|
|
|
|
|
|
by polshaw
5353 days ago
|
|
|
I paraphrased. It was done for brevity. Did i misrepresent the intent of your post? I do not need to google it, becauase i can hear it myself. Like i say, not subtle. I haven't got vinyls/rips of everything, but i can assure you it is not uncommon. Must i provide examples? Destructive 'loudening' of music is not useful with vinyl music (IE. compressing the waveform 'up' does not make for a louder output, as what happens with the digital loudness wars-- thus is 'pointless'), because there is no 'reference point' (that is, you can't have a waveform offset, because the needle is already moving wherever to meet the waveform), you can only increase/decrease the dynamic range. Because of a greater difference in amplitude, it is easier to cut a record with a larger dynamic range. |
|
|
Try doing an ABX comparison of whatever it is you think you can hear, and then talk to me.
> Must i provide examples?
Prove it to yourself first with a representative sampling of vinyl records and a blind waveform analysis.
> Destructive 'loudening' of music is not useful with vinyl music
That's true in theory. It's also true that destructive loudening of music is not useful with digital music, but they still do it. In reality, most vinyl masters are the same mastering plus an additional pass through a multi-band limiter. This is not a guess, by the way.