Mastering recordings on CDs

[Erogen]

Note that my experience with dynamic range measurements of the Offline Meter type is that they are really measuring bass dynamic range, not really psychoacoustically relevant dynamic range for higher frequencies.

Chris

It all comes down to varying the volume of the recording, not having the entire recording be the same volume. This creates a listening pleasure because when the entire recording is the same volume, meaning all sounds strive to be as loud as possible, then such a recording is, firstly, difficult to listen to, secondly, tiring, and thirdly, simply boring.

DR measurement doesn't tell us how a given recording was mastered; it's a simple RMS/Peak metric, but it allows us to quickly understand the mastering process we're dealing with.

 

[babadono]

How much does DR actually matter?

Live music is dynamic. The more dynamic recorded music is on playback the better it sounds to my ears. YMMV. I have heard some of Chris's demastered recordings, they sound better.

 

[Erogen]

Bad mastering, compressor+limiter.
2005

 

[somebodyelse]

Live music is dynamic. The more dynamic recorded music is on playback the better it sounds to my ears. YMMV. I have heard some of Chris's demastered recordings, they sound better.

Well...it ought to be, but is also sometimes victim to too much compression. When you can see the band transition from a nice delicate bit to full throttle, or vice versa, it just feels wrong and disappointing when it doesn't sound any louder. The change loses its impact and meaning, perhaps more so than when listening to a recording.

 

[voodooless]

The album sold an estimated 15 million copies, so it's likely that people liked this mastering.

By that logic, Mc Donald’s makes the best food…

 

[krabapple]

You talk as if you make a living doing this to music tracks.

Er, no. What a weird thing to think. As if people can't simply educate themselves about their hobbies.

If this is a true statement, it is my suggestion to simply agree-to-disagree on what constitutes "acceptable mastering practices".

I marvel at what other people find inconceivable.

Anyway, you didn't address my point:

The frequency of clipped peaks (how often they occur, in what span of time) determines whether they are heard. Do you disagree?


(And alas I fear most if not all of my favorite acoustic recordings don't make it to 17 on the TT meter. Unreal!)

 

[krabapple]

By that logic, Mc Donald’s makes the best food…

No, it means a lot of people like McDonald's food. Erogen is quite right, big sales means something was (and perhaps continues to be, I don't track album sales) in-demand. Nothing more or less.


These discussions are always useless. It's another audio topic that's been beaten to death.

 

[voodooless]

big sales means something was (and perhaps continues to be, I don't track album sales) in-demand

Yes, that something isn’t the mastering, like for Mc Donald’s it isn’t the food quality

 

[MatrixS2000]

All it takes is one loud, high-amplitude crackle and the measurement result can be thrown in the trash.

That is why the record should be de-crackled and de-clicked before measuring. Also, DR meter is ok but it only gives you score for the entire song. What is better is DR trace that traces the song in 3 second windows such as this:

is the solution to that issue,

It is. I have been doing that for about 20 years. The difference is not small.

Examples here:

Raw vinyl rip

Restored vinyl rip

 

[krabapple]

Yes, that something isn’t the mastering, like for Mc Donald’s it isn’t the food quality

Again, there are people who *love* McDonald's food. Their idea of quality may differ from yours. Imagine that. Please.

 

[Auditory Cortex]

DR measurement doesn't tell us how a given recording was mastered; it's a simple RMS/Peak metric, but it allows us to quickly understand the mastering process we're dealing with.

PLR is a better measurement for assessing music dynamic range. I use both to visualize the dynamic range of music.
Key Differences

• • Calculation: DR uses specific older statistical formulas, whereas PLR explicitly uses modern integrated loudness (LUFS) minus peak.
  • Precision: PLR is more accurate for modern streaming standards because it relies on standardized LUFS measurements.
  • 

 

[MatrixS2000]

Yes, that something isn’t the mastering,

Yes it is mastering.

Here is a vectorscope capture of Crown Land’s Starlifter. First the vinyl:

And here is the same of the digital download version:

The digital version is clearly limited, while the vinyl version is not.

And mastering engineers also clearly state that the vinyl master will be more dynamic version (red is mine):

 

[MatrixS2000]

PLR is a better measurement for assessing music dynamic range.

PSR is the better measurement. PLR is an average over the entire song, while PSR is averaged over 3sec windows. Loudness maximization practices are much easier to capture with PSR.

For example:
Lady Blackbird’s It’s Not That Easy:

Digital download version:

Not the box on the left centre - it is showing that approx. 76% of the song is above 9dB DR, while the vinyl is about 95% over 9dB DR. This tool is using PSR to create these traces - look at the word DYNAMICS in the centre of the capture and you will note: Target PSR.

 

[Erogen]

PLR is a better measurement for assessing music dynamic range. I use both to visualize the dynamic range of music.
Key Differences

• • Calculation: DR uses specific older statistical formulas, whereas PLR explicitly uses modern integrated loudness (LUFS) minus peak.
  • Precision: PLR is more accurate for modern streaming standards because it relies on standardized LUFS measurements.
  • View attachment 556101

 

[goat76]

Another case in point - some music naturally has a lower DR (such as RHCP, I'd imagine).

The type of music RHCP plays has a natural dynamic range of about 12 to 15. That is after some sound improving compression has been applied to certain instruments, which are usually bass guitar, kick drum, and vocals tracks during mixing.

 

[Erogen]

The type of music RHCP plays has a natural dynamic range of about 12 to 15. That is after some sound improving compression has been applied to certain instruments, which are usually bass guitar, kick drum, and vocals tracks during mixing.

It all depends on the final mastering.
The mastering of the Californication album is very poor.

 

[goat76]

It all depends on the final mastering.
The mastering of the Californication album is very poor.

What I meant with “natural dynamic range” is the dynamic range the “raw” mix usually has for that type of music before any limiting or compression has been applied in mastering.

 

[Erogen]

Lenny, rok 2001.

 

[voodooless]

Again, there are people who *love* McDonald's food. Their idea of quality may differ from yours. Imagine that. Please.

You're totally missing the point... again. There is no denying that people love McDonald's. Others don't, and still go there...

In general, people don’t eat billions of Big Macs because McDonald’s represents the pinnacle of cooking. McDonald’s is successful because the product and the way it is presented are ruthlessly optimized for consumption: familiar, convenient, heavily marketed, and designed for immediate appeal. Californication is much the same. People liked the music for sure! But they were presented with it through massive promotion, radio exposure, and a deliberately loud, compressed, in-your-face master specifically designed to grab attention against everything around it (at least, back then).

So, yeah, in many ways, Californication is the fast food of music.

 

[Erogen]

You're totally missing the point... again. There is no denying that people love McDonald's. Others don't, and still go there...

In general, people don’t eat billions of Big Macs because McDonald’s represents the pinnacle of cooking. McDonald’s is successful because the product and the way it is presented are ruthlessly optimized for consumption: familiar, convenient, heavily marketed, and designed for immediate appeal. Californication is much the same. People liked the music for sure! But they were presented with it through massive promotion, radio exposure, and a deliberately loud, compressed, in-your-face master specifically designed to grab attention against everything around it (at least, back then).

So, yeah, in many ways, Californication is the fast food of music.

Definitely, "Californication" was a product, very well-made, precisely designed, thought out, and at the same time, a very good product. If it were a bad product, it wouldn't have sold in such huge quantities.
On the other hand, the title track is a merciless criticism of the commercialization of life. The song is a bitter, yet melodic, warning against a world that sells perfect, plastic dreams that have no basis in reality.

A similar product was Aerosmith's album "Get a Grip." It's definitely not their best album but it sold in huge quantities. Loud production, three heartwarming ballads, very good music videos promoting them, etc.

When I'm driving on the highway, I always stop for a meal at McDonald's. In my country, McDonald's locations are premium, very clean, the decor is elegant, the food is tasty and fresh.
I never eat at McDonald's in my city, but I always do on the highway.
Both albums are great for listening in the car on the highway, also because they have such loud mastering.