HDR Audio

[Samuel T Cogley]

20 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Interesting take. I don’t think it’s accurate though. 
 

CR is fairly unbiased - https://www.consumerreports.org/tvs/everything-you-need-to-know-about-4k-hdr-tvs/

 

Am I reading you right that you see no value in high dynamic range for audio? 

 

We already have lots of "HDR" audio content.  Classical.

 

And as I said, unlike HDR video, HDR audio is impractical to play unless you have a very quiet environment.

[The Computer Audiophile]

2 hours ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

We already have lots of "HDR" audio content.  Classical.

 

And as I said, unlike HDR video, HDR audio is impractical to play unless you have a very quiet environment.

That’s kind of an argument for why we can’t have nice things. 
 

Imagine if one of my favorite albums, Californication, had high dynamic range. It would be fantastic. However, since you believe we have HDR with classical music, then I guess we’re all good. Doesn’t make much sense to me. 
 

I’m not suggesting a dynamic range that makes music unlistenable, but we also don’t have to sink to the lowest common denominator. Movies have pushed for better quality. Audio should too. 

[Samuel T Cogley]

2 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

That’s kind of an argument for why we can’t have nice things. 
 

Imagine if one of my favorite albums, Californication, had high dynamic range. It would be fantastic. However, since you believe we have HDR with classical music, then I guess we’re all good. Doesn’t make much sense to me. 
 

I’m not suggesting a dynamic range that makes music unlistenable, but we also don’t have to sink to the lowest common denominator. Movies have pushed for better quality. Audio should too. 

 

As I approach age 60, one thing I discovered is that most of what we call "rock" is actually "pop".  And that Chili Peppers record is most certainly a pop record, with all the peak limiting that comes with that genre.

 

You're trying to turn a McDonald's hamburger into a high end steak.  With due respect, it's a fool's errand.

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

16 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

As I approach age 60, one thing I discovered is that most of what we call "rock" is actually "pop".  And that Chili Peppers record is most certainly a pop record, with all the peak limiting that comes with that genre.

 

You're trying to turn a McDonald's hamburger into a high end steak.  With due respect, it's a fool's errand.

 

HDR has zero to do with genre. 
 

I accept you aren’t interested in high dynamic range. 

[Samuel T Cogley]

Just now, The Computer Audiophile said:

HDR has zero to do with genre. 
 

I accept you aren’t interested in high dynamic range. 

 

I think there's a difference between wanting a version of Californication with higher dynamic range (I'm well aware of how horrible it's compressed) and wanting some hypothetical pop/rock music with much higher dynamic range.  Loud pop music has always been a thing, as long as pop music has been around.  The thing about HDR audio, is if you turn it up loud enough to hear the quiet parts, you can potentially damage your system and/or hearing when the loud parts come.  Probably not ideal for pop music consumption.

 

You may not be aware of this, but @John Dyson 's brilliant work with Dolby A decoding actually restores some lost dynamic range in the source material.  I'm not talking about "HDR Audio", which I still think is something like a unicorn, but it sure breathed some life into Breakfast In America that I never knew was there.  Highly recommended.  👍

[Allan F]

22 hours ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

Loud pop music has always been a thing, as long as pop music has been around.  The thing about HDR audio, is if you turn it up loud enough to hear the quiet parts, you can potentially damage your system and/or hearing when the loud parts come.  Probably not ideal for pop music consumption.

 

While loud pop music "has always been a thing", there is a difference between the dynamic range of pop music as it existed before the "loudness wars" and what it is now. Akin to your comment about HDR audio, pop music dynamic range has been compressed for its primarily young consumer demographic that listens mainly via mobile devices and headphones.

[Samuel T Cogley]

6 hours ago, Allan F said:

 

While loud pop music "has always been a thing", there is a difference between the dynamic range of pop music as it existed before the "loudness wars" and what it is now. Akin to your comment about HDR audio, pop music dynamic range has been compressed for its primarily young consumer demographic that listens mainly via mobile devices and headphones.

 

What do you suppose was the dynamic range of the typical pop 78?  Or Phil Spector's entire career output?  Pop has pretty much always been compressed.

 

I understand the notion of "HDR Audio" being some way to bring the Loudness Wars to heel, but let's call it that, and not try to compare it to HDR video.  The analogy fails on so many levels.

[The Computer Audiophile]

4 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

The analogy fails on so many levels.

Although you can’t name any of those levels?

[Samuel T Cogley]

7 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Although you can’t name any of those levels?

 

HDR video is all about brightness or "nits".  HDR video is only possible now because of how bright modern TVs get.

 

There are no equivalent Sound Pressure Level advances in audio to hang this "HDR Audio" concept upon.  I'm sure the vast majority here would agree their systems get plenty loud enough right now.

 

 

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

2 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

HDR video is all about brightness or "nits".  HDR video is only possible now because of how bright modern TVs get.

 

There are no equivalent Sound Pressure Level advances in audio to hang this "HDR Audio" concept upon.  I'm sure the vast majority here would agree their systems get plenty loud enough right now.

 

 

 

Where do you get this information? it isn’t correct. 
 

Look at the dynamic range database. Over time, recordings got squashed. It would be great to have unsquashed recordings and display an HDR logo on those. 

[Samuel T Cogley]

10 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Where do you get this information? it isn’t correct. 
 

Look at the dynamic range database. Over time, recordings got squashed. It would be great to have unsquashed recordings and display an HDR logo on those. 

 

So this bid for "HDR audio" is a ruse to fool the record labels into re-releasing recordings that are victims of the Loudness Wars?  The label's answer to "hi rez" is MQA, but I'm sure they'll get this one right.  😆

[Mayfair]

1 hour ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Where do you get this information? it isn’t correct. 
 

Look at the dynamic range database. Over time, recordings got squashed. It would be great to have unsquashed recordings and display an HDR logo on those. 

Indeed.  Here's the dynamic range database entry for the pre-loudness war (1986) re-issue of two 60s era pop albums by The Supremes: Where Did Our Love Go? (originally released in 1964) /I Hear A Symphony (originally released in 1966).   The minimum DR is 9 dB, the maximum is 14 dB.  "Come See About Me" has a dynamic range of 12 dB.  

 

 

https://dr.loudness-war.info/album/view/133974

 

 

[Rexp]

2 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Where do you get this information? it isn’t correct. 
 

Look at the dynamic range database. Over time, recordings got squashed. It would be great to have unsquashed recordings and display an HDR logo on those. 

 

Whats the DR rating for this recording? It has its levels pushed up to zero db. 

 

https://brio.orastream.com/widget?shareId=60821e5681764c39d1336641&theme=dark

 

[Iving]

4 hours ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

It would be great to have unsquashed recordings and display an HDR logo on those. 

 

Indeed

 

4 hours ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

So this bid for "HDR audio" is a ruse to fool the record labels into re-releasing recordings that are victims of the Loudness Wars?  The label's answer to "hi rez" is MQA, but I'm sure they'll get this one right.  😆

 

But a noble ruse.

 

What would the business case look like. Rough parameters. Bag of fag packet/napkin notes.

 

I'm sceptical. I'd love to be convinced otherwise.

 

And yes - how would purity be assured - prevention of "innovative" meddling with original recordings/mixes. That could be pre-requisite for the HDR stamp.

[MetalNuts]

6 hours ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

So this bid for "HDR audio" is a ruse to fool the record labels into re-releasing recordings that are victims of the Loudness Wars?  The label's answer to "hi rez" is MQA, but I'm sure they'll get this one right.  😆

 

I believe so, some will be tricked into buying HDR re-issue expecting them to be better because of the label said High Dynamic Range just like MQA which communicated to people as Master Quality Audio. 

 

I think it will work to the best interest of the record companies who can start planning a series of reissue, HDR 5, then HDR 10, and then HDR 15...  May be the equipment manufacturers will come up with the idea of their machines will have different colors of LED showing and verifying the HDR grading.😅

[The Computer Audiophile]

8 hours ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

So this bid for "HDR audio" is a ruse to fool the record labels into re-releasing recordings that are victims of the Loudness Wars?  The label's answer to "hi rez" is MQA, but I'm sure they'll get this one right.  😆

What are you talking about?

[firedog]

10 hours ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

What do you suppose was the dynamic range of the typical pop 78?  Or Phil Spector's entire career output?  Pop has pretty much always been compressed.

 

I understand the notion of "HDR Audio" being some way to bring the Loudness Wars to heel, but let's call it that, and not try to compare it to HDR video.  The analogy fails on so many levels.

Not accurate. Till the 90's pop was compressed. But not the same way. Either it was done on specific instruments or for certain effects. In the 90's it changed to: "master the song entirely (including whatever compression and effects)and then add additional global compression to the entire track - just to make it loud. And more and more compression was added. That's how the term loudness wars came about. There's a reason it didn't exist earlier.

When you look at music releases in the DR database, there are lots of examples where you see how the finished product became progressively louder, or simply made a big jump in loudness at a certain point in the chain of remasterings.

 

[Samuel T Cogley]

1 hour ago, firedog said:

Not accurate. Till the 90's pop was compressed. But not the same way. Either it was done on specific instruments or for certain effects. In the 90's it changed to: "master the song entirely (including whatever compression and effects)and then add additional global compression to the entire track - just to make it loud. And more and more compression was added. That's how the term loudness wars came about. There's a reason it didn't exist earlier.

When you look at music releases in the DR database, there are lots of examples where you see how the finished product became progressively louder, or simply made a big jump in loudness at a certain point in the chain of remasterings.

 

 

So Phil Spector's "Wall Of Sound" had nothing to do with compression?

 

 

[firedog]

11 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

So Phil Spector's "Wall Of Sound" had nothing to do with compression?

 

 

Read my post again. That's not what I said.

And btw, looked up some old Spector productions, in old masterigs: none have the low DR ratings of post 90's recordings, which was exactly my point.

I have a Spector "girl groups" compilation from 1971 that has a DR of 12. That's double or even triple the DR of some modern releases. And it's not because the music itself had some incredible dynamic range like classical music often does. It's because that extra post mastering added compression wasn't tacked on.

[Samuel T Cogley]

3 minutes ago, firedog said:

Read my post again. That's not what I said.

And btw, looked up some old Spector productions, in old masterigs: none have the low DR ratings of post 90's recordings, which was exactly my point.

I have a Spector "girl groups" compilation from 1971 that has a DR of 12. That's double or even triple the DR of some modern releases. And it's not because the music itself had some incredible dynamic range like classical music often does. It's because that extra post mastering added compression wasn't tacked on.

 

Now you've proven my point: a "DR of 12" is not "High Dynamic Range".  We're talking pop music here.  It's misleading or even disingenuous to suggest that restoring recordings to their pre-Loudness-Wars levels result in something that's "High Dynamic Range".

 

I would like all victims of the Loudness Wars restored to their past glory.  Californication is drenched in contemporaneous pop production values, including a vanishingly small dynamic range.  I think @The Computer Audiophile would be better served creating a Kickstarter campaign to hire Rubellan Remasters to remaster the title rather than this misleading concept that bestows a "High Dynamic Range" moniker to pop music.

 

 

[AudioDoctor]

@Samuel T Cogley I think you're massively over estimating the reach of Chris's idea. This is just us talking.

 

Who wouldn't want an HDR version of Oops I Did It Again???

[Summit]

On 5/21/2021 at 2:56 AM, sphinxsix said:

Good idea, was thinking about it some time ago!

 

Yes you sure did. 

 

 

[Summit]

27 minutes ago, Samuel T Cogley said:

 

Now you've proven my point: a "DR of 12" is not "High Dynamic Range".  We're talking pop music here.  It's misleading or even disingenuous to suggest that restoring recordings to their pre-Loudness-Wars levels result in something that's "High Dynamic Range".

 

I would like all victims of the Loudness Wars restored to their past glory.  Californication is drenched in contemporaneous pop production values, including a vanishingly small dynamic range.  I think @The Computer Audiophile would be better served creating a Kickstarter campaign to hire Rubellan Remasters to remaster the title rather than this misleading concept that bestows a "High Dynamic Range" moniker to pop music.

 

 

 

DR of 12 is "High Dynamic Range" for pop music.

[Samuel T Cogley]

6 minutes ago, Summit said:

 

DR of 12 is "High Dynamic Range" for pop music.

 

And fast food might be gourmet fare for some.

[The Computer Audiophile]

25 minutes ago, AudioDoctor said:

@Samuel T Cogley I think you're massively over estimating the reach of Chris's idea. This is just us talking.

 

Yes!!!!!!