# Album sound quality rating site



## .69077

Googled it and can't find it again. 

Couple years ago I found a site that had albums and their rating based on the sound quality of the recording. 

Thanks all


----------



## bradknob

This one?

http://dr.loudness-war.info


----------



## .69077

bradknob said:


> This one?
> 
> Album list - Dynamic Range Database


That's it. Thank you!


----------



## CUAviator

I have a question about that list - it is a ranking of Dynamic Range...but how does that correlate to Sound Quality?

The reason I ask is because both my friend and I like Metallica. However, I prefer "old Metallica" (Justice and earlier). He prefers everything from the "Metallica" album on. He says he prefers the newer Metallica because the albums have better sound quality. I would concede that the studio quality is better on the new albums; not as raw, cleaner sound in the guitars, more distinguishable sounds throughout the music. 

However, if you were to look at the DR ranking of Metallica albums, it's the older ones that score higher on the scale. I want to prove, somehow, that the older ones "sound" better because that is what Metallica is "supposed" to sound like...oh yeah, and the songs are just better. 

***i realize "sounding better" and liking songs songs is totally subjective, but this thread is specifically about the Objective SQ of albums.


----------



## gregerst22

Newer Metallica is over processed and overly distorted thus lacking dynamic range of their earlier material.


----------



## CUAviator

But how does that (smaller dynamic range) relate to the actual sound quality?


----------



## gregerst22

More dynamic range in a recording doesn't mean necessarily mean it's better SQ. It's part of it but it can also be subjective, a personal taste and preference. A lot of popular music today seems to be more condensed and louder. Maybe the rise in popularity of music streaming and lossy compression (mp3) has something to do with it.


----------



## gijoe

CUAviator said:


> But how does that (smaller dynamic range) relate to the actual sound quality?


Dynamic range is important to sound quality. Dynamic range, if you aren't famiiar, is the difference between the quiet parts of a song and the loud parts of the song. Good dynamic range allows for each of these moments to stand out. Low dynamic range means that every sound is very close to the same SPL, there is no subtle noises, everything is just loud. This really masks details, when the bass is recorded as loud as the vocals, they tend to blur together, without a clear distinction between sounds. 

Google "loudness wars" to get a lot of really interesting information about what poor dynamic range has done to music, and how it all started.


----------



## High Resolution Audio

Subbed for future reference


----------



## Alrojoca

A couple of youtube videos about the loudness wars, many of them there.

Interesting when they say, compression make people addicted and more fatigued at the same time











https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Gmex_4hreQ






https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w1uKiQ6doJY



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7UjQc0dM4H4


----------



## TOOSTUBBORN2FAIL

I will chime in tomorrow. Lots of graphs and stuff to share about this.


----------



## TOOSTUBBORN2FAIL

gregerst22 said:


> More dynamic range in a recording doesn't mean necessarily mean it's better SQ. It's part of it but it can also be subjective, a personal taste and preference. A lot of popular music today seems to be more condensed and louder. Maybe the rise in popularity of music streaming and lossy compression (mp3) has something to do with it.


Unfortunately this has been going on since before streaming or MP3's existed.


----------



## TOOSTUBBORN2FAIL

Ok, so the DR Database is actually a database showing the crest ratio of the music, which is slightly different than dynamic range. Crest Ratio could be looked at as the _average_ dynamic range throughout the song, and basically compares the peak amplitude to the RMS amplitude. Dynamic range on the other hand is the difference in amplitude between the loudest and quietest part of a song.

Also, it appears that the loudness wars have not had a huge effect on the actual dynamic range. The loudness wars DID have a large effect on the crest ratio however.

For instance, lets look at two different versions of Hotel California. One is a vinyl rip of the original pressing, and one is a remastered cd version that is currently available. This is the first 1:15 minutes.

Original Pressing


Remastered CD


Now, the remastered cd has a DR rating of 7db, while the original vinyl rip has a DR rating of 15db. Remember, this is the crest ratio, or the difference between the loudest part of the song and the average loudness of the song.

If you run both songs through the spectrum analyzer in audacity, you can get a good idea of the dynamic range of the songs, which is the difference between the loudest part of the song and the quietest part. In this case, BOTH versions have a dynamic range of about 20db. 

I've done this with many other songs where I have a compressed and not so compressed version for, and it always has come out this way.



So, what the loudness wars have done is not actually change the dynamic range, but the average dynamic range. Now, does that hurt the sound quality? Yes, it does. But, you have to compare apples to apples. 

Taking the Metallica example posted above, its not really possible to compare the old stuff to the new stuff based just one the DR ratings or dynamic range in general. They weren't made to sound the same. The newer stuff is much more compressed, and will never be as dynamic as the older stuff. That said, the vinyl copies are mastered better, and have better DR/crest ratio numbers, and it is an audible difference. But, you'll never be able to convince someone that old Metallica is better than new Metallica based on just numbers.

What these numbers are really good for is comparing different releases of the same album or song. I've found that differences of as little as 2db on the DR/crest ratio rating are audible, and higher has always sounded better, to me and anyone else I've done direct comparisons for.


----------



## muzikmanwi

Thanks for that.


----------



## Lord Raven

allmusic.com


----------



## TOOSTUBBORN2FAIL

Allmusic.com doesn't have any concern for the format which they reviewed.

For instance, I looked up Eluveitie's Slania, and it's just a basic review of the music. On the other hand, the Dynamic Range Database linked in the second post clearly shows that the vinyl release of Slania was mastered far better than the cd release. And my observation (and measurements) through owning both the cd and vinyl record versions, is that they are dead right. The vinyl version, even when ripped to Redbook format, is better than the cd.


----------



## MikeS

I have been buying used vinyl / CD's to get original ones and not remasters. 

Most vinyls are higher numbers on dr database but vinyl always seems to measure 3-4 higher than CD's. Higher than that and you could get a better one. Black sabbath's 13 sounds the very same for example despite the numbers. 

Album details - Dynamic Range Database 

It's junk as said there. I have stopped buying new vinyl aswell if I can't confirm it's actually better.


----------



## TOOSTUBBORN2FAIL

It's all dependant on the mastering for each individual album. I have yet to buy a new record that didn't measure better than the cd, a few are very close, others are night and day different.

Eluveitie's newest album, Origins, shows as 6db on cd, and 14db on vinyl, and I can confirm that that's accurate.


----------



## Lord Raven

I know, I thought you were asking about the album reviews. For SQ, your ears are the best judge. At times I have a CD, HDCD, HDTracks, Needle Drop, SACD and DSD of a same album. I keep the highest bit rate and keep an order of preference by listening to each.



TOOSTUBBORN2FAIL said:


> Allmusic.com doesn't have any concern for the format which they reviewed.
> 
> For instance, I looked up Eluveitie's Slania, and it's just a basic review of the music. On the other hand, the Dynamic Range Database linked in the second post clearly shows that the vinyl release of Slania was mastered far better than the cd release. And my observation (and measurements) through owning both the cd and vinyl record versions, is that they are dead right. The vinyl version, even when ripped to Redbook format, is better than the cd.


----------



## MikeS

TOOSTUBBORN2FAIL said:


> It's all dependant on the mastering for each individual album. I have yet to buy a new record that didn't measure better than the cd, a few are very close, others are night and day different.
> 
> Eluveitie's newest album, Origins, shows as 6db on cd, and 14db on vinyl, and I can confirm that that's accurate.


Ofcourse it is. That's some difference, but there are too many "vinyls" that are unfortunately the same loud masters as CD's even if they measure bit more than CD. I have few new vinyls that don't sound any better, while they are listenable I could have saved my money and just used streaming services instead. Most bad ones are dream theater (2013) Album list - Dynamic Range Database 
Don't know if these are different pressing than mine but it's very compressed and lifeless sounding. (yes the cd with it sounds the same) If theres is subtle difference it's the gear and different eq.

And later I read that HD tracks has more dynamic master (will not pay second time to confirm :mean: ) 

Another example Album list - Dynamic Range Database from 2013 

I didn't even bother to needle drop it, this is the all time lowest quality vinyl/cd I have ever bought. Clips audibly, very compressed.. unlistenable.
My copy came with the cd and it equally sounds just as bad. There is nothing wrong with the vinyl pressing itself. This album is good example of extreme compression making the mp3/whatever other codec sound worse than it really should. The CD sounds better played directly. (with all the clipping)

So they look on the database awesome more dynamic by 4 but really isn't.
For these reasons I have not bought more new stuff (if can't confirm) but instead stream it. You get the same "quality" from streamers for monthly fee.


----------



## TOOSTUBBORN2FAIL

Have you ever viewed your rips in audacity?

It clearly shows when something is compressed more than something else. I have NEVER seen a vinyl rip that was mastered the same as the cd version, but I also don't buy records if I know the cd should be mastered well.

I've also done blind tests and each time, people pick out the records I've ripped as sounding better.


----------



## MikeS

That's what I used for recording. Level is bit lower sure and it seems like theres something more but theres no significant difference in peaks. Actually these LP's sound very quiet and have to be cranked way up because of excess compression they must have dialed them down to get them to vinyl. I would have gotten the exact same quality buying the cd. Some albums have been actually better, more of that is the original press releases used. Old van halen vinyls sound great compared to non remastered cd's which I thought were not that bad at all..

One reason for them to sound better found here if compared with CD player

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BhA7Vy3OPbc


----------



## TOOSTUBBORN2FAIL

Hmm. There has been a noticeable difference with every cd to vinyl comparison I've ever done, both listening and in audacity. Yes, the levels on vinyl are lower, but that's not compression. And that can easily be compensated for by using the amplify feature in audacity, as long as you don't clip the transients.

No matter what though, the better mastered version is going to have a lower rms output level, it has to. This is because you can't have both high rms output in a recording, and a high crest ratio, it's impossible. You'll notice this on better mastered cds as well. This is why headroom in a stereo system is so important.

One way to really see the difference is to take audacity, and reduce the rms level of the cd recording, to that of the vinyl recording. Pretty easy to do with the dr database dr tool. Then, both recordings will sound about the same "loudness", but you'll really be able to notice, especially in metal, that the drums are no longer buried in the mix by the guitars. In fact I may throw a couple of these samples up when I have some time.


----------



## MikeS

TOOSTUBBORN2FAIL said:


> Hmm. There has been a noticeable difference with every cd to vinyl comparison I've ever done, both listening and in audacity. Yes, the levels on vinyl are lower, but that's not compression. And that can easily be compensated for by using the amplify feature in audacity, as long as you don't clip the transients.
> 
> No matter what though, the better mastered version is going to have a lower rms output level, it has to. This is because you can't have both high rms output in a recording, and a high crest ratio, it's impossible. You'll notice this on better mastered cds as well. This is why headroom in a stereo system is so important.


Well, the new vinyls that sounded the same as the crushed cd/streaming version play with much lower volume than old dynamic vinyls. You'd think it would be the older that are quieter.. Amplify it and it looks like brick too altough the top of waveform looks slightly better. 
For better mastered cd's I try to buy original pressings used whenever I can find one. For new stuff there is some exceptions ofcourse.

Have you tried to purposedly enable clipping in audacity (just for test) and amplify a really dynamic album so it goes some over while sounding much louder? I tried and could not get the sound as bad as some remasters. :laugh:

Most dynamic LP I've got so far is Alice in chains unplugged music on vinyl pressing. Original series albums are quite good aswell on cd/streamers. 

The DR rating is still not absolute measure, there are few new albums that have industry standard numbers for today and still manage to sound quite good. But I am not going to spend any money for this level of compression..


----------

