>Hmm I wonder where the chorus begins
Why are labels allowed to do this?
Does no one care about the integrity of the first pure vocalist in pop for decades?
Shove that fat bushpig up your dickhole poptimist scum.
>>60753485
I understand high school is tough, but there is no need to be rude.
looks like a Pixies song desu
>>60753465
money money money money money
>>60753465
>blaming production
It's possible that the chorus just happened to be exactly the same volume
>>60753499
>refers to Adele as 'the first pure vocalist in pop for decades'
>calls anyone else high school
Even the shitposting on this board sucks.
>>60753465
>filename
>>60753532
I wasn't implying Adele is bad, I was implying you are rude kid.
>>60753532
I'm OP, i didn't make the highschool comment
>tfw no IDs on boards that need them
>>60753509
Pixies songs are very well produced. This looks like an MGMT or Tame Impala song.
Monthly reminder to never purchase records from artists who participate in the loudness wars. They don't consider their work to be art so neither should you.
>>60753509
ahahaha
its true
>>60753593
No it isn't. Are you retarded?
>>60753588
>purchase records from artists
>buying music ever
nah
>>60753588
>>60753661
>making a wild guess of the artist of the song
>calls anyone else retarded
Even the shitposting on this board sucks.
>>60753735
ahahahahahahhaahahahahahahaah
>>60753764
But it doesn't look like a Pixies song you retard. You'd know that if you ever listened to the Pixies and paid attention. Their songs have plenty of dynamic range. You have either never listened to Pixies or you're a retard who doesn't know what this thread is about.
reminder that no-one in this thread knows shit about mixdowns or mastering
all of you can go suck a footlong dick
>>60753845
I rather suck a footlong dick
>music is for listening with your ears
>OP uses a picture of music to critique it
>>60755468
>music is for listening with your ears
>Uses elaborate analysis and demonstrates using examples written out in score
I think I see a problem with your position
>>60755503
>elaborate
>analysis
>demonstrates
>score
Stop using big fancy words, it doesn't make you look smart. Quite the contrary actually.
>>60755570
I thought you were going to bed? Also the fact that you think these are big fancy words, well...
>>60753465
While I don't support poptism showing a mix down like that doesn't mean shit. A quite bass that fills in the song will look like that.
>>60753465
>those hard limiters
geeze, really paid top dollar for mastering didn't they
>>60753527
>not understanding the op
>it was sarcasm
>the levels between the chorus and verses are distinctly different, so its really easy to eyeball by the waveforms the structure of the song
do your homework before calling the op a dipshit dude
>>60757636
what mix is this?
>>60753588
>the loudness wars
loudness wars is where the entirety of the song is at the same (high) volume level, ie there is no variation in loudness throughout the song.
your OP image demonstrates the exact opposite of this, where the quiet choruses are actually quiet, compared with the loud choruses. if it was exemplary of the loudness wars, those quiet choruses would be made virtually as loud as the chorus, whereas they are actually half as loud.
>There are two ways to measure "loudness"—peak levels and average levels. The former refers to the loudest part of a piece of music or sound; a crescendo or climax. The difference between the highest and lowest points makes for the average level. Sadly, the science of psychoacoustics suggests our ears generally respond to the average level rather than the peak level of volume—hence we would perceive a consistently loud piece of rock music as being "louder" than a piece of classical that reaches the same or even a higher volume level during a crescendo, simply because the rock song is "loud" all the way through. "Loud" records grab our attention (obviously—being louder they are harder to ignore on first impression) and in order to grab attention quicker and more effectively in a crowded marketplace, record companies and artists have been striving to make their records as loud as possible from the second the first note is played, whatever the cost.
>Think of the classic, exciting Pixies formula again—it doesn't exist anymore, because those dynamic leaps have been ironed out. Keane should NOT be twice as loud as Nirvana.
http://web.archive.org/web/20060612221324/http://www.stylusmagazine.com/articles/weekly_article/imperfect-sound-forever.htm
>>60757944
Record store day one
https://mega.nz/#!zkkz1boD!E6b5osv_9suW4Azd-FJ8pmnAi7c_f24u0Q1m9hgEZks
>>60753588
>Implying the musicians can veto loudness even if they want to
Steven Wilson is famously anal about loudness, and his albums STILL get fucked over sometimes if the label pushes for it
>>60757961
whoa not that guy, but thanks. I love that album, but early 2000s mastering is fucking awful
>>60755503
This just shows how shit notation is 2bh
>>60753694
This desu
>>60758007
t-thanks andy wallace
>>60753842
To be fair that looks like it has about as much dynamic range as the Adele song, it's just quieter overall
>>60758292
but the peaks aren't crushed against maximum loudness and have a lot more room to breathe
>>60758343
True. Adele is top 40 pop music though, what do you expect? That's been standard practice for like 20 years now.
>>60758408
..I expected the quality of Blackbird Studios in Nashville and got over produced shit instead.
She should've stuck with the Nashville shit.
let's play
>guess song by waveform
again
>>60758441
Adele is British man
>>60758475
Something by either Merzbow or Kanye
>>60758475
iggy pop's raw power remix.
>>60758495
kayne was closer cause usual merz waveform looks like this
>>60753485
>poptimist
Kill yourself. You probably use the term "dad rock" and "rockist" too.
>>60753465
that song is literally annoying and repeptitive as fuck
>>60758600
>literally
triggered
>>60758600
It's top 40 pop what exactly did you expect?
>>60758478
reading this comment in a russian accent makes it better
>>60753465
Wait, what's the problem? We don't like a big dynamic range now? I thought the main complaint about modern mastering was brickwall compression, and now you're complaining about the opposite.
>>60758958
im a bit confused too. i guess hes saying the chorus is too brickwalled?
if you took >>60753842 and brought the peak up to 0db, it might look similar to the adele crap, but it looks like the pixies song still has a lot more transients in it's loud parts
i thought that >>60757958 is what the loudness war is about
>>60758475
>>60758534
that is not a wave idiot, neither is it a waveform
>>60759098
you're an idiot.
>>60759159
all you can see on those graphs is the peak volume. if that was waves you would actually barely hear anything since both phases are playing at the same time, cancelling each other out
>>60759213
what if we use two speakers and an amp
>>60758475
Even Sunn O))) doesn't do that shit
>>60758566
What the fuck is a rockist?
>>60759418
>what is hnw
>>60759376
ok i am starting to think you are just trolling me
>>60759213
That's because the sample rate is 44100hz but most screens are a few thousand pixels wide at best. It would be horrendously impractical to zoom in to where you can see anything other than peaks.
The peaks, however, are actually useful.
>>60759578
the point is, what you see there are no waveforms.
>>60759659
>air isnt real because i cant see it
>>60753465
Are you surprised?
Also she's only above average, hype is fueling it all right now. Including you, unless your memeing which I hope is the case.
Better vocalists like Captain Beefheart and frankie valli had vocal ranges of 7 octaves, or billy holiday that had a stretch of a little over one octave but who's vocals were fueled by emotion. They are still regarded as some of the best, and they aren't as famous. Do you even know what makes her a great vocalists beside the fact that you find it appealing?
>>60759437
That has too much variation for HNW
my ears are ringing just READING this thread lmao
>lmao
lmao
>>60758534
what the hell
how do you master noise like this?
I just naturally assumed all his shit clipped through the roof
>>60760569
Presumably the same way you'd master anything else.
>>60753735
JESUS CHRIST
>>60760813
wouldn't the original recording be red hot anyway?
>>60761153
Not if he was playing it at a reasonable volume while recording. There's nothing stopping noise artists from playing quietly.
>>60761230
but that's no fun
maybe he just had a shitload of compression pedals between the mixer
>>60761230
>>60761264
I can already see them sipping their afternoon tea with some soft hisses in the background.
>>60753465
>https://youtube.com/watch?v=4KlB0XepFFI
You can only hear the chorus coming from this guy's earbuds.
>>60758475
Death Grips
Guess
Y'all motherfuckers don't even know what loud is.
>>60762089
What Death Grips song is this?
>>60762143
https://clyp.it/km53xkw0
>>60753465
>>60753521
>>60753735
But, uh anon, i->VI->III->V
btfo
>>60762552
shit i mean i->VI->III->VII
don't hate me pop gods
>>60753842
>dynamic range
>range
I know nothing about this aside from what is pertinent to IEM reviews, but, perhaps 'variety' is a better word to what you meant to say?
because even a song that's mostly a flat mush with a distinguishable variation/variety of instruments/inputs, it may not reflect as well in a graph
and the discussion was about how it looks, rather than how it sounds
>>60753735
>>60753842
like this lmao
>>60762051
it's a split mono track
I hope I'm right
>>60753845
Will you stop bringing up your inconvenient presence to the thread
Somebody post a Godspeed song pls
