TranscendingMusicAudio Blog

Over at Gearslutz there is a thread called “Vote on the Solutions for Loudness” and although I applaud the effort, there is no practical means by which one can thwart the loudness war. I’ve said it time and time again but nobody is understanding the nature of why the contention for loudness exists. Such a contention that compromises musical fidelity is by all means rooted in something else other than what it is apparent. It’s not to be taken at face value. Let me put it this way: any convention or behavior found in cultures is based on a deep psychological force. Until that force is addressed itself, the convention will continue to exist so long as it feeds the underlying will to empowerment,  no matter the stupidity involved. If doing one thing either empowers through belief of something assumed to be true or directly creates a brute force result that invokes primitive or visceral excitement, no rule or practical solution will stop it. In other words, devise ways to suppress the loudness wars and you are giving the masses more incentive to defy it. The only thing that can even touch the onset of a solution for loudness is like what I mentioned in my “Loudness Pandemic” blog. A profound and psychological persuasion is the sole weapon. The sense of empowerment used in aiding the detriment of implementing unyielding loudness, which in short is a type of influence really, can also be used to mold the logic (or whatever is left of it) into realizing or at least lauding the prospects of perhaps producing not such loud masters but to show more concern for musicality. Then with time people will start to realize “wait, this non-crushed master does sound better and there is less harshness”, etc…

First and foremost to achieve this, the most influential and and prominent individuals in both the creative avenues of our industry and the most technically proficient must set this bar. The individuals that are looked up to in which young minds would follow suite (because following those at the helm is a sense of empowerment) are the individuals that will create the model in how we must approach music production. A sense of “Man, that’s just dumb making it sound that loud and crushed” coming from the creative and technical leaders would create perhaps a scurvy of implicit shame for any person who would dare revert back to creating squashed, lifeless, harsh sounding music. Incidentally, this is the same recursion record labels/A&R/big name producers  had created that started toppling a few pebbles turning it into a loudness avalanche. Why? Again, because following those at the helm gives a sense of empowerment. Rules, methods of enforcing loudness control, and the like will only create more defiance. These types of methods are associated with administration and bureaucracy: precisely the antipodal world to creativity and art. Not a good way of getting people on board.

Mark my words that this is already happening in some sense. Metallica’s “Death Magnetic” has ushered in a new awareness and just as stated above, what better way then through a power configuration such as Metallica. Highly influential; highly powerful: an exemplar of what NOT to do represented by such figureheads. Artists, bands, and people in general will realize how much their music can suffer for the sake of unbridled loudness.

How does a cycle endure? When consumption and replenishment of a source are about equal. If there’s a tiny village with a communal water source, there’s a system in which the precious water is distributed. A system in which allocates not only rations for the water but also implements a kind of compensation towards the good of the village itself. Each family gets to have some by first contributing a bit manual labor to the construction of village structures the natives all share, and secondly, waiting exactly a week for the water to replenish. So there is the compensation which gives something collectively back and there is the balancing of time so as to not deplete the resource. Any upset to the balance of this cycle and everybody loses. If one family decides to sneak more water than they should, lets say in the middle of the night, it would mean for that moment that the contribution aspect to the village is lost and the balance of time for replenishment is gone. Integrity and resource of that living environment is compromised. Everybody eventually starts to lose.

In this day and age of music and entertainment, the balance of our cycle(s) has been upset. Summed up into two ways, by greed and ignorance. Both greed and ignorance falls on the consumer and the industry.

There doesn’t seem to be a big disagreement on record labels in general being blood suckers so to speak. I mean just look at Nine Inch Nails’ front-man/mastermind Trent Reznor’s plight against them. We are talking big-time labels, the ones who can make an impact with less of a struggle. There are some indie labels that have caught whim of what it means to one, be fair where everybody wins, and two, causality and how it affects everybody in the long run. Before the days of piracy, as we know it today, what were the reasons for record labels taking so much while the creator/artist took so little? Greed. And that greed eventually also pushing the consumer started to push the integrity of our cycle off the deep end. It is not to say piracy and file sharing wouldn’t have existed without this greed and I’m in no way placing blame solely on the greed of the industry. I’m rather pointing out how one corrupting aspect affected our cycle for bad. File sharing and piracy, whether stemming from backlash or not is no lesser evil and equally needs to be addressed. You see, to go back to our analogy of the village, the record labels are like the higher-ups who administer and keep a degree of control over the resource. The people of the village are obviously like the modern day consumer. At any point within the cycle, if either party halts their share of what they put into the cycle and take more out than they put in than the long-term effects are the demise of the integrity of our cycle; our lives. If  X-label takes THIS much from the artist, that may directly affect the artist’s lifestyle and how they create their art. It may indirectly ensue a backlash from those who are supporting the monetary foundation for both the artist and the label hurting once again the artist, then eventually the label, then finally the consumer for draining the source (artist) of their entertainment, art, and music. Look, the bottom-line is,  no matter which thread you want to pull to destroy the sweater they all come down to being equally destructive. Everybody has responsibility in upholding their living environment. Every fair consumption that gives back fairly upholds the integrity of our cycle.

*I’m not affiliated with this gentleman, but Richard Gibbs’ activism against piracy and getting back to the artist what is indeed theirs is noteworthy. Check out this article and concept “Day Of Sharing”:

http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0225/p12s01-ussc.html?page=1

And also what is being done:

https://www.payartists.com/

Interesting reads…

So anybody who knows me or knows about me reading online bio info or the like knows I like heavy music. Lamb of God is not a band I really listen to, but nonetheless I respect their status, resilience, and the following they’ve amassed. What  kind of piqued my interest about 2 years ago regarding the band was the release of a special edition of their album “Sacrament”. This aroused the audio engineer in me because it was a special release based around the concept of “you” the consumer getting a chance to actually mess with, mix, and dub tracks over their studio tracks from this particular album. I mean whether you like a particular band or not that is a pretty unique opportunity to get your hands on some commercial tracks to play around with. I figured what the hell and I went out to pick it up from Best Buy or where ever it was at the time. Now, this is a rant so let me just say I was more than disappointed when finding out what the actual tracks were.

First off, the reason I’m bringing this up now is because just recently I was reminded of it while in a forum some seasoned pro’s and amateur mixers brought it up. Now after acquiring this special edition CD, to my dismay these weren’t pristine raw tracks right from the studio. Now I know that I am an audio professional and perhaps for the layman, to have some kind of isolated version of what a normal album sounds like is exciting and interesting. However, anticipating that perhaps the layman would still purchase this special disc to mess with it and have some fun I firmly still think that full disclosure of the nature of the content should have been provided so I, or someone like myself, would not waste time and money on it. So what was/is the problem with this “special edition”?

Like I mentioned before, these weren’t raw audio tracks. The tracks are super processed, program compressed (“mp3′ed”), maximized, and grouped or put into stereo stems like the drums for example. For me, or someone like me, this is a huge disappointment and a bit misleading. Sure on some beginner’s level, one can still chop these up, do over dubs, re-mixes, etc., but the actual audio aspect of it is vilified because of the nature of these tracks. You can’t really expect to create a nice full, clean but heavy true re-mix; not with these tracks.

I don’t know, maybe I was delusional expecting more than what this turned out to be but I don’t see why the description of the contents couldn’t have been more explicit and clear as to what you are actually getting. To that end, this was a misleading product.

if you want to get a glimpse at a commercial track from the inside out to some degree and just want to mess around or be artistically creative with these tracks by all means, get it. But if you think you can practice your audio skills with these it’s a bit of a lost cause. That is of course if you as a pro or an aspiring pro want to test your skills in a situation where you may have no choice but to work with overly processed MP3′s then by all means, get it. Just don’t expect actual studio tracks as you’d think they’d be. The pretext to this is a bit hyped and misleading.

Yeah, loudness pandemic, not war. There’s been really no effort to deter or persuade the propagators of loudness in the industry to keep a mindful eye for the music and not for decibels. This hardly illustrates a war in my opinion. A pandemic; a plague is one-sided. That one side is doing all the winning right now. Metallica’s “Death Magnetic” isn’t the start of it either but nevertheless anything they do stands out obviously.

You know technically speaking, “loudness” isn’t the issue. It’s what the process of achieving loudness within audio production and what that does to the fidelity of the program material that problems arise. Loudness is relative anyway. We can pretty much control the loudness of a musical track on the playback medium of preference. If you want to listen to something loud, turn the volume knob up! And if you want to listen to it not as loud, turn it down, naturally. The idea of songs of different mixes/masters in contention for that aspect of loudness is just silly. I’m afraid the “personal player” culture has some hand in it. If we all know, for the most part, our music is on the front lines competing with some other track from some other album before and after it, the strive, in being mindful of that contention, to make it louder be it through the mixing or mastering or both, transgresses its initial purpose: namely, being music; being musical.

I mean really, the term should be “trashing” perhaps and not “loudness maximizing”. I’ve heard plenty of lively, bold, warm, full, colorful, dynamic, snappy, dimensional tracks that were also made plenty loud. That is, it was taken to a point of stress (perhaps one could call it bestowing character or color) upon the audio and perhaps backed away just enough to retain all of the good aforementioned things; to retain the MUSIC. So I’m not saying we shouldn’t process to be loud. There is good that comes out of that stage of making a master louder. There is a certain tension, energy, and vibe when the audio is being pushed. But there is also that line drawn in the sand where one should back off. We’re talking having the best of both worlds here. A sense of being driven, having the loudness but also protecting the music. We’re talking a fundamental backing down of at least 3 – 6 dB off of that mixed stereo track – at the very least! Making that the new “0″, the new ceiling, will be the start of giving us our music back but still keeping to a modern effort (striving for some appropriate degree of inducting loudness) that should have stopped itself at a certain point of loudness perhaps about a decade ago. This signifies some kind of standard to be implemented.

While there are short quips and sometimes diatribes and opinions by professionals and audio enthusiasts as to a scientific “what” when it comes to understanding what is and has happened to music, crest factor, dynamic range and the like for the sake of loudness, I’d like to state here perhaps a pyschological “why”.  As in, why loudness became so important and ultimately such a pertinent goal at the end of the whole process of creating an album. In short one could say competition. That is the more ostensible idea. But if I could use the philosopher Nietzsche here and the notion of “Will to Power”, (look it up if you aren’t familiar with the notion) maybe it could suite the topic better on why “loudness” is of prime concern. In any endeavor, one could look at its inception, its development, and its apexes and find a similar cycle that expatiates as to what occurs as it unfolds from start to pseudo-finish. Initially, there is a genuine interest for the endeavor in and of itself. There is a child like curiosity, passion, and thirst in attaining knowledge about it and further developing it into fruition. As time passes and so does the element of having been around the endeavor, awareness of its role in the world and the fact that others embrace the very same thing ensues the sense of connection; maybe camaraderie. Then as times passes and the aspect of its techniques and methods are more brought into light, the next level naturally is putting ideas into action. Now one guy does something good, another does it better. A sense of competition ensues. And at the very visceral thread of our existence, our “Will to Power” takes over. This sense of competition always lurks however. Either for extreme differences because “it can be done” or to stand out. It’s what has happened to the audio world. The innocence in making nice sounding music has been supplanted by the competition for loudness. Who can deny that “our period of time” (the mid to late 90′s into 2000′s) was and is not an apex for the audio world as well? Again not to say it’s the only one, but certainly a significant time indeed. More significant in the sense of heightened awareness of audio, the increased accessibility to the craft’s techniques and methods and also a whole new perspective that can emulate the perspective of yesteryear! And not to mention more ways to mess music up! By namely, the digital domain. At the apex of an endeavor  there is a need for “more” but unfortunately what we turn to is not more of a good thing but moreof pushing boundaries at the expense of aesthetics. Just some extreme to constitute “more”, suffices. It is what has happened to audio after all. Where is the respect for it? If one wants to destroy its crest factor, distort it (without regard to aesthetic intent), squash it, level it, 2-d it, suffocate it, weaken it, smash it, destroy dynamics within it (all of these characteristics of course contingent upon how it sounds ultimately), then what kind of respect is left for it really? At our particular apex we have the loudness pandemic. “Joe schmoe made it THIS loud, I have to make it louder” says the brazen will imposing itself. In the interim, enter music executives and/or producers, A & R people: those who are not necessarily the artists in other words. They just add more fuel to the fire. You see, the brute has taken over at this point. Compete for the “more” i.e loudness. The pure interest and passion has been replaced with a hungry and base aspect from the “Will to Power”. Initially of course, collectively through time it can be argued that there is the “Will to Power” that competed in the realm of aesthetics of audio and music. In other words, the competition and imposing of will between persons or perhaps a person (challenging himself) to make it sound best (not necessarily loudest). Okay, fine. BUT, in that case, the extension of will for that notion supported and sublimated audio and music. For audio and music delivered as an artist’s message is an aesthetic one. So it’s not to say our “Will to Power” is bad. Like anything else, it’s the application of it that makes it bad or good. Loudness is a part of music, not an absolute and static element of it. Therefore, once again, any attempts at focusing on loudness for the sake of loudness; the sake of competition, verily, are idiocies. After the sense of aesthetics satiates, our drive to compete steers us into the realm of extremity at any cost. Loudness was what was left after aesthetics and unfortunately that’s what drives the competition now. I believe evolving has to do with a higher sense of thought; a degree of awareness as to what motivates our actions. When this function is not developed factors involved in an endeavor but not necessarily for the good of that endeavor take over.

Why does loudness attract people in, say, an A/B listen? Well usually, in an A/B listen the minion of loudness is trying to win the crowd over with the louder track. So it’s a matter of maybe 5 – 6 seconds of listening and switching to the competiting track. Back and forth, back and forth and the louder one comes out on top. Okay, why? Well, this kind of comparing is first of all, not musical. Secondly, who truly listens to music in second spurts? What takes over then if not the musical ear? The combative ear! And what is the combative ear looking for? The biggest BOOM! he or she can get in that short duration. Just like in war, the bomb with the biggest boom, explosion, and destruction is the most brutal and combative weapon. It is awe-inspiring; mind blowing; unbelievable BUT has nothing to do with music. They are explosion lovers, nothing more.

My opinion is this race for loudness could end once people understand why they want to make things loud; this more psychological “why”. Once you understand that, you could feel quite foolish. Humilation for the greater good. See you can play on man’s ‘Will to Power” but to do good. Once the awareness of the dumb brute force and base competition aspect of it is elevated, one can instigate the competition in not being so dumb and then who knows, maybe “The Good Sounding Masters with Dynamics and Fullness Wars” could start. A guy can dream right?