What Audio Compression Can Do For You ...

[RJVB]

What audio compression can also do: fit a whole lot more hours of music on a single CD ^^

[FrankHudson]

I worked for years at a radio network. I was astounded at how much work went into the sound of someone talking on the air. I can recall sitting in meetings where small details in sound quality would be discussed, and I'd be thinking to myself "It's just someone announcing a piece of music or delivering a news story! I've listened to this stuff all my life and I can't recall ever caring about the sound of the spoken voices, just the content."

Near the end of my time there, podcasting started to become a thing, with a whole lot of people, some attached to fairly big organizations that weren't broadcasters, recording stuff. I'd listen to them in those early days and all of sudden I'd hear all kinds of annoying audio issues: consonant pops, bad levels, weird EQ, and a pet peeve of mine sibilance. "Oh" I thought "that's why they cared."

[KevWind]

Originally Posted by RJVB

What audio compression can also do: fit a whole lot more hours of music on a single CD ^^

True but that's a completely different kind of "compression"-- that is digital data compression not dynamic audio compression. You can compress the bajeebers out the audio dynamics of the file and it will still be virtually the same size data file

[RJVB]

Originally Posted by KevWind

True but that's a completely different kind of "compression"-- that is digital data compression not dynamic audio compression.

Oh really? It's still "audio compression" though, maybe even more so than the one in question here that just compresses output volume (or power) according to some probably more or less S-shaped transfer function

[Gordon Currie]

Originally Posted by RJVB

Oh really? It's still "audio compression" though, maybe even more so than the one in question here that just compresses output volume (or power) according to some probably more or less S-shaped transfer function

No, you are incorrect. Data compression != dynamics compression (aka audio compression).

When you data compress, you do not alter the dynamics.

[RJVB]

It's the language usage here that is imprecise and thus incorrect. The compressor you are thinking of compresses a particular aspect of audio, the compressors I referred to another (or a few others). That was the whole crux of my interjection and I'm not going to go further down this rabbit hole.
(But even "dynamic compression" and "dynamics compression" as used above are ambiguous terms.)

[KevWind]

Originally Posted by RJVB

It's the language usage here that is imprecise and thus incorrect. The compressor you are thinking of compresses a particular aspect of audio, the compressors I referred to another (or a few others). That was the whole crux of my interjection and I'm not going to go further down this rabbit hole.
(But even "dynamic compression" and "dynamics compression" as used above are ambiguous terms.)

Agree the term audio compression is ambiguous, but is only because in common usage the term has been used (as you correctly note ) to describe both data compression of a digital audio file, and dynamic compression of the audio wave form
But I doubt many in this thread are or were , confused by the distinction.

Of course main difference is the distinction that :: while dynamic compression of the audio wave form can be performed in either the digital realm (via plugin) OR in the Analog realm vis analog hardware compressor
Data compression as in compressing a WAV file down to an MP3 is done only in the digital realm. And the distinction is the difference and is neither imprecise or incorrect


And this thread has been about the effect dynamic compression of the audio waveform and not data compression (until you interjected data compression) which is a different discussion.

[LFL Steve]

Originally Posted by KevWind

. . . this thread has been about the effect dynamic compression of the audio waveform and not data compression (until you interjected data compression) which is a different discussion.

I thought it was about every vocal nuance being gain-enhanced to an intimate creepiness.

[SpruceTop]

Originally Posted by LFL Steve

I thought it was about every vocal nuance being gain-enhanced to an intimate creepiness.

Bada Bing, Bada Boom! ... or it's like John Waters directed the response and any second I expected Divine, impersonating Joan Crawford, to come barging in on Katie with a wire hanger in her hand screaming, "No wire hangers!" while chasing Katie around her kitchen table.

[KevWind]

Originally Posted by LFL Steve

I thought it was about every vocal nuance being gain-enhanced to an intimate creepiness.

Well YES sort of. For starters the title "What Audio Compression Can Do For You " is actually talking about the speculated "cause" not the creepy "result" (I say speculation, unless the OP had direct knowledge of the actual mix techniques used in the broadcast)
However given that various dynamic audio compression and or limiting techniques are routinely used in such broadcasts, it's a reasonable assumption if still speculation .....

Then OP then went on to speculate the "result" of those techniques was as you say an enhanced "intimate creepiness" which it may well be . OTOH Shakespearean actors were also able to give this perception of intimate creepiness or audible perceived breathy whisper,, without the use of any audio compression ... so the thread (again unless direct knowledge is involved ) is just speculation.


BUT. again what the thread was not originally about was compressing the data resolution of file to a lower bit rate (which is in fact a completely different type of digital audio "compression" ) and will not only not result in an enhanced breathy"creepy" makeup gain related "result", with quiet parts being louder ... BUT is more likely to reduce the overall volume level and dynamic range further BUT without the enhancement of makeup gain and so is likely to sightly reduce the perception of said effect . Which is what I was attempting to relate in the part of my post that you edited out.