compressed/mastered 'hot' than earlier recordings. But you also had highly compressed recordings from the 60s/70s/80s as well.

[PHC1]

Yep, we've had these dynamic range compression discussions before, both here and that other place we all came from.

While I am not really surprised at the crappy dynamic range of many CDs anymore, I'd say the most recent example that really shocked me as to how piss poor things can get with the technically much more superior CD media, was AC/DC "Black Ice". I was anxiously awaiting the release since I have been an AC/DC fan for many years and every new album is something I look forward to and I was disgusted just how dynamic range compressed it was once I got the CD. It was simply impossible to listen to it. No wonder, it has a 6 on DR scale. What are these people thinking anyways? Are the trying to make them sound bad on purpose to kill interest in music?

[MyPal]

Originally Posted by cmalak

I came upon this web site that features a database with dynamic range compression stats for many recordings. You can also upload tracks and the site's software will analyze the DRC characteristics, rate the track/album you upload, and add it to the database. I have not done this yet but at the very least you can search the database and see how music you own rates on this characteristic and compare it to your own listening impressions. Also you can check it for music you are thinking of buying. It's interesting for example that the new Beatles box set release shows that the Mono version rate slightly better (i.e., have slightly less DRC) than the Stereo version. Here is the link to the site: DR Database

Cyril...Thanks for this reference resource, most helpful to peruse the DRC database...I may be 3 years late, but I think it would be good to resurrect this thread & do some more comparisons with what's new...

I've been pulling a few Cd's out this evening, mainly from 2000-2005 era which IMO was a shameful mastering period. The listening prompted me to search further on this dynamic range compression matter of fact that continues to desecrate the current generation. Not even McIntosh can make some of my collection from this period sound any good. Those poor blue meters with frigidly fixed needles... Just a wall of compressed noise.

[cmalak]

Steve...I agree. Maybe it's a good idea to supplement this thread with our own database of digital albums (whether physical discs or downloads) that people have found to be of excellent sonic quality?

[MyPal]

Originally Posted by cmalak

Steve...I agree. Maybe it's a good idea to supplement this thread with our own database of digital albums (whether physical discs or downloads) that people have found to be of excellent sonic quality?

Absolutely! I think with new releases, "excellent" is the exception. There are many CDs that sound amazing but most are more than 10 years old. More often than not it is better to by a used CD in EC rather than go for the re-release. For example, the Yello remaster series aren't a patch on the original Mercury titles.

My system's not that forgiving & I'm quite pleased about achieving a configuration that is faithful.

Thank goodness for Verve & Analogue Productions. On the most part SACD has worked for me but like many, I wish more artists pushed the format. I have come across a few duds on SACD too. The Amadeus movie soundtrack on SACD comes to mind.

I look forward to getting back into vinyl very soon but that will no doubt raise similar questions with some recent pressing re-releases too...like the master source generation used & lathe groove spacing algorithms...

As for digital hi-res, I'm going sit in the stalls & watch for maturation awhile longer.

[o0OBillO0o]

There goes my Amazon wishlist..