Death of Stereo Followup

Rob,
I am still not entirely convinced by that argument tbh.
Several of the good mastering blogs out there has shown how the dynamic compression trend (overall and yes there are some anomalies) has changed over the years, and it exploded after 2000, when one could possibly state there started a fundamental switch in listening habits of those (the important point) who purchase the main chart/popular music.
I agree radio has had a part to play but it is not the catalyst as more CDs and singles were sold in the 90s than now (and it is proved dynamic compression has been a lot worse from 2000 onwards).

One further technology that may be involved in all this crud; nearly every studio has some kind of tone equaliser for singers to ensure they sing in key and I do wonder if this is possibly integral to using dynamic compression so aggressively.
A good modern example of this annoying trend; Will.I.Am and some of the Black Eyed Peas songs... so effing annoying as they are pretty talented bah :)
The more they used the tone-tuning equalisation (for effect rather than tuning) their dynamic compressions has become worst.

Just a thought, but anyway it is another nasty cog in the wheel.
Cheers
Orb

I think the reason for that is to do with the rise of the bedroom studio in the 2000s. This has led to thousands of 'All The Gear, No Idea' DIY engineers blindly following every other DIY engineer. The deaf leading the deaf.

It's physically impossible for music to get more loud and less dynamic than albums like Oasis' "(What's The Story) Morning Glory" (which was released in the mid 1990s), or RHCP's "Californication" (released at the end of the 1990s), because both were cut to 0dBFS, with a dynamic range of about 3dB. It's just there are more albums like this now, trying to recreate their forbears chart success.

The problem is, from a purely commercial perspective, loud seems to sell. Many of the most successful album and singles of the last 25 years have been cut 'hot'. No A&R man is going to have the guts to pull back from the 'everything louder than everything else' demands from on-high, because they will fear they will get accused of destroying the next "I Gotta Feeling"; which whatever you or I or anyone else might think of it, was the biggest selling song of the last decade.
 
I think I already said this, but:

If signal B is slightly louder than Signal A, but is otherwise identical, B will almost always be preferred. IF C is slightly louder than B, C is preferred. But there is no, repeat NO guarantee that C will be preferred over A once the perception changes from "something is different" to "that's louder". No guarantee at all.

Yes, but you are dealing with two groups of people who can't count to 'C' - Hormonal teenage girls, and A&R men.
 

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu