General question on dynamic range and music

[Jochen]

I have a general question on dynamic range (DR). Redbook CD offers 16 bit, corresponding to 96dB DR. With dither up to 120dB. High-Res 24 bit audio even 144dB. Vinyl, according to different sources up to 70dB and tape machines roughly 65dB. On the other hand, recorded music has very limited DR. I am not referring to the loudness war (https://dr.loudness-war.info/), but if one refers to this database of almost 1.7 million albums, even for very well recorded, mixed and mastered albums the DR is only between 10 and 25 dB. Recorded classical music is said to deliver up to 40 dB, although in the mentioned database this value is not found and always well below 25 dB. On the other hand, live music supposedly may have up to 80-90 dB (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_range and https://hub.yamaha.com/audio/music/what-is-dynamic-range-and-why-does-it-matter/). This is close to the threshold of hearing, which resides between 90-115 dB. So my question would be, why is it not possible (or desirable?) to record the full dynamic range of live music and why is the capacity of the standard CD not taken advantage of? Is the 96dB - 25dB = 71dB difference of capacity minus actual content on CD actually wasted? Not talking about 3dB loudness war abominations or even High-Res. Or am I mixing things up?

 

[Keith_W]

1. The loudness wars as you have already mentioned has a lot to do with it.

2. Not relevant any more, but in the early days of digital most recording were remastered from analog. So the limited dynamic range was built-in.

3. Large dynamic range is not suitable for some listening situations, e.g. when you are listening in a car. If you turn up the volume to hear the quiet passages which are drowned out in road noise, when the fortissimo comes you will have a car crash. Radio stations assume you are driving when you are listening, so they deliberately compress the dynamic range.

4. A lot of equipment out there can't handle massive volume peaks, e.g. consumer bluetooth speakers, cheap stereo systems, etc. My Bluetooth speakers are already at close to 80% volume for normal listening, and they clip with fortissimos (NOT only amplifier clipping, the voice coils max out!). A lot of BT speakers are engineered to create high volume in a small enclosure, made even smaller by batteries. They simply can't go loud without being forced to.

 

[RayDunzl]

In your listening room, 60db range would take you from pretty loud (average) to a whisper.

You'd probably turn up the quiet parts.

 

[Jochen]

But in principle it would be possible to record music on a CD with, say, a DR of 80 dB (allowing some headroom for noise below and peaks above) ? As far as I understand it, neither the gear nor the microphones should prevent one from doing it. So why is it not being done?

 

[RayDunzl]

Try this:

Take a recording.

Reduce part of it by 80db.

Listen to it.

Here's a track reduced by 80dB

2V peaks would be reduced to 0.0002 volts

Note the change in the scaling.

 

[Jochen]

Try this:

Take a recording.

Reduce part of it by 80db.

Listen to it.

I am not sure if I get the point. You want to say that it will be drowned in the ambient noise? I mean, if I am in a concert hall listening to an orchestra, I try to be as silent as possible to not lose the silent parts. So why can I not do same thing at home listening to my recording with the same DR?

 

[RayDunzl]

If it is a 16bit recording, this is all that's left:

 

[RayDunzl]

I am not sure if I get the point. You want to say that it will be drowned in the ambient noise?

I've fooled with it before.

From a "normally loud" level:

-60db leaves something barely heard, not really recognizable

-70dB ;eaves something unintelligible

I think I stopped there.

 

[Jochen]

Try this:

Take a recording.

Reduce part of it by 80db.

Listen to it.

Here's a track reduced by 80dB

2V peaks would be reduced to 0.0002 volts

Note the change in the scaling.

View attachment 283552

I am sorry, I don't get it. Why should I substract 80dB from the total signal? What has this to do with the overall DR?

 

[Jochen]

Additional question. I understand that certain circumstances prevent one from really gaining from more DR (ambient noise in a not anechoic room, distortion in speakers etc.). But could there not be something like special high dynamic range recordings instead of higher bit-depths or sample rates? I mean this is utterly pointles (in red are average, minimum and maximum DR). So it is a 24 bit 96 kHz high-res file of a track with 6 dB DR????

So why not go the other way and provide standard 16 bit 44.1 kHz recordings with 60dB DR instead?

 

[dc655321]

I am sorry, I don't get it. Why should I substract 80dB from the total signal? What has this to do with the overall DR?

Because the “quiet bits” would be 80dB down. Maybe inaudible.

 

[RayDunzl]

I am sorry, I don't get it. Why should I substract 80dB from the total signal? What has this to do with the overall DR?

Sorry if you don't get it.

I'm trying to illustrate the soft sounds that would occur in a piece with an exceptionally large dynamic range.

Have a nice day.

 

[Jochen]

Because the “quiet bits” would be 80dB down. Maybe inaudible.

Ok, but when it is said the live music has 80dB DR, this is basically the same, or isn't it?

 

[restorer-john]

Ok, but when it is said the live music has 80dB DR, this is basically the same, or isn't it?

With live music, 80dB is unrealistic. Maybe when the venue was empty vs absolutely flat out all the PA rig going bananas.

 

[Jochen]

With live music, 80dB is unrealistic. Maybe when the venue was empty vs absolutely flat out all the PA rig going bananas.

I was just quoting wikipedia:" The dynamic range of music as normally perceived in a concert hall does not exceed 80 dB", which quotes John Eargle, Handbook of Recording Engineering.

 

[sam_adams]

Try this:

Take a recording.

Reduce part of it by 80db.

Listen to it.

Here's a track reduced by 80dB

2V peaks would be reduced to 0.0002 volts

Note the change in the scaling.

View attachment 283552

Not red enough . . .

Van Halen's "Hot for Teacher" from the 2000 Warner HDCD remaster.

Here's Van Halen's "Hot for Teacher" from the 1984 album, 1983 Warner Bros. Records – 9 23985-2 Japan Target:

Much better . . .

Another example of 'good' mastering:

Robin Trower - Bridge Of Sighs (1974) MFSL UDCD 684, 1996.

 

[Jochen]

Not red enough . . .

View attachment 283564

Van Halen's "Hot for Teacher" from the 2000 Warner HDCD remaster.

Much better . . .

View attachment 283567

Robin Trower - Bridge Of Sighs (1974) MFSL UDCD 684, 1996.

According to the https://dr.loudness-war.info/ database, the Robin Trower CD has an average DR of 12 dB. Wouldn't it profit from still more?

 

[Ifrit]

One note: "DR number" "measured" and presented in database on website from original post is not dynamic range of the recording. It isn't even peak (crest) factor of that recording, although it is somewhat similar. And it isn't quite accurate for material other than the 'standard' pop/rock song.
So it might have some value for rough judgement, especially for the extreme examples, but not really useful.

And there are recordings out there that have very large dynamic range. Mostly 'classical', if I'd have to guess.

 

[DVDdoug]

the DR is only between 10 and 25 dB.

That's the difference between the average (RMS) and the peaks (or sometimes another measure). It's NOT the full range which on a digital recording can be from total silence (-infinity dB) to the peak.

IMO - Musically, "dynamic contrast" is a better term. Dynamic range better describes the capability of the format or transmission channel.

With records or tapes the format is important because even with highly-compressed (undynamic) music (or program material) you still don't want to hear noise between tracks or during the rare quiet parts or during the fade-out, etc.

So my question would be, why is it not possible (or desirable?) to record the full dynamic range of live music and why is the capacity of the standard CD not taken advantage of? Is the 96dB

I wouldn't want the full range but I grew-up with vinyl and when CDs were introduced I expected musicians & producers to start taking advantage of the wider dynamic range... Boy, was I WRONG!!!!

 

[scrubb]

I don’t think this answers your question, but it’s an interesting data point. Listen to PJ Harvey’s “Rid of Me”. Make sure to turn it up right at the beginning loud enough that the vocal is a natural volume and the guitar is has a nice live punchy sound, then wait for the chorus to come in. Steve Albini wasn’t playing with any loudness war nonsense when he produced this album. it registers “14” on the dynamic range database; the high end of their scale (for whatever that’s worth).

I think the answer to your question is that recordings with 70+ dB of dynamic range would make people angry and destroy audio systems, not to mention the fact that most cant reproduce that range.

(EDIT) Oh, and if you can, listen to this song on high res streaming. I don't think Youtube is playing the full dynamic range.