Loudness War Compression Headroom

From SOS article below. L, a 1980 CD; R, much more recent CD. If you read the article you'd know what shocking things that represents.

New York Diary (20-28): The Loudness Wars, Compression, Dynamic Headroom and The Inconveniences of Life

Over? Everyone knows about the Loudness War and how audio has been negatively impacted by young people who grew up on highly compressed and low-res music. The Loudness War peaked around a decade ago (this 2011 Atlantic article is fun), and later recording professionals even declared it over. This excellent 2014 Sound on Sound (SOS) article gave a detailed report on why that was. To make a long story short, the powerful Streaming and Media Services now do loudness equalization for whatever they play so there is little competitive advantage to maxing things out. But is it truly all over? Not quite, as one can see from this article (which is a rare one that seriously considered classical playback) and an even more recent one.

Difference between Streaming/Media Services Even I know different services do things a little differently. NML is basically classical, so can serve as a marker. Spotify, which I use quite a bit also, is definitely louder than NML. Every ten minutes or so, they ram loud ads into my ears. They don't normalize the loudness of the ads, but as I don't listen very loud, it is within tolerance. :-( Occasionally I toggle between NML and Spotify, and I always have to get up from my chair to adjust the volume. More on Spotify below.

TV If you think you have it bad with music in the US, I'll tell you it cannot possibly compare with Chinese TV. Say you are watching your favorite serial in China, and the ads come on almost 20 db louder - really irritating, downright terrorist attacks. The rationale behind that eludes me: the louder it is the more I dislike the ad (I usually mute it).

Birds Do It, Bees Do It Even in HiFi Audio, where you'd think standards would be adhered to, it is not necessarily the case. Chinese Audiophile CDs When I had my EAR 912 Preamp, I'd avoid playing my friend's Chinese "audiophile" CDs (I own few). Many of these, regarded as well recorded, like the female singer 童麗 (妙音,九洲), are totally into the red and made the needles on the meters bang around. The only company that honorably never does that is rhymoi (瑞鳴). Audio Note UK DACs These typically have much higher output (current ones are spec'ed at 3.2V but I suspect my old 2.1 was even more than that), AN said that is because they can play into their amps directly but I think that is totally nonsense. No one is going to use an ultra expensive Level 5 DAC to feed a lower level integrated with volume. I am sure they did it to juice up the "jump factor" of their SE amps (I don't condemn this practice, as many flea-powered amps need all the help they can get). BTW, ANUK is not alone. Take the current R2R hot potato, Holospring May, its RCA output is a highish 2.9V (whereas another R2R hot potato, Denafrips Terminator is 2.3) Preamps Among audio equipment, the role of the preamp in the chain is the big divide. Some insist on No Gain, some More Gain (particularly Vinyl Addicts). Most Tube Preamps (especially if the maker also markets phono products and amps) hover around 10-13 db Gain (My Artemis LA-1 and Manley Retro 300B both 13 db); some are even higher (the current Shindo Monbrisson, likely also my old one, my Yamamoto CA-04 and ANUK M10 have 16 db gain; the famed Jadis JP80 has 20 db!). But they are very different in design and, hence, how they work that volume control (there is no set value for the volume pot; for tube amp it's usually 50 or 100K). For Shindo and Yamamoto, given that my horns are ultra efficient, I only need to turn it up a little bit; for Artemis, more. Of course, part of that has to do with matching the Input Sensitivities of the maker's own amps, but one can also perhaps view this as a certain manipulation of loudness (different designers prefer different levels) for that "jump factor". Mind you, as an impure one who believes in poly-stylistic endeavors, I am not at all wary of manipulation. For me, in audio, there is no gospel. Which brings me back full circle to the following question.

Loudness War in Classical? Pop music has long been sold on loudness. As for jazz, it is better in general. But, what about Classical Music, which is supposed to be the beacon of recording integrity, the one immune to the war? Is that true? This is little talked about and based on mostly facts, though perhaps not without a little assumption. But my intensive streaming experience had me in doubt and there are more questions than answers.

Streaming on Spotify Loudness Variations between Genres As I also listen to some Jazz and Pop on Spotify, I am sure as a whole, as always, classical albums are less loud than jazz and certainly less hot than Pop. However,even streaming on NML, many recent classical albums, particularly of lean and mean baroque music (which young people, even me, take to) surprised me by their loudness. On these albums, performed by as few musicians as one to a part, their loudness is unsettling. I know, because I listen to a lot of baroque music, HIP or not. Sometimes I just lower the level on the computer, but that is audibly detrimental to the sound. A string quartet's loudest moment should not sound as loud as or even louder than an orchestra in full cry (this never happens with the LPs I play). The engineers more often than not record up close too. This is highly unsettling and makes me get up often from the chair - dial up for orchestras and down for smaller ensembles (I can understand why mrgoodsound insists on a remote). This naturally raises the question if the engineer had upped the gain (even in conjunction with a little "judicious" compression) to obtain a more "impactful" or 'fuller" sound (in fairness, I actually think all engineers use these when they deem it necessary). But, Is this the Engineer's doing or is it Spotify? I decided to conduct some simple experiments. Using BT, I picked two AIFF tracks on my iTunes on Macbook and compared with the same tracks on Spotify via Chromebook (as the Mac's browser is crippled), both outputs maxed, without changing the preamp volume setting. Compared to Spotify, the Schubert Quartet track (Doric Qr/Chandos) on the Mac was almost inaudible. On the Mac, a cover of Billy Holiday's Strange Fruit by Rokia Traore (a favorite singer of mine; the song is certainly relevant for these times; in the youtube below her live performance is worth hearing even with the heavy African accent) fared better, much louder than the Schubert and certainly clearly audible, but still not as loud as through Spotify. I will grant there may be maximum level differences between the Macbook and Chromebook, but I am pretty certain the results shall stand even if I take that out of the equation (I can burn a couple of tracks on my chromebook to compare but I can't find my external disc drive). What does this mean? I think: 1) despite the "normalization" across the board, classical music is overall definitely not quite as loud as pop, so Spotify uses different criteria across genres; 2) even within just the classical genre, albums, particularly of chamber music or small groups, tend to sound louder than expected (I don't notice this as much from the chamber music CDs I borrow from the library); 3) let us not forget that labels do have room to maneuver in what they send to Spotify and not everything is necessarily Spotify's doing. I am sure I will have more to say about this down the road. Suffice to say, this is kind of a nuisance in my my streaming experience.

Headroom Gain, whether present or not, has no direct relationship with Headroom; rather, the design, and the Power Supply does (Naim people and most Flat Earthers will agree on this) as we see in the Artemis. In my experience, with most Preamps and Buffers of various designs, for a given piece of music, I usually only have to set the volume initially but, as I have found out, not so with he Artemis LA-1. Sometimes during orchestral climaxes I will find it a little too loud and would have to dial back a little, such is its dynamic capability. Or one could think there is not enough resolution at low level but I doubt this is the case, as it has always been a priority in my systems to be able to listen to microdynamic details even at very low level. In any case, it is clear the Artemis LA-1 (as mentioned in the last article below) has more headroom than most. This is not a factor of its having 13 db gain, as my Manley (of equal gain) does not exhibit this trait as strongly. The More Headroom the Better? This is of course a rare quality, but one that does not always work well in some circumstances, one being the streaming environment, replete with "normalization" and unexpected and not end user controllable dynamic manipulations. The last link I provided on the loudness war at the start of the article describes this situation in depth. In my case, a preamp with less headroom, say the Elekit TU-8500 I used before swapping in the Artemis, is in some ways more suitable for streaming. This is not a casual observation. How Compressed is High Fidelity? We audiophiles sneer at compressed music, but is what we are listening to truly uncompressed? Of course they are not, compared to live music. It is actually quite misleading and even arrogant for an audio journalist to even talk about no compression. Recording, Mastering and Media Limitations The engineer has to work with microphones, playback and mastering equipment and they all have headroom limitations, and the end formats themselves have limitations too (certainly LPs and CDs). Audiophiles who believe in numbers sneer at the LP (this goes on everyday in some threads). Well, yes, of course the LP has less headroom than CD, so why does it sound better? Numbers tell us that the LP has less dynamic range, and therefore more compressed, but how come in a good system it sounds more dynamic? Believe me, this is particularly true of rock and pop. The harder the music goes the better the LP sounds (my AC/DC LPs, which I picked up in HK for next to nothing, sound way better than the CDs, ditto Led Zep). You just look at all the young musicians - most dig LP. Plackback Equipment Limitations And then our equipment, even the most expensive ones, leave much to be desired. What is Happening in an active Preamp? My view of the preamp is completely at odds with the orthodox view, be it a straight wire with or without gain. Large scale symphonic music being my primary diet, I am pretty sure I hear things quite differently from the majority of audiophiles (and so may not be applicable to you). Many audiophiles, particularly the technically minded ones, tend to view the preamp as a nuisance and an obstacle, hence the popularity of passive devices and the proliferation of digital devices, even phonoamps, with volume control (whether digital or analog). Many of these can sound fairly good with simpler audiophile material but they usually fall down with symphonic works. Why? Unlike many audiophiles, I'd say I don't know for sure, and the preamp, which mostly attenuates, is a mystery to me, but I'd say this: there is a lot more we don't know about the preamp than the amp. This article tells you why only horns and huge line source loudspeakers can reproduce the dynamics of live performance (the rest is BS), and I am a firm believer of that. Just look at my inner circle, all horn users and many large Infinity users. But, the amp has an impossible task of swinging enough current for that instantaneous peak. However, audiophiles don't think of the preamp that way, more as a switchboard. I happen to think differently. I think that demand of the instantaneous peak is equally challenging for the preamp. Proof for me is that, although I'd use a passive device in some instances (like Leak, of high input sensitivity), I have seldom heard a passive device (volume pots, buffers and even expensive TVC's with gain) sound better than a good preamp with gain. Big classical devotees, like my friend Andy, always find passive devices lacking. Actually, the problem is likely not gain, but headroom. Buffering Of course, there is also the issue of buffering, which helps for sure, which is why some passive devices like Autoformers and, likely, mrgoodsound's The Truth, would be better than the so-called highest quality megabuck resistor laden volume control (that could be ridiculously costly). A tube preamp naturally buffers so has an advantage. I am a believer of buffering.

This is just some observations and food for thought. As I finish this article, I was listening to Arrau's German Radio Recordings of Brahms Concertos and the levels were among the lowest I have ever streamed; I estimate greater than 15 db lower. But guess what, I cranked my Yamamoto Preamp way up, and the 1969/72 sound just came alive; more than that, it was wholesome and perfectly captured the hall sound (as is typical of German Radio Productions). It managed the not inconsiderable feat of conveying the majesty at hand. Highly satisfying. So, why do today's levels have to be so high?...Again, it casts doubt on audio progress. Sigh...