Author Topic: Would you even consider R128 instead of brickwalling? (Read 10179 times)

FarleyCZ · « **on:** January 11, 2016, 07:29:34 pm »

I've got into funny conversation lately, where few people midlessly advocated EBU R128 loudness metering recomandation. I was trying to prove them wrong, but it got me thinking... It's pretty obvious and audible that however all kinds of organizations tried to end the loudness war, they failed. But seeing few big industry names on this forum, I can't help but wonder: How heavily is this brickwalling train rolling? If radios got together and said: Ok, guys, we're not longer accepting heavily limited -5 RMS records, from now on we want clean neat -23LUFS stuff. (LUFS means dBFS +- some frequency weightening)

Would like that idea? Do you think this might ever succeed? Or does "limited" mean just "modern" and it's here to stay?

...also, if you are against loudness war too, do you thing R128 is right weapon against it? Or K-Weightening?

clearskys · « **Reply #1 on:** January 11, 2016, 07:50:20 pm »

Quote from: FarleyCZ on January 11, 2016, 07:29:34 pm

Would like that idea? Do you think this might ever succeed? Or does "limited" mean just "modern" and it's here to stay?

I would like that idea. I can't help but think how much we (general society) are damaging our ears on a daily basis because of increased volumes. It only takes a single subway ride to hear people blasting tunes into their skulls from point blank range using their iPod earbuds.

Do I think this might ever succeed? Probably not. It would require all syndications to get together, establish this new metering standard, educate their clients about it, and then have it implemented. That sounds like way too much work when the status quo is too easy to maintain. I reckon music syndications like radio have limited budgets, and to allocate billable hours to something like this simply wouldn't fly from an upper management financial perspective.

I think limiting is here to stay. People seem to love that wall of sound because it is exciting. A perfect quality of music from a production standpoint seems to be an elusive, never ending summit that we all work towards. Unfortunately, mass listeners hardly give a shit about this (more or less) and appreciate loud and exciting earworms, even at terrible sub-128kbps broadcasting standards.

FarleyCZ · « **Reply #2 on:** January 11, 2016, 07:57:25 pm »

Quote from: clearskys on January 11, 2016, 07:50:20 pm

Do I think this might ever succeed? Probably not. It would require all syndications to get together, establish this new metering standard, educate their clients about it, and then have it implemented. That sounds like way too much work when the status quo is too easy to maintain.

That's the confusing part. R128 is here, it's done and TVs work with it. Some radios too. I heard they really insist on it in Germany. Implementation is actually easy. Everyone of us have this meter already in oZone.

(You have to turn it on though.) ...or you can find some pretty cool free ones. But it somehow ... didn't catch on. I wonder why.

clearskys · « **Reply #3 on:** January 11, 2016, 08:56:05 pm »

Quote from: FarleyCZ on January 11, 2016, 07:57:25 pm

Quote from: clearskys on January 11, 2016, 07:50:20 pm
Do I think this might ever succeed? Probably not. It would require all syndications to get together, establish this new metering standard, educate their clients about it, and then have it implemented. That sounds like way too much work when the status quo is too easy to maintain.
That's the confusing part. R128 is here, it's done and TVs work with it. Some radios too. I heard they really insist on it in Germany. Implementation is actually easy. Everyone of us have this meter already in oZone. (You have to turn it on though.) ...or you can find some pretty cool free ones. But it somehow ... didn't catch on. I wonder why.

Huh. I wasn't aware of the whole Germany thing. I think it didn't catch on because there's nothing mathematically wrong with RMS measurements and it's the status quo.

I think this provides some good insight on the matter as well: https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=544781152237225&id=118480138200664

FarleyCZ · « **Reply #4 on:** January 11, 2016, 09:13:43 pm »

Quote from: clearskys on January 11, 2016, 08:56:05 pm

I think this provides some good insight on the matter as well: https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=544781152237225&id=118480138200664

Yeah this part:

Quote

What this means in practice is that the LU-meter in itself is a superb tool for measuring perceived loudness of any type of audio material but implementing the standard reference level of 0LU is pretty pointless before all physical media is gone and all types of online streaming and media playback such as Spotify, iTunes, YouTube, Media Player, VLC etc… gets a built-in LU analyzer and conforms to this standard playback level without deviation. Until then, people can do a bit as they please and we're still going to have the "loudness wars" happening in one form or another, since louder will always be better.

...essentially confirms what I thought about it.

Author Topic: Would you even consider R128 instead of brickwalling? (Read 10179 times)

FarleyCZ

Would you even consider R128 instead of brickwalling?

clearskys

Re: Would you even consider R128 instead of brickwalling?

FarleyCZ

Re: Would you even consider R128 instead of brickwalling?

clearskys

Re: Would you even consider R128 instead of brickwalling?

FarleyCZ

Re: Would you even consider R128 instead of brickwalling?