As I was reading 'this post on metal-fi'
(http://www.metal-fi.com/dynamics-the-numbers-game/) I came across 'this
link on Sound-on-Sound'
(http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/sep11/articles/loudness.htm). At first
read it seems a plausible explanation, but can we really all be wrong?
bakker_be wrote:
As I was reading 'this post on metal-fi'
(http://www.metal-fi.com/dynamics-the-numbers-game/) I came across 'this
link on Sound-on-Sound'
(http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/sep11/articles/loudness.htm). At first
read it seems a plausible explanation, but can we really all be
Julf wrote:
I think that it shows the current audiophile fixation on a single DR
measure is misguided - actually looking at clipping and hard limiting
tells us more about the quality of a mastering. Limited dynamic range is
an artistic choice, but trying to exceed the maximum amplitude when
The article starts off saying things have got worse over time according
to the traditional measure; then it says they haven't got worse if you
look at non-local loudness range (I agree); then it proposes a new
measure, that I like very much, that shows things HAVE got worse.
So what is the
A couple of thoughts.
First, the article points out that one's perspective on the loudness
wars issue is somewhat dependent on the type of music involved. Those
who are fans of an urban rap genre may well have an opinion on this
subject that is considerably at variance from the fellow who finds
