Loudness War Project

[notsocoolguy]

Thanks everyone for all your replys! It's been a huge help!! But keep 'em coming! You can't have too many opinions!!

 

[nononsense!]

I am an amateur composing making music mixing and mastering now for 23 years. I once wrote this letter to Bob Katz. Never had an answer on it, I send it about 5 times.

Date: 30 augustus 2006

To: Bob Katz

Sender:
Nononsense

The way you are writing a book is not a good thing, it is too complicated for most people.
You are probably thinking that you never had any complaints. But a whole lot of people
don't dare to complain, especially Americans, that's why there are so many homeless and poor
in your country.

I assume that a lot of your readers are professionals but also hobbyists like me, hobbyist have
the right to know things and have a nice hobby without any thinking to do, so they can enjoy there
freetime and concentrate on the music. You are not providing the information in the right way.

I have more than once been confronted with people like you. What do I think about you?
You are a person that links 'self value' to behaviour of 'doing complicated'.
So I think you are a person with an inferiority complex that tries to have self-esteem
by doing complicated. You like persons to come to you so they can ask questions that you
already have answered for a thousand times, you like the attention. You don't see the purpose
anymore of writing a book or answering the questions you only feel the appreciation, you
think you are important. So the purpose of solving problems is no longer the issue, it is the
attention the appreciation that you get that fills your fantasylife.

I also think that it has to do a lot with 'making money'. You proudly send people to the links
where people can buy your book, while the information isn't there, at least not in a straightforward
way. You also send people to the meters that are sold by your website. And of course you send
people to the many articles so that they stay on your website so they will buy your k-system.

A lot of beginners, hobbyists but also professionals are using compressors and limiters too
much (for my opinion I am not using it too much). That also has a lot to do with the low
opinion they have of themselves. I think Bob Katz is one of the persons responsible for that.
Bob Katz should give more psychological information about the people in the studio's, they
have a low opinion of themselves so they try to filter that out by raising the volume, so they
can stand up against the big studio's. But Bob Katz himself has a low opinion of himself and
needs attention because he links 'self value' to behaviour of 'doing complicated'.

What is the result of the inferiority complex of Bob Katz? The result is as follows.

Step 1
People like Bob Katz with an inferiority complex are making books and manuals for hobbyists
and professionals over 'how loud to record and playback and treat compressor/limiters in studio's'.
But the information is described difficult in a technical way and it is very hard to filter out the
information, because the purpose of the book is not providing information but making money
and feeling themselves important as a writer. The books and manuals are written by a person
with an inferiority complex that tries to have some self-esteem by doing complicated.

Step 2
Hobbyists and professionals have the need for information on how hard to record and playback
and how to use compressor/limiters. They collect all kind of information like books from Bob Katz.
Also they read information on the internet and magazines which is highly influenced by people like
Bob Katz.

Step 3
The books like from Bob Katz are too complicated and the information on the internet is too
confusing because only a few people are really understanding all of this. A whole lot of blah-blah
and only little information, so they cannot filter the information properly.

Step 4
They don't have the proper information and that feeds their insecurity and so the inferiority
complex is even more growing.

Step 5
They are really desperate and keep looking for ways to pump up the volume even more
because the competition is going harder every year. So they put the volume louder on the
tv-commercials, they put the volume louder in announcements on tv and radio and they put
the volume louder on the Top 40 noise. And the amateurs are copying this kind of behavior.


Next time you have the tv on in the background and you are irritated by a freaking loud commercial
and want to put it softer right away, you must think of the following......

You YOURSELF are responsible for the explosions on your tv!
YOU are responsible for the destruction of today's music!
YOU have an inferiority complex that keeps you giving information in a deliberate complicated
way so that nobody has straightforward information on how to treat the volumes.
YOU are part of that movement that makes money instead of giving information in a pure and simple way.
Bob Katz is one of the persons responsible for the loudness wars!


Advise
Make a new book that is much simpler, make the information freeware.

Example of the construction of the new book. (the new way of communicating)

Chapter 5: Recording levels
The best analog signal level is: +4 dBu but this has to be taken as average.
What is average.....short explanation.....

A signal begins with distorting at ...level...
A signal begins with noise problems at ...level...
The best signal levels you will find between ...level...

There is an alignment of analog with 24 bit soundcards here you see the table:
http://www.xs4all.nl/~pj090367/pdf/db_levels.pdf

The best digital signal level is: ......short explanation..........
The best signal level out of a 24 bit soundcard before getting analog is....short explanation....


It is all that simple, most people don't have to know all the arithmetic behind it.








With kind regards,
Nononsense

 

[suprstar]

For example, listening to an old Megadeth album from the mid 80's or so, I'd have the player on full blast and would actually have to boost it with the EQ to make it audible on a train. And even then I could have done with having it a little louder. Of course, I have the thing on shuffle, and the next tune is from an album post 2005, comes on before I have the chance to adjust my volume, and inevitably, I nearly end up blowing my fucking ears into my skull. Especially with what they do to metal these days.

SOOO true, I feel your pain..... In my car is where I experience that the most, since that's where I do more listening than anywhere else. I can turn the volume on modern metal up to about 18 or 19 before it starts breaking up at earsplitting spl. I made a mix cd with some 80's stuff, I had to turn it up to about 28-30 to get to that same spl/distortion point.. If I left it at 28 and Lamb of God or something 'loud' started, I swear I think all my speakers would blow simultaneously..

I will also add that some of that 80's stuff sounds better than ANY of the new brick-metal production-wise. I have actually trained myself over the years to turn the deck WAY down in between songs, specifically to defend against that. It's totally automatic and subconscious...

 

[VomitHatSteve]

I put a potential solution to all this on the table a year or two ago. Unfortunately the table was back in the corner by the kitchen in a restaruant not often frequented by Those Who Matter in this issue :

It makes total sense to me for both sides of The Wars to agree not on a content standard, but on a petition to the playback hardware manufacturers to bring back a modern version of the old AGC (Automatic Gain Control) circuit in the playback devices. These used to be fairly common on portable AM/FM radios and tape players 30-40 years ago.

On a basic level, AGC was little more than a hard limiter, sometimes with gain boost, sometimes not, depending upon the circuit design. IOW, it performed on the playback end what producers and engineers are now doing on the production end with the Volume Wars.

Granted, the old AGC circuits were cheap, low quality curcuits, but with today's digital technology they could pretty easily be made just as cheap or cheaper, but quite higher in quality.

The modern AGC would be switchable On/Off by the user (as many of them were back then too), and the better quality ones might even include a simple gain control knob. The idea is that the producers would be free to make the music as they see fit, and they can give the listener the choice of either listening to the full dynamics (AGC off) or everything equally loud (AGC on).

The new AGC could even include an "Auto/Manual" switch setting. "Manual" means that the user/listener can manually decide whether the AGC is on or off at any given time as described above. When it is switched to "Auto", however, the AGC circuit would read a single info bit embedded in the P Code of the disc or track that the mastering engineer could encode to automatically instruct the circuit to turn on or off based upon the desire/recommendation of the label/producer/artist.

Everybody would win IMHO under this scheme: the listener would win in that they could listen to what they want how they want, the dynamics advocates would still be able to produce their music The Way God Intended It, the loudness advocates would be able to still offer bricks on playback to still compete on the Loudness field if they wish, and the manufacturers wold have another gadget they could use to sell new gear and to compete with (our AGC is better than your AGC).

G.

A solution that is cost-effective, gives artists/creators more flexibility, and ultimately puts control back into the end consumers hands? Blasphemy, I say!

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

A solution that is cost-effective, gives artists/creators more flexibility, and ultimately puts control back into the end consumers hands? Blasphemy, I say!

Yeah, it's one of those ideas that tends to get people assasinated. I probably should stay away from book depositories and motel balcony railings until things blow over.



G.

 

[blueroommusic]

wow no nonsense...that is a pretty harsh letter...no wonder he hasn't responded.

having met and hung out with bob several times, I will tell you that he is one hell of a nice guy and very humble. his delivery in his books can be a little over the top of most hobbyists heads at times, but he is the master so you can't really blame him.

I think you may be misguided to determine someone's psyche from a book they wrote.

btw, don't talk about poverty and laziness in the states...it makes you sound like a prick.

 

[nononsense!]

btw, don't talk about poverty and laziness in the states...it makes you sound like a prick.

And so I am a prick, see the link....
Americans have to take action now!
Have you seen the FEMA concentration camps?


http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/03/19/welcome-to-tent-city-america-style/

And yes Bob Katz has various 'problems' expecially with writing a good book and is crazy about money. Read my letter again.

Possible reaction:
Well the book sold hundred thousands of copies.

My reaction:
That is not the proof that it is a good book.
It is a deliberately complicated book because he likes to talk more and get more attention. Just like a lot of posters around here.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Mr. nonsense is looking for this:

Maybe we only have those in our country.

G.

 

[nononsense!]

Now could you tell me Mr. Deliberately Difficultus
what is wrong with doing EASY?

In serious words?

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Now could you tell me Mr. Deliberately Difficultus
what is wrong with doing EASY?

In serious words?

Seriously:

Where did you ever get the idea that some things were simply that easy? Where is it written that such things are made to be understood by anybody without any education or effort on their part?

This is called "audio engineering" and not "audio knitting" for a reason. Some questions have no single, simple, easy answers, but instead require a real understanding of what's going on in order to deterime the right answer for each different situation.

Let's look at the questions you posed in your post:

The best analog signal level is: +4 dBu but this has to be taken as average.
What is average.....short explanation.....

There is no short explanation to such a general question, at least not without bringing math into it. "Average" as used in audio measurements is based upon RMS -or quadratic mean - values. But since RMS is an algebraic term, it's impossible to define without getting heavy into math.

And by the way, when you say things such as "The best analog signal level is: +4 dBu", that is a statement based upon a more complicated truth, yes; but is such an "easy" oversimplification of that truth that it is at face value, in fact, not always true, often false, and always misleading.

This is the problem with "easy" answers to these kinds of questions; making them easy makes them inaccurate.

A signal begins with distorting at ...level...

That depends entirely upon the gear through which the signal is flowing. there is no one simple answer to that question, easy or hard.

A signal begins with noise problems at ...level...

Same answer as above.

The best signal levels you will find between ...level...

Best for what? Analog or digital? On What gear? I could cover all those variables, but it would no longer be the short answer you were looking for.

The best digital signal level is: ......short explanation..........

Somewhere between the level of the noise floor and and 0dBFS.

The best signal level out of a 24 bit soundcard before getting analog is....short explanation....

Somewhere between the level of the noise floor and and 0dBFS.

I agree that Bob Katz sometimes gets lost in the forest of numbers, and that he is not for the lighthearted or for those who are just toying with audio. But that's not what he's addressing or who his intended audience is. Complaining about his style would be like complaining that Einstein's writing on Relativity didn't give any easy answers to the lay person as to why the universe acts the way it does.

You claim to have been mixing and mastering for 23 years now. Let's see your simple answers to those questions you ask. After 23 years, certainly you should have learned quite a bit about them by now. In serious words.

G.

 

[nononsense!]

Seriously:

Where did you ever get the idea that some things were simply that easy? Where is it written that such things are made to be understood by anybody without any education or effort on their part?
G.

I didn't say it IS easy.
I am saying that the purpose is that WE WANT IT TO BE EASY. Never spoke to a person that likes it to be difficult.

I can't see the reason for having an education for making music I really don't. I want it to be as simple as possible that it comes out just like that. I don't want to study so much like I did through the years. If I knew back then how difficult it all would be, I would have been less enthousiastic about this hobby.

 

[andyhix]

Now could you tell me Mr. Deliberately Difficultus
what is wrong with doing EASY?

In serious words?

If it was all so easy, it wouldn't be half as fun. Learning and trying new stuff is half the fun of this hobby.

 

[andyhix]

...In serious words.

.

 

[nononsense!]

There is no short explanation to such a general question, at least not without bringing math into it. "Average" as used in audio measurements is based upon RMS -or quadratic mean - values. But since RMS is an algebraic term, it's impossible to define without getting heavy into math.

And by the way, when you say things such as "The best analog signal level is: +4 dBu", that is a statement based upon a more complicated truth, yes; but is such an "easy" oversimplification of that truth that it is at face value, in fact, not always true, often false, and always misleading.


G.

Well this could be very simple.....
When someone buys a piece of equipment, then in the manual it could say something like:

Here are the average values
Input level of channels - average level is:
Output level of channels - average level is:

People shouldn't have to study what the average level is in a certain circuit. Let the factory do the math, the musician doesn't need to know.


About +4 dBu being the best recording level.
Well I wouldn't know. But lately I think the best recording level is 13 dB under the clip level of the equipment.

 

[nononsense!]

This is the problem with "easy" answers to these kinds of questions; making them easy makes them inaccurate.
G.

That is a strange statement. I can say that when an answer is easy IT CAN BE ACCURATE!

So hang this above your bed:
An easy answer can be accurate.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

I didn't say it IS easy.
I am saying that the purpose is that WE WANT IT TO BE EASY. Never spoke to a person that likes it to be difficult.

I can't see the reason for having an education for making music I really don't. I want it to be as simple as possible that it comes out just like that. I don't want to study so much like I did through the years. If I knew back then how difficult it all would be, I would have been less enthousiastic about this hobby.

Sure, we'd all like everything to be easy. But the harsh reality is that is not how the world is. Some things are harder than others, and very few things are really all that easy.

Anything we really want that we really feel is worth having is worth working for. The harder we work for something, the greater the sense of acheivement we feel andthe hapier we are when we do accomplish it.

What complicates that is that some things come easier to some than they do to others. We all have our own specialties, our own things that we are naturally good at and other thngs that we are no so good at. What we are naturally good at and what we want to be good at are not always the same thing.

When I was growing up, I wanted so badly to be a star running back in American pro football. But I simply did not and do not have the speed. No amount of work or dedication on my part could solve that; that's just the way my legs and body are constructed. It was like asking a 1.5 meter tall person to be a star basketball player.

But instead of being bitter about it and pissed at the folks who were good running backs, pissed at entire countries or pissed at the world in general, I moved on and searched for other thngs I could be good at and enjoy.

The question I believe you need to ask yourself is which category do you fall into: can you be good enough at it and do you want it bad enough where you're willing to put in the effort to be good at it? Or are you simply not cut out for this type of disclipine, and perhaps better off switching to one that is better suited for you?

You have to be honest with yourself. The answer won't come easy, and it won't necessarily be easy. But when you find the RIGHT answer, easy or hard, it will be worth it.

G.

 

[nononsense!]

Quote:
A signal begins with distorting at ...level...

That depends entirely upon the gear through which the signal is flowing. there is no one simple answer to that question, easy or hard.

G.

Yes there is and the same goes for the other questions.

Example: (but I don't know if the answers are ok)

The signal of this mixer channel begins with distorting mostly at ...level...+20 dBu. But for some frequencies it starts earlier, see the overview.

A signal begins with noise problems mostly at ...level...-20 dBu but there are exceptions, see the exceptions list when you are interested in that.

The best signal levels you will find between ...level...-10 and +7 dBu. But there are exceptions, see the table of exceptions.

There is an alignment of analog with 24 bit soundcards here you see the table:
http://www.xs4all.nl/~pj090367/pdf/db_levels.pdf

The best digital signal level is: ......short explanation..........The best digital level is -14 dBu lower then the best analog level when you bought your soundcard in the European trade zone.
For people in the American tradezone it is -20 dBu under the best analog level.


It is all that simple, most people don't have to know all the arithmetic behind it.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

An easy answer can be accurate.

Sure. To say that the answer to 2+2 is 4 is an easy answer and it is 100% accurate.

But just because easy answers *can* sometimes be accurate doesn't mean they always *are* accurate. Your point about +4dBU is inaccurate when it comes to computer sound cards, when it comes to signals with extremely high crest factors, whether your're talking about average levels or peak levels, when it comes to consumer audio gear, in situations where you want to take advantage of circuit saturation, etc, and many more examples. I'm not being difficult or overly hard; I'm stating the truth of the real world.

Tell me, what is the best color? What is the temperature of the planet Earth? What is the best signal level? Should I run into that burning building to try and save that person? What do you mean by "best"? Why do I love that girl? What does average mean? Should I believe you? Which hobby is best for me? Give me an easy and accurate answer to any of those questions.

G.

 

[nononsense!]

I agree that Bob Katz sometimes gets lost in the forest of numbers, and that he is not for the lighthearted or for those who are just toying with audio. But that's not what he's addressing or who his intended audience is. Complaining about his style would be like complaining that Einstein's writing on Relativity didn't give any easy answers to the lay person as to why the universe acts the way it does.
G.

That is not the truth. Bob Katz on his websites often shows hobbyist the way and advises his books and his K-system. So he IS also there for the hobbyist, so he should be more simple.

About Einstein.
Einstein is more a commercial product. Hang this over your bed....

EINSTEIN WAS THE INVENTOR OF THE ATOMIC BOMB!!!

He was a looser anyway. He also thought it was possible to travel throught time. He always wore the exact same 1 suit according to his caretaker\assistant.

E=mc2 is more an estimation.

 

[nononsense!]

The question I believe you need to ask yourself is which category do you fall into
G.

I like the hobby anyway even when it was difficult for me, by the way it is not that difficult anymore these days. Now when the study is over it is more simple.

But it could have been more simple in the past.