[Bytor123]

Walter Matthau
http://boardofwisdom.com/togo/Quotes/ShowQuote?msgid=7307#.VDjWt_ldXEI

 

[Strangelove424]

With all due respect to the legend of Walter Matthau, it was George Carlin...
 
http://scomedy.com/quotes/333

http://www.quotepictures.net/beethoven-was-so-hard-of-hearing-he-thought-he-was-a-painter/
 
http://www.spuddie.net/carlin.htm
 
http://comedynightjokes.com/beethoven-was-so-hard-of-hearing-he-thought/
 
http://jamesaquilone.com/101-greatest-george-carlin-quotes/
 
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Talk:George_Carlin

 

[Bytor123]

Ha! Either way, it's a good one  

 

[Strangelove424]

Both great comedians too.  

 

[Strangelove424]

I finally got around to updating the original post. Sorry it took so long, I tried to make the tools list as comprehensive as possible. Unfortunately, I was unable to make Diffmkaker work when comparing two masters (perhaps due to timing differences). If anyone has a good tutorial or set of complete instructions for competing a null test between two masters in Audacity please post it and I will copy it into the op. 
 
I will continue to post observations and analysis in this thread for both low and high quality masters I run across, and hopefully others will do the same, maybe we can save each other a few bucks and steer ourselves toward quality music. 

 

[BeatsWork]

  I finally got around to updating the original post. Sorry it took so long, I tried to make the tools list as comprehensive as possible. Unfortunately, I was unable to make Diffmkaker work when comparing two masters (perhaps due to timing differences). If anyone has a good tutorial or set of complete instructions for competing a null test between two masters in Audacity please post it and I will copy it into the op. 
 
I will continue to post observations and analysis in this thread for both low and high quality masters I run across, and hopefully others will do the same, maybe we can save each other a few bucks and steer ourselves toward quality music. 

Kudos to you sir for both quality and effort - thanks for sharing

 

[Strangelove424]

Thanks for checking it out! 

 

[Roly1650]

I finally got around to updating the original post. Sorry it took so long, I tried to make the tools list as comprehensive as possible. Unfortunately, I was unable to make Diffmkaker work when comparing two masters (perhaps due to timing differences). If anyone has a good tutorial or set of complete instructions for competing a null test between two masters in Audacity please post it and I will copy it into the op. 

I will continue to post observations and analysis in this thread for both low and high quality masters I run across, and hopefully others will do the same, maybe we can save each other a few bucks and steer ourselves toward quality music. 

Here's a link to null testing with Audacity, move wherever you need to: http://sdk.bongiovidps.com/2013/09/26/audio-null-test/
I've found with ADM that testing one file with itself is a good way of learning the software and it gives a baseline of what the host computer/sound card is capable of. ADM has limits on how far it can move level and time differences to match, anything out side these limits will result in bogus results. Look at the two files under comparison in Audacity to see if they differ widely in time/level from one another. It may be necessary to adjust either or both first in Audacity.

 

[Strangelove424]

Thanks for the link Roly. Due to timing differences, I was unable to get the masters I was comparing to sync in Audacity either. I'm starting to think the idea of doing null testing on masters might just be a bad one. Too many tricks the mixer or masterer could have to adjust timing or attack for notes. The null test, as I've usually seen it done, is used to isolate technical differences, like effects of a change in signal chain, DSP, or down-conversion. It was probably a bad idea of mine to use on mastering differences. I will add your link to the op though, it's always a helpful trick to know in Audacity. 

 

[tarnumf]

  However, I wonder how much of the "Loudness Wars" is being driven by the market move away from big stereos in quiet rooms to ear buds crammed into ears and played back on buses or while wandering city streets or other areas with high ambient noise levels.  As much as we audiophiles enjoy dynamics, I suspect a lot of the low level dynamics that we miss would simply be inaudible to a modern urbanite enjoying music on his iPod.  

 
That is good observation as it makes complete sense that mastering is the function of target market. Read about Yamaha NS10 monitors..

 

[RRod]

   
That is good observation as it makes complete sense that mastering is the function of target market. Read about Yamaha NS10 monitors..

 
The thing is that loudness could easily be gotten by making some kind of compression the default on DAPs/apps, whilst leaving the mastering alone.  I'd be all for having to take 1 minute to turn off compression on a new player if I got full DR out of my albums.  The whole situation is just incredibly insane.

 

[tarnumf]

It may look insane from hi-end audio perspective, but we are on minority side and not most economically attractive. DR 6 db song will sound better than DR 15 db on average boombox or car because there is less chance that it will clip cheap amp.
 
Adding on-fly compression is probably to so straightforward, will cost something anyway and most people won't even notice the difference.

 

[RRod]

  It may look insane from hi-end audio perspective, but we are on minority side and not most economically attractive. DR 6 db song will sound better than DR 15 db on average boombox or car because there is less chance that it will clip cheap amp.
 
Adding on-fly compression is probably to so straightforward, will cost something anyway and most people won't even notice the difference.

 
Both of our cars came standard with on-the-fly compression for CDs/MP3s back in 2005/2006.  But yes, the goal is to make the track loud regardless of all circumstances, and that means to change its very DNA.

 

[RRod]

So there's a github project for a Linux-native dynamic range meter:
https://github.com/adiblol/dr_meter
It is, however, horribly out of date (last update was 3 years ago).  I went ahead and did what I could in terms of updating the function definitions, and I got it to compile if I left in one deprecated function call.  Here are the files (they compile for me on Ubuntu 14.04 with the latest libav file installed):
https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0BwmVtb5IwniEalgtWVhCNFFJTGs&usp=sharing

 

[Strangelove424]

  So there's a github project for a Linux-native dynamic range meter:
https://github.com/adiblol/dr_meter
It is, however, horribly out of date (last update was 3 years ago).  I went ahead and did what I could in terms of updating the function definitions, and I got it to compile if I left in one deprecated function call.  Here are the files (they compile for me on Ubuntu 14.04 with the latest libav file installed):
https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0BwmVtb5IwniEalgtWVhCNFFJTGs&usp=sharing

Thank you for doing that, members on Linux I'm sure will be grateful. The OP is already updated.