Review of the Dire Straits album Money For Nothing with comparison between CD, Cd remastered in 1996, streaming and vinyl of the new 2022 remastering

[Geert]

How do NS10's (the 'monitor' one loves to hate) cope in reproducing this kind of compression?

Note that the loudness war got worse with the NS10 loosing popularity, so I don't think these speakers have much to do with it.

It's also been said that much compression is in the bass, but I have no proof of that.

Compression is everywhere, for different purposes.

 

[MCH]

If i remember well, dire straits albums of that time, specially brothers in arms, were used to promote the new format (released by Phillips in some countries?), so they better did it well with the first presses

 

[Sokel]

specially brothers in arms

I guess this justifies it:

Edit: I have to add that this is the Mobile Fidelity 2013 remaster copy of "Original Master Recording" as they state.

 

[DSJR]

I bought vinyl and CD copies of Brothers In Arms on release. One has the channels revered compared to the other!!!

 

[Newman]

I consider both the TTDR tool and whole-song waveform plots to be diabolically misleading indications of audible dynamic compression issues.

When a website dedicates itself to using those two tools to 'analyse, review, compare' between releases of songs or albums, I consider that website to be ill-informed and, much worse than that, misleading. And - OMG - using the TTDR tool to compare vinyl vs digital is tantamount to propaganda-level deception.

So, putting them aside, what have you got?

 

[Geert]

I consider both the TTDR tool and whole-song waveform plots to be diabolically misleading indications of audible dynamic compression issues.

They're indicators, not the final word. But often they're right, especially for music that normally has high dynamics. People started measuring/visualizing DR because they heard there was a problem, not the other way around..

Considering this, can you elaborate on why they are misleading?

 

[Sokel]

I consider both the TTDR tool and whole-song waveform plots to be diabolically misleading indications of audible dynamic compression issues.

When a website dedicates itself to using those two tools to 'analyse, review, compare' between releases of songs or albums, I consider that website to be ill-informed and, much worse than that, misleading. And - OMG - using the TTDR tool to compare vinyl vs digital is tantamount to propaganda-level deception.

So, putting them aside, what have you got?

Aside from comparing formats,what would be an easy tool for the end-user to identify good from bad?

 

[Geert]

It's nice to see the evolution of loudness for this album on https://dr.loudness-war.info/album/list/1/year/asc?artist=Dire straits&album=Brothers

1985 Initial CD release: DR max 20 dB, DR min 13 dB (beating the DR of the vinyl release)
1996 First releases, including the first lossy ones, with DR reduced to max 14 dB, min 12 dB. By now engineers figured out how to make CD's louder. Brick-wall limiters became available. This decade the loudness war got out of control
2013 First audiophile releases with DR more in line with the original release. A few years earlier SACD became available
2014 The start of the Tidal streaming platform, again reducing DR so people's playlists have a more consistent volume

It reads like the history of HiFi.

 

[Mnyb]

But streaming nowadays can have the sound “normalised” to some extent so that most track sounds reasonable equal re loudness?

So loudness war should not be necessary anymore ? Just use the necessary compression the genre needs , you do need some.

And god old radio , they have their own compressors for broadcast .

And I suspect most Bluetooth speakers are smart enough to compress filter and protect themselves ?

So it does rarely makes sense anymore.

Bass is an interesting topic , look at the equal loudness contour ( fletcher Munson curve ). I listened to some well recorded reggae the other day it did not sound loud but it was the track in question had some heavy low bass , that does not sound as loud as the same spl in the midrange.
So music with uncompressed deep bass can still be penalised I think.

Or does these equal loudness functions weight the spectral content of the track ?

 

[antcollinet]

Hello,

Here's the comparison of album Money For Nothing between CD (1988), CD (1996), Qobuz 2022 remastered ( 24 bits 192 kHz) and Vinyl.

View attachment 213572

This album is an example of the impact that remastering can have on compression.
The compression increases with each new remastering as shown in the graph below:

View attachment 213571

To get an idea of the impact when listening, you can listen to the samples at 3 levels of compression and vinyl, and find all the measurements (DR, Spectrum, waveform...) here.

The original CD remains the best version despite the Qobuz streaming version in 24 bits 192 kHz.

That is horrendous.

 

[Geert]

Or does these equal loudness functions weight the spectral content of the track ?

Yes, the algorithm applies the "K Weight filter". It's less sensitive for bass lower than 80 Hz, and more sensitive above 2 kHz.

 

[DVDdoug]

The waveforms are pretty clear but you can't always trust "DR" measurements which is the Crest Factor. If you rip a CD to MP3 the wave shape changes making some peaks higher and some lower giving the MP3 a "better" crest factor and making the waveform look slightly better (without changing the sound of the dynamics) . It's more pronounced with highly limited & compressed recordings. Something similar happens with the vinyl cutting/playing process making the vinyl "measure better" even if it's made from the same master.

There is no perfect way to define or measure dynamic range (or "dynamic contrast") but IMO UBU 128 Loudness Rage (LRA) is better than the crest factor.

 

[Geert]

There is no perfect way to define or measure dynamic range (or "dynamic contrast") but IMO UBU 128 Loudness Rage (LRA) is better than the crest factor.

And the loudness measurements algorithms are described in standard ITU-R BS.1770-2 (incl. the 'weight filtering I already mentioned). It's based on scientific research, where the resulting algorithms where verified with loudness listening test.



Perfect no, but pretty good and valuable.

Source: Recommendation ITU-R BS.1770-2 (03/2011) Algorithms to measure audio programme loudness and true-peak audio leve l

 

[Jean.Francois]

The waveforms are pretty clear but you can't always trust "DR" measurements which is the Crest Factor. If you rip a CD to MP3 the wave shape changes making some peaks higher and some lower giving the MP3 a "better" crest factor and making the waveform look slightly better (without changing the sound of the dynamics) . It's more pronounced with highly limited & compressed recordings. Something similar happens with the vinyl cutting/playing process making the vinyl "measure better" even if it's made from the same master.

There is no perfect way to define or measure dynamic range (or "dynamic contrast") but IMO UBU 128 Loudness Rage (LRA) is better than the crest factor.

I agree, the DR is not perfect, but it gives a simple value to use for comparison, as long as you measure everything with the same tool. The other solution is to use the integrated LUFS and True Peak to calculate the dynamics, I have already done the exercise and we get similar variations to the DR, it does not change the conclusions. Otherwise, you should put the 2 values (DR and Dynamic between LUFS and True Peak), I think about it, but it must remain comprehensible.

The LRA is different, it indicates a variation of the average loudness level, it is interesting to know the distribution between the loud passages and the weak passages, but does not take into account the peaks of dynamics. It is not the objective of this measurement. This is why streaming services use the integrated LUFS and the true peak.

The analysis is done by combining the DR measurement and the waveform visualization, I work with different zoom levels, but I present a version of the graph that is the easiest to understand. I add zooms to highlight problems like clipping for example.

Concerning the DR measurement for vinyl, I consider that the measurement is valid if it is done with some precaution, and that the problem is not the measurement but its interpretation. I have described it in detail here, if the burning of vinyl strongly increases the DR, it is because the mastering of the vinyl is badly done and does not take into account the constraints of the analog support. A brickwall limiter is a purely digital treatment which does not pass well in analog if it is strongly used. The same phenomenon can be observed with analog tape recording.

 

[Robocop]

Rare to find quality compilations of any band. I’ve witnessed a compilation being made and the engineer was taking tracks from cd’s. Most can’t be bothered going to original masters a lot more work and money.

 

[dlaloum]

I guess this justifies it:


View attachment 213588

Edit: I have to add that this is the Mobile Fidelity 2013 remaster copy of "Original Master Recording" as they state.

The original 1985 CD and LP had a kick drum "hit" at just after 1:00 which on a good system would give you a solid chest thump.... all the subsequent Masterings don't.

Forget the remasters - go back to the first release.

And yes they were used as promotional recordings those of us working in the business at the time, received free LP's / CD's... (I rashly traded my LP some years later... )

 

[Newman]

But streaming nowadays can have the sound “normalised” to some extent so that most track sounds reasonable equal re loudness?

So loudness war should not be necessary anymore? Just use the necessary compression the genre needs, you do need some.

I wish. But you are not accounting for the fact that streaming platforms are in competition. So, if one platform normalises to -16 dB LUFS and the competitor to -10, the latter will ‘sound better’, just like AM/FM radio stations. Is that not a loudness war scenario all over again?

 

[Newman]

They're indicators, not the final word. But often they're right, especially for music that normally has high dynamics. People started measuring/visualizing DR because they heard there was a problem, not the other way around..

Considering this, can you elaborate on why they are misleading?

Digital vs Vinyl

Digital for Factuals, vinyl for Believers. ;)

www.audiosciencereview.com

Digital vs Vinyl

Re flatlined CDs: I said many, not all. Cassettes predate the loudness wars. which is my point. Not really - Xtreme limiting/compression was done for years, even before cassettes. It was just done by analog means with names like Optimod, used for FM broadcasting. Messing up perfectly good...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Apologies for linking to my own posts from the past, but….

IMHO a tool that sometimes works and sometimes doesn’t, is broken (for that specific application).

 

[Gringoaudio1]

To assure your song isn't blown away by the competition when played on the radio or the typical mediocre sound systems most people listen to during the day. It drives sales. Loudness wins, as you know from (failed) blind test. Most people are not active listeners or don't have a high quality HiFi system and don't care or know about DR.

The problem when music is commodity and not art.

 

[restorer-john]

The problem when music is commodity and not art.

True.

Consider a song from Dire Straits like Telegraph Road. It was a featured epic 14+ minute song you'd occasionally hear on the radio, but it a magnificent track. Like Private Investigations- not commercially popular but just fuggin awesome musical art.

There's a youtube video of Bruce Hornsby talking about his hit "the way it is" where he said it was totally unexpected to have a song with two piano solo parts become a pop hit. He's another artist where I never thought he'd 'sold out' to the commercial interests- he kept it real. His music has stood the test of time very well IMO.

Even our own Midnight Oil who I followed and watched live from their pub rock underground days, ended up 'selling out' after Diesel and Dust. All the music afterwards was sadly, a mess. Sure, bands have to evolve, but they went from songs like US Forces, Power and the Passion, Read about it, to love songs for goodness sake. It was just wrong. They were angry young head banging anti-war, anti nuke protesters who suddenly became dads or soft in the head- not sure which. The lead singer ran for parliament, got elected and that was it- the band disbanded.