Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Vinyl succumbs to Loudness War: more than just collateral damage (2025)

magicvinyldigital.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 270 posts

Re: Vinyl succumbs to Loudness War: more than just collateral damage (2025)

#241

Post by wk_end »

breezybottom wrote: post #192
wk_end wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I dunno if you’ve listened to these records in question but it’s very, very obviously for artistic effect. They’ve discussed it in interviews and stuff. Low wasn’t looking to get radio play with fractured collages of distorted noise. The “vinyl can’t reliably reproduce these waveforms” explanation someone else suggested makes the most sense.

Artists usually aren't involved at the mastering stage, at that point the music is already recorded and mixed.

That's just not true. I just had my band's album mastered; we weren't in the room or anything but the mastering engineer asked us directly questions about how we wanted the record to sound and we got final approval on it.

Re: Vinyl succumbs to Loudness War: more than just collateral damage (2025)

#242

Post by soulofmischief »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #239
soulofmischief wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"deciding not to give someone a gift out of absolutely nowhere" as a matter of course , as a guiding philosophical principle , is categorically putting money before friends.

That's reading way too much into the earlier posts.

I'd say I'm reading into them the regular amount. Your entire premise is that you wouldn't just hand money to a friend for no reason. I challenged this mentality and whether or not such a friendship is ideal, offering a perspective into why there are more important things in life than money.

If this isn't your intent, you should reflect on how you've presented your argument.

Re: Vinyl succumbs to Loudness War: more than just collateral damage (2025)

#243

Post by shmageggy »

esikich wrote: post #225
shmageggy wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, but you don’t know what you’re talking about. Many releases get mastered separately for digital and for vinyl, and one or both of them often does “change much”. Usually the brickwall limiting (among other things) on the digital master.

I absolutely know what I'm talking about and have released multiple records. I don't think you know what mastering is and how subtle it is. You're thinking of a separate mix which, yes, does sound quite different.

Just because you chose to have subtle mastering applied doesn’t mean that the commercial records we’re discussing have done the same, particularly for their digital releases, which is why they sound different. If you listen to vinyl versus digital releases of certain albums, it is obvious. Stop spreading misinformation.

Re: Vinyl succumbs to Loudness War: more than just collateral damage (2025)

#244

Post by spider-mario »

emsign wrote: post #69
maqp wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

PSA: https://dr.loudness-war.info/ is a great place to look for info on dynamic range of releases, and also, a great place to find new music with excellent dynamic range.

There are usefull software components (=extensions) for the foobar2000 music player (sadly Windows only player) that can analyze the dynamic range and loudness according to EBU standards. foo_dr_meter: A simple Dynamic Range meter based on DR estimation formula published by https://dr.loudness-war.info/ foo_truepeak: ITU-R BS.1770-5 compliant True Peak scanner. ReplayGain is part of the core components of foobar2000,…

Small correction: the formula itself was published by the Pleasurize Music Foundation (https://web.archive.org/web/20131206121248/http://www.dynami... ), not by loudness-war.info (which publishes only the results of the formula on various releases).

There are other tools that can compute it, including MAAT DROffline MkII (proprietary), as well as a couple open-source, Python-based tools (DR14 T.meter, DR Check), or https://github.com/sboukortt/speedr in C++.

Re: Vinyl succumbs to Loudness War: more than just collateral damage (2025)

#245

Post by NikolaNovak »

Jach wrote: post #156
NikolaNovak wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thread started with calling those who buy a record at 1300, and I quote, insane. Argument was made that keeping a 1300 record is equally insane or not. That is the discussion here. It started about whether 1300 was sane or not. It was not turned into that discussion by people who hussle. It is a massive massive massive privilege of us here to even ponder keeping a record we bought for 2 which could be sold for 13…

You are assuming symmetries where there are none. I want a thing, discover it's readily available for $1300, that seems insane, so I don't buy it. By chance I acquire the thing from a source that was unaware of its fair market value for $2, amazing deal. I have the thing without having to pay an insane price, I am happy. Now here comes an insane person who wants it enough to offer me $1300. Both parties must benefit…

>> You are assuming symmetries where there are none

That's the Crux of the conversation here, with two differing perspectives. I'm not assuming it, I'm putting my perspective forward. and asking either clear disproof or acknowledgement of two perspectives.

My perspective to be clear :

If I buy a thing for $2, somebody offers me $1,300 for it, and it is not worth $1,300 to me, I will likely sell it; or I will acknowledge that it's clearly worth 1,300 to me and not call others who buy it for 1,300 insane :).

(This is the opposite of claiming there is no sentimental value. This is acknowledging that somethings absolutely have sentimental value to me and others are more utility based).

Re: Vinyl succumbs to Loudness War: more than just collateral damage (2025)

#246

Post by throw0101a »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #129
throw0101a wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Buy for $x, have and not sell for $x, same mathematically. But oh boy will people get instantly riled up emotionally :). Price and value are not the same. The logic of your friend was basically putting a price on how "special" (or not) he saw your relationship versus some rando-buyer online. That is why people (close to you) get riled up emotionally: they're being treated in a way no different than a complete stran…

If you ask your friend for $100 for no particular reason, just because you want $100, that's an annoying request and "no" is a reasonable response. It's not putting a price on your relationship. It's technically the same answer they'd give a stranger, but that doesn't mean you're being treated like a stranger. (I do think a slight discount often makes sense just because a friend is probably quicker and easier to deal…

> If you ask your friend for $100 for no particular reason, just because you want $100, that's an annoying request and "no" is a reasonable response.

If a stranger walks up to you and asks for $100, you're unlikely to give it to him. If a friend does, there's a more likely probability that you will consider the request.

And depending on the relationship, you may expect for the money to be paid back (eventually), or you may not (considering it a gift). (Often the advice is to consider "loans" to family and friends as gifts in practice, as otherwise the expectation of repayment may sour the relationship.)

Re: Vinyl succumbs to Loudness War: more than just collateral damage (2025)

#247

Post by throw0101a »

NikolaNovak wrote: post #135
Dylan16807 wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you ask your friend for $100 for no particular reason, just because you want $100, that's an annoying request and "no" is a reasonable response. It's not putting a price on your relationship. It's technically the same answer they'd give a stranger, but that doesn't mean you're being treated like a stranger. (I do think a slight discount often makes sense just because a friend is probably quicker and easier to deal…

That's the thing. This was a $3000 camera. A 20% friends discount is 600. We've been best friends for two decades, but most days he doesn't give me $600 on cash. Don't get me wrong, we don't keep track who paid for dinner or cinema ticket or whatever. But there IS a threshold at which it really becomes a random cash gift. Yes dealing with friends is nicer than strangers - but also when you're selling stuff, sometimes…

> But there IS a threshold at which it really becomes a random cash gift.

Not wrong, but it is also possible that the $600 'cash equivalent' discount would be considered a birthday or Christmas present, or a form of 'repayment' for the time he helped you out with the Thing with the Guy in the Place. (“I'd never been to Belize.”)

Re: Vinyl succumbs to Loudness War: more than just collateral damage (2025)

#248

Post by legacynl »

everdrive wrote: post #7

It's a weird social psychology quirk. For whatever reason, the entire music industry has been captured by the delusion that mixing all the sounds louder is good. No one likes it, except for those guys. For reasons I'll never understand, the movie industry has been captured by the opposite delusion; they're going to pump dynamic range so high that you can only understand about half the dialogue in the movie. And of co…

You're false. Research has shown that if people like sound A, they will like it even better when you play sound A louder.

The change in mixing and mastering can be largely explained by people changing the way they consume it. Eg. people watch more movies on netflix than in a cinema. People used to sit in a room with a record player, now they listen in their car or headphones while doing other stuff.

Re: Vinyl succumbs to Loudness War: more than just collateral damage (2025)

#249

Post by [deleted] »

throw0101a wrote: post #247
NikolaNovak wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the thing. This was a $3000 camera. A 20% friends discount is 600. We've been best friends for two decades, but most days he doesn't give me $600 on cash. Don't get me wrong, we don't keep track who paid for dinner or cinema ticket or whatever. But there IS a threshold at which it really becomes a random cash gift. Yes dealing with friends is nicer than strangers - but also when you're selling stuff, sometimes…

> But there IS a threshold at which it really becomes a random cash gift. Not wrong, but it is also possible that the $600 'cash equivalent' discount would be considered a birthday or Christmas present, or a form of 'repayment' for the time he helped you out with the Thing with the Guy in the Place. (“I'd never been to Belize.”)

[deleted]

Re: Vinyl succumbs to Loudness War: more than just collateral damage (2025)

#250

Post by Dylan16807 »

throw0101a wrote: post #246
Dylan16807 wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you ask your friend for $100 for no particular reason, just because you want $100, that's an annoying request and "no" is a reasonable response. It's not putting a price on your relationship. It's technically the same answer they'd give a stranger, but that doesn't mean you're being treated like a stranger. (I do think a slight discount often makes sense just because a friend is probably quicker and easier to deal…

> If you ask your friend for $100 for no particular reason, just because you want $100, that's an annoying request and "no" is a reasonable response. If a stranger walks up to you and asks for $100, you're unlikely to give it to him. If a friend does, there's a more likely probability that you will consider the request. And depending on the relationship, you may expect for the money to be paid back (eventually), or y…

Sure you'll consider it. The point is you could say yes or no without being a bad friend if their reason for the money is "friendship I guess? *shrug*".

I don't know why so many people are acting like I said a "no" is the only acceptable answer.

Post reply on HN