Have the "Loudness War" and Phil Spector's "Wall Of Sound" the same goal of producing loud records?

Have the "Loudness War" and Phil Spector's "Wall Of Sound" the same goal of producing loud records?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=i1PAw3PqkqE&t=151s
youtube.com/watch?v=LK6uXwzJrgY
youtube.com/watch?v=XYRAmSLHnd8
youtube.com/watch?v=N2Ak9-Bdiz8
youtube.com/watch?v=pZl3GjkFzfY
youtube.com/watch?v=JxXMqBydynM
youtube.com/watch?v=vdcZgZvLmX4
youtube.com/watch?v=5jyR-6IbGvI
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wall_of_Sound
youtube.com/watch?v=bVFV-PAw5t4
youtube.com/watch?v=W2X0Gf9jfz8
youtube.com/watch?v=DfM6dl_yt10
youtube.com/watch?v=zRXuAhvY4xM
youtube.com/watch?v=TJAfLE39ZZ8
youtube.com/user/reichardtaj
youtube.com/watch?v=p4RBHCsLLI8
youtube.com/watch?v=sBxQR1lcbSo
dropbox.com/sh/44c6dmldj8dngc4/AAD1Lhi6D9nGEKEPVeqEz2gza?dl=0
dr.loudness-war.info/
dr.loudness-war.info/downloads/foo_dynamic_range_1.1.1.zip
youtube.com/watch?v=--WTudU0vyc
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

...

I think Spector just wanted a symphonic sound

>implying the wall of sound was about making loud records
You have a lot to learn.

They're completely different types of "loud" though, and I think that's a very important distinction

Wall of sound isn't necessarily loud, it was developed because mixing a mono recording without it sounding weak and tinny is difficult without layering the instruments. The fact that the approa h translated well to stereo recording and was used for a lot of dense noisy recordings doesn't mean that their mastering has to be loud.
youtube.com/watch?v=i1PAw3PqkqE&t=151s for example is very "wall of sound" but isn't grating or "loud", even when you listen to it at a higher volume.
Loudness war focuses on optimizing how something will hold up when being blasted through phone speakers or blown-out club PAs, where all that matters is the noise being heard.

They have nothing to do with each other, are you retarded? Read a damn book.

Recommend me, i will love to read it.

phil's sound was more about density in an era where not much was being done with the primitive equiptment, relatively speaking. apples and oranges to compare the loudness war with phil spector, really.

phil also had his own musical philosophies, such as his obsession with richard wagner's grandiose and roaring sound in his operas. operatic pop music was really spector's goal, and i think he achieved it quite well.

youtube.com/watch?v=LK6uXwzJrgY
youtube.com/watch?v=XYRAmSLHnd8
youtube.com/watch?v=N2Ak9-Bdiz8
youtube.com/watch?v=pZl3GjkFzfY

compare these songs (all produced by phil spector) to an average song made a victim by the loudness war and you'll immediately see the difference.

other examples of the spector sound not produced by phil include (but are not limited to):
youtube.com/watch?v=JxXMqBydynM
youtube.com/watch?v=vdcZgZvLmX4
youtube.com/watch?v=5jyR-6IbGvI

if you listen very closely to a typical song with "wall of sound" technology, you can often hear a perpetual "hum" in the middle of the recording. that's essentially the "wall" in question, and you can't hear it in music often incorrectly attributed to the spector sound (such as pretty much all shoegaze and noise music). the "hum" is produced naturally when all the ingredients of the "wall of sound" are correctly put into action.

All the videos you linked aren't available.

all in all, the spector sound was more about echo, reverb and layering than anything else.

move to a better country
or just take the video titles and pop them into youtube

This is incredibly interesting.
Please tell us more about this or other similar composing techniques.

Why the fuck haven't you killed yourself yet?

why hasn't anyone killed themselves yet

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wall_of_Sound

>Wilson considers Pet Sounds to be a concept album centered around interpretations of Phil Spector's recording methods.
Is this why Pet Sounds and Phil Spector have the same initials?

yes apparently

also if you're going to listen to phil spector in mono then i highly, highly recommend listening to pet sounds in mono. totally different experience than listening to stereo reproductions.

Totally different..

Loudness war would make wall of sound sound like absolute shit. They are totally different

If only you put this much thought and attention into things that actually mattered

like waifus and braap posting?

what makes you think i don't
pointless comment

>people are not allowed to have hobbies

The very second you stop taking Sup Forums this seriously, your life will improve. I guarantee it.

wtf no are you retarded?

No

Phil was trying to make lush thick recordings not have something made loud with little to no dynamics. Though originally it was to cater to radio listeners.

The human ear tends to enjoy music when its turned up louder and back around the late 90s/early 2000s this became the trend to make music more appealing on radio. The downside as you know is the louder it gets pushed through a limiter during mastering the less dynamics it has. Death magnetic is probably the best example or even Imagine dragon's garbage music

Thankfully we are starting to move away from the need to have super loud over compressed songs now that streaming services like spotify have built in algorithms to play music at similar volumes

More examples of the Wall of Sound

youtube.com/watch?v=bVFV-PAw5t4
youtube.com/watch?v=W2X0Gf9jfz8
youtube.com/watch?v=DfM6dl_yt10

HOOKTUBE RETARD

you consistently show it

y-you too

>Thankfully we are starting to move away from the need to have super loud over compressed songs
You sure about this? Post some examples of recent top 40.


also maybe you know about stero recordings during the 60s. they sound annoying in headphones. was this just a gimmick or was it something bands actually wanted?
something like Cream's Wheels of Fire, for example with bass guitar hard left exclusively.

>you consistently show it
that is not an argument

Not an argument

What are some recent songs that employ this WOS philosophy, but are produced with modern equipment and techniques?

youtube.com/watch?v=zRXuAhvY4xM
youtube.com/watch?v=TJAfLE39ZZ8 (maybe)

it's inherently a vintage sound and not a lot of people like that, so it isn't used as often as i thought it was gonna be. with that said you're better off looking into the past for the wall of sound.

youtube.com/user/reichardtaj

also this guy's youtube channel is fucking loaded with 60s spector/wilson pastiches, most being recorded in the same studio as phil and brian (gold star studios, now defunct)
just search for "wall of sound" and enjoy.

also maybe you know about stero recordings during the 60s. they sound annoying in headphones. was this just a gimmick or was it something bands actually wanted?
something like Cream's Wheels of Fire, for example with bass guitar hard left exclusively.

There's something very addictive about this specific sound. I found something new to enjoy every time.

very informative, thank you for sharing.

operatic grandeur is/was the logical conclusion to top 40 pop music, honestly. pop music today is fucking terrible. i think the last time i enjoyed a hit song on the radio/charts was like 2010.

personally i think spector's sound should come back to the charts, but again, it's inherently a vintage sound that pretty much everybody and their grandmother (literally) knows even if they aren't immediately aware of it, and tastes have vastly changed over the years, for better and worse.

>was this just a gimmick
yes; stereo was new technology at the time and they didn't know what they were doing yet which explains why you have records that were originally mixed in mono sounding like complete panned-out shit in stereo (i call it fake stereo tho)
when in doubt, stick to mono for 60s recordings

Thank you, but I didn't mean music that has the "Phil Spector" sound. Just that it's made with the same philosophy of the wall of sound (like layered instruments, all frequencies used, operatic sound, etc), but with a more modern sound.

none of the videos you linked are available*

fuck me...

i too am part of the national grammar socialist workers party

ah man, we'd be here all day. look into shoegaze i suppose. a place to bury strangers? suffocate for fuck sake is great too.

HANL?

Will check them out, thank you.

?

Have a Nice Life, the band

youtube.com/watch?v=p4RBHCsLLI8
youtube.com/watch?v=sBxQR1lcbSo

wouldn't say "operatic" but they're very dramatic for sure.

Ah, thank you.

Is the harsh clipping intentional or it's just a shitty YT version?

nah they were that shit at producing and they lost the masters in a hard drive crash

The producer lost the fucking masters so the only thing that exists for half the album are 128kbps exports.
not kidding.

Why did they have 128kbps exports anyway?
Were they sharing them on floppies?
Why not export them at least in 320?

Didn't they initially release them on CD or Vinyl or whatever?
Why not just work off of those releases? Assuming this is a remaster/rerelease we're talking about of course.

All of those had the shit exports.
Dan and Tim couldn't back shit up and now EVERYONE has to suffer / claim its part of the "lo-fi experience (tm)"
blegh

In a way, Spector's music was also processed and murky, but it also had the goal of creating a ton of underlying texture and feeling.
Loudness wars mastering just makes things undefined, harsh and shitty without any particular artistic goal in mind other than "people being able to rupture their eardrums listening to this on iPhone headphones"

>You sure about this? Post some examples of recent top 40.
Things haven't gotten 'good' but there's been a general relaxing, most artists' latest albums aren't as loud as their previous.
>Beyonce
S/T(DR6) - > Lemonade (DR7)
>Bruno Mars
Unorthodox Jukebox (DR5) -> 24K Magic (DR7)
>Daft Punk
Human After All (DR6) -> RAM (DR8)
>Childish Gambino
Because The Internet (DR6) -> Awaken, My Love! (DR9)
>Chance the Rapper
Acid Rap (DR7) -> Coloring Book (DR11)
>Lady Gaga
ARTPOP (DR5) -> Joanne (DR7)
>Eminem
The Marshall Mathers LP 2 (DR5) -> Revival (DR7)
>Tyler, the Creator
Cherry Bomb (DR3) -> SFFB (DR6)
>Frank Ocean
Channel Orange (DR7) -> Blonde (DR9)

And outside of pop there's been bigger shifts
>Mac Demarco
Another One (DR7) -> This Old Dog (DR9)
>John Maus
Pittiless Censors (DR5) -> Screen Memories (DR9)
>Leonard Cohen
Popular Problems (DR9) -> You Want it Darker (DR13)
And the WTF moment
>Avenged Sevenfold
DR5s&6s (for early 00s albums) -> The Stage (DR12)

There's still a lot of overly compressed music out there but a positive trend is emerging. And the days of overly boosted remasters of older albums are practically done, with rare exceptions they're generally at a reasonable level now. Even Weird Al of all people had his catalog remastered and Straight Outta Lynwood went from DR6 to DR11

What does DR* mean?
I assume it stands for Dynamic Range, but what are those numbers?
Are they your subjective way of representing it or there's an objective way to measure it?

dropbox.com/sh/44c6dmldj8dngc4/AAD1Lhi6D9nGEKEPVeqEz2gza?dl=0

Does this song have a high dynamic range?
Obviously the drop has very little of it, but the intro is rather quiet, so would it have a low or high value, overall?

I appreciate you user

It's from the TT Dynamic Range meter, it's a Foobar plugin that analyzes the dynamic range in decibels (that's what the numbers mean, how much DR in dBs). It's an objective measurement, though there's flaws in its methodology when trying to apply it to analog sources like vinyl due to digitally limited waveforms being changed through the many steps of playback process and appear less bricked (though if the vinyl and CD are different enough there's a point at which you can comfortably assume they are different masters).
Those numbers come from the database:
dr.loudness-war.info/
Literally scores DR0, Merzbow territory. It's because the vast majority of the song is solid clipping

Neat, thank you.

>TT Dynamic Range meter
I installed it and when I tried to run it it told me:
>This foobar2000 component has an expiration date set to 1 September 2011.

This one works for me
dr.loudness-war.info/downloads/foo_dynamic_range_1.1.1.zip

This worked thank you.

Informative

Indeed.

Producing loud records, no. Ruining the recording, yes.

>Literally scores DR0, Merzbow territory
Is this good or bad?

I wish I was successful too despite being totally incompetent.

wtf I just listened to Walking in the Rain and it actually sounds great. very dense and orchestral

true. it should also be mentioned that the shit phil spector was doing in the studio in 1963 was totally unprecedented. you're not going to find a pop tune released beforehand that sounds remotely like it; "music production" wasn't taken very seriously at all prior to the 1960s.

youtube.com/watch?v=--WTudU0vyc

this is arguably the single best expression of the "Wall of Sound" that exists. mindblowing. brian wilson is and was obsessed with this song for very good reason.

nothing "actually" matters

The wall of sound is about layering not compression. In a sense it is a precursor of how synthesis is used. Its also quite normal to layer instruments in studio recordings these days for size and weight, the Beatles did all the time as well (e.g., Penny Lane piano). Phil and Brian just made more exotic layers and Phil put a lot of reverb on them as glue.

Compression itself is the signature sound of rock and roll but loudness is about limiting which isn't quite the same thing although they are obviously very closely related.