Newer CDs sound horribly Loud and distorted...

[Jinny]

Leave the preamp switch alone!!! its ruining the dynamics
Older versions of the same song I have in my collection sound so much better.
I dont even have an expensive stereo.


update: my properly mastered songs on good quality metal CASSETTE TAPES sound better.

sigh
end rant.

 

[Oceandevi]

radio mixes are also highly modified. Try listening to a record, it has a much nicer sound.

 

[Chaotic42]

Yeah, I really noticed this too on a CD I recently bought. I've got to find some good smaller bands that sell music directly.

 

[SludgeFactory]

In an era where they need any selling point they can get for their CD's, the RIAA sure picked a good time to bring sound quality of physical media to an all time low. I can "acquire" MP3's that sound like lossy hypercompressed dogsh!t or buy CD's that sound like plain old hypercompressed dogsh!t. Good job guys. I'm not sure why I continue to buy the odd CD, force of habit I guess.

 

[Jeff7]

There's a thread around here somewhere that deals with dynamic compression. The market says that louder is better, so that's what the record companies put out.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: Chaotic42
Yeah, I really noticed this too on a CD I recently bought. I've got to find some good smaller bands that sell music directly.

You will find the same thing.

It's freaking DISGUSTING what they do to CDs these days.

Finding good quality recordings on any media is getting very difficult. More power to the vinyl.

 

[Jinny]

Originally posted by: SludgeFactory
In an era where they need any selling point they can get for their CD's, the RIAA sure picked a good time to bring sound quality of physical media to an all time low. I can "acquire" MP3's that sound like lossy hypercompressed dogsh!t or buy CD's that sound like plain old hypercompressed dogsh!t. Good job guys. I'm not sure why I continue to buy the odd CD, force of habit I guess.

hehe AGREED.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: SludgeFactory
In an era where they need any selling point they can get for their CD's, the RIAA sure picked a good time to bring sound quality of physical media to an all time low. I can "acquire" MP3's that sound like lossy hypercompressed dogsh!t or buy CD's that sound like plain old hypercompressed dogsh!t. Good job guys. I'm not sure why I continue to buy the odd CD, force of habit I guess.

Come on over to the vinyl side. You'll never go back. Plus they're cheap.

 

[EGGO]

I thought I was the only one who noticed this. CDs that I've ripped are all of a sudden louder when music switches to a song from it.

 

[MasterOfKtulu109]

i dont buy cds for the music quality. you can download high quality mp3s without looking around very hard. i only buy cds for the interesting packaging or booklet.

i support bands by going to concerts; at least then they get the money, unlike when you buy cds.

 

[SludgeFactory]

Originally posted by: spidey07
Come on over to the vinyl side. You'll never go back. Plus they're cheap.

Yeah, that's one of those things I'm planning to do at some point in the future. Get set up with a decent budget turntable, maybe some vintage speakers and a tube amp, hopefully all under $1K. Then start picking through the vinyl wherever I can find it. My dad's ancient records sound pretty good to my ears, even if most of them are totally not my style, heh heh.

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Dynamic Range Compression FTMFL.

- M4H

 

[Excelsior]

Here is a relevant video about this matter:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Gmex_4hreQ

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: MercenaryForHire
Dynamic Range Compression FTMFL.

- M4H

Good link actually. FTMFL for sure.

The aspect that made CD so great is literally raped and left gasping for headroom on the floor.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: Excelsior
Here is a relevant video about this matter:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Gmex_4hreQ

Perfectly described. Great link.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Originally posted by: EGGO
I thought I was the only one who noticed this. CDs that I've ripped are all of a sudden louder when music switches to a song from it.

Not ideal, but it can at least help reduce the amount of times you have to go to change the volume...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replaygain

 

[Excelsior]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: Excelsior
Here is a relevant video about this matter:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Gmex_4hreQ

Perfectly described. Great link.

Aye. I'd say 90% of the music ripped from CDs that I listen to, are pre-2000 stuff, mostly early 90s or earlier, so I don't have to deal with this crap. I pretty much refuse to listen to the crap that is put out today (anything affected by this compression/loudness fiasco, and that is most of it).

However, you can still find good CDs every now and then. They are usually the smaller artists though, or so it seems.

 

[StrangerGuy]

I find it funny when people starts to compare MP3 kbps quality of their horribly produced songs.

 

[misle]

I've noticed a lot of distortion on the top end of newer CD's. The first one I really noticed it on was RHCP's Californication.

As a hobby, I record local bands. They must be compressing the hell out of the music (losing all dynamics) and then hard limiting it (causing the digital and very unpleasant distortion).

Basically, they are pushing it so loud that it clips. With analog, clipping causes a smooth overdrive sound (warm and fuzzy); with digital, clipping causes a very unpleasant square wave clipping.

 

[Rubycon]

Originally posted by: bunnyfubbles

Not ideal, but it can at least help reduce the amount of times you have to go to change the volume...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replaygain

No! Compression TOASTS the life for EVERYONE! If people don't like quiet recordings then buy a receiver/preamp/head unit with a compressor, night feature, etc.

This topic has been beaten to death.

Generally, DVD's don't have the dynamic range compressed so why should CD's? Especially in 2007! PWM amp tech makes it possible to have VERY powerful amplifiers in small boxies. (1U amps >10kW exist in pro audio!) If people want to hear every part of a song at low volume - great! The playback equipment should have the compressor. Once a recording is torched, it's done. No amount of post processing will fix it. It's like a footprint on the sidewalk.

There are still good recordings out there but most pop stuff going to CD is torched big time. I have heard stuff before torching and even though it may not be my preferred genre it's actually enjoyable to listen to because it sounds LIVE and jams. But the same thing on CD for public release is just awful.

Bit rate of an MP3 is not nearly as important as the compressor that makes it. I've heard 320kbps files that sound like dog poo and 128kbps files that were quite listenable - again because of the codec. The superior ones make 320kbps sound very good - very close to CD quality and only easily discernible with certain program material from the original. But that's another topic that has been beaten to death.

 

[Old Hippie]

Bit rate of an MP3 is not nearly as important as the compressor that makes it. I've heard 320kbps files that sound like dog poo and 128kbps files that were quite listenable - again because of the codec. The superior ones make 320kbps sound very good - very close to CD quality and only easily discernible with certain program material from the original. But that's another topic that has been beaten to death.

I've still have a few places on my back without welts. Would you mind mentioning the 320kbs codecs you feel are superior?

 

[Rubycon]

Originally posted by: Old Hippie

I've still have a few places on my back without welts. Would you mind mentioning the 320kbs codecs you feel are superior?

For PC users read up on lame and how to use it - correctly. It's going to give the best results most of the time.

There's also hardware that does this along with pre-processing to improve final output but for the most part it's still in the developmental stages and under NDA.

 

[Jinny]

I'd much rather have a 192kbps of a properly mastered song versus a 320Kbps from a poorly mastered source.

 

[Pepsi90919]

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: SludgeFactory
In an era where they need any selling point they can get for their CD's, the RIAA sure picked a good time to bring sound quality of physical media to an all time low. I can "acquire" MP3's that sound like lossy hypercompressed dogsh!t or buy CD's that sound like plain old hypercompressed dogsh!t. Good job guys. I'm not sure why I continue to buy the odd CD, force of habit I guess.

Come on over to the vinyl side. You'll never go back. Plus they're cheap.

you know, although vinyl is great, and i believe in an A-A-A recording chain if at all possible, it is possible to make a great-sounding CD.

/me is listening to supertramp's 'school' mastered by MFSL

 

[Rubycon]

Originally posted by: Jinny
I'd much rather have a 192kbps of a properly mastered song versus a 320Kbps from a poorly mastered source.

Well of course.

We have XM streams that are quite low bit rate wise yet good ORIGINAL material still sounds very listenable. Of course there's some serious post processing going on but the "garbage in garbage out" rule always applies.

A crappy 128 kbps encode of truly reference quality material with wide dynamic range just makes you want to find a better copy - pronto.

But everyone these days wants their audio with them. Particularly with open air cans and in cars with lots of background noise - they want it loud. With a wide dynamic range the volume is often set to 0 dB and guess what happens when the fortissimo comes? Welcome to clipville where there's a traveler's advisory from voice coil smoke. Don't breathe this - yes it burns! :laugh:

Put the damn compressor on the consumer playback decks. Even Sony could get that right. (of course it would take them a year to figure out how to make a compressor with DRM that mutes the output if its spectral analysis doesn't match an original label release. )