I too am saddened by this trend toward ever more sonically-compressed music.
I am not opposed to MP3 in theory. I have a Sony Walkman, and listen to music on MP3 (never under 256 kbps, often 352, which is the max for ATRAC). MP3 at the higher bit rates is still superior to the old cassettes (I always hated them) used in the old personal stereos.
My issue is with this horrible flat, dynamically compressed, harsh tinny sound that seems to be applied to all music these days. It sounds bad whether on MP3 or on SACD.

The new Genesis remixes are a case in point. Nick Davis cries about how 'hurt' he is when he reads the negative reviews. Grow up Nick. If you put something out into the public domain, you can expect it to be scrutinised, and you have to take the bad reviews with the good. These new mixes are sterile and cold, harsh and brash. And sorely lacking in punch and dynamics or warmth or feel.

So sad. Lets hope this trend changes direction soon.

Andrew Cochrane, Sheffield, UK

This is all very good and scientific but largely irrelevant . This whole article presupposes that people listen to music in the same way that they did in the 70's, which clearly they do not. I am not talking about Vinyl vs CD, but or the actual environment. When Led Zepplin II was released we all went around to my freinds place with the best record player and sat transfixed as the sound blasted from the speakers. Today, listening to music is a largely solitary pursuit thanks to the iPod. The music was designed to be listened on a Hi-Fi system. (when the term meant something).
The mastering process was largely an attempt by gifted engineers to "fit" the music into the limitations of vinyl. Too much bass and the needle would skip. Too Loud and you would get track Print through (this would be evidenced by hearing a shadow of the track from overmodulation of the groove) Today it is dubious mp3 rips of overloud CD masters that sound appalling to any professional, that most people listen to.

Simon Leadley, Sydney, Australia

The best sounding LZ software are the 200g vinyl reissues by Classic Records, you need a great turntable to really appreciate them but they sound dramatically better than any CD I've heard.

Jason Kennedy, Lewes, England

There's a misconception here. There are people who belong to the Steve Hoffman forum (audiophiles) who HAVE been critical of Mr. Mew's over use of noise reduction, compression, etc. but that is their opinion (which I often agree with but not always). I can't speak for Mr. Hoffman but I've never read a comment where he is critical of Mr. Mew or Mr. Davis' work.

Likewise, Nick Davis seems to have confused comments by audiophiles with Mr. Hoffman's opinion. Having belong to the forum for a year there are many that are critical of Mr. Davis' remastering job for the Genesis albums. He remains neutral.

Another misconception seems to be that Mr. Hoffman does a "flat transfer". That's not true exactly. While I can't speak directly for Mr. Hoffman's technique in transferring mastertapes to CD and vinyl, I do know that he tries to capture the essence of the master recording as much as possible without squeezing the life out of the dynamic range.

Wayne Klein, Fairfield, USA, CA

To continue on I don't believe music fans fault the engineers as much as they do the A&R and record companies for pursuing louder sound over better dynamic range. To be fair, the 1990's remasters of the Led Zep catalog sounds inferior to the original CD masters done by Barry Diamante in the United States (don't know who did the masters for Japan and the rest of Europe).

Barry's masters represent the intent of the original master recordings very well staying very true to the sound of the vinyl with better sonic detail and without "cleaning up" the recordings.

Making things sound like a chirpy, bad mp3 isn't a good thing for the music itself--it robs it of much of its power (part of that power comes from the dynamic range) in the process. I've heard both good and bad remasters that have fiddled with the original sound. Usually the bad ones are compressed, loud with no dynamic range. It would be the same if you remastered black and white movie with the contrast too high-washed out

Wayne Klein, Fairfield, USA, CA

I love the idea that old recordings can be revitalized by having them remixed to suit digital players. But in reality, who will be able to the difference when they've transfered it to their MP3 players at 128kB/s?

MancFrank, Seattle, WA, USA

Why? “Because of fashion. No other reason.”

A person with this attitude has no business in the mastering business.

dogofdoom, arlington, va,

If you want to listen to a brilliant example of audio recording, go and listen to Rush's Snakes and Arrows. Never have I heard such a crisp and clear, soulful recording.

James Gabb, Street, England

Why don't they leave the volume on the recordings alone and get CD player manufacturers to add 11 to the volume controls for those that want it?

Kevin Browne, Reading, Berkshire, England

Quoting Steve Hoffman himself, the "maverick remastering engineer" from his forum :

"By the way, Peter Mew is the nicest guy around. I don't know where they get the idea that I hate him; he's a pussycat. Just an example of some comments on the Forum being attributed to me personally. My name is at the top and it goes with the territory."

Roger, Montreal,

Loud shmoud. I don't care how LOUD or compressed the sound is and they can do whatever they want to do with the mix. Fine with me.

The problem the digital filters and "techniques" they are using are robbing the music of the finer details - especially evident on the dreadful, DREADFUL (did you hear me Tony Banks or is your hearing DAMAGED from all of those wonderful concerts?) Genesis remasters.

There is a HARSHNESS and GLARE that is being added - more audible on better equipment. That's right, Tony Banks, that guy on Amazon.com probably had superb equipment worht more than most sports cars.

Glare and harshness are are bitter brew and don't mix with wonderful music. The digital techniques being currently used simply don't work.

Mastering engineers: please put thine egos aside, take your lumps, and give up the Digital Domain tweaking until the filters have been developed to really offer the Promised Perfect Sound Forever. :)

Tom Rogers, New York, NY

I am a Led Zep fan but wont be buying this. I find it ironic we are examining the finer detail of music bot hin respect of MP3 which sucks the life out of music and is the main method of consumption these days. Also, as Classic as all these bands are and the great music they have produced it is indicative of the lack of new bands given the ability to develop and grow giving a career longer than 3 weeks

kevin shaw, Amazingstoke, UK

TOO OLD TO ROCK or just skint?

jeremy, Ruislip,

As someone who is a big Steve Hoffman Fan, where did Mew and the record industry get the idea that people want their music loud? How many people complain when commercials seem "louder" than the show they are watching? Without even knowing it, they are complaining about compression.

Brett, chicago, IL, USA

In reply to Neil in LA - I blame the engineer because it is they who actually do the deed. Like I said, they do it because it is the best way to get lots of work. Steve has high principles and will not master in the way many labels would like. By taking this approach maybe he looses out on some of the better paid work but at least he can sleep easy at night in the knowledge that he hasn't contributed to the desecration of precious legacy recordings.

Nobody hates Peter Mew et al. for what they are doing - but they have to accept that they are spoiling the enjoyment of valuable artwork for millions of people.

Would anyone here like the Mona Lisa digitised and the colours, contrast etc boosted so it looks good on an iPod and then have the real thing placed in a vault so the public at large can't see what it really looks like?

This is what Peter Mew et al. are effectively doing - why not present the music in the best light and leave it up to the end user to decide the playback quality?

Mal, Greenwich, UK

Peter Mew says, "there’s only so much information a CD can process"

A bit ominous, that. I feel another format coming on...I guess I'll have to buy the White Album again.

Jack Bloxam, Neuvo Galaxy,

A little hiss on a CD, such as mentioned in regard to the early EMIs, is fine. The '80s Zeppelin remasters I've heard, however, suffered from way too much of this -- to the point where the music truly suffers. I'm guessing these were sourced from inferior tapes. Those CDs certainly offer lesser sound than vinyl pressings.

Heather Court, Seattle, WA

What Peter Mew has missed entirely is Steve Hoffman's (SH) *point *: for record mastering, it's *not* automatically less = better.

It's that one should do the *minimum* needed to maintain *faithfulness* to what the artist's vision as recorded on tape is.

SH is not adverse to using EQ or processing to acheive the "best" sound. Think of cooking with spices - a little makes food taste good, but too much and you overwhelm the senses. You *can* fiddle around too much with a record.

The very reason why vinyl sounds so "good" is because you *can't* DIGITALLY MAXIMISE the volume to minimise the difference between soft/loud sounds, or raise the volume to ridiculous levels, as is done with most (all?) new CD releases - you'll either run out of space to cut grooves on the vinyl (+volume = +groove width) or you'll create an untrackable record (all loud, all time the time).

Aaron, Australia,

Its a shame you didn't check the original first released Zeppelin CDs released prior to the 1990 remasters you used to compare Mothership with. Now your thoughts on those compared to remasters and mothership would be most interesting.

Bill Cason, manhasset, USA/New York

in regards to Mal of greenwich,uk, i am not a mastering engineer, but i am a tracking and mixing engineer in los angeles, california...when you trash a mastering guy(or girl) for squeezing all life out of music(and i have, loudly and mercilessly), your really meaning to trash the record companies....see this is what the labels want, the famous ELE-everthing louder than everything else...no mastering engineer would do this if they have the choice, they are music lovers every bit as we are, but the labels are the ones paying the bills, the ones booking the mastering houses,therefor they are the ones who get to dictate the final outcome...granted some guys can squash better than others and some forms of music lends itself better to this flavor of mastering.

but to hold mastering engineers solely responsible for the loudness wars is 100% misplaced anger...

and that is the truth, the whole truth...

neil, Los Angeles, usa, california

Before I understood about mastering, I wondered what it was about the sound that seemed so overpowering and unlistenable. Now I realize it was the compression and loudness of the CD's. Check out Vapor Trails by RUSH to see what I mean.

Roger Cleven, Snoqualmie, WA

Why is it so important to boost the volume and compress practically every CD thats put out today? If you want it louder just turn up the VOLUME! Record companies should keep this in mind - its the "audiophiles" who still want to buy physical media - most of us have no interest in downloading compressed music files (legal or illegal). Keep your loud, compressed files on iTunes and give the rest of us CD's with true dynamics!

John, Michigan, USA

How sad to read that classic recordings are being manipulated louder & louder for "fashion". The CD format allows more dynamic range - why not just take advantage of it then?
I was so disappointed w/ virtually all of the Genesis "Definitive Remasters", ELP's Victory re-dos etc....shrill & compressed to the nines. Very sad times if this is what the music business envisions that music fans are after.

chris of soCal, SoCal, USA

Steve Hoffman doesn't hate Peter Mew - that's just ridiculous. Many of us at Steve's forum have a strong dislike of Peter Mew's mastering approach, that's all.

The members of www.stevehoffman.tv harbour no ill will towards engineers who don't master in the way Steve does but instead use digital compression etc to give CDs an "in your face" sound - we just feel that their methods make the music unpleasant to listen to.

If the engineers complaining about what we say about their work have an conviction about their mastering approach then why don't they come onto the forum and debate with us? Their unwillingness to engage in an intelligent discourse about their approach betrays the real reason they do it - because it's the easist way to get lots of work.

They have no interest in what sounds good on a decent playback system - they only care about how to make the CDs seem good initially on the worst playback systems because that's what most of their customers listen to the CDs on.

Mal, Greenwich, UK

Would have been nice if along with Steve Hoffman, Mr. Maxwell had interviewed one time Atlantic Records remastering engineer Barry Diament who mastered all of the original mid 1980s Zeppelin CD releases (except IV). Bary's Zep CDs are arguably the best of the lot.

And Mr. Mew, I'll be hanging on to all of my EMI CDs mastered before 1989 or whenever it was that your company began using noise reduction and other digital futzing. Those early CDs I have by the Hollies, Herman's Hermitts, Animals, Manfred Mann, Gerry & The Pacemakers, Cliff Richard, etc. are the best because they were probably "flat transfers". I can hear everything as it was originally intended, tape hiss and all. :)

Mike Richards, Calgary, Canadda

Thanks for an insightful article. I don't agree with some statements, but it was a fair appraisal of a substantial cultural change that I find alarming. With a slew of substantially louder (and otherwise tinkered-with) remasters, every engineer guilty of complying to executive demands for ADDITIONAL VOLUME (or bringing it about himself) is affecting a change in listening habits that might well be irreversible. It's akin to adding a layer of dayglo to a famous painting ... just to go with the fashion.

The result of the "LOUDNESS" wars is a strict conditioning of casual listeners - and especially a whole young generation - in a way that will leave them to drool only when the bell rings MUCH LOUDER and basically not feeling hunger when it rings the way it was intended to ring.

You can see the result in a mass of customers' comments on Amazon: LOUD is already better, and everything else, especially if it comes close to a well-recorded original, sounds "boring."

deus, KA, Germany

I love the practicality of cd but love the sound of vynl ..so am self condemmed to spending fortunes on hi end cd and d2a systems to be able to buy cd's and listen to Vynl sound. The variety of cardigans talkling abt "the excellent production on that album" are, apart fm being pratts, missing the point - i dont want to "hear" the production. Go back to the pressings of the Doors, Jimi Hendrix, Miles Davis and it seems to me that you can hear the instruments warts and all.. of course thats assuming the band want to sound real... or are playing instruments.. or are in the room, town or country as each other.

zugerman, Zurich, Switzerland

Thanks for posting an interesting and informative article. Too bad you couldn't interview Mr. Hoffman, because he would have corrected some of your generalizations about his work. I'd suggest those who are not familiar with Mr. Hoffman's work read this interview:
http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showthread.php?t=59070

Keith, Columbus, Ohio, USA

An interesting read. Not that I've heard this release, but the trend towards louder and louder cd's is an alarming one!!

It damages the sound compared to how it was recorded, and when the sound ends up being clipped so much that it is clearly audible (as can be heard in several modern masterings) you are not improving the sound in the slightest... it seems mastering engineers are simply following instruction as best they can to make the new release louder than everybody else's to make more impact and drive sales. That's business, but it IS damaging the music, and people have begun to notice this.

Don't get me started on digital noise reduction too, another trick in the re-mastering engineers toolbox that is apparently so often unnecessarily used as well.

Jon, London

Jon, London, UK

It was a sad day when Philips managed to sideline DAT, it is a far better format for music than the CD can ever be.

depressed consumer, wiht no choice, Abu Dhabi, U.A.E.

Xmas is coming ... sounds like a good reason to milk the Led Zep gravy train yet again ... tweak a few knobs and hey presto, it's the Mothership! A nice boost to the Zeppelin pension fund.

Steve, Warwick,

What I want when I listen to music is to feel like I am sitting in the mixing room not just to the main musicians but the backing players and singers, too. I want the music to come alive for me, I want to feel why they made that particular piece of music and why they became musicians.

Christopher Hobe Morrison, Pine Bush, Ulster County, NY, USA

You can’t beat the vinyl's. Every hiss, crack and pop is a signature and for me adds to the soul of the music entirely.
It's like listening to Pink Floyd - The Final Cut on CD, it'd far too sterile, loses its feeling and departs a million miles from the vinyl version.
I'm a die-hard Zep fan and will not be buying Mothership

Phill Barlow, The Wirral, England

So yet more atrocious mastering in a self-defeating attempt by dim-witted record execs to win the "loudness war". One day, buyers will wonder why music is fatiguing and unpleasant to listen to - it's just non-stop digital clipping and distortion!

Colin Soames, London,