Why is new/modern music so much louder?
 

I've noticed that all of the modern albums I have sound a lot louder. Sometimes so much that it makes listening to the album annoying after a while, but some others seem to do it right.

For this reason listening to an old 80's hardcore punk or thrash metal song can actually sound..not all that ''heavy''(for lack of better word) You can turn it on in the background, and it's not all that distractig to me. But than I listen to a newer album, and it's not the case. It's a lot louder, or ''heavier''

Sometimes the modern louder production makes it better to me, like, I know a feel ska/reggae albums that I like more because of the modern sound.
hey give me a certian ''feeling'' that the older sound doesn't give me.

what is it that makes some of the modern ''loud'' albums so annoying to me after listening to them for too long(even if I like the album), while others I don't mind.
Take System of a Down, Alternative metal. I like the band, but after a while the sound of the album just gets on my nerves.
System Of A Down - Cigaro #04 - YouTube (2005)
Most Nu Metal and Alternative Metal bands are like this.

But this modern Thrash Metal album has distortion guitars that don't annoy me, yet it's still as ''loud'' with the modern sound:

Sacrifice-The Ones I Condemn - YouTube (2009)

Now let's make a comparison to an old thrash metal album and a newer one.
Testament's first album from 1987:

Testament - Over The Wall - YouTube

Testament's 2012 album:

Testament - Rise Up - YouTube

Same band, newer album. They're the same type of music(although the newer once are quite groovier, since they're ususally mid tempo instead of fast). Yet, the newer one ''feels'' heavier to me. I guess it's just a lot louder. I prefer the older one in this case.

So why are modern albums so much louder? What happened there? And why am I put off by this in some modern albums, but not with others?

Are you talking volume loud? Because that's to do with better production technology available today. If you're talking louder musically, I think that's just because the market is craving heavier music, so bands like Testament is catering to them. Then again, there are just as many, if not more bands that don't use the loud approach but mix rock/metal with acoustic interludes and stuff like that.

Maybe it's the leftovers by 90s grunge.

I think you're probably talking about The Loudness War.

There's an actual wikipedia article on this? 0.o.
Definitely gonna read this..

edit: funny how it mentions metallica's Death Magnetic. Modern metallica also annoys me with it's production. Ever since the black self titled album.

I understand what you're saying here, and I've noticed this too (especially with SOAD), but it seems to me like this thread is yet another attempt to bash modern music–and I don't want to hear anymore of that fallacy of composition bull****.

This right here is basically the kind of **** I can't stand. wtf do you even mean here with this statement about the production??
The simplest explanation for why it sounds weird to you, is that you simply don't like modern Metallica...


Anyway, as far as the loudness, I don't see what the problem is, I always have soundcheck enabled anyways. I am displeased to hear that some bands artificially increase the volume of a CD at the loss of sound quality.

If that's really true, it's majorly f'd up, and I'm with you in that that needs to stop.

It is really true and it's not just some bands, it's an industry-wide phenomenon.

I'm in no way bashing modern music, there's plenty of modern music that I love, I'm 17 years old.(Even if I was older, I wouldn't limit myself to just older music, that would make no sense) But it's just that I noticed the loudness, and with some albums the loudness got on my nerves after a while, while with others it didn't. You're right, I don't like modern metallica in general(I don't hate it though, I think it's okay). But I actually like SOAD.

Yeah this is noticeable. Whenever I play an older album right after playing a newer album with the volume the same, the older one is noticeably softer.

I've also got mixed feelings about other aspects of modern production. It's sharp and clear, but at the same time it often sounds sterile. IMO the best-sounding albums (sound quality-wise) are from the early 70's. A lot of stuff I listen to from that era sound like they were recorded in a wood-panelled studio with heavy carpeting and mics muffled just right. It's got a nice, soft, warm sound which is also clear but doesn't have the tinny/lo-fi sound you hear in a lot of mid-60's and earlier music.

Even when I listen to a modern album that was recorded, say, in someone's house, it still has a bit of a sterile vibe to it. I note this is regardless of the quality of the music itself.

Here's what I'm talking about. Both these are mellow, acoustic songs. The Grizzly Bear tune is noticeably louder and clearer, which is OK in one respect, but the production on the Carole King song is very nice 'n soft and gives it more "atmosphere" IMO.

2006:
http://grooveshark.com/s/Easier/4HcWWX?src=5

1972:
http://grooveshark.com/s/Been+To+Canaan/6yHVYK?src=5

I'm sorry but the first song is a white box for me. Can you give the name?

^
I switched them to Grooveshark links.

EDIT: Also, the Grizzly Bear song was recorded in someone's house, so you can't say it's because of some fancy modern studio. The issue is either in modern recording equipment and/or in the mixing process.

Thanks. I could definitely hear that the other one was a lot louder at the same volume level, but like you said, it gives it a different type of sound. I think both have their ups and downs. I think both achieve different effects..if only they were more aware of that..

Sometimes I think the louder/clearer sound is better for stuff like heavily electric/synthesizer songs or anything you want to have a big, sort-of "epic" sound, but when you've a mellow acoustic piece the softer, warmer, fuzzier production works better. I think that Grizzly Bear song would sound a little better if they had gone through a time machine and borrowed Carole King's 1972 recording equipment. ;)

Depends what you mean by "louder". A lot of the modern mastering uses a ton of compression to squeeze every last bit of volume into the song, sacrificing dynamics in the process.

Meh. If I want to hear some kind of folk, I'm going for something from the seventies, but if I want something to completely pummel my brain into submission (as I often do), I want something so loud that I can't even think straight. Thankfully Rick Rubin's production does kind of the same thing, so Reign in Blood still sounds loud as **** even if it's from 1986. But in general, I'm perfectly happy to have an album be senselessly loud, since I'm not as interested in the specifics as I am the overall effect. So I have an affinity for albums after the early nineties.

And an affinity for threads from 2014.

It's all Rick Rubin's fault. I enjoy it when that approach is taken with mindless abrasion (Merzbow, some extreme metal and punk) as opposed to Red Hot Chili Peppers or other bands focusing more on melodies. It just whitewashes everything too much. Can you imagine what Blue would sound like with Rick Rubin as the producer? (Not that she would ever hire him.)

It's not my fault that the new poster was a spammer. Apparently I had things to say.

As other posters have noted, there is this thing called The Loudness War. It presumably started by someone wanting their song to "stand out" on the radio - most likely the record company rather than the artist. I doubt that it has a lot to do with "heavy music" such as metal, as I think it's a cross-genre phenomenon.

You could say just turn down the volume - why is it a problem? The problem is that the extra loudness is achieved by dynamic compression, i.e. the softer sounds are amplified more, the louder ones not amplified so much, losing dynamic range.

Steven Wilson is one artist who has a bit of a crusade against the loudness wars. On one of his albums he actually suggests in the liner notes to use the volume knob if you find the music too quiet or too loud.

I have four Midnight Oil albums. Two of them are recorded noticeably louder than the other two. While I don't notice any compromising of sound quality, the volume disparity is very annoying, because if I want to play all the albums together in "shuffle" mode, I find myself constantly having to turn the volume up or down as a new song starts.

no melodies available in modern music so they are making it very disresepctful to listen and honestly i love 80s and 90s music much that todays

Yeah I see zero flaws in this theory. Seriously, you're 100% correct.

Turn the vol down then

The worst decade for unnecessary loudness was the 1980's; chart-based pop/rock in particular.
Why on earth did we have such a fascination in putting those awful, in-your-face crashing snare drums on all our records?

Not sure about but last few years I noticed that become very popular genre with calm and melodic music, some of tracks sound even like lullaby. For example Lana Del Rey, Adele.

I see this thread turning into "Music Was So Much Better in the Glorious Days of Yore" thread.

More like: all the long-time members have heard the "Music Was So Much Better in the Glorious Days of Yore" **** enough times that we would rather troll this thread than dignify it with a proper response.

The Loudness Wars is a legitimate thing, but it gives sixties purists too much ammo to be a compelling rallying cry. We're more concerned with those people going away than saving music.

Today's "music" has no melody. The music from when I was a kid was something you could hum along with, like Throbbing Gristle.

A loud snare was to ensure a song would be played in a dance clubs, so people would know where the beat was, then it became a fad and every other band follow suit.

The highest volume levels of any albums I own would easily include the Ditty Bops, including or even especially the duo works at the end of their careers. It's simply a matter of recording techniques.

But why is it even a legit thing when there is a volume control? I have problems where music I find online isn't loud enough like on YouTube.

I don't understand what you are getting at about Sixties purist, everyone is a purist of some sort even Metalheads.

What about Ke$ha fans though.

I'm annoyed by the same thing about low volume, so the Loudness Wars doesn't bother ME at least, but a lot of people who listen to pre-Loudness Wars music get really bitchy about that ****, and use it as an excuse to complain about new music the same way that they would otherwise. Just like if they were going to complain that pop music today just isn't as good as it was in the sixties, cause the Beatles invented good music and nobody else could replicate the idea of music that isn't bad. Except they cloak that snobbery by talking about the Loudness Wars.

I don't know if that is true.

The Beatles had their place in music history and I am not going to bash them or their fans for the sake of bashing them. Most of what The Beatles recorded on was (what Sir George Martin called) a three head tape console. Even Sgt Pepper was recorded on that, which might seem primitive by today standards. However they made best for what they had and really pushed the envelope in the recording studio for the technology they had at the time.

I've seen people pan The Beatles for having a lo-fi sound, and that is a reason they can't get into them. So the argument goes both ways. But that's not the only problem (old versus new recording technology) it also has to do with how songs back thend are arranged and the instrumentation used. I mean if you are going to talk about why one group of music fans that doesn't 't like "new" music. Loudness wars is just icining on the cake. Or vice a Versace eg. "The Beatles stinks ... btw their lo-fi records sound terrible!"

I see the "loudness wars" no different than how newer movies have less dialogue and are spammed with a **** ton of cgi. It's what corporate think the masses want so they are going to give it them, whether they like it or not.

As usual, most people are missing the point, and sometimes I suspect they do it deliberately.

See my earlier post in the thread. The problem is not volume as such, it's about dynamic compression, which is what results from trying to get an overall louder sound.

It's a legit thing because when a track is mastered with brick wall limiters and the like, the sound is much worse - less dynamic range and often actual distortion (I'm not talking about intentional distortion from something like an effects pedal, but an actual loss of information).

Can you really compare the loudness? Nowadays most music is digital, old music was on CD or even vinyl.

CDs are digital.

lol