Why is louder always better/preferred

[Cote Dazur]

This afternoon, I was home alone, I took advantage of the empty home to crank the volume higher than usual. I had a great time, from Norma Winstone to Norah Jones, with detour to Manzanera and Simon & Garfunkel, everything sounded spectacular and captivating. All the glorious detail and presence, great stereo image and convincing low frequency with authority. It had been a little while since I listened in the 80/90 dB range, usually it is more like 65/75 dB range.
When doing comparison, like AB blind testing or any testing, every one always insist on having no level difference or the result will be biased as everyone will prefer the loudest sound. Producer go in a war on loudness because the loudest is always preferred. When going to live event, rock, but not only, the level is always very high.
One does not need to listen too high to get the details, if the environment is not too noisy, but the music feels so much more alive at higher levels. More so, for me, on speaker, not so much on headphones.

My question is why, as human, do we prefer when testing, higher level sound and enjoy higher dB levels so much, particularly when actively listening to music.

 

[Vacceo]

Because listening to this at low db makes Lemmy curse you from the netherworld.

 

[digitalfrost]

It increases the singal/noise ratio. Like in a normal room, depending on where you live, you will easily have 40dB background noise, maybe more. If you only listen 30dB above that it's just not as precise as if you made it louder. If you think about it in the SINAD term used on this website, your typical room will simply have a lot of noise. Ofc this comparison is apples to oranges because amplifier noise will be amplified along with increasing volume (imagine an amp with -40dB of noise...) whereas the room stays at the same level. But that is precisely why increasing the volume makes it better.

I recently discovered in ear monitors, and of their main features for me is the isolation. You do not need to make it loud at all to hear everything crystal clear because you pretty much don't hear anything else but the music. It's nice.

 

[Newman]

“Sounds at levels that can injure the ear are regarded as enjoyable by many people. In many societies, a common form of this behavior is listening to loud music, either via personal audio systems or at music venues. Drawing on theory from the literature around loud sound and emotional responses to music, and combining it with concepts of physiological sound adaptation and classical conditioning, we developed a model of the process that may underlie people's enjoyment of loud sound, particularly loud music in nightclubs. The Conditioning, Adaptation, and Acculturation to Loud Music (CAALM) model proposes that the benefits associated with loud sound, alongside other desirable aspects of nightclubs, provide the unconditioned stimuli. Over time regular clubbers become conditioned to enjoy loud sound in itself. Exposure to loud sound also causes adaptation within the auditory system, so there is both a desire for, and tolerance of, loud sound during leisure time. This sets up an expectation of loud music as a cultural norm, and staff of leisure venues, who are themselves part of that culture, set music levels to meet customer expectations; and a cycle is perpetuated. This theory may be a useful consideration for health promotion and hearing conservation interventions.”

Welch and Fremaux, Understanding Why People Enjoy Loud Sound, 2017. Link

 

[Lambda]

It had been a little while since I listened in the 80/90 dB range, usually it is more like 65/75 dB range.

dB or dBA? Peak or RMS?
90dB Peak is not very loud at all. most of the energy (in music) is in the low end and wen don't hear low frequency well and loud.

So if you only listen to low levels of you can't even hear most of the low end from the music

And you certainly can't feel it....

 

[Blumlein 88]

Expanding on Lamda's post, as you increase volume you extend what you can hear in the low end and somewhat in the high end. You overcome the thresholds just a bit more. So you really are hearing just a little more of the music or what is in the music. So louder can mean wider frequency response of what you are hearing along with pulling a little more detail out of the noise floor of your room background.

 

[MRC01]

I find there is an optimal volume - louder is not always better.
Starting from low volumes, turning it up increases the SNR and flattens the perceived frequency response. That means better!
Yet I reach a point when going louder makes it sound worse, not better.
Measuring my system, this is not due to increasing distortion. And I perceive it both on headphones & speakers. At a certain point the sound just becomes artificial and fatiguing, despite being clean and distortion-free. Where exactly that point is, around 80 dB SPL but varies quite a bit from day to day and depending on the music.

 

[Newman]

Yet I reach a point when going louder makes it sound worse, not better.

Yes, but I think that is just an edge-case. What's that debating trick called, where you exaggerate a person's claim to the point of absurdity, then say that proves the claim wrong? eg "I enjoy heights, the higher the better" - "Well you won't enjoy it when you can't breath, buddy."

The interesting point IMHO is our tendency to prefer sound when it is a bit louder -- sometimes even when we aren't consciously aware of the extra loudness.

cheers

 

[dc655321]

Back in the primordial past (2018), Alan March posted the same track recorded through Meridian and Mojo (og) DACs, and challenged forum members to listen to the difference. I thought the mojo version sounded "warmer" (see this post, plus the following ~10), but it turns out that it was 0.75dB louder than the other sample track.

Was a neat little demonstration on the importance of careful level matching when audibly comparing, but I don't remember thinking the subtly louder tracker was "better".
Though, I could understand that term being a common response if posed to a larger group...

 

[MRC01]

Yes, but I think that is just an edge-case. What's that debating trick called, where you exaggerate a person's claim to the point of absurdity, then say that proves the claim wrong? eg "I enjoy heights, the higher the better" - "Well you won't enjoy it when you can't breath, buddy."

The interesting point IMHO is our tendency to prefer sound when it is a bit louder -- sometimes even when we aren't consciously aware of the extra loudness.
...

Not really, because the point at which the music starts to sound worse (subjectively, to me at least) is not so loud that it's uncomfortable (nor so high you can't breathe).
In other words, sounding worse doesn't mean it's uncomfortably loud. Put differently: starting from a quiet volume, and incrementally increasing the volume:
Some people perceive the music sounding better, all the way up to the point where it becomes uncomfortable / painful.
Other people (like me) perceive the music sounding better, then reaching a point where louder sounds worse, before it reaches a level that is uncomfortable / painful.

One contributing factor is the type of music. I listen mostly to acoustic music, and it sounds "worse" when it gets much louder than the actual instruments sound in a real space. With small ensembles that's not very loud. This makes sense because the perceptual frequency response changes with volume, so when they get much louder than actual instruments the timbre sounds "off".

 

[MRC01]

Back in the primordial past (2018), Alan March posted the same track recorded through Meridian and Mojo (og) DACs, and challenged forum members to listen to the difference. I thought the mojo version sounded "warmer" (see this post, plus the following ~10), but it turns out that it was 0.75dB louder than the other sample track.

Was a neat little demonstration on the importance of careful level matching when audibly comparing, but I don't remember thinking the subtly louder tracker was "better". ...

When the only difference between A and B is loudness, and the difference is small enough (say, 1 dB or less) we still hear the difference but don't perceive it as loudness. It can be warmth, brightness, detail or whatever. Some equipment makers take advantage of this: you can hear that player B sounds different from A, it's not obviously louder or quieter, just different, and it's more expensive, so it must be better.

 

[MakeMineVinyl]

As mentioned above, the Fletcher-Munson Equal Loudness Contour makes the music subjectively fuller the louder it is, up to a point. Some early preamps, and some current ones I believe use a 'compensated volume control' which introduces inverse compensation at lower volume levels. Ironically, it is sometimes easier to hear small details of sounds at very low levels.

 

[Blumlein 88]

Back in the primordial past (2018), Alan March posted the same track recorded through Meridian and Mojo (og) DACs, and challenged forum members to listen to the difference. I thought the mojo version sounded "warmer" (see this post, plus the following ~10), but it turns out that it was 0.75dB louder than the other sample track.

Was a neat little demonstration on the importance of careful level matching when audibly comparing, but I don't remember thinking the subtly louder tracker was "better".
Though, I could understand that term being a common response if posed to a larger group...

Yes, and I've seen similar demos of online listening samples like this. One on another forum had 4 DACs and one track was actually a repeat of one, but 1 db louder. No one commented on the fact it was louder. It was overwhelmingly chosen as sounding better. That is why some of us harp on level matching. Really close level matching. You don't have a good listening comparison without it. And matching by ear just plain doesn't get the job done.

 

[Slayer]

. Ironically, it is sometimes easier to hear small details of sounds at very low levels.

I whole heartedly agree with this statement. I will just add, your choice in speakers play a big role in this.

 

[Soandso]

Cote Dazer, - You did infer you were "actively listening".

Back in 1999 University of Manchester's Todd and Cody [reference citation = https://doi.org/10.1121/1.4287] found over 90dB A-weighted dance music initiated vestibular responses to low frequency beats. Being distinct from cochlear functions they proposed the vestibular reaction elicited thalamus responses extending physiologically to brain pleasure centers associated with sensations of self motion.

For more about our vestibular & auditory systems relations to brain structures see "Section 5: Discussion" of the free full text available on-line (2008) titled "Vestibular influence on Auditory Metrical Interpretation".

 

[Neuro]

Simultaneous intensity masking makes music sound better. More intense lower frequencies can mask distortion at higher frequencies.

Sound Masking

At lower frequencies simultaneous intensity masking masks higher and lower frequencies.

Auditory Masking and its Effect on our Perception of Sound - Live Sound

As our ears work together with our brain to create the sounds we hear, the ‘Auditory Masking’ phenomena alters directly our perception of sound.

blogs.qsc.com

 

[Andysu]

Simultaneous intensity masking makes music sound better. More intense lower frequencies can mask distortion at higher frequencies.


View attachment 210312

Sound Masking

At lower frequencies simultaneous intensity masking masks higher and lower frequencies.

Auditory Masking and its Effect on our Perception of Sound - Live Sound

As our ears work together with our brain to create the sounds we hear, the ‘Auditory Masking’ phenomena alters directly our perception of sound.

blogs.qsc.com

View attachment 210321

all aware of this and its my benchmark in when pink noise setting up with i lost count how many microphones i have is it 9 or 12 ? try star trek 2 how much detail can you hear . thou i think star trek 4 the one with the whales has been remixed ? there is a sound i seem recall and this was on tv around 1986 kirk and the punk rocker and kirk makes sound with his lips yet i can not hear it in the laserdisc , dvd , blu or 4k and it would be around 1KHz to 3KHz range meaning it would be audible .

 

[Cote Dazur]

“Perceived sound quality of reproductions with different frequency responses and sound levels” (JAS 1990) AIf Gabrielsson.
“Another important physical factor is the sound level. The available evidence indicates that an increase in sound level will usually increase the perceived fullness spaciousness and nearness as well as sharpness and brightness and decreasing sound level gives the opposite results.”

I do not think their is doubt or dispute in the proven scientific fact that we prefer louder between to similar file, why adding a db or 2, is not really perceived as louder but is perceived as better?

My question , as this is the Psychoacoustic thread, is why, as human, are we reacting that way?

 

[Soandso]

Here are some brief excerpts from a recent report's (2021) section regarding loudness. Citation for quotes' source is given below (and in it's own reference portion one can find their citation for these respective report author's statements; the report also has as Appendix with a sub-category listing loudness studies).

In line with previous comments here: "... college students tended to prefer higher loudness levels if they liked the music."

There is a caveat, which adds nuances to comments regarding matching dB comparisons : "... college students who liked rock music estimated significantly lower loudness levels than college students who disliked rock music." [Note: italics rendering is mine for nuance highlighting.]

Age relevance was revealed among 18-90 year olds: "... [r]esults showed that younger subjects (age 18-53) preferred higher loudness levels than did older subjects (age 54-90)."

Furthermore that preceding age disparity is a trend since "... older subjects with deteriorated hearing abilities did not compensate by increasing the loudness level."

See free full (2021) text available online of "Music Preferences As A Function of Musical Characteristics".

 

[sarumbear]

“Sounds at levels that can injure the ear are regarded as enjoyable by many people. In many societies, a common form of this behavior is listening to loud music, either via personal audio systems or at music venues. Drawing on theory from the literature around loud sound and emotional responses to music, and combining it with concepts of physiological sound adaptation and classical conditioning, we developed a model of the process that may underlie people's enjoyment of loud sound, particularly loud music in nightclubs. The Conditioning, Adaptation, and Acculturation to Loud Music (CAALM) model proposes that the benefits associated with loud sound, alongside other desirable aspects of nightclubs, provide the unconditioned stimuli. Over time regular clubbers become conditioned to enjoy loud sound in itself. Exposure to loud sound also causes adaptation within the auditory system, so there is both a desire for, and tolerance of, loud sound during leisure time. This sets up an expectation of loud music as a cultural norm, and staff of leisure venues, who are themselves part of that culture, set music levels to meet customer expectations; and a cycle is perpetuated. This theory may be a useful consideration for health promotion and hearing conservation interventions.”

Welch and Fremaux, Understanding Why People Enjoy Loud Sound, 2017. Link

That’s how drugs work