The so-called loudness wars are about aesthetic standards.

To criticize the "lack of dynamics" in any given piece of music, or category of music, or music in general, is to hold that music against a set of aesthetic standards.

The Pleasurizing Music Foundation is about establishing a set of aesthetic standards. It's right there in their name.

The use of a 'DR number' label is about enforcing a set of aesthetic standards.

To invoke a "moral commitment" to live up to a "public stance" one took to follow a set of aesthetic standards is about enforcing those aesthetic standards with emotional blackmail; if that's too harsh a word, call it guilt-tripping. Or peer pressure.

The attempt to establish and enforce aesthetic standards is about as unaesthetic as it gets.

I'm sure this movement will find many followers. I'd be very surprised if it got anywhere. It's all so incredibly prissy.

And that assumes this movement is not just an April Fool's joke, and a publicity move for the company behind the DR measurements (whose concern for aesthetic standards didn't keep them from making a VST that takes up 3/4 of the vertical height of a 1920x1200 monitor.)

Its voluntary right. How is that a problem to anyone.? Agree to it or not and really who cares? Me I think I will pass but not for any reason you list. I don't like joining anything. Besides I used the "tool" and I found its not ready for prime time. I already have meters that give me a good readout of dynamic range by me simply looking at the RMS levels and peak levels. The greater the distance between them the greater the dynamic range. Plus add in the lowest parts and one should have a good idea of what it will sound like. But then we already know that by the old fashion way of listening.

Marah,

I like the way you think!!!

mike

ORIGINAL: Marah

The attempt to establish and enforce aesthetic standards is about as unaesthetic as it gets.

I'm sure this movement will find many followers. I'd be very surprised if it got anywhere. It's all so incredibly prissy.

C'mon, Marah...there is absolutely nothing "prissy" about taking a "moral" stance on the loudness war...I don't think the organization is advocating a law...just moral pressure to participate in a voluntary standard. There is nothing wrong with that. It's as democratic as you can get.

BTW, all my sons are Boy Scouts...my eldest is an Eagle Scout...good kids. (in reference to your previous commentary...)

And that assumes this movement is not just an April Fool's joke, and a publicity move for the company behind the DR measurements (whose concern for aesthetic standards didn't keep them from making a VST that takes up 3/4 of the vertical height of a 1920x1200 monitor.)

I did find that ironic and amusing as well...

ORIGINAL: Marah
And that assumes this movement is not just an April Fool's joke

I'm starting to think you might be right about this... the more I read on the website, the more it sounds like some of their statements might be inventions rather than facts.

For example: statements like "These facts have been carefully confirmed and scientifically proven" are *usually* footnoted or credited. There's no explanation on the PMF website of what research they're citing, or its legitimacy. Statements like "The Dynamic Range process of the Pleasurize Music Foundation eliminates this problem completely so that distortion and artifacts no longer occur when files are encoded into standard data compression formats" have no further explanation or development.

I see three possibilities:

A) It's a hoax
B) Their research, principles, and assertions are valid and proven, but whoever is presenting the arguments online is an amateur at thesis defense
OR
C) They truly think they're right, but the principles are *not* in fact proven.

It'll be interesting to see how this develops. I'm not specifically against it at this point, but I'm also not sold.

This is similar to a movement that I am trying to start. It's one where heavy metal guys will be forced to learn what a third is.

(I think this movement has just as much chance of being sucessful as mine! )

Just kidding guys - I like POWER CHORDS (in moderation).

[feels idea for fake commercial coming up]

Rising levels .... global earwarming ... Greenpeaks.

ORIGINAL: RTGraham
A) It's a hoax

I doubt it, given the extensiveness of the site and the list of partners.

B) Their research, principles, and assertions are valid and proven, but whoever is presenting the arguments online is an amateur at thesis defense

Could be...but I think the graphic illustration on the front page are pretty clear....plus I have read a lot of articles and study on this topic...I don't think many disagree that overcompressing destroys(literally...clips) the music. Do a google for the Metallica "Death Magnetic" fiasco for a current example.

C) They truly think they're right, but the principles are *not* in fact proven.

Feel free to check it out and judge for yourself.

WHAT ????

I CANT HEAR YOU???

ORIGINAL: barlowjam

This is similar to a movement that I am trying to start. It's one where heavy metal guys will be forced to learn what a third is.

(I think this movement has just as much chance of being sucessful as mine! )

Just kidding guys - I like POWER CHORDS (in moderation).

heehee! I don't do metal (whatever metal means) but I'm about to explore the world of drop-D tuning... on my only guitar... with a locking nut... so it's gonna take a real commitment. I hope to forget what a third is!