Members Duardo Posted August 16, 2005 Members Share Posted August 16, 2005 It's funny (actually, sad is more like it) how everyone's so concerned about getting the latest and greatest converters with the widest dynamic range, and then everything winds up getting squashed into a signal with a 10 dB dynamic range. -Duardo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Kiwiburger Posted August 16, 2005 Members Share Posted August 16, 2005 Extreme compression brings up the noise floor - so I suppose if you are going to smash everything, you do need a big dynamic range to start with. I know they aren't exactly the same thing, but you can't have a big dynamic range with a high noise floor, so generally the greater the dynamic range, the lower the noise floor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Billster Posted August 17, 2005 Members Share Posted August 17, 2005 Originally posted by Phil O'Keefe Billster, that's probably because most / all radio stations use a TON of compression and limiting pre-transmitter. My point exactly. I said so in my first post Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members gsHarmony Posted August 17, 2005 Members Share Posted August 17, 2005 can understand wanting a strong steady signal, so people aren't reaching for the volume control during the album. That's why i'm interested in the illusion of dynamics, rather than actual dynamics in a classical sense. I agree completely. Most people who listen to popular music would be very frustrated with the dynamic range of orchestral recordings, for example. Its actually pretty amazing how much the ear can be tricked into hearing dynamics even when they aren't there by using different textures and timbres. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.