Are the loudness wars fake so record companies can destroy the music?

@russashe, to respond to your comments I will address them individually.


"How is an LP, recorded and mastered on a digital deck a different format than a CD. The compression and other insults occur in the mix for the master tape/file."


I did not make any claims as to how or why. I only cited what has been observed and documented. Again, I have a CD by the Tesky Brothers. I own it and it sounds compressed, and it is according to the DR database.  I also own the vinyl LP. It does not sound compressed and in fact it sounds very well recorded. According to the DR database it is less compressed than the CD. I have seen many more examples of this.
One can only conclude that the compression does not take place until final mastering and in some, if not many, cases, the vinyl shows less compression.


"Also you mention Mark Knopfler but I seem to remember early Dire Straits digital recordings that were pressed to vinyl that were awful. Huge sound stage, remarkable dynamic range, improbable separation, 20-20K response, all the good things that come with great sound without great sound."


Well, first off I'm referring to Knopfler's solo work and not Dire Straits. And not all of his solo work is recorded with low levels of compression but a lot of it is and it sounds that way. Second, I don't remember Dire Straits albums sounding bad back in college and my roommate had a rather nice hi-fi system. But I can't make any claims about my perception of sound quality back then. Probably pretty poor.


"Compression of the type employed in the ’noise wars’ is a function of digital mastering/editing. In the analog domain compression, like everything else, is quite tricky and has to employed with skill and discretion if you don’t want to get laughed out of the studio."


Agreed. But I think it requires skill and discretion regardless of the format. It can and has been done effectively and artistically within the digital format. So it is not a unicorn....but it might be a platypus.


"Lastly, you said recently that there is nothing wrong with businesses wanting to maximize profit. While this is true as a standalone statement, when examined in light of what SOME companies and individuals are willing to do to maximize profit it becomes a little less innocuous. ’Wanting’ someone dead is a lot different than murder."


I made no claims about what people might do in the name of profits. Anything can be made evil  and nothing about the nature of business makes that more or less true than it is with anything else.

WHY WOULD THE MUSIC INDUSTRY ACTIVELY SEEK THE DESTRUCTION OF THE SOUND QUALITY OF MUSIC???!!!

I think a fairer question might be would the music industry limit the absolute quality of sound in order to make that same sound APPEAR to be of higher quality to the bulk of listeners who use compromised devices and supposedly make up most of the purchases?  Might get a different answer.  They could probably find a better but less 'cost-effective' way to do the same thing.  If they cared.

Once upon a time, people listened to music while they sit still and focused.

The creation of portable playback (walkman, for example) started the killing process in mid/late '80s.

The nails on the coffin: Individual song download, and, wireless blue tooth ear buds.

Nowadays, barely anybody listen to music without mostly distracted by something else (web browsing, flashy music videos, Kindle, you name it).

Seriously, when is the last time you would sit still and listen to the music only?

I have seen many audiophiles - and they are among the worst: They consistently would not even let the song to finish before hopping to another song or started talking over the music.  

Why would anybody in the music industry care, if the buying customers don't seem to care?

Never go full conspiritard.

I usually only go half conspiritard. I have a theory that they want you to go full on. So I never do.