The art of beeing in Dynamic Range

Hi!
I didn´t know exactly where to put this post, but hope this is ok.
A huge problem for audio enthusiasts is the bad mastering of CD records. This is a result of the so called "loudness war". Today vinyl versions of new records sometimes sound better due to better mastering. That´s bad.
I recently come across a free software - a dynamic range meter. This program make it possible for every audio enthusiast to measure the dynamic range of CD:s. It is very easy, it do not take a lot of computer and software knowledge.

The link to the download is here.
http://www.dynamicrange.de/es/es/download

The VTS version can be used with Jriver. Read about it here:
http://yabb.jriver.com/interact/index.php?topic=77129.0

There is also a plugin for foobar2000. Here:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/wki2m3yotl...ange_1.1.1.zip

Here is a link to a database where people have uploaded metering results. A depressing read. You can upload your own meterings as well.
http://dr.loudness-war.info/

Interesting is that the Database often confirms that Vinyl versions have a better dynamic range than the same music on CD (a depressing fact).

I have measured some Miles Davis CD:s and other Jazz recordings (Recordings from late 50-ties and early 60-ties) and they are superb compared to much of todays music. A dynamic range about 15 - 16 compared to today's 6 - 7. Classical music has often good dynamic range, but the big companies like Deutsche Gramophone are worse than many smaller record companies. The more mainstream, the worse the audio quality is, as a general rule.

I which all reviews of music, not at least in the HiFi press, always included a DR value. Fact is, that some music today is so bad when it comes to audio quality that the CD:s ought to be regarded as faulty.

Happy metering




Edited by Humboldt - 28 Feb 2014 at 12:49pm

Yes, some CD albums are so poorly mastered that it's no surprise that many audio enthusiasts deem CD sound quality to be inferior to that of vinyl. On the whole, CD format has been rather misused/abused when in fact it is a very capable medium for musical enjoyment. It's all dependent on the implementation and thanks to the imminent emergence of Graham's Majestic DAC, listeners will soon be able to experience the excellence of digital audio from a well mastered source. As for the poorly mastered digital stuff, enthusiasts will have to resort to vinyl for a higher fidelity, better mastered source then convert it to digital audio themselves.

but............. there be dragons?

Thanks Par. I'm going to have a play later with the DR plug-in.

I've written elsewhere on the perils of excessive limiting and compression. Echoing the comments above, a squashed master will sound poor on vinyl or CD. Like John and other members, I have carefully cleaned second hand LP's that are far more enjoyable than the re-released version. There are many exceptions to this that show digital restoration isn't a bad thing.

I think you are right to suggest that recording medium degradation or detail lost in the original may have been "faked" by digital tweaks. I suspect the other problem is an audiophile restoration that is then 'brought up to date' with a bucket full of effects like multiband compression, enhancement of high and low frequencies, stereo width processing. I use those techniques but I think there is a difference between a restoration/reissue of a classic album and a remix!