# "The secret of maximum loudness" (new FabFilter video by Dan Worrall)



## Pier (Jul 18, 2021)

Not sure where to put this, but here's another of Dan's fantastic videos sponsored by FabFilter:


----------



## X-Bassist (Jul 20, 2021)

Pier said:


> Not sure where to put this, but here's another of Dan's fantastic videos sponsored by FabFilter:



I really dislike videos that start with “the answer will be at the end of the video” then at the end of the video say “the answer will be on the next video... part 2!”. Classic video bait and switch. If he was a used car salesman, this is where I walk out.

As this narrator would say “This could go on forever, in infititium, if the viewer continues down this rabbit hole. But we’ll leave this for now.”


----------



## Pier (Jul 20, 2021)

X-Bassist said:


> I really dislike videos that start with “the answer will be at the end of the video” then at the end of the video say “the answer will be on the next video... part 2!”. Classic video bait and switch. If he was a used car salesman, this is where I walk out.
> 
> As this narrator would say “This could go on forever, in infititium, if the viewer continues down this rabbit hole. But we’ll leave this for now.”


I agree but, to be fair, the video is already quite long and the topic merits to be explained in depth.

FabFilter paid Dan to produce this video (and many others) so a bit of marketing trickery is expected. This doesn't mean the educational content is bad.


----------



## Soundbed (Jul 20, 2021)

Was about to post this same video bc it appeared in my YT feed. Depending on your definition of Masterclass, this certainly could be considered one!



X-Bassist said:


> I really dislike videos that start with “the answer will be at the end of the video”


Yes I'm glad the amazing Dan Worrall did NOT do that at the beginning of this video.

Instead, he immediately apologises for the clickbait-y title, which clarifies it's only "part 1"... then he says, "you'll have to keep watching..." to find the answer (implying — to me, at least — that it will not even be fully answered in the first video).

And then he delivers more clear and concise content in 15 minutes than most videos / trainings / classes provide in an hour or more.

Amazing free content imho.


----------



## Pier (Jul 20, 2021)

Soundbed said:


> Amazing free content imho.


Totally.

Dan Worrall is the best audio educator in the world.


----------



## bill5 (Jul 20, 2021)

Soundbed said:


> he immediately apologises for the clickbait-y title, which clarifies it's only "part 1"... then he says, "you'll have to keep watching..." to find the answer (implying — to me, at least — that it will not even be fully answered in the first video).


Disagree; there's no way to know what that implies. He lost me at hello; there may be great info there, but I have zero patience for such games. (This is a fav tactic of the alt-med pimps)

Also I abhor the "Loudness Wars" and have no interest in that anyway, fortunately.


----------



## Soundbed (Jul 20, 2021)

Pier said:


> Totally.
> 
> Dan Worrall is the best audio educator in the world.


I would have thought Craig Anderton in terms of his overall contribution for the past couple decades, but when it comes to making informative videos you’re right, Dan is probably the best content creator I’ve seen.


----------



## Pier (Aug 9, 2021)

Here's part 2


----------



## Soundbed (Aug 9, 2021)

Pier said:


> Here's part 2



Awesome, a great way to start the week!


----------



## mscp (Aug 9, 2021)

Pier said:


> Here's part 2



What an awful waveform towards the end. It's as ugly as it sounds I'm sure.


----------



## Pier (Aug 9, 2021)

Phil81 said:


> What an awful waveform towards the end. It's as ugly as it sounds I'm sure.


Here's the video in question.

That flat bit does sound awful... what were the engineers thinking?


----------



## Soundbed (Aug 9, 2021)

Pier said:


> Here's the video in question.
> 
> That flat bit does sound awful... what were the engineers thinking?



I keep turning it down waiting for the distortion / saturation to clear up! 😂


----------



## mscp (Aug 9, 2021)

Pier said:


> That flat bit does sound awful... what were the engineers thinking?



Yeah, 3:21+ is lovely. Glad they chose Eilish.


----------



## mscp (Aug 9, 2021)

Soundbed said:


> I keep turning it down waiting for the distortion / saturation to clear up! 😂


Waveform loudness debate is not limited to threshold of pain, bleed ears to death type of arguments -- but I guess this is a long debate that would be better downed after a few pints of beer rather than over a sobering 16 pages of rampage online forum thread - since it's a completely subjective matter.


----------



## Soundbed (Aug 9, 2021)

Phil81 said:


> Waveform loudness debate is not limited to threshold of pain, bleed ears to death type of arguments -- but I guess this is a long debate that would be better downed after a few pints of beer rather than over a sobering 16 pages of rampage online forum thread - since it's a completely subjective matter.


There's no debate @Phil81


----------



## mscp (Aug 9, 2021)

Soundbed said:


> There's no debate @Phil81


One page threads are rare in these whereabouts. It caused a kernel crash over here. I need to update the firmware. Hold on.


----------



## Soundbed (Aug 9, 2021)

Phil81 said:


> One page threads are rare in these whereabouts. It caused a kernel crash over here. I need to update the firmware. Hold on.


What I mean is to a large extent I prefer to divorce the aesthetic choices from the point of the videos; the measurements of the final file that gets delivered. And the choices that led to that file (intentional and unintentional).

No arguments or debates about the aesthetics along the way to "loudness" seem necessary.

I think the point of the videos is how to make good music and deliver a final file, in 2021.


----------



## mscp (Aug 9, 2021)

Soundbed said:


> No arguments or debates about the aesthetics along the way to "loudness" seem necessary.


Fair enough, but aesthetics was not what I was solely referring to. Sorry for the confusion, and vagueness.



Soundbed said:


> I think the point of the videos is how to make good music and deliver a final file, in 2021.


Not at all, especially because 'good music' is 100% subjective. This is more of a technical video with some background. Also, that kind of loudness is not the standard of how files must be mixed and delivered in 2021, nor any other year, as it really depends on who you work for. But if you're referring to some Hollywood blockbusters, then yes, you nailed it. Not everyone in the industry abides to that though -- for a large number or reasons.

The point of the video is to discuss the engineering aspects of processing audio to the loudest way possible in order to fill every space within the DnR in the "best way" possible.

I can see why you got confused with my "waveform loudness debate" post. Wording. I didn't have much of a point, but there is an excessive amount of reasons why squashing audio is tragic to the listener over time, and that's why I wrote that it would be a more interesting thing to discuss it over a "pint of beer" (figuratively) rather than in a forum, as it is a long subject (in general).

Before the pandemic, I have "recently" left the cinemas countless times right in the middle of a movie, not because of the stories themselves were particularly bad, but because the audio was too damn loud ALL THE TIME, sometimes even fighting against the dialogue for space. It's borderline bad. And I'm not talking about independent movies.

Sometimes, the instrumentation is just a clout of "pitched noise" without discernible content except lead instruments/vocals that need to stand out (hence the word 'lead'). Sometimes I wonder if some people are just deliberately trying to fight each other to see who screams the loudest.

It's super early in the morning over here, so I guess I'm rambling.


----------



## jmauz (Aug 9, 2021)

Ugh. This video should be called 'Achieving Dull, Boring and Lifeless Walls of Sound.' 

More proliferation of removing dynamics from music. Shame this is coming from FabFilter; I quite like their plugs.


----------



## KEM (Aug 9, 2021)

If you ain’t redlining you ain’t headlining


----------



## Soundbed (Aug 10, 2021)

Phil81 said:


> that kind of loudness


What kind of loudness?


Phil81 said:


> that kind of loudness is not the standard of how files must be mixed and delivered in 2021


In regards to streaming, he specifically says there is no standard. In regards to CDs, he also implies there is no standard, and there’s no reason to make things overly “loud” … only relatively even, and the audience will adjust their own volume.

So what are you saying?




Phil81 said:


> The point of the video is to discuss the engineering aspects of processing audio to the loudest way possible in order to fill every space within the DnR in the "best way" possible.


I guess I think he’s trying to encourage people to back off the loudness wars.

There’s no mention of filling “every space possible” within the dnr that I noticed as “the point.” When discussing that sort of tactic I think he was low key frowning upon it, but letting people make their own (informed) choices.


----------



## Soundbed (Aug 10, 2021)

jmauz said:


> Ugh. This video should be called 'Achieving Dull, Boring and Lifeless Walls of Sound.'
> 
> More proliferation of removing dynamics from music. Shame this is coming from FabFilter; I quite like their plugs.


Where did he suggest anything of the sort as something to be desired?

I got the impression … he was pretty clear overall … about helping people understand that removing dynamic variation is NOT what makes people feel “loudness”.


----------



## pcohen12 (Aug 10, 2021)

jmauz said:


> Ugh. This video should be called 'Achieving Dull, Boring and Lifeless Walls of Sound.'
> 
> More proliferation of removing dynamics from music. Shame this is coming from FabFilter; I quite like their plugs.





Soundbed said:


> Where did he suggest anything of the sort as something to be desired?
> 
> I got the impression … he was pretty clear overall … about helping people understand that removing dynamic variation is NOT what makes people feel “loudness”.


I was going to say - I'm pretty sure this video is condoning the exact opposite of "lifeless walls of sound"  I feel that Dan did a phenomenal job sharing deeper technical ideas/concepts while keeping the actual musicality (and how the user experiences that musicality) at the center of everything.


----------



## Dirtgrain (Aug 10, 2021)

Ya, it seems jmauz did not watch the video.


----------



## Trash Panda (Aug 10, 2021)

jmauz said:


> Ugh. This video should be called 'Achieving Dull, Boring and Lifeless Walls of Sound.'
> 
> More proliferation of removing dynamics from music. Shame this is coming from FabFilter; I quite like their plugs.


He explicitly called out such a practice being a bad thing, but feel free to push your narrative.


----------



## Soundbed (Aug 12, 2021)

In case there was any confusion about where Dan Worrall stands on this topic...


----------

