Audio dynamic range in movies - is it too big for home play?

[RoGeorge]

In a normal room, with normal ambient noises for a city home, it's either that the action scenes are too loud, or the dialogs are too low to hear them during normal or quiet scenes.

First, I don't have any hearing problems that I know of, and I noticed the dynamic ranges is annoying especially in the recent years movies.
- with headsets it's OK, maybe some scenes are too loud, but it's bearable
- with stereo speakers, dialogs are sometimes hard to hear even for normal scenes, for quiet scene I found myself manually boosting the volume

Changing the player, the room, or the speakers doesn't make the problem go away, so I guess it's some recent audio trend or technology in movies. I tried the dynamic range compressor from VLC, a few other compressing or voice enhancing settings from the sound card (Creative SB Pro), and not happy with the results.

1. I don't need theater sound quality at home. All I want is to hear the dialogs from ALL scenes without shaking the windows if there is some action scenes. How can I do that?
2. Will a hardware compressor (as HAMs sometimes use) work better for this kind of application?

[Yansi]

Wow...  Just pure wow. You are being annoyed that the AV materials you get at home are in too high quality? 

You just have to be kidding.  Do you know how much of a hard work it is (at least here in the ass of the world where I live), to get a movie or two at home, that will have both reasonable video and audio quality?  Do you know how freaking bad the majority of AV media sound, if you have anything slightly better than average commercial chinese crap at home as a sound reproduction system?

(Not only) Due to people thinking this way, they just usually preset utter garbage as AV media today. Because their plastic 16mm thick $150 LCD TV set would not cope with anything with a slight evidence of a dynamic range.

Sham on people thinking this way! I can't disagree more.

The more dynamic range, the better. Both for movies and for music.   

//BTW, your poll is biased. I can not choose any of the three. Because it both bothers me and I like dynamic range. You can always compress the dynamic range if your set is shitty or you don't like it, but it does not work the other way round!

[Cerebus]

Well mastered film soundtracks will, in digital formats like AC3, have accompanying dynamics information. This can be used by the decoder, along with end user settings for dynamics, to adjust volume levels to effectively compress the soundtrack. Somewhere your home theatre system should have a setting to tell it to take notice of the dynamics information and turn compression on - my Sony system labels this as "Dynamic range Compression". Sadly to say, many soundtracks seem to be missing the encoded dynamics information.

[Cerebus]

Wow...  Just pure wow. You are being annoyed that the AV materials you get at home are in too high quality? 

You just have to be kidding.  Do you know how much of a hard work it is (at least here in the ass of the world where I live), to get a movie or two at home, that will have both reasonable video and audio quality?  Do you know how freaking bad the majority of AV media sound, if you have anything slightly better than average commercial chinese crap at home as a sound reproduction system?

(Not only) Due to people thinking this way, they just usually preset utter garbage as AV media today. Because their plastic 16mm thick $150 LCD TV set would not cope with anything with a slight evidence of a dynamic range.

Sham on people thinking this way! I can't disagree more.

The more dynamic range, the better. Both for movies and for music.   

//BTW, your poll is biased. I can not choose any of the three. Because it both bothers me and I like dynamic range. You can always compress the dynamic range if your set is shitty or you don't like it, but it does not work the other way round!

Some of us are considerate enough to our neighbours that, when we're watching a film at night, we don't want to wake their children up when an action scene is on and is so loud that it can be heard two houses away, but do want to be able to hear dialogue which, as the OP says, tend to be recorded at much, much lower levels.

So, if anyone should be shammed[sic] it's you for shamming[sic] the OP for his attitudes, when they probably just represent being civil to one's neighbours and cohabitees.

[wraper]

So, if anyone should be shammed[sic] it's you for shamming[sic] the OP for his attitudes, when they probably just represent being civil to one's neighbours and cohabitees.

Then use headphones.
I'm sick enough of compressed dynamic range music which sounds like garbage on decent enough system. Demanding movies becoming like that as well, sounds ridiculous to me. When there is no quiet, there can be no loud.

[Decoman]

I am not sure what to think about this.

I guess it would make sense to adjust the volume to get to hear what people are saying, when watching a movie at home, but then, when the scene goes BOOOM! and BANG! it gets so loud I adjust the volume down again, fearing I annoy my neighbors.

Presumably, this habit of mine, of lowering the volume when the movie becomes loud, is partially a fault of mine, though I do suspect that a movie can be too noisy for the dialogue to be heard well.

On my computer, I can get to enabled "loudness equation" to better hear sound from when watching movies, which I like a lot, as it tend to raise the volume of the sound of speech and also lower the sound of what would otherwise be too loud (unless I am mistaken about this last part).

At the cinema while watching 'Dunkirk', I felt my seat vibrating as the sound of the roar of the Spitfire engine was put through the speaker system, which I kind of liked, but maybe that one movie was a little too loud. Same effect happened at the start, when gunshots rang out. I also noticed that the speaker system was used to play the advertisement before the movie started playing, something that sounded HORRIBLE with clearly a distorted sound, and everything that was meant to be base like sound, turned into noise.

[AndyC_772]

A good A/V receiver should have a feature to limit the dynamic range, precisely for situations where the viewer doesn't want the loud scenes to be too much louder than the quiet ones. Look for a feature called 'night time' mode or similar.

It's absolutely correct that the source material should have the full dynamic range of the original film soundtrack, though. Range compression is easy to apply at the point of reproduction. If one particular player or decoder doesn't have the option to apply compression to your liking, you can't really blame the film.

Personally I wouldn't want any range compression applying at all. (Detached house, no kids, 5.1 surround and a general liking for action and sci-fi content).

[Zero999]

I can see both points of view.

In ideal listening conditions: a fairly well sound-proof room, having a large dynamic range is a good thing. If one has reasonable hearing, they should have no problem with the dialog being too quiet or the action being too loud.

The problem is, when the room isn't perfectly quiet, so the volume needs to be increased, so the dialog can be heard, but then the action becomes too loud. Now the large dynamic range is a hindrance, not an advantage.

If you need reduced dynamic range, then you need an automatic gain/volume control. Since this is a digital format, it should be possible to do this in software. Unfortunately, I don't know what to suggest, since I've not had this problem before.

[dexters_lab]

if you only have stereo speakers then your going to be limited in options but if you have anything more than a 3.0 (front surround & centre) setup then in your AV amp settings you should boost the centre speaker level, which predominantly carries the speech content.

5.1 and 7.1 setups take even more load off the fronts and allow you brain to hear the dialog from the centre speaker even better

[Cerebus]

Since this is a digital format, it should be possible to do this in software.

That's the thing. This is already done for you. Many 'cinema' 5.1 style encodings include an encoded loudness 'track' that allows an AV receiver to perform almost perfect compression on the sound (AC-3 aka Dolby Digital definitely does). You don't have to dynamically track the loudness and then guess at attack and release times for your compressor, it's all already been done for you. You just need to turn on the feature of your AV receiver that uses this 'track' to reduce the output dynamic range.

However, this information is missing from a good number of commercially encoded films. I gave up turning the 'Dynamic Range Reduction' feature on and off on my Sony AV Receiver because the worst offenders (action films and the like) appear not to have encoded it, or have done so incompetently.

[Cerebus]

5.1 and 7.1 setups take even more load off the fronts and allow you brain to hear the dialog from the centre speaker even better

You'd think it ought to.

I've got 5.1, the centre is a dual-concentric Tannoy, the whole thing is set up correctly using the AV receiver's built in room calibration with a decent mike placed at my listening position. Even with all that, I still encounter plenty of films where some dialogue is inaudible while action scenes are still painfully loud.

[RoGeorge]

Added the 4'th poll option requested by Yansi.

Just to be clear, I love to literally feel the explosions, too, but in a cinema theater. At home, this is not always possible, or even desirable. Also, wearing headsets is not always possible.

I want to understand where from this extra dynamic range is coming, and why only in some recent movies, so I can properly "undo" the extra dynamic range when necessary. It's just a technical question, so let's put aside the audiophile grade emotions for this one.

So far, I tried various effects from the sound card and I didn't like the results. Either they are too soft and ineffective, or they degrade the sound too much with spectral artifacts and distortions so the whole soundtrack become unpleasant. I'm not a picky audiophile, and I can be just fine with consumer audio quality, yet these compression settings make the audio bad enough to complain about it. For the VLC compressor, the compressor works, yet I couldn't find the right settings to emulate a normal movie, one without enhanced dynamic. In the pics are the Creative and VLC settings tested so far. I know none of them are enabled in these pics, it was intentionally.

Would a HAM voice compressor be effective for a movie? Would it be more pleasant to hear than a DSP compressor?

[kripton2035]

I'm little hijacking this thread, asking another similar question :
I have the same concern, but for car audio. the sound has too much dynamic range for me in a car, the car makes noise, even modern cars, there is always some background noise.
I'm searching for some device, that could compress the sound, and level it just above the noise level of the car.
does such a device exists ?
thanks.

[Cerebus]

Would a HAM voice compressor be effective for a movie? Would it be more pleasant to hear than a DSP compressor?

I'd imagine a HAM voice compressor would sound absolutely horrible. AFAIK they tend to be designed for maximum voice intelligibility and sacrifice all other characteristics to that end. So I suspect that you'll hear a 'breathing' background noise floor, audible noise gating and every other analogue compression artefact known to man and beast.

A studio style compressor would be the best bet in the analogue world, and I'm guessing from the controls that the VLC compressor is trying to achieve similar ends. From hours of fiddling with studio compressors in my youth I can tell you that finding the right setting for those few controls is more of an art than a science and can take a long time to get to an acceptable sound. It doesn't mean it can't be done but one set of settings will suit one 'programme' and another suit another. It's precisely that which dissuaded me from adding a compressor to my setup, back in the days of analogue TV and VCRs, for the same 'action movie' problem, but I did consider it as a possible cure and came very close to trying it.

[Cerebus]

I'm little hijacking this thread, asking another similar question :
I have the same concern, but for car audio. the sound has too much dynamic range for me in a car, the car makes noise, even modern cars, there is always some background noise.
I'm searching for some device, that could compress the sound, and level it just above the noise level of the car.
does such a device exists ?
thanks.

Back in the day Phillips patented and briefly produced a car radio that had a microphone that attached to the bodywork in the footwell. The idea was that the microphone would measure the background noise and then the radio would adjust its volume to compensate. I thought this was a winning feature, but it clearly flopped in the market place. It's long enough ago that the patent will have lapsed, but I haven't seen this feature added to any mainstream manufacturer's line or I would have bought one.

[kripton2035]

Back in the day Phillips patented and briefly produced a car radio that had a microphone that attached to the bodywork in the footwell

I bought in the 90's a blaupunkt bremen rcm127 that had this feature. it was kind of nice, although I did not achieve to set it up correctly, there was always some delay between the ambiant noise and the radio reaction.

[Bassman59]

Added the 4'th poll option requested by Yansi.

Just to be clear, I love to literally feel the explosions, too, but in a cinema theater. At home, this is not always possible, or even desirable. Also, wearing headsets is not always possible.

I want to understand where from this extra dynamic range is coming, and why only in some recent movies, so I can properly "undo" the extra dynamic range when necessary. It's just a technical question, so let's put aside the audiophile grade emotions for this one.

So far, I tried various effects from the sound card and I didn't like the results.

I agree with those who wish that the loud parts (explosions and such) don’t need to be that loud in a home environment. In my house, the room with the television is right across the hall from my son’s bedroom, so keeping the volume down at night when he’s asleep is a good thing. But for some shows, setting the volume to keep the loud parts from waking him means dialog is inaudible. (Closed captions help!) A longstanding complaint is that commercials are louder than the program. At least with commercials, I’m quick on the mute button.

We use a Mac mini for all of our TV watching. It handles streaming from all of the services, and an EyeTV One tuner lets us watch over-the-air broadcasts. The Mac has support for all sorts of audio processing in the form of Audio Unit plug-ins for Logic, Garage Band and Final Cut. And there are several clever programs such as Soundflower which can reroute an audio stream from an application through an AU plug-in and then out through the chosen hardware. So I set up a limiter in Soundflower. The threshold is set for just above “nominal” dialogue levels and it slams hard on those loud events. Does the limiting sound bad? Sure, but who cares, the explosion noise isn’t ripping my head off. Setting the threshold can be tricky, but if you use the individual playback application’s volume control then you can get it to work well enough.

(Oh, we don’t use the TV’s built-in speakers, which are awful. A pair of little KRK powered studio monitor speakers are on a shelf above the TV, and they’re perfect for the application. And they were less expensive than a bad-sounding “sound bar.”)

[Someone]

I'm little hijacking this thread, asking another similar question :
I have the same concern, but for car audio. the sound has too much dynamic range for me in a car, the car makes noise, even modern cars, there is always some background noise.
I'm searching for some device, that could compress the sound, and level it just above the noise level of the car.
does such a device exists ?
thanks.

Back in the day Phillips patented and briefly produced a car radio that had a microphone that attached to the bodywork in the footwell. The idea was that the microphone would measure the background noise and then the radio would adjust its volume to compensate. I thought this was a winning feature, but it clearly flopped in the market place. It's long enough ago that the patent will have lapsed, but I haven't seen this feature added to any mainstream manufacturer's line or I would have bought one.

Its found on higher end cars in their OEM headunits and easily integrated on a modern CAN system with more information than just ambient levels, but the complications of adding external microphones is a challenge for aftermarket installs. Similarly the problem the OP is having is solved in many high end TVs which have (probably lookahead) limiters (not compressors) available to level out advertisements or movie sound tracks.

[RoGeorge]

While searching for dynamic compressors, I found similar complains. It's clear that the dynamic range is indeed too high for home. Average consumer doesn't like to have the untamed sound of a jet engine or a firearm in their living room. 

The poll results here indicate the same. Too much realism with the volume level for a home.

I found a free program, 'Sound Lock', https://www.3appes.com/sound-lock/ . Not sure if a sound limiter is the same thing as a dynamic compressor, but so far 'Sound Lock' seems better than what I was able to achieve with VLC compressor, and it has only one setting, the upper limit. Will see how it does in the long run.

Later edit:
About the car, I suspect there is some automatic volume change, but it is based only on the car speed, and not on the ambient noise. Hard to say, because in the car I listen to audiobooks. 

[tooki]

I like dynamic range, and still it annoys me, because some movies simply take it too far. I know they want chair-shaking explosions, but some movies are mixed such that if I adjust the volume to merely where I don’t have to strain to hear the dialog, the explosions or club music or whatever literally are so loud it causes me pain. (This is often the case for me in cinemas, where the volume is so high that the dialog and most sounds are unpleasantly loud, and the explosions outright painful.)

For what it’s worth, my apartment has very thick masonry walls, and even so, the two neighbors I share walls with are very tolerant, as am I, so we play loud music whenever we want and nobody is bothered. So this isn’t even a reason, though it is for a great many people. (I have a surround system that produces ample bass. Movies are fun.)

[2N3055]

Dynamic range is fantastic stuff.. Unless idiots mix recordings...

Like tooki said, I also find it that it bothers me that effects and explosions are 10x louder that dialogs... And when I set up dialogs to be at normal volume, explosions literally hurt my ears...

So despite all the fancy receivers and speakers, I usually watch movies with setup that central channel is +10, and subwoofer is -8 from calibrated level... That makes it more acceptable..
I have different preset for music that is set to be flat....

Regards,

Sinisa

[amyk]

So, if anyone should be shammed[sic] it's you for shamming[sic] the OP for his attitudes, when they probably just represent being civil to one's neighbours and cohabitees.

Then use headphones.

Now you get to choose between not hearing the quiet parts, and hearing damage on the loud parts.

[DrGeoff]

I'm little hijacking this thread, asking another similar question :
I have the same concern, but for car audio. the sound has too much dynamic range for me in a car, the car makes noise, even modern cars, there is always some background noise.
I'm searching for some device, that could compress the sound, and level it just above the noise level of the car.
does such a device exists ?
thanks.

Re-encode those recordings with too much range through a 2:1 compressor. I used to do this back in the cassette days in order to improve audibility in noisy vehicles.
In those days it was a piece of hardware. Now it is a piece of software.

[helius]

Back in the day Phillips patented and briefly produced a car radio that had a microphone that attached to the bodywork in the footwell. The idea was that the microphone would measure the background noise and then the radio would adjust its volume to compensate. I thought this was a winning feature, but it clearly flopped in the market place. It's long enough ago that the patent will have lapsed, but I haven't seen this feature added to any mainstream manufacturer's line or I would have bought one.

Some cars do use the vehicle speed sensor to adjust the volume on the stereo. Volvo was one company that offered that feature.

[kripton2035]

Back in the day Phillips patented and briefly produced a car radio that had a microphone that attached to the bodywork in the footwell. The idea was that the microphone would measure the background noise and then the radio would adjust its volume to compensate. I thought this was a winning feature, but it clearly flopped in the market place. It's long enough ago that the patent will have lapsed, but I haven't seen this feature added to any mainstream manufacturer's line or I would have bought one.

Some cars do use the vehicle speed sensor to adjust the volume on the stereo. Volvo was one company that offered that feature.

this does not solve the dynamic problem : try to listen to classical music in a car : unless you put very high volume, you can't listen to it. then if you have some "modern" music, it's too loud.

[kripton2035]

I'm little hijacking this thread, asking another similar question :
I have the same concern, but for car audio. the sound has too much dynamic range for me in a car, the car makes noise, even modern cars, there is always some background noise.
I'm searching for some device, that could compress the sound, and level it just above the noise level of the car.
does such a device exists ?
thanks.

Re-encode those recordings with too much range through a 2:1 compressor. I used to do this back in the cassette days in order to improve audibility in noisy vehicles.
In those days it was a piece of hardware. Now it is a piece of software.

I can't recode : I listen to my music in different places, some nice quiet isolated rooms where I want a high dynamic, and some more or less noisy cars where I want to compress the dynamic.

[tszaboo]

Try watching Lord of the Rings without a remote in your hand.
Music too loud. Dialogue too quiet.
I actually considered to make a custom release for myself.

[2N3055]

LIke I said before, central channel is dialog/voice channel ... You increase volume of central channel and decrease overall volume... If there is still to much bass decrease subwoofer volume too (it is called effects channel for a reason...)

My old Yamaha receiver actually has something called  "Night mode" that does something like that....

Regards,

Sinisa

[Cerebus]

Some cars do use the vehicle speed sensor to adjust the volume on the stereo. Volvo was one company that offered that feature.

Where the Phillips idea wins out is that it measured actual noise. Speed, as a proxy for background noise is a comparatively poor measure - a smooth tarmac road makes much less noise than cobbles at the same speed - and speed doesn't account for other extraneous sources of noise.

I suspect that anybody who offered the speed controlled volume may have been working their way around Phillip's patent while it was still extant.

And, of course, the one drawback to that particular proffered option is that it involves wrapping a Volvo around the radio. 

[DrGeoff]

I'd suggest that this patent expired some time ago. Even Mazda have auto volume adjustment based on background noise level.
However this won't solve the OP's problem, as the adjustment time is too slow. They need to either compress the dynamic range at the source, or add a processor inline to perform compression of the dynamic range.
Back in the 1980's I used to find that compressing the whole signal (very low threshold, fast attack) with a VCA compressor at 2:1 was usually sufficient.

[BrianHG]

If you truly must, and you are using Windows OS, you can turn on the internal 'Loudness Equalization' and change it's settings to 'fast'.  Turn up your media player's volume to 100% and turn down your system volume to whatever you like is comfortable.  Everything will come out as 1 set volume.  For everything.  Movies, Youtube, system sound effects.  In fact, it does such a good job, it can be nauseating to listen to music.

I have the opposite problem, usually the dialog is too loud and when gunshots or explosions come, they are way too soft compared to reality.  It pisses me off that with 24 bit dac tech, they still compress the audio somewhat.  Only original classical music recordings from the mid 80s to 90s on Telarc CDs at only 16 bit ever recorded the proper full dynamic range.  And when I listen to classical music, it does piss off the neighbors just as I like it...

[RoGeorge]

I'd suggest that this patent expired some time ago. Even Mazda have auto volume adjustment based on background noise level.
However this won't solve the OP's problem, as the adjustment time is too slow. They need to either compress the dynamic range at the source, or add a processor inline to perform compression of the dynamic range.
Back in the 1980's I used to find that compressing the whole signal (very low threshold, fast attack) with a VCA compressor at 2:1 was usually sufficient.

Interesting tip, I'll give it a try, thanks! I would like to reverse engineer the time constants.
Do you have a schematic, or hints how to find the one you used back then, please?


Looking up for "VCA compressor", I found these type of compressors:

• VCA - Voltage Controlled Amplifier
• FET - Field Effect Transistor
• Optical - uses a lightbulb on the audio path to detect the audio RMS, and a photoresistor in the negative feedback loop to adjust the gain
• OTA - Operational Transconductance Amplifier
• Tube
• Feed-forward - while all the above types do the compressing on the fly, analogical style, the Feed-forward needs to look ahead, so it will add some latency and it seems the only one that is implemented digitally

This type of classification for compressors seems unusual from the engineering standpoint, but is common for the sound record industry. Except the last one, which seems to be a DSP (Digital Signal Processor), all the rest are the same: an analog VCA, where the control voltage is the RMS value of the audio signal.
http://www.ovnilab.com/articles/comptypes.shtml

There is also a type named a 'Soft Limiter', which controls the amplitude based on the instant value of the signal, without measuring the RMS, and without integrating the measured RMS before applying it to the gain control element.


The program that I tested earlier, 'Sound Lock' is nothing more than a digital emulation of a VCA, with all the dials hardcoded (except the trigger level). It introduces the same audio artifacts as the VLC compressor

I thought a 'limiter' will do something different than a 'dynamic range compressor', but 'Sound Lock' is the same thing under a different name.


Now, all I need to find out is what exactly is so bothering at a soundtrack after a strong dynamic compression is applied, and how exactly is a strong compression different from a good audio mix that doesn't need any compression at the play time. I have no idea how to describe what bothers after a strong dynamic compression, but it's annoying enough to notice it during a movie.[/list]

[tooki]

I'm little hijacking this thread, asking another similar question :
I have the same concern, but for car audio. the sound has too much dynamic range for me in a car, the car makes noise, even modern cars, there is always some background noise.
I'm searching for some device, that could compress the sound, and level it just above the noise level of the car.
does such a device exists ?
thanks.

Back in the day Phillips patented and briefly produced a car radio that had a microphone that attached to the bodywork in the footwell. The idea was that the microphone would measure the background noise and then the radio would adjust its volume to compensate. I thought this was a winning feature, but it clearly flopped in the market place. It's long enough ago that the patent will have lapsed, but I haven't seen this feature added to any mainstream manufacturer's line or I would have bought one.

Its found on higher end cars in their OEM headunits and easily integrated on a modern CAN system with more information than just ambient levels, but the complications of adding external microphones is a challenge for aftermarket installs. Similarly the problem the OP is having is solved in many high end TVs which have (probably lookahead) limiters (not compressors) available to level out advertisements or movie sound tracks.

Back in 2001, I bought a Blaupunkt San Francisco CD70 car stereo, which included a microphone for both initial EQ calibration, and for real-time volume and EQ compensation for noise. Here’s Crutchfield’s blurb on the feature:

Dynamic Noise Covering System (DNC): This feature helps mask noise generated by your vehicle while driving. When your vehicle is in motion, the DNC system automatically adjusts the radio volume. The volume is adjusted depending upon frequency ranges and noise development inside your vehicle. The DNC system uses the supplied microphone to determine which frequencies have been affected, and compensates by adjusting those frequencies that need boosting or cutting.

My parents’ Volvo that they had up until recently (a V50, mid-2000s model year I think) had active noise cancelation — it was an inline 5-cylinder, so kinda loud engine I suppose. Not sure if it used a microphone or just synced with the engine timing.


Lots and lots and lots of cars have speed-dependent volume adjustment. I know my 2005 Mazda3 did.

[tooki]

I'm little hijacking this thread, asking another similar question :
I have the same concern, but for car audio. the sound has too much dynamic range for me in a car, the car makes noise, even modern cars, there is always some background noise.
I'm searching for some device, that could compress the sound, and level it just above the noise level of the car.
does such a device exists ?
thanks.

Re-encode those recordings with too much range through a 2:1 compressor. I used to do this back in the cassette days in order to improve audibility in noisy vehicles.
In those days it was a piece of hardware. Now it is a piece of software.

Netflix playing on a settop box (Apple TV, Chromecast, whatever) doesn’t provide any avenue for changing audio parameters, never mind an opportunity to re-encode. I do use the compressor in my receiver, but the success does depend on the source content, too.

[mikerj]

LIke I said before, central channel is dialog/voice channel ... You increase volume of central channel and decrease overall volume... If there is still to much bass decrease subwoofer volume too (it is called effects channel for a reason...)

My old Yamaha receiver actually has something called  "Night mode" that does something like that....

Regards,

Sinisa

This doesn't really help because surround information can be at quite low levels so if you are turning down everything except the centre channel you will be losing that detail.

[nctnico]

In a normal room, with normal ambient noises for a city home, it's either that the action scenes are too loud, or the dialogs are too low to hear them during normal or quiet scenes.

First, I don't have any hearing problems that I know of, and I noticed the dynamic ranges is annoying especially in the recent years movies.
- with headsets it's OK, maybe some scenes are too loud, but it's bearable
- with stereo speakers, dialogs are sometimes hard to hear even for normal scenes, for quiet scene I found myself manually boosting the volume

Changing the player, the room, or the speakers doesn't make the problem go away, so I guess it's some recent audio trend or technology in movies. I tried the dynamic range compressor from VLC, a few other compressing or voice enhancing settings from the sound card (Creative SB Pro), and not happy with the results.

First of all turn down the bass (low frequencies) using an equalizer. The audio compressor in VLC works a little but I still use the volume control a lot.

[james_s]

I like the high dynamic range, it's nice to have a theatrical experience at home. Something to compress the dynamic range ought to be built into every player/receiver/TV these days for situations where one does not want anything too loud. The technology to achieve that is trivial.

In a nutshell you cannot recover dynamic range that is not present in the audio track, but you can easily reduce the dynamic range to taste when playing.

[AndyC_772]

It's interesting (IMHO!) to see how the difference between audio quality vs available processing power has changed.

It used to be that the worst sounding audio equipment was cheap and simple, whereas better equipment was more costly but tended to have greater processing power available. Music, much more so than movies, was heavily compressed to suit the meagre capabilities of crappy equipment.

Nowadays, the worst sounding equipment people use is the mobile phone - a device which isn't cheap, and which has abundant processing power that could easily be harnessed to post-process any sound recording to best suit its tiny speakers. Conversely, expensive hi-fi equipment tends to be relatively simple.

The loudness war has been spoiling the sound of recorded music for decades. Why is it not now finally over?

[DrGeoff]

I'd suggest that this patent expired some time ago. Even Mazda have auto volume adjustment based on background noise level.
However this won't solve the OP's problem, as the adjustment time is too slow. They need to either compress the dynamic range at the source, or add a processor inline to perform compression of the dynamic range.
Back in the 1980's I used to find that compressing the whole signal (very low threshold, fast attack) with a VCA compressor at 2:1 was usually sufficient.

Interesting tip, I'll give it a try, thanks! I would like to reverse engineer the time constants.
Do you have a schematic, or hints how to find the one you used back then, please?


Looking up for "VCA compressor", I found these type of compressors:

• VCA - Voltage Controlled Amplifier
• FET - Field Effect Transistor
• Optical - uses a lightbulb on the audio path to detect the audio RMS, and a photoresistor in the negative feedback loop to adjust the gain
• OTA - Operational Transconductance Amplifier
• Tube
• Feed-forward - while all the above types do the compressing on the fly, analogical style, the Feed-forward needs to look ahead, so it will add some latency and it seems the only one that is implemented digitally

This type of classification for compressors seems unusual from the engineering standpoint, but is common for the sound record industry. Except the last one, which seems to be a DSP (Digital Signal Processor), all the rest are the same: an analog VCA, where the control voltage is the RMS value of the audio signal.
http://www.ovnilab.com/articles/comptypes.shtml

There is also a type named a 'Soft Limiter', which controls the amplitude based on the instant value of the signal, without measuring the RMS, and without integrating the measured RMS before applying it to the gain control element.


The program that I tested earlier, 'Sound Lock' is nothing more than a digital emulation of a VCA, with all the dials hardcoded (except the trigger level). It introduces the same audio artifacts as the VLC compressor

I thought a 'limiter' will do something different than a 'dynamic range compressor', but 'Sound Lock' is the same thing under a different name.


Now, all I need to find out is what exactly is so bothering at a soundtrack after a strong dynamic compression is applied, and how exactly is a strong compression different from a good audio mix that doesn't need any compression at the play time. I have no idea how to describe what bothers after a strong dynamic compression, but it's annoying enough to notice it during a movie.[/list]

The response was intended for the car audio poster, to reduce dynamic range for listening in noisy environments.
However, this application is not the same as the use of a compressor in audio recording or mixing situations, where peaks are compressed relative to the RMS value.
In this case it is similar to the old dBx noise reduction system for tapes, where the entire dynamic range of the incoming signal is compressed, and then expanded on playback. In this case we just use the compression part of it to reduce the dynamic range of the entire signal, with a fast attack time and relatively slow release time.
For car audio in the 1980's I used to use the old NE571 compander chip. Check out the data sheet and you will see examples of its use.

[DrGeoff]

I like the high dynamic range, it's nice to have a theatrical experience at home. Something to compress the dynamic range ought to be built into every player/receiver/TV these days for situations where one does not want anything too loud. The technology to achieve that is trivial.

In a nutshell you cannot recover dynamic range that is not present in the audio track, but you can easily reduce the dynamic range to taste when playing.

You can, but it is artificial. Use an expander.

[DrGeoff]

It's interesting (IMHO!) to see how the difference between audio quality vs available processing power has changed.

It used to be that the worst sounding audio equipment was cheap and simple, whereas better equipment was more costly but tended to have greater processing power available. Music, much more so than movies, was heavily compressed to suit the meagre capabilities of crappy equipment.

Nowadays, the worst sounding equipment people use is the mobile phone - a device which isn't cheap, and which has abundant processing power that could easily be harnessed to post-process any sound recording to best suit its tiny speakers. Conversely, expensive hi-fi equipment tends to be relatively simple.

The loudness war has been spoiling the sound of recorded music for decades. Why is it not now finally over?

It is. Standards have been agreed upon for loudness values in various media distribution. Lookup streaming services LUFS.

[klunkerbus]

I rarely need or want the theatre effect at home.  Part of my "fix" for everyday TV viewing is to leave the subwoofer off and run the amp in "all channel stereo" mode, which I've made sure my last 3 or 4 amps all had.  That certainly helps get the front or center channel voice content spread throughout the room.  The "night mode" on my current Onkyo amps doesn't seem to do anything, but IIRC it only kicks in for certain encoding formats. 

[james_s]

I like the high dynamic range, it's nice to have a theatrical experience at home. Something to compress the dynamic range ought to be built into every player/receiver/TV these days for situations where one does not want anything too loud. The technology to achieve that is trivial.

In a nutshell you cannot recover dynamic range that is not present in the audio track, but you can easily reduce the dynamic range to taste when playing.

You can, but it is artificial. Use an expander.

I don't consider that "recovering" dynamic range that has been left out, rather it is simply creating as you point out artificial dynamic range.

Why switchable dynamic range reduction is not built into virtually all consumer audio gear I don't know.

[metrologist]

I just don't want the commercials to come on so much louder than the regular programming. Wasn't there a law?

I boosted the center channel on my home theater system and that seemed all that was needed for me.

[AndyC_772]

It is. Standards have been agreed upon for loudness values in various media distribution. Lookup streaming services LUFS.

Wow. Streaming services and crappy phone speakers actually - albeit indirectly - help improve sound quality for the rest of us? Who'd have thought it? 

[DrGeoff]

I just don't want the commercials to come on so much louder than the regular programming. Wasn't there a law?

I boosted the center channel on my home theater system and that seemed all that was needed for me.

Laws are of little use, as they only apply to a particular jurisdiction.
Standards and agreements for broadcast and streaming systems have come into effect and are being adopted.
Commercials that breach the standards are usually not accepted by the broadcaster.

[DrGeoff]

It is. Standards have been agreed upon for loudness values in various media distribution. Lookup streaming services LUFS.

Wow. Streaming services and crappy phone speakers actually - albeit indirectly - help improve sound quality for the rest of us? Who'd have thought it? 

A streaming service playlist is like a personal radio channel.
You do not want to have to reach for the volume control for each track. Hence the need for loudness standards.

[james_s]

I just don't want the commercials to come on so much louder than the regular programming. Wasn't there a law?

I boosted the center channel on my home theater system and that seemed all that was needed for me.

That's one of the main reasons I have almost entirely ceased using any sort of broadcast media. Regardless of what they say, commercials are absolutely louder than the rest of the content, it's obnoxious. As if commercials weren't obnoxious enough to begin with.

There seems to be a positive feedback loop where advertisers try harder to grab your attention above all the noise, leading people to further tune out and ignore them, leading to yet louder and more irritating commercials.

[floobydust]

I'm puzzled why dynamic range is too high for movies, for home play.
In the old days, you compressed to go onto analog media and expanded on playback. If you did not expansion, then you got overly compressed audio, which was tolerable.

Present day, either movies are encoded with some garbage algorithm, or the playback decode should be doing compression?

My experience of Dolby is it never works well outside of the lab or a technical paper. They patent their algorithms and you can't just buy a decode IC. Gotta buy an entire AV receiver.
It's really screwed up audio- from being something a person could build to now having to always be on the remote's volume control.
I have no idea if royalties have been paid to Dolby or Hughes on my media player, if it is actually decoding or fudging it.

[Sal Ammoniac]

I think movie dynamic range (on Blu-Ray and DVD) is just right. But, then again, I've got a dedicated theatre room with sound insulation, excellent sound system, and my nearest neighbor is 1/4 mile away, so I can crank up the volume as much as I want.

I don't want to see this changed to accommodate the lowest common denominator... I'd rather see separate, selectable, audio tracks--one full dynamic range for people like me, and one with compressed dynamic range for those that desire that.

[james_s]

Is there even a need for separate tracks though? I mean is there something I'm missing here? Isn't it trivial to compress the dynamic range? I know there are lots of AVC circuits out there.

[floobydust]

Scenes with dialog are too quiet, turn up the volume and then an action scene comes in and gunfire is shaking my entire house. Then an explosion scene shakes the house even more, walls are rattling. I have 300W/ch and dual 15" main speakers, no subwoofer. It can handle full dynamic range, but I can't hear the quiet stuff.

It seems like crappy mixing, actually. Does dialog have to be -40dB down?

Surround channels are smaller speakers, they can't take as much power so I see a need for a compressor or limiter there.

[BrianHG]

In a normal room, with normal ambient noises for a city home, it's either that the action scenes are too loud, or the dialogs are too low to hear them during normal or quiet scenes.

First, I don't have any hearing problems that I know of, and I noticed the dynamic ranges is annoying especially in the recent years movies.
- with headsets it's OK, maybe some scenes are too loud, but it's bearable
- with stereo speakers, dialogs are sometimes hard to hear even for normal scenes, for quiet scene I found myself manually boosting the volume

Changing the player, the room, or the speakers doesn't make the problem go away, so I guess it's some recent audio trend or technology in movies. I tried the dynamic range compressor from VLC, a few other compressing or voice enhancing settings from the sound card (Creative SB Pro), and not happy with the results.

First of all turn down the bass (low frequencies) using an equalizer. The audio compressor in VLC works a little but I still use the volume control a lot.

VLC's limiter sucks, but sort of functional.  If you want that 1 level audio based on acoustic energy tuned to human ear sensitivity instead of peak signal level, use the one built into Windows as I posted.  It will also then work for all other apps on your system as well.

[RoGeorge]

Standards have been agreed upon for loudness values in various media distribution. Lookup streaming services LUFS.

Again, thank you for mentioning the LUFS, which I didn't know about.


After some searching, my understanding is that the most upsetting is not the RMS dynamic range, but the LRA, which is used by the broadcast industry to measure and control exactly what bothered me with some movies.
LU - Loudness Units (dB) - similar with RMS (Root Mean Square), except that LU is taking into account the physiological response of the ear using a K filter
LUFS - Loudness Units Full Scale (dB)
LRA - Loudness Range Audio - similar with the dynamic range, except it is measured using LU and it does not take into account silence periods (some Gating is applied to calculate LRA)
Better explanations here: http://www.tcelectronic.com/loudness/loudness-explained/

Measuring the LRA of an audio program doesn't seem to be possible on the fly, so in order to apply a compression that will keep the LRA at a comfortable level, the whole audio program need to be known in advance. If this is true, then an offline movie or an audio compilation for the car can be dialed to the desired LRA, but for commercials only the broadcaster can align the volume with the rest of the program.

TL;DR - movie players should have two knobs for audio: a Volume knob and a LRA knob. Will look for that.

[RoGeorge]

...use the one [loudness control] built into Windows as I posted.

I couldn't find a loudness setting first time you mentioned it. Now, that you mentioned it again, I googled it. Indeed, there is a Windows 10 Loudness Equalization checkbox that I didn't know about, but not for all playback devices. For the main sound card I don't have the Loudness Equalization checkbox. The soundblaster have only an 'Enable audio enhancements' whatever that mean, at it was checked by default. For the monitors' speakers, which are seen as different soundcards because the monitors are connected by DP/HDMI, there is a Loudness Equalization checkbox.

Anyway, the Win10 loudness correction works great with the monitor's speakers, way better than the SoundBlaster's 'Smart Volume' or 'Dialog Plus' settings, thanks for the tip.

[BrianHG]

...use the one [loudness control] built into Windows as I posted.

I couldn't find a loudness setting first time you mentioned it. Now, that you mentioned it again, I googled it. Indeed, there is a Windows 10 Loudness Equalization checkbox that I didn't know about, but not for all playback devices. For the main sound card I don't have the Loudness Equalization checkbox. The soundblaster have only an 'Enable audio enhancements' whatever that mean, at it was checked by default. For the monitors' speakers, which are seen as different soundcards because the monitors are connected by DP/HDMI, there is a Loudness Equalization checkbox.

Anyway, the Win10 loudness correction works great with the monitor's speakers, way better than the SoundBlaster's 'Smart Volume' or 'Dialog Plus' settings, thanks for the tip.

Now you got it!.  It's available in Windows 7 and up.
Just click on you speaker's properties and go to enhancements.
You can even select enhancements just for 1 set of speakers like headphones or line out and disable the enhancement for HDMI audio, or, vice-vesa...  Ignore all the rest like bass management since it's for things like small laptop speakers...

Just highlight the 'Loudness Equalization' and remember to click 'settings' and set it to 'Short', and even you subsonic and bass will be lower volumed down while the speech volume will be raised.

Also, it is the best for youtube videos in this setting.  Everything comes out at 1 set volume, the ads, cheap weak recorded amateur camcorder videos, over gained audio videos, you name it.

The only issue, is that when I want dynamic range, I need to remember to turn it off...

[Bud]

As to difference in audio level in commercials vs programs , in 2012 Canada introduced a requirement for broadcasters and digital providers to broadcast commercials and programs at a same level. Not sure how effective that has been, because i do not watch TV.

[RoGeorge]

You can even select enhancements just for 1 set of speakers like headphones or line out and disable the enhancement for HDMI audio, or, vice-vesa...

Not always, that is why I attached the pics for 2 different audio devices.

i.e. For the standfloor speakers (driven by the onboard SoundBlaster card) it does NOT have the win10 loudness checkbox. Only for the HDMI audio (the small internal speakers inside monitor) it has win10 loudness, but I don't use the internal speakers.

[BrianHG]

That is strange.  I wonder if you disable 'Sound Blaster's' drivers and use Windows High definition media drivers in it's place will give you the option.  All the speakers and HDMI and SPDIF on all my PCs and Laptops speaker options all have the feature, however, none of them are sound blaster, they are either Windows High Definition Audio devices 192K24bit audio device, Intel HDMI audio device, NVIDIA HDMI audio device, or Windows 192K24bit Media device drivers.

Try disabling the 'Signal Enhancements' option for your sound-blaster card and maybe it will allow Microsoft's software enhancements.

After googling, it looks like you would need to un-install Sound-Blaster's control panel, you know, that fancy volume control panel.  Once un-installed, your audio still works, but your volume control and features will use Microsoft's built in features.  You may not want this, so there might not be anything you can do.

[Assafl]

Fidelity is important. Getting the intent of the musicians, audio effects, recording and mixing engineers is important. Heck - even foley is important. Imagine a horror movie without the leaf rustle the monster makes as it stretches its limb ready to eat the chearleader (done using mylar/cellophane by the foley artist).

I, for one, never want anyone to mess with fidelity. A good decoder (like the Momentum Data Systems DAE, when programmed correctly!) can do a stellar job of relocating the voice from the center to the L/R channels when center is missing, squashing the LFE channel (when bass capability is missing/and or limited) and of really cutting information down (e.g. anything under the 80Hz limit to the main speakers).

Override (downmix) controls are also available for crappy mastering where they forget to embed the DRC information. Works well on DAE boards - but is fiddlesome.

FWIW - I never understood why a good quality card that merely implements the various Dolby and THX modes faithfully (as written in the specs) is so expensive. What should be a data sheet implementation is needlessly complex and becomes more so when the HDMI gets added to it.

But never ever mess with fidelity. Oh - and never re-edit the film for any reason. Just like you can't cut out boobs from impressionist paintings, don't take them out from films. If, Mr. Mastering Engineer, you don't like it, find another movie to master or get another job. 

BTW - I have helped many implementations of audio systems where dialog was unintelligble and many times it as an incorrectly set up system (e.g. not turning off center for a stereo system). And sometimes, there is no option than to select downmix, which is often hidden in settings.
 

[Assafl]

My experience of Dolby is it never works well outside of the lab or a technical paper. They patent their algorithms and you can't just buy a decode IC. Gotta buy an entire AV receiver.
It's really screwed up audio- from being something a person could build to now having to always be on the remote's volume control.
I have no idea if royalties have been paid to Dolby or Hughes on my media player, if it is actually decoding or fudging it.

If it says Dolby (and from a reputable source) then it is licensed. So is THX.

Sadly, neither actually tests the implementation, so it could very well be that the decoders are not used properly.

AFAIK THX did have certification (like THX select and THX ultra2) that did test the ability to reproduce the dynamic range and implement the standards correctly.

That said THX certification was costly as its audience was movie theater (that would buy a pallet of THX certified Crown amplifiers), had lots of tests and took time, and they were very picky. Also, since their audience was movie theaters where the directors wanted to force the dynamic range - there were always arguments going on with home devices about compression (allow/disallow), Select was supposedly cheaper - but I never saw one that carried the label.

There are therefore three way to pick an Audio stack for home use:
1. Wait for the reviewers to test DRC (especially the DRC logic) on AV forums and the like. Yup - Amazon reviews are useless for audio.
2. Buy a reference design (like an MDS DAE based processor) - that is very expensive and they tend to be either pro equipment or mixed (pro/home) devices. Popular ones are guaranteed to work well.
3. Buy from a vendor that has a history - and you believe will support the DRC logic over time (like a Oppo can be expect to - if not guaranteed).

Note that none of these consist (sadly) of visiting a hifi-shops and/or getting a friends advise. In an effort to make it universal and flexible they made it far too complex for a hifi store owner to understand. But some integrators are okay for this type of query.

Also - building a system that has a pretty darn good DR is not that expensive. Amplification is cheap. Processing is relatively cheap (even if the Logic is wrong). The only component in the audio chain that limits DR is the loudpeakers. Many people seem to prefer smaller speakers which exacerbates the problem. 
 

[IanMacdonald]

Well, I've stopped going to local cinemas because the sound level in action scenes was physically painful. Not that there are meany decent films these days anyway, they all seem to follow the things blowing up or people screaming stereotype. Sometimes, both at once.

In some cases it was verging on painful with earplugs in.

[gnif]

Also - building a system that has a pretty darn good DR is not that expensive. Amplification is cheap. Processing is relatively cheap (even if the Logic is wrong). The only component in the audio chain that limits DR is the loudpeakers. Many people seem to prefer smaller speakers which exacerbates the problem.

I agree entirely, I ended up building a system for my office that kicks the crap out of the hifi I have in my lounge room. Properly designed bi-amplified system with great dynamic range, sounds beautiful and cost around $500 in total, including materials to build the speaker cabinets .

These days it really annoys me to find content that has been horribly compressed, I am always on the lookout for sources with great DR.

[DrGeoff]

Also - building a system that has a pretty darn good DR is not that expensive. Amplification is cheap. Processing is relatively cheap (even if the Logic is wrong). The only component in the audio chain that limits DR is the loudpeakers. Many people seem to prefer smaller speakers which exacerbates the problem.

I agree entirely, I ended up building a system for my office that kicks the crap out of the hifi I have in my lounge room. Properly designed bi-amplified system with great dynamic range, sounds beautiful and cost around $500 in total, including materials to build the speaker cabinets .

These days it really annoys me to find content that has been horribly compressed, I am always on the lookout for sources with great DR.

Likewise. Nothing beats a well designed system.
Did the pre-amp, filters and power amplifiers and bi-amplified speaker systems.
Replicated the same bi-amplified speakers in the studio for mastering use as well.

[Assafl]

Also - building a system that has a pretty darn good DR is not that expensive. Amplification is cheap. Processing is relatively cheap (even if the Logic is wrong). The only component in the audio chain that limits DR is the loudpeakers. Many people seem to prefer smaller speakers which exacerbates the problem.

I agree entirely, I ended up building a system for my office that kicks the crap out of the hifi I have in my lounge room. Properly designed bi-amplified system with great dynamic range, sounds beautiful and cost around $500 in total, including materials to build the speaker cabinets .

These days it really annoys me to find content that has been horribly compressed, I am always on the lookout for sources with great DR.

Bi-amping is inherently better not just due to active filters - but mainly because each driver is properly filtered. Clipping will not affect other drivers, and if you filter the low-bass out, you will avoid most clipping based distortion entirely, maximizing the Stereo phenomenon and gaining intelligibility in the process. You will still give up some DR in the room (lack of low woofer/subwoofer ranges) but for most purposes it will be hardly missed.

For a regular speaker one must make sure the bass drivers (let alone the amplifiers) don't clip. Depending on the filter slope, sometimes you have to cut the bass off at 100-120Hz. The first thing that goes is intelligibility. A movie that has a constant rumble (or an organ pedal, or a double bass doing B0 or E1) in the background may kill the audio of a smaller system due to clipping.

Boggling how many people have the filters turned off.....

[RoGeorge]

local cinemas ... the sound level in action scenes was physically painful

That reminds me of an IceAge movie seen at iMax. After about half an hour I ended up literally sticking the ticket leftovers into my ears.
Ticket leftovers can make great earplugs, just don't forget to pull them out when the movie is over, or else you'll get funny looks from other people. 

[gnif]

For a regular speaker one must make sure the bass drivers (let alone the amplifiers) don't clip. Depending on the filter slope, sometimes you have to cut the bass off at 100-120Hz. The first thing that goes is intelligibility. A movie that has a constant rumble (or an organ pedal, or a double bass doing B0 or E1) in the background may kill the audio of a smaller system due to clipping.

For sure, initially I did not filter the lows out, but after I found this I added another active crossover to the pre-amp to send everything under 120Hz to a sub woofer I found in a junk pile, after bypassing it's abysmal filters it sounds very very good. I used Linkwitz Riley 24dB/octave crossovers for my design (keeping everything phase aligned ) and some voltage controlled amplifiers for volume control (I asked nicely and they sent me some samples for my little pre-amp).

[floobydust]

Classic paper Are Movies Too Loud?, and consensus (in theaters) is yes.

I think part of the problem goes back to the "volume unit", the 1942 standard based on a VU meter. Then the PPM meter became popular in European broadcast.
I see several standards, all with different integrating times, weighting,  and alignment levels.
How do you measure volume?

[DrGeoff]

How do you measure volume?

Now it is done with Loudness Units (EBU R128), Conveniently 1LU is also 1dB.

[tooki]

Classic paper Are Movies Too Loud?, and consensus (in theaters) is yes.

I think part of the problem goes back to the "volume unit", the 1942 standard based on a VU meter. Then the PPM meter became popular in European broadcast.
I see several standards, all with different integrating times, weighting,  and alignment levels.
How do you measure volume?

Very interesting read, that Dolby article!

I found another (seemingly a rip off of the Dolby one, but with added info) that mentions standards for trailers and commercials that emerged a few years after the Dolby paper. And I wonder if those standards are responsible for a common problem when I watch YouTube on my home cinema via Apple TV: the advertisements that play are often many times louder than a typical YouTube video! They seemingly have been mixed to cinema sound levels, while YouTube is often a bit on the quiet side. End result: between videos, I get ads that literally make my walls shake (sometimes from narration alone!).

Another distantly related volume issue: stereo vs Dolby Digital. Like most receivers, mine has “virtual surround” and “multichannel stereo” modes for playing 2-channel audio out of all the speakers. But that means that at a given volume control setting, multichannel stereo ends up being WAY louder than true 2-channel stereo, and way louder than an actual DD soundtrack. So as I switch between stereo and DD content, the effective volume level jumps around like crazy. I wish my receiver let me program, for example, an automatic -10db adjustment on multichannel stereo. (Denon, I’m talking to you!)

[paulca]

There have been a few movies recently where the dialog has been very quiet, but the action very loud.

With only a little bass boost and having to turn the volume up to hear what they are saying the quiet bits, things started walking off shelves when they cut instantly to a loud action scene.

[tooki]

There have been a few movies recently where the dialog has been very quiet, but the action very loud.

”A few”?! The whole point of this thread is that it’s extremely common, and has been a problem for decades now...

[paulca]

... and built in compressors in TVs (often called dynamic volume) are rubbish.

Maybe an actual decent compressor might help.  Sorry if this has been proposed I haven't read the whole thread.

[691175002]

I find that dialog in movies is completely incomprehensible at sane volume settings, especially in an apartment with ambient noise and neighbors.

I normally turn on subtitles.  If you are used to subtitles they become more or less transparent/automatic, however I know that they can seem intrusive to some watchers.

Volume normalization does the job as well but tends to noticeably degrade the audio quality of the movie so its more of a last resort.  Normalizing something with a good soundtrack feels pretty bad.

[paulca]

Volume normalization does the job as well but tends to noticeably degrade the audio quality of the movie so its more of a last resort.  Normalizing something with a good soundtrack feels pretty bad.

I think that's more to do with the TV's implementation of the normalization.

Put BBC Radio One through a quality audio level meter.  It barely moves from 0db when there is music playing.  Almost 0 dynamic range, but sounds okay.  they use many thousands and thousands of $$$ multi-band compressors though.

[DrGeoff]

I think that's more to do with the TV's implementation of the normalization.

Put BBC Radio One through a quality audio level meter.  It barely moves from 0db when there is music playing.  Almost 0 dynamic range, but sounds okay.  they use many thousands and thousands of $$$ multi-band compressors though.

That's because they use a broadcast compressor. This is designed to maximise the RF modulation.

[DrGeoff]

... and built in compressors in TVs (often called dynamic volume) are rubbish.

Maybe an actual decent compressor might help.  Sorry if this has been proposed I haven't read the whole thread.

'Dynamic volume' is inherently non-linear and can sound awful.
So too can a compressor when used incorrectly.
Compressing the entire audio at around 2:1 (ie the knee or threshold is set to as low as possible) produces a dynamic-range compressed, but linear gain transfer.

[Sal Ammoniac]

Please--don't compress audio by default on soundtracks. Don't pander to the lowest common denominator. Let people who need restricted dynamic range do their own compressing and don't force that crap on the rest of us.

[paulca]

Please--don't compress audio by default on soundtracks. Don't pander to the lowest common denominator. Let people who need restricted dynamic range do their own compressing and don't force that crap on the rest of us.

Agreed.

[DrGeoff]

Please--don't compress audio by default on soundtracks. Don't pander to the lowest common denominator. Let people who need restricted dynamic range do their own compressing and don't force that crap on the rest of us.

Nobody said anything about 'default'. This discussion is about mechanisms to improve listenability in noisy or less-than-perfect environments.

[floobydust]

Compression was mandatory with analog media, a long time ago with film optical soundtracks, mag tape etc. mostly for signal/noise ratio.

[Zero999]

Compression was mandatory with analog media, a long time ago with film optical soundtracks, mag tape etc. mostly for signal/noise ratio.

I would have thought they'd use companding, which is different to what's been talked about here.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Companding

[floobydust]

Movie audio reminds me of turning on an (analog) expander without the mating compressor. Dynamics are all weird and the ear's own AGC clashes with the incoming audio.

[Buriedcode]

Maybe I'm missing something here, but surely all film audio is heavily compressed already, and it is much easier to add further compression, than to remove it.  I mean in the cinema, especially in films with gunshots and explosions these are obviously significantly quieter, and close up dialogue is significantly louder - that is the whole point of compression.

Perhaps in recent years producers have dialed back the amount of compression used as these days folks tend to have more capable sound systems for their viewing experience,  but I can't say I have had trouble hearing quiet dialogues at a volume that prevents explosions being "too loud" (as in heard outside the residence). 

For those who say they wish to 'feel' the explosions in a film... you surely can't expect to have a system capable of that whilst simultaneously have it not wake up the neighbors?  If I want an immersive experience - I go to the big screen.

[tooki]

Maybe I'm missing something here, but surely all film audio is heavily compressed already, and it is much easier to add further compression, than to remove it.

I think you must be missing something. Film audio is anything but compressed.

I mean in the cinema, especially in films with gunshots and explosions these are obviously significantly quieter, and close up dialogue is significantly louder - that is the whole point of compression.

Significantly quieter than what? People haven't been complaining about explosions being too quiet, we are complaining that with dialog set to a comfortable volume, the explosions and music are deafeningly loud.

Perhaps in recent years producers have dialed back the amount of compression used as these days folks tend to have more capable sound systems for their viewing experience,  but I can't say I have had trouble hearing quiet dialogues at a volume that prevents explosions being "too loud" (as in heard outside the residence).

They weren't "dialing back" compression since they weren't using it. But since the 1970s, the dynamic range of movies has been going up. This isn't because they were using compression, but because of how they're mixing it to begin with. The fact that by the 1990s, some sound editors were finding themselves needing to wear hearing protection (!!!) while mixing at the cinema reference levels tells a lot.

For those who say they wish to 'feel' the explosions in a film... you surely can't expect to have a system capable of that whilst simultaneously have it not wake up the neighbors?  If I want an immersive experience - I go to the big screen.

What a silly thing to say. Nobody here was asking for such a thing. Are you being deliberately obtuse to the entire point of this thread? Did you even read it before commenting? A lot of the complaint was about it being painfully loud in cinemas.

[Buriedcode]

I think you must be missing something. Film audio is anything but compressed.

I think I need examples here.  On big-budget films with lots of "loud" scenes, I generally haven't had to adjust the volume, leaving it at a point where the explosions aren't particularly loud, and the dialogue is loud enough to hear clearly.  My point was that if it wasn't compression in film, either the explosions would be deafening, or the dialogue would be inaudible.   I'm unsure what you mean by 'anything but compressed'.. I assumed, perhaps wrongly that all film audio was compressed in some way, because for many films, the dynamic range is simply too wide for any sound system to reproduce.

I mean in the cinema, especially in films with gunshots and explosions these are obviously significantly quieter, and close up dialogue is significantly louder - that is the whole point of compression.

Significantly quieter than what? People haven't been complaining about explosions being too quiet, we are complaining that with dialog set to a comfortable volume, the explosions and music are deafeningly loud.

For those who say they wish to 'feel' the explosions in a film... you surely can't expect to have a system capable of that whilst simultaneously have it not wake up the neighbors?  If I want an immersive experience - I go to the big screen.

What a silly thing to say. Nobody here was asking for such a thing. Are you being deliberately obtuse to the entire point of this thread? Did you even read it before commenting? A lot of the complaint was about it being painfully loud in cinemas.
[/quote]
Ok,, I believe I misinterpreted RoGeorge's reply #11

Just to be clear, I love to literally feel the explosions, too, but in a cinema theater. At home, this is not always possible, or even desirable.

So the main complaint here is... either... explosions are too loud when set at a volume that allows one to hear all dialogue clearly. Or.. coming at it from the other end.. dialogue sections are too quiet when set at a volume that prevents explosions from being troublesome. Obviously I haven't watched all films, so some examples would be good.

Also, I'm sure the dynamic range is different for home media than it is for the big screen - completely different sound systems and in the former, a whole range of different systems, at least I assume so. So the volume/range at the cinema is surely a separate issue?

[tooki]

I think you must be missing something. Film audio is anything but compressed.

I think I need examples here.  On big-budget films with lots of "loud" scenes, I generally haven't had to adjust the volume, leaving it at a point where the explosions aren't particularly loud, and the dialogue is loud enough to hear clearly.  My point was that if it wasn't compression in film, either the explosions would be deafening, or the dialogue would be inaudible.   I'm unsure what you mean by 'anything but compressed'.. I assumed, perhaps wrongly that all film audio was compressed in some way, because for many films, the dynamic range is simply too wide for any sound system to reproduce.

Where do you get the idea that it's too wide to reproduce?!? What would that even mean?

So the main complaint here is... either... explosions are too loud when set at a volume that allows one to hear all dialogue clearly. Or.. coming at it from the other end.. dialogue sections are too quiet when set at a volume that prevents explosions from being troublesome. Obviously I haven't watched all films, so some examples would be good.

Yes, that's exactly the problem. You either experience pain (and/or anger the neighbors), or you can't hear the dialog.

Also, I'm sure the dynamic range is different for home media than it is for the big screen - completely different sound systems and in the former, a whole range of different systems, at least I assume so. So the volume/range at the cinema is surely a separate issue?

No, it's not. It's something cinemas have been receiving complaints about for years, which you'd know if you'd read this thread and the things linked from it, before commenting. Please read the paper floobydust linked earlier in this thread:

Classic paper Are Movies Too Loud?, and consensus (in theaters) is yes.

I think part of the problem goes back to the "volume unit", the 1942 standard based on a VU meter. Then the PPM meter became popular in European broadcast.
I see several standards, all with different integrating times, weighting,  and alignment levels.
How do you measure volume?

[Buriedcode]

I think you must be missing something. Film audio is anything but compressed.

I think I need examples here.  On big-budget films with lots of "loud" scenes, I generally haven't had to adjust the volume, leaving it at a point where the explosions aren't particularly loud, and the dialogue is loud enough to hear clearly.  My point was that if it wasn't compression in film, either the explosions would be deafening, or the dialogue would be inaudible.   I'm unsure what you mean by 'anything but compressed'.. I assumed, perhaps wrongly that all film audio was compressed in some way, because for many films, the dynamic range is simply too wide for any sound system to reproduce.

Where do you get the idea that it's too wide to reproduce?!? What would that even mean?

Well a gunshot can easily deafen a person in a room.  Jets engines can reach  140dB+ etc.. obviously a home sound system cannot reproduce this volume - thankfully.  But also there are scenes where the characters are tens of feet away, yet you can hear them very clearly.  These are necessary for the audience. My point is whilst this may not be simply a 'compressor' but rather they way the film is recorded, my point was.. the dynamic range is reduced when compared to reality, with actions films this is necessary.  With things that are supposed to be very quiet being louder, and things that can damage hearing being quieter - surely that fits the definition of 'compression' ?

Whether or not it requires further compression, limiting or more processor for the audience, of course it depends on the equipment, and the audience surely.

[tooki]

Well a gunshot can easily deafen a person in a room.  Jets engines can reach  140dB+ etc.. obviously a home sound system cannot reproduce this volume - thankfully.

Don't be so sure. A midrange home cinema probably could. A modern Dolby Atmos cinema easily can.

My point is whilst this may not be simply a 'compressor' but rather they way the film is recorded, my point was.. the dynamic range is reduced when compared to reality, with actions films this is necessary.  With things that are supposed to be very quiet being louder, and things that can damage hearing being quieter - surely that fits the definition of 'compression' ?

No. Compression means a specific thing, namely the automatic reduction of dynamic range by a (usually parametrized)  electronic circuit. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_range_compression

We've already established that the issue here is the mix -- again, you'd know this if you'd read this thread, and the referenced materials. Would you please do this before responding further??? We'd all be on the same page if you'd just catch up first!

[DrGeoff]

My point is whilst this may not be simply a 'compressor' but rather they way the film is recorded, my point was.. the dynamic range is reduced when compared to reality, with actions films this is necessary.  With things that are supposed to be very quiet being louder, and things that can damage hearing being quieter - surely that fits the definition of 'compression' ?

No. Compression means a specific thing, namely the automatic reduction of dynamic range by a (usually parametrized)  electronic circuit. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_range_compression

Compression refers to any reduction in dynamic range, whether it be automatic using electronic gain cells or manually by 'riding the fader', or even using tape. Whatever method is used, it is used to reduce the dynamic range of the input signal by changing the gain transfer characteristics.
Manual compression by riding the fader is used a lot in mixing rather than relying on the VCA/opto/FET compressor to do it. With automation available these days it is quite easy to draw in a fader change where a loud sound occurs, or increase the dialogue level in some passages.

[helius]

Many theatres now have "assistive listening devices", i.e. personal headphones that reproduce the movie's soundtrack at a louder level for the hearing impaired. If the volume of the main theatre PA was in fact "deafeningly loud" I don't think they would be necessary. QED?

[paulca]

There was research done by movie producers into how loud people will accept the action, explosions, gun shots etc.  It was found to depend on the length of the loud section.  Short sections of a few seconds people would tolerate very high volumes, as the period gets longer people start to get upset.

This is not helpful when you cut from a quiet home scene with people speaking quietly in hushed tones straight to a gun fight for 5 seconds.  It still makes you reach for the volume control as the floor starts bouncing.  I am also sure this is done deliberately, shock tactics with contrasting scenes.


I think the only solution is a compressor for the home system.  If the TV's built in compressor is rubbish (most are), then an external compressor. 

I just wonder how much one needs to spend to get "decent".  I also wonder if a software solution would work on something like a PI.  However we get into issues with audiophiles/fools and adding a decode/recode cycle and getting the PI compressor to support 7:2:1 and all the other digital multi-speaker formats.

[tooki]

My point is whilst this may not be simply a 'compressor' but rather they way the film is recorded, my point was.. the dynamic range is reduced when compared to reality, with actions films this is necessary.  With things that are supposed to be very quiet being louder, and things that can damage hearing being quieter - surely that fits the definition of 'compression' ?

No. Compression means a specific thing, namely the automatic reduction of dynamic range by a (usually parametrized)  electronic circuit. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_range_compression

Compression refers to any reduction in dynamic range, whether it be automatic using electronic gain cells or manually by 'riding the fader', or even using tape. Whatever method is used, it is used to reduce the dynamic range of the input signal by changing the gain transfer characteristics.
Manual compression by riding the fader is used a lot in mixing rather than relying on the VCA/opto/FET compressor to do it. With automation available these days it is quite easy to draw in a fader change where a loud sound occurs, or increase the dialogue level in some passages.

OK, that’s not how I’ve heard the term used. When it’s been done manualy, I’ve heard it referred to as the mix, not compression — to me compression has always implied something automatic.

Regardess, in the context of this discussion, compression has been referring to using a feature in a home cinema receiver to reduce dynamic range.

[tooki]

Many theatres now have "assistive listening devices", i.e. personal headphones that reproduce the movie's soundtrack at a louder level for the hearing impaired. If the volume of the main theatre PA was in fact "deafeningly loud" I don't think they would be necessary. QED?

I guess you also missed the point: if a soundtrack is mixed such that for a normal person to hear the dialog, the effects must be painfully loud, what makes you think a hearing-impaired person will be able to hear the dialog? Just because they can hear the effects doesn’t mean they’ll hear the dialog.

Also, are you *sure* the assistive listening devices are just headphones? I thought they involved devices that pair with a customer’s hearing aids.