[MLA] Loudness War in New York Times

[Grimm | Eelco]

Hi Ian,

> I saw it - overall I thought it was a very clear explanation for a non-technical audience, although I agree it’s a shame he didn’t use LUFS graphs !
> 
> Meanwhile I’m under sustained criticism in the “Mastering Engineers Worldwide” Facebook group from engineers who think I shouldn’t be “preaching” that loudness is bad, and shouldn’t have used the word “penalty” in the name for our site, and that I’m spreading bad information to the world…
> 
> [Sigh]

My goal has always been that there is no penalty for people who master dynamic, and that is what normalization brings. Anyone who prefers to keep squashing his masters is welcome to do so. For me personally, I just will not listen to his work since there is too little time in my life to waste it on ugly stuff. But everyone is welcome to make whatever he/she likes of course! That is the main message for me: loudness normalization offers an equal stage for everyone. With peak normalization there is a penalty for dynamic masters. I am not against squashing, I am just in favor of making things dynamic and I want to be heard.

> On a more positive note, please let me know of any releases you guys have done or know about that have decent dynamics - I need some good examples for the Dynamic Range Day Award next month…!

For a couple of years now this album is one of my favorites: https://www.younsunnah.com/discography/same-girl/ (88.2/24 available at HD tracks).
But it is already from 2010.

Cheers,
Eelco

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://grimmaudio.nl/pipermail/mla_grimmaudio.nl/attachments/20190208/b6a20640/attachment.html>