Why is louder always better/preferred

[MRC01]

... 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?

Technical biological reasons aside, it's not all that surprising that when a particular difference shrinks to the point that it is so small that we can barely perceive it, we lose the ability to articulate the nature of the difference, before we lose the ability to perceive whether difference exists. In other words, the difference is just barely enough to be perceptible, but not enough to describe exactly what is the difference we are detecting.

 

[Newman]

...but it is still enough to prefer the louder one.

 

[Soandso]

The following is a synthesis of quotes from (2014) free full text available on-line report titled "Brain Correlates of Music Evoked Emotions". Note: any italics are mine for highlighting relevance of loudness.

In cited report sector headlined "Principles underlying music-evoked emotions", which contains sub-sectors I'll condense it as follows.

Increased or decreased musical "... tension... [factors such as] ... expectation ...consonance or dissonance, loudness and timbre can ... increase or decrease ... (un) pleasantness."

Musical "emotional contagion ... triggers physiological processes ... [where-in] ... the acoustic characteristics of speech when expressing joy (such as fast tempo, high sound level ,and high pitch variability) ... [in music are] ... universal acoustic signals for emotional expression and ... evoke processes of emotional contagion."

Comment: louder music elicits feelings of well-being (joy), and apparently as we age our brains undergo physiological changes related to the threshold between cries of joy and shrieking.

 

[F1308]

I don't think louder is preferred.
I think perhaps the aim is for a ”natural level".
A soprano is a soprano, a trumpet is a trumpet , etc.

 

[BoredErica]

I think louder is better up to a certain point, and my assumption is it differs for each person. A lot of people listen to music more loudly than I'd like.

 

[abdo123]

Listening at realistic volumes will always be more enjoyable. moderation ensures that you can enjoy it longer.

 

[Kvalsvoll]

Preference for playback volume is not the same as finding preference for louder when comparing something.

When doing a controlled test to compare products or any other change in the audio chain, it has been shown that small differences in level causes a preference for the louder sample. Level normalization between samples or tested devices is necessary to avoid this. This is a known and solved problem, yet occurs frequently in demos or tests presented by reviewers and enthusiasts.

Playback level for enjoying music will be both situation and person dependent. As a general rule, the lowest volume that still preserves hearing everything important in the music, is the best. I find that in a quiet environment, a master volume setting of -30dB, or even lower at -40dB, is enough to enjoy everything except for the lowest bass below 30hz.

But to fully enjoy music similar to live, it is simply a different experience when played loud, at 0dB or louder. I wrote this:

"Instruments get a presence and realism that simply is not there at lower volume. And the physical tactile feel is not restricted to bass frequencies, the sound has this powerful feel up into the midrange, where instruments like snares and smaller drums hit your body with a sharp kick."

But everyone does not enjoy this. Some people do not like loud music, do not care about the tactile feel and excitement. Generally, many audiophiles (that is you) enjoy a loud listening session, while normal people still enjoy good sound, but played at quite low levels. And everyone likes to turn down the volume after some time.

 

[coonmanx]

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.

I agree with this 100%. I usually listen at a level of somewhere between 65 and 75dB. Plenty loud for me. Also I run a small amount of EQ that makes it sound just right for that listening level. Sure I can crank it up but then the neighbors are going to complain. However, if I do feel the need to crank, it always sounds good and clean, a sign of a good system.

 

[Zensō]

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.

I think you’re right. And IEMs always sound louder than they actually are. In my experience, the intensity of an IEM at 70dB is about like a speaker at 85 or 90dB.

 

[Newman]

This thread seems to have diverted to people saying they don’t like super-loud for their overall long-term listening.

The OP, however, asked: “why, as human, do we prefer when testing, higher level sound”.

 

[MRC01]

When testing, as in listening for differences, playing it loud is helpful as it increases the SNR and flattens frequency response. This helps make some kinds of subtle differences more audible.
However, listening for other things like distortion, I find a less loud level provides the best differentiation. So the ideal level depends on what I'm listening for.

 

[Pugsly]

Given the Fletcher-Munson curve, i.e., that hearing at different spl is non-linear, I have begun to wonder how much preferences in speakers, etc. is affected by the preferred volume level of a listener. Is this another uncontrolled variable in this hobby (given that we have no idea how loud the sound engineer was listening to the recoding during mastering)?

 

[Soandso]

Newman, - I read the OP's question; which continues to include "... when actively listening to music." (Note: italics are my addition for highlighting.)

Comment #23 above is mine and may be a basis partially explaining why your observation about long-term loud listening not being preferred.

[Cited report indicates we have personal emotional states and being social creatures are acoustically attuned for various social messages. Cited author elaborated particular joyful utterance characteristics, including "high sound level", others pick up on ("emotional contagion") and that audible music to others hearing registers emotionally with some "universal" content (ex: enjoyment).]

Exposure to music involves, among other things, autonomic nervous system activity. There are structures in our fore-brain involved in emotions that music evokes and the autonomic system can work through nerve fibers of both the para-sympathetic and the sympathetic pathways.

Some of which nerve fibers are why personally pleasing music, more so than quietude, is more likely to be associated with not only an increased heart rate but also an increased respiratory rate; yet personally non-pleasing music decreases the heart rate. And, for context, musical beats are not experimentally found to be what act to entrain the heart rate.

A further distinction is that when contrasting tranquil music with exciting music it is the exciting music that actually lessens the variability of our heart rate. Loudness is more excitatory and yet entrains heart stability - which is, in part, why sports researchers find positive performance indicators with loud music.

Yet prolonged loud listening occurs in the context of our natural physiological proclivity to balance activity of para-sympathetic and sympathetic nervous system physiological processes. And, in this context, like many aspects of the human body there are changes associated with age that involve our para-sympathetic and sympathetic nervous systems.

[Go by a school playground during recess where children are running around - they can sustain play joyfully loud. We adults passing by marvel at their energy, but unless have personal ties the sound level moves us along despite any happiness elicited.]

 

[Zensō]

(given that we have no idea how loud the sound engineer was listening to the recoding during mastering)

85dB is pretty standard for larger control rooms, 75dB for small rooms.

 

[fpitas]

Loud for me is maybe 90dB or so. Seldom do I want to go louder, my ears object. 80dB is probably about right. Sometimes I prefer listening softly, maybe 70dB.

 

[BostonJack]

“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

Conditioning, Adaptation, and Acculturation to Loud Music CAALM would make a great band name

 

[killdozzer]

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.

Interesting thread.

 

[Neuro]

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.

The explanation for why louder sounds are perceived as better is psychological/physiological.
Floyd Toole and Sean Olive evaluated speakers around 80 dB to give the subjects the opportunity to hear all the relevant details even the weaker ones.
Evaluation at approx. 100 dB can intuitively be perceived as better. Compared to evaluation at 80 dB, many relevant details cannot be heard.
Intensity masking means that only the sound peaks are audible at 100 dB and weaker sounds near the frequency of the sound peak are inaudible.
The louder the sound, the more sound becomes inaudible.
The weaker inaudible sound is extrapolated by the brain through qualified guesswork and experiences according to the Gestalt principles. This extrapolation can remove real distortion and distracting sound.
The brain's cognitive guessing what to fill in causes listening fatigue.
At high volume, the ear registers the louder sound peaks and the inaudible sounds are filled in by the brain with an invented polished sound.

Auditory masking - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Gestalt psychology - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Audiofire]

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.

One has to take into consideration that the uncalled loudness war of the music industry has compressed the dynamic range, to where people can incur excessive hearing fatigue simply by listening to what would otherwise be the desired loudness (dynamic range expansion is a weapon in this war).

 

[Soandso]

... why louder sounds are perceived as better is psychological/physiological.
... inaudible sound is extrapolated by the brain through qualified guesswork and experiences ... The brain's cognitive guessing what to fill in causes listening fatigue.
At high volume .. the inaudible sounds are filled in by the brain with a invented polished sound.

To me the contention that our brains construct musical passages to replace masked (inaudible) content is speculation - unless we are already very familiar with the song's phrasing. Many of us have had the experience of a song, or bars of music, "going around" in their head that we know well.

Yet if I am listening very loudly to unfamiliar jazz there is no guarantee I've context to extrapolate any "inaudible" portion. For example looking at Rahsaan Roland Kirk performing: if we were listening very loud and thus "cognitive guessing" inaudible sounds then that negates any presumption we heard what the musician actually played - meaning high fidelity is lost at louder sound.