Yeah - there've been several studies with the loudness findings for some time. I don't mind loud (obviously) - it depends on the music. Pop music has generally sucked since I was 19, I think.

Oh - and that kitten thing, I thought that happened when you played a Nickelback song...or used an ellipsis... gratuitously...

I am the ellipsis king...I don't think I've ever made a post here w/o one. :-|

Crazy talk…

Official or not.... people who are perceived as "experts", claim to be "experts" - or those who conduct AI studies which come to particular conclusions about music are actually proving very little. Experts are only experts until a new expert comes along and proves them wrong. These kind of studies are entertaining - but they're still utter hogwash. Lets see them do an algorithm on the finest paintings in history.... afterall.... it's just boring splodges of paint in the same old colours that have been around for hundreds of years.... and talent has nothing to do with the outcome. Should be dead easy for them.

Here's another related article.
Has image overtaken music?

It's all about selling something and controlling what's being spoon-fed to the public. Sex sells (for example) and what better mechanism is there to put "products" on display for an impressionable target market. Talent is both stifled and compromised because of a minority of individuals who control the output and presentation. They're only intersted in exploiting a situation for profit.

I think many of us are aware of the "loudness war" and as a disciple of Bob Katz (who is quoted in the Engadget article), I have not been bashful about posting the below video in various Kompoz forums to address questions and comments on loudness.

For those not familiar with Katz, he is widely recognized as one of the world's preeminent mastering engineers.

Katz states, "the average level of the compact disc went up 20db in the last 20 years". When you think about it, that's pretty insane.

This is really crucial information, not only for those of us that master, but also for musicians here in K-town who are comparing the "loudness" of their own mastered tracks to contemporary radio/club music.

It's very simple - loudness compromises musical dynamics. Dynamics are what make a song interesting and create emotional flow.

As far as "pop" songs becoming more bland and homogenous over the years...well, "pop", by nature is homogenous, using the same chord progressions, instruments, and verse/chorus design. I believe it's a result of most pop songs being written on guitar/piano by songwriters of limited musical skill and training. That's not a criticism, just a difference from composers/songwriters that precede the 50 year observational window of the study.

My mastering hero, Jim.

Material with a narrow peak-to-average level reading is harder to listen to at a lower level than material with plenty of dynamics played back at a higher level. That's just a fact. Listening fatigue sets in quicker as the dynamic range decreases. If you want your material to sound both dynamic and loud, don't over compress in the mix and just turn up the volume when playing back. It'll sound great. YOU have to take charge of the volume control.

100% agree, Rab. Squashing dynamics in the mastering stage to achieve "loudness" is an ear killer.

There is a reason that AC/DCs 'Back in Black' stands the test of time at very high volume...it was mastered at low levels with lots of dynamic range. All you have to do is twist the volume knob.

Yeah, I don't get all this fascination with louder is better. Louder is, well, just louder! I don't like to use much compression when I mix. Only what's necessary to achieve the right sonic texture for the part. Both Rab and Jim know I try to get my mixes to -6db and let the mastering guys (them!) worry about the loudness.

I notice a lot of "sameness" in dynamic range is most modern pop music. Not that I don't like a lot of current songs...there I many I do like...as SONGS...but still am critical of how they were mixed.