The quote from the guy sounds like a "fire and brimstone" evangelical rant. Anti-music? That's a bit much. Why? Because you're attenuating the peaks and increasing the level of the valleys? And making it more linear sonically? And this is what defines whether it qualifies as music?
He states that as of 2005 there was a drastic decline in CD sales which can to be attributed to overuse of compression. I guess file sharing on the internet, and the market of new artists being more about style over substance doesn't factor in......
The overall implication he is trying to convey here is that overcompressing is directly linked to digital, and that digital is the culprit, and audio would be much better without it. ( analog good, digital bad !)
His comments are misleading to say the least. There is some historical truth to what he says, in terms of cause and effect, but making digital the scapegoat is wrong and innacurate. Analog compression abuse started before digital became prevalent as the preferred recording/storage medium, and would have continued regardless. Yes, the demands of radio did have a role.
I will agree that compression is being overdone/ abused. He is referring to analog compression of the signal, and not bit compression as in MP 3.
Compressors, were invented for a very important reason, and that was to allow a much louder signal to be recorded onto tape without oversaturation of the medium with the result being, audible distortion.
The problem began a long time ago, slowly, that compressors started being abused ( in that they were used in a manner that they were not originally intended). And as with most things, it can get out of hand.
Recording in the digital domain, overloading is bad news. Really bad news. Digital recorders have a "zero" tolerance policy against clipping. When clipping occurs, it is immediate, and BRUTAL! There is no warning to tell you went you're on the verge of clipping. It is a clear line drawn in the sand, and once crossed, the damage to the recording is done, permanent, and irreversible.
The role of the compressor was to limit the highest peak in the program material down to the loudest average level to prevent this from occuring. In theory, the compressor/limiter would be in the signal chain, but with the threshold set high so that in effect in was in standby mode and not doing anything till the program exceeded the preset threshold in order to prevent the signal from exceeding the digital recorder's threshold for clipping.
In the old days, they were used in a similar manner. In the old days, VU meters weren't fast, couldn't keep up with quick transients at all, so if you didn't have your eyes glued to the meters, and really quick hands you could oversaturate analog tape quite easily. If it didn't go too far, it was tolerable. Compressors were an invisible set of hands that could react to attenuate a signal that was headed in the direction of overloading an input, or oversaturating analog tape. So as a tool, it was quite indispensible.
But like anything else, people being experimental, would abuse the controls and discovered that you can achieve some interesting results with them. And so people got creative with them. There are lots of cases of abuse, and yes, there are way too many examples of that.
The implied thing here that is that compressors are evil. Wrong. People going to town, and abusing them, has gotten out of hand. But, I'm afraid that for those who haven't had exposure to compressors, they're getting their knickers in a knot over nothing. This guy is being an alarmist.The correct use of compressors, aids in intelligbility and discernability, not the other way around. It's one of those things that if used properly you wouldn't even know is there, but if it were to be suddenly removed from the signal chain, would make the recording sound erratic in level and not be as pleasant, no matter what your personal tastes.
As far as the debate over digital versus analog. Digital is here to stay. Recorded music has enjoyed more benefits than detriments due to it's invention. The bandwidth and fidelity of todays recordings, are much better than those of yesteryear. Same with noisefloor.
There a lot of 2 tracks masters that are "squashed" during the mastering process, unfortunate, but true. But sometimes the 2 track masters that go to mastering are already "squashed". This is the thing that bothers this guy the most, and I agree that there is too much of it. Compressors don't kill dynamics, people kill dynamics, ( with compressors...).
But people for years have been enjoying the "benefits" of compression for years, and just not even know. When used properly, it is transparent to the listener and makes the music more cohesive. Period. Ask any engineer and he will tell you the same thing, guaranteed.
There is a paranoia that digital is cold and harsh, especially among purists. There is a paranoia that there are tons of musical artifacts and upper level harmonics that are beyond the resolution of digital and that you're being robbed of the warmth by the flatness and lifelessness of digital.
Actually digital can be considered sterile, in that it is a less colored version of the input signal, and by that definition it is sterile. Now, your preferance becomes entirely subjective. Accuracy, or preferred innacuracy? Distortion by definition, is adding to, or changing the actual input signal to something is wasn't in origin. The problem is, distortion can be quite seductive and pleasant. Kind of like, aural seasoning, if you will.
There is no such thing as an unmanipulated recording. Never was, never will be.
Unmolested, well, that's a different story
