New Green Day Masters - A Loudness War Victory
Vložit
- čas přidán 20. 09. 2012
- Get the LCast loudness meter featured in the video here:
bit.ly/PA-LCast
More info:
productionadvice.co.uk/green-d...
2012 remasters of "American Idiot" by Green day have more dynamics than the original CD and sound better as a result - Hudba
In the intro the difference is staggering. Its like night and day for me. Bring back dynamics!
plain as day. with all of it.
You know its bad when you can tell the difference when playing on a cell phone speaker.
Okay you owe me a new Kontrol because I just spewed my cofefe all over it upon reading this... ^_^
Holy shit. You can really hear the difference once you play the actual
files, not the version here on CZcams. The saxophone in Homecoming is
fucking amazing.
Wow. The comparisons starting at 5:35 are crazy. To my ears it's like the song changes genre, just because there's actually a quiet-loud gap.
I don't have super trained ears, but, for me, the difference was in how my ear felt. The CD version was like my eardrum was constantly flexed where as the HD track version there was a lot less constant tension.
imo metal (and derivates) and classical music, are the ones that need the more of the dynamic range, because they usually have a lot going on, and if you just compress it, it sounds like sheer noise
just listen to master of puppets, then go ahead and listen to death magnetic. death magnetic just wants to kill u there's no dynamic range.
Modern metal music sounds like crap cause they're lifeless, bland, over-produced, and over-compressed. Not all modern metal bands do like this though but you have to dig down more to find a modern metal band with good production (not over-produced) and dynamic range cause it's rare.
I believe modern jazz is affected by the loudness war too, which is sad cause jazz music needs dynamic range too.
www.dr.loudness-war.info is your friend man.
My ears feel much better without the loudness.
one of the rare times a "remaster" actually made something better.
I'm a huge fanboy of American Idiot and even own the 2004 CD. This has convinced me to go buy the HDtracks remaster.
Green Day doesn't clip like Metallica's Death Magnetic. That album is so compressed it can actually cause nausea and headaches!
damn..nausea and headaches? wtf
You know it’s bad when the Guitar Hero version of the album has better dynamics than the actual retail release.
also known as Deaf Magnetic
Luckily for all of us that album was remastered. www.metallica.com/store/9422.html?cgid=digital-downloads#sz=12&start=13
@@thisisawsome34253212 Did some quick research to make sure that the remastered was actually better in the dynamics. It's still not the Guitar Hero version, but it looks like it's better than the original release:
Original release: dr.loudness-war.info/album/view/147596
2015 "Mastered for iTunes" release (it's what they used on that digital download you linked): dr.loudness-war.info/album/view/99068
Guitar Hero version: dr.loudness-war.info/album/view/111080
Thanks for this presentation - excellent!
Hey Ian,
Thanks for sharing with us on how to fight these "loudness wars". For one who has not gone to school for audio, you're really revealing what it's all about and how not "squashing your track" can actually have a better advantage as you have explained in this video!
The more and more I watch, the more I understand!
Thanks,
Riley!
For me the biggest difference I felt was that in the quieter section the more dynamic version just simply grooved much harder. It sounded ok in the CD version, but when you switched to the dynamic release, I couldn't help dancing and bobbing my head and just grooving with it. Also, since you can hear more of a dynamic difference between the sections it affects you emotionally way more. The climax of the piece sounds like a climax. Very relieving information! Keep it up!
exactly! dynamics really hits emotionally, and that's why is so important, is not just a technical thing as many people believe
again very well put across and great points
What you did make a big difference.
And it's true the 2004 version is really pushed hard.
Ian you're a Pro, love this stuff, and learned a lot today
Awesome video! Thanks for doing this :)
So strange how things have changed. When I was in my teens, the quality of how the music was recorded was extremely important to the 'Vinyl' buying consumer. Many would go to extremes in some cases to import digitally mastered copies at substantial extra cost to get what was perceived to be optimum sound quality. But with today's listener, quality means so much less. It's the sign of a new finger print for a different generation, faster food and crushed music. Back in the day, you would never hear anyone say that distorted music sounded better outside of those genres where that is thought to be desirable as in some of the comments below. And how is it that so many can't hear the difference? Damaged hearing perhaps?
BeGoodNow5 You're blaming listeners, but it was the producers who waged the loudness wars.
"How is it that so many can't hear the difference?"
Uh, because they're not music producers???? Can people stop pretending like this stuff is super obvious to the average layman? We hear it easily because we've trained our ears a bit to hear things like compression. Most people can't even hear what a compressor does.
@@urphakeandgey6308 They sure as hell can tell, I've done the tests with my family with 25 dollar in-ears, but it's hard for them to know what you're missing when you've never heard what it can be like without it being brickwalled.
Tracks don't need to be crazy dynamic like some in the past, but an average of -5LUFS makes no sense when CZcams and streaming services level them to -14LUFS. And radio compresses everything anyway, like the dynamic track Get Lucky by Daft Punk, it never had a disadvantage by being less loud. In fact it got praised for it.
I can't hear a difference but I feel a sense of relief in my body when switching away from the louder version. Is this placebo effect? Am I crazy?
No you're not crazy. Louder songs can give you a headache. Think of it like not letting your ears breath.
Great vídeo Ian! Very usefull! Thanks!
I clearly notice there being a lot more space to breath in on the remaster. And it sounds so much more natural.
If you listen from 4.50, shortly before you say that there's not all that much difference, when the remaster kicks in, the phaser actually becomes hugely more apparent.
"no prizes for guessing which is which" lolololol
Very good Ian.
Thanks, Ian!
6:20 you should be listening to the acoustic guitar, sounds way better on the 2012, the 2004 is dead. Acoustic guitars always get destroyed the worst
It's an interesting difference. At first I had no idea what to listen for, but when you mentioned the snare I could hear a slight difference. It sounds a bit more open to me. Thanks for pointing it out.
I am learning about dynamic range and loudness war. 2012 version is clearer, joyful and colorful. My ears not easily fatigue. Thumbs up :)
one thing that suprised me was the new the clash remasters that came out in september 2013 mastered By mick jones is less compressed than the version that came out freshly remastered in 1999. thats a loudness war win
the difference is pretty striking especially at the beginning. The 2012 is significantly.
the drums... on the CD version the snare drum actually sounds slightly later...so it even affects the groove and feel of the song not just the sonics.
Coincidentally, I purchased this HD track years ago, and yes: even converted to CD quality it sounds better. The sound waves actually have enough ROOM. What a concept!
A glimmer of hope.... Finally!
I guarantee that anyone complaining that they don't hear much of a difference is listening on cheap little computer speakers or earbuds. One of the casualties of over-compression is high-end audio playback systems. For those of us who care enough to invest in full range loudspeakers, the compression is VERY audible, and pretty much makes your $5000 speakers sound like $50 desktop speakers.
as always, great info, great point of view. +10
I can hear it thanks Ian
Great video. very informative. Thanks
Danzig's Deth Red Sabaoth is a beautiful example of production. It was recorded in analog with amps and effects from the 1970's. It still sounds heavy and modern but still has a large dynamic range.
I wouldn't call it beautiful, considering it's very muddy sounding. Of course, that "demo tape" sound is what Danzig seems to go for, but it's not an audiophile recording by any means. Still, it's awesome to have a vinyl copy of it.
Brandon Vaughan I agree it is a bit too muddy but it was cool that he attempted such a thing in this modern age of protools and auto -tune. I think the best Danzig has production wise would probably Danzig II. Rick Rubin seemed to know how to capture Glenn's voice.
Really well explained Ian. I have tried and tried and tried to explain loudness issues to clients etc for ages only to find I'm looking at blank faces.
For layperson to compare the loudness release versus the more dynamic release is to run the beginning of the song and the acoustic guitar - is sounds so obviously different and much more natural in 2012 remaster that every one should be able to recognize the benefits of more dynamics.
well, you will bleed if you listen to 2016 's Green Day album. dynamic range of 4 ahah crazy shit.
Interesting that when you had turned the CD version down 5.2 db, the TP meter was showing -3.9 db, meaning definite intersample peaking would have occurred listening at full volume.
Fantastic.
3:18 Yup, that's not fatiguing at aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaall.
I think amped guitars do suffer the most from compression and heavy limiting. These lower and louder volume transients are so delicate to limiting - this is why Rock Music suffered the most from the loudness war.
"Lack of impact on the snare in the CD release". I found the snare in the CD release to hit significantly harder and louder...am I insane?
***** It has a different harmonic content. To me the CD version sounds like it has a little less of the highest treble, but a bit more just below that. To me it sounds about equal volume, but a bit harsher. My ears are pretty sensitive to high frequencies, though. If you're less sensitive to those highest frequencies, the downward shift in the high harmonic content probably makes it sound louder.
Eh I think I was just too obsessed with smashing my own masters that I didn't have the confidence to say that the unsmashed version of this actually did sound better. Headroom is what I've been striving for lately.
***** It's hard to be objective sometimes, too. Compared side by side, usually the hotter mix will sound better, at least in the short term. Also, loudness is not the same thing as peak levels, so even when comparing too sounds that have been normalized one can sound louder than the other, and will seem to have more impact.
When you fill a whole album with this cranked-to-11 sound, it's just too much, and nothing stands out anymore.
nwimpney I've been telling everyone that higher levels does not equate to perceived loudness haha. You can take a mastered track, put a limiter all the way up on it and it will be just as loud, but it will sound shitty and unnatural. If you do the same thing with a saturator, you'll get a much louder signal, but it will obviously be distorted to hell.
It's because the snare hit is flattened - the initial transient and sustain are closer in level, which gives the sense that the snare hit is fuller. But if you listen to that pop, the transient of the snare hit on the remaster, it's much more clear.
Chris Lord-Alge has a video on his youtube channel where he plays his mix of the two songs, unmastered, and they sound absolutely amazing.
Delicious HD version. It even seems wider, guitars sounds warmer and way more enjoyable. The transients takes me into the music.
ANYONE saying that louder is better, should just turn up the volume or add their own compression. OR record companies should get a grip, and see the opportunities in doing two masters always for costumer choice. Most depressing of all, I hear so many great mixes BEFORE industry psyko mastering..reminding me how great the world could be..
The original just causes me ear fatigue. No reason to push it that hard.
Hi, i've heard when i was in a sound techniques school, that if the CD master are so compressed, it's because sound engineer want to make the final product as more audio system compatible, and that they take in account the fact that the CD will be played in a noisy environement, a car for example, to avoid the listener to constantly change the volume output, according to the rms volume of the track, like when you listen to calssical in your car, you have to constantly change the volume. In the other wayn when making music for videos, it's cool to have parts that are louder than another, to create more surprise. It's like in an action movie, sometimes the sound effects make just your ears bleeding, the volume is way bigger than other sounds but your attention is definitively capted. So the compromise could be to create 2 CD of the same album, one for listening where there is noise, and the other for listening when your alone in your living room.
Great video man. It's good to have people like you to review these versions for the consumer. It's hard to find information about different versions of albums nowadays. I'm not an audiophile or a sound engineer by any means. However, I know good sound and the HDtracks version of American Idiot is amazing. I want to get this on the 2009 vinyl though. Have you listened to the vinyl version? If you have, does it have good dynamics?
I think the reason the difference seems smaller than you might have expected is because the recordings themselves are probably quite distorted. Not to the extent of digital clipping, certainly, but you can bet those guitars are pretty heavily clipped by the effects pedals already, so clipping them again gives a bit more of the same. I think this goes a lot further to say that even if you want that over-saturated sound, you can get it without blowing out the whole mix with bulk compression and clipping.
That OSX dock is out of control! :)
This was really cool to see/hear, thank you! I would expect the difference would be even more profound on source material that wasn't recorded and produced in a squishy manner as well. Specifically, I mean that in this example I hear dynamic differences between the instruments in the track, but the instruments themselves still sound pretty crunched up.
Thank you to the powers that be for this!!!
Thanks for a very interesting and illuminating presentation, Ian. So, what's the future for someone like me who loves CDs? Will downloading (on, say, iTunes or HD Tracks) become the only way to hear more dynamic music? Or will CD manufacturers start doing the unthinkable and actually start pulling it back?
***** I can only hope. As a bedroom producer only recording myself, I've found it very hard the last 10 years or so to keep up with the "standard" I've compressed my tracks more-so than I wanted to keep up. It hurts me most when it comes to drums and acoustic guitars.
Hmmm. I think a fair comparison would be if the reissue version would be made with exactly the same mastering chain minus brickwall limiter. The CD version lack the punch of the drums, that is obvious and I always like to hear drums punching through the mix. The funny thing is, that I had a few hip-hop clients who wanted their masters heavily crushed, because they didn't like the transients punching through. They grew up with the crushed, flat sound and that's what they like. And I think it is sad.
When it comes to genres like EDM and hip hop, the Loudness War largely still rages on. Not just because that being often preferred for the style, but because it makes it MUCH easier for DJs to smoothly mix from one track to another. (Gain staging is way easier if everything is sausage limited.)
Another great post! Initially, the 2004 version seems more exciting, but, I feel, becomes fatiguing. I like the 2012 version. Thanks.
At about 4:30-5:00, the principle differences in the HD Tracks remaster I notice are mainly in the high end spectrum. Overall, the drums sound fatter and the cymbals are clearer - especially on the ghost notes which Tré uses often. Additionally, Billy's guitar sounds better in the high end as well. The tremolo effect in the intro sounds noticeably better. I know nothing about HD Tracks, so this could be due to other remastering tools they used, but regardless, it sounds better than the original mix.
I am new to the loudness thing, one of my friends has introduced me to it, but I never really heard a difference, until now...the remastered one seems to sound more...transparent/softer...perhabs less direct/harsh.
Judging from the comments, I must be the only one who liked the CD version better, loudness compensated and all.
There is a reason that the two versions sound way more similar during the loud sections. It starts with the engineering and recording process. Todays engineers group so many instruments together and allow for little breathing room when they clump it together. Loud rock music is going to sound this way in general and many people are used to this sound. But I agree that the HD Tracks version sounds better with less compression due to the remaster.
Anyone have the link to listen on hd tracks? I can't find it. I've also heard that youtube degrades audio quality so I'm sure the difference will be even more pronounced with the actual files.
im about 1000% sure the loudness war wont last another 5 years, the worlds taste will change......
Right around 4:50, you can hear a big difference, at least with headphones on, in the guitar "wah"/delay effect. It is almost non-existent in the 2004 version but is very noticeable in the Remaster
The video to this song is kind of hilarious with the three band band members all "walking alone" together.
I could tell the difference between the two songs on my first pass through my laptop speakers. Then i put my headphones on and had a second pass of the loudest part and couldn't see the difference as clearly. Then my first pass of the quieter section with headphones on I couldn't hear to much of a difference in regards to the drums, but the acoustic guitar in the intro definitely sounded over compressed in the 2004 version. I feel like this is all in my head. I am a professional musician and I work in the studio fairly regularly. I struggle with mastering because it requires so much critical listening for what seems like such subtle results. I have a space to really hear though, what are some videos you could suggest to help me see things more clearly (like this video) and believe in paying mastering engineers the $$$ that they demand for the highest levels of audio finessing. Thanks!
Some people sy they can't tell the difference, but I think the remastered version is much, much better. Clarity seems to be improved, or something like that
I agree, the HD version is more clear, you might miss a few db's of punch but is that really safe for our ears, besides we get tired after a while, why the risk I say.
Looked at Californication on the HDTracks website. Scar Tissue still sounds distorted. That will never be undone.
there is an unmastered version online, that sounds incredible
to hear the original before mastering go to Chris Lord Alge youtube channel. He plays it directly from the tapes thru his ssl console
The first time I recognized this issue was when I bought Daughtry's album from 2006 back in 2008. It literally makes me feel uneasy and gives me a headache. I've never had anything do that to me before or since (and I have Red Hot Chili Peppers "Stadium Arcadium" and hadn't noticed anything wrong with it)- so it might be very interesting to analyze that Daughtry album and see if it is the worst one ever?
The first album? The compression in that album is horrible. Good thing they learned on the next album.
The funny thing is, the day this video was posted was the same one when Billie Joe Armstrong had the epic meltdown in Vegas: "I'm not (expletive) Justin Bieber you (expletive)!"
just wow
LOL I've listened to the louder version of this song so many times, it just doesn't feel right to me any more, when the crash cymbals in the last part of the song are actually dynamic.. I've gotten so used to them being this flattened out plane..
At the same time, I've listened to Pink Floyd's Dark Side Of The Moon so many times -- I would probably hate it, if I heard it squashed now... I guess, getting used to something is a big part in this loudness issue, as well as everything else.
When I compare Dark Side Of The Moon and American Idiot dynamic-wise though, it's clear to me, who the winner is ;-) But then again, I've always been a huge Pink Floyd fan :-)
If you listen to the videoclip here on you tube and the cd you will hear the difference too.
I was working with a song a friend wanted me to remix, Charli XCX and it was so loud I had to turn it down. So I looked at it in Izotope RX, when the chorus comes in there is a -3 RMS on the meter. I don't know about you, but that hurts! I can't listen to modern music the way it's being mastered, and for one my ears are very very sensitive to louder levels, Bob Katz talks in detail about how we will go deaf one day listening to such a huge increase of just 20 years. There is hope though, I heard
that snare tho
Hey Ian, thanks for the great video. In my opinion compression for the music tracks is the warmth of Sergio Leone western movies which is shoot with 35 mm cameras. It may sound stupid comparing sound with video but this is how I feel : ) Bu also compression is a fine line between good and bad, too much of it can drive crazy a sound guy like me. If I was running a huge live setup,I would definitely play the 2012 version of GD song.
They don't add compression, but maybe your computer does. I was surprised to find out that mine does.
I can barely tell any any difference on my studio monitors (except for soft intros). But of course CZcams crushes the crap out of audio as well.
It'd be interesting to see what has changed by reversing the phase on one version, summing them and seeing what is left (different).
I was unaware that the TV loudness laws are bleeding over to other media. Is this why Spotify tracks sound crushed and dead compared to older CD or Vinyl versions? They're compressing/limiting everything?
Моё пояснение по вопросам участников группы vk.com/loudness_war касательно содержания данного видео:
На данном видео дело не только в громкости как таковой, хотя она тоже имеет место быть. На видео "наглядно а что более важно и на слух" показана разница в динамических диапазонах после и до, в первой части видео видно и слышно что динамический диапазон трека сжат компрессором и обработан лимитером. Использовано было именно ограничение амплитуды сигнала (Brickwall лимитером) это привело к сжатию и как следствие сокращению динамического диапазона в треке, допустим, для примера что в его оригинальной версии была разница между самым громким и самым тихим звуками (динамический диапазон) в -18 дБ RMS, то после такой обработки она стала допустим -3 дБ RMS dBFS, что во много раз сократило разницу в самых тихих и самых громких звуках (динамическом диапазоне) в этой композиции. А как известно невозможно увеличить субъективную громкость цифрового сигнала путем нормализации его уровня по мгновенной (пиковой) амплитуде выше 0 дБ и без ограничения её пиков, для этого используют нормализацию уровня опираясь на показатель уровня измеряемый в RMS - (это среднеквадратическая, а не пиковая громкость, Для получения среднеквадратичного уровня все мгновенные значения напряжений для волны сложной формы возводят в квадрат, усредняют полученные значения и извлекают из результата квадратный корень. Для периодического сигнала (например, для синусоидальной волны, чтобы получить среднеквадратичное значения достаточно умножить пиковое напряжение на определенную константу.) но она неизбежно приводит к тому ,что часто эти пики «срезаны» и имеют форму "квадрат или меандр" что приводит к нелинейным искажениям сигнала вполне заметным даже на слух (буквально в десятки процентов THD) а поскольку сигналов такой формы в природе нет, слушать такой звук весьма тяжело, он звучит неестественно и не динамично, все звуки в нём равны по уровню и субъективно находятся почти на одной громкости в течении продолжительности всего трека, в результате в треке почти нет и не осталось тихих мест, динамики нет.
I had the dynamic equalizer turned on in my sound settings, that's why I wasn't hearing any difference.
The album was recorded on analogue tape fully?!!? It all goes to show...
To be honest, I didn't get that it is a acoustic guitar in the intro of 2004 master😂 ı realized that when you switch to 2012 remaster 😂
How's the vinyl version of this album? I think they has both dynamic range. I just wondering what's better between this HDTracks
If that's what you honestly think I can't change that, but I'm not sure we're listening to the same Green Day. I can very, very clearly hear, and feel, Mike Dirnt's bass track, and the distortion that Billy Joe is using on his guitars may be more than what was used by, say, Clapton or Buddy Guy, but it's still a very musical, organic overdrive to my ears, and certainly not 'bereft of performance, warmth, character or detail.'
Went to hdtracks to buy that version of the song but "due to territorial restrictions" it's not sold here in Germany ;_;
I found an Aqua rerelease, limited edition of their 1st album. The loudness war effect was reverted totally. I have the flacs if you're interested in a comparison, the difference is obvious.
www.dropbox.com/s/0fpojao8xy2o58u/Screenshot%202017-02-25%2002.20.33.png?dl=0
limited version will definitely sound louder cause it has quite a lot of saturation on top of everything even you make than same level. CLA mixed already quite loud and everything touches to the limiter.
I've discovered, for me at least, the biggest difference in dynamic range is almost always in the drums, which I suspect is at least in part because drums are completely an analogue sound, while guitars are going straight through an amplifier. It's an "electric guitar." That said, the differences would probably more clear there, too.
Another thing I find is that I just have a "sense" that I'm enjoying the music more on a song with higher dynamic range, which may again be down to the drums (or bass, which also seems to get a bad hit.)
Two other albums I know of on HDTracks are also similarly more dynamic than their CD versions - last releases by Dream Theater and Megadeth. After listening to their more dynamic versions, hearing the CD was simply uncomfortable. I am very happy to see and hear more albums appear without the loudness war applied, even if it's only three so far ;)
I just used the TT DR Offline meter to check the average dynamic range of Dio's 1990 track 'Wild One', which is classified as traditional heavy metal. Guess what the result was? Even when I chose just the loudest parts to be analyzed, it was still 12db average! No wonder it sounds good.
sounds like the 2004 release has been limited with an L2
Ugly distortions
but there is a degradation in quality depending whether you are viewing at 720p or 240p
To be honest, I feel like the remastered version masks the snare a little.
I have a question: Because CZcams is now normalizing the levels automatically, is our hearing of educational videos such as this one reliable? In other words, can we depend on what we are hearing in this and similar videos to be accurate enough to learn from? The reason I ask, is I listened very closely to the clips that were played, and did not notice a very noticeable difference. This is probably up to lack of experience, however I would like to know if CZcams's normalization system is also hampering my learning efforts here.
***** Alright, thank you for the help
Imagine Dragons "Night Visions" is a new victim of the loudness war... so sad
Yeah, that's right. Especially Demons, Bleeding Out and Radioactive... Quality of those tracks is so poor. And that's really sad cuz I liked their music.
Marek Drzewiński
So true! I like Demons so much but when I start listen to it and the chorus starts I need to stop it because that sounds like a really really bad 120kbit/s rip-off. I hope they make a remade just like green day did !
Marek Drzewiński That is probably the reason I cannot stand Radioactive. Been trying to understand why I can't listen to that song.
Marek Drzewiński I just listened to it. the Dubstep bassline sounds like SHIT, and i'm not even a producer/masterer!
Skylar I've only now come across this "loudness war" and now that I think about night visions (by my favorite band ^^) is sadly the perfect example :(
One album that REALLY needs a remaster is Imagine Dragons - Night Visions. The song Radioactive is so brick-walled that the chorus sounds like they are singing through static! I love the album, but I find it very very hard to listen too because its so compressed and muddy. I heard even the LP release suffers clipping. The most tragic part is the intro of the song sounds great, and then the verse begins, the beat drops, and so do the dynamics. then when the chorus hits, the meter doesn't move
This is one of the reasons I avoid streaming playlists. The selection of songs is so random in the sources that you can end up turning the volume up and down for every song as you go from brickwalled remasters to 70’s/80’s dynamic versions.
fight this war !!!
I can't hear much of a difference over youtube because they compress their audio. correct me if i'm wrong.