Lord Hasenpfeffer wrote:

flint wrote:
If you listen to any CD at one level then compare it to the same CD
with the volume turned up 6dB, the louder one will sound better.

"The louder one will sound better"... I like that. I think you
understand me better than most when I say "my remastered WAVs sound
better than their source CDs". Because "the louder one will sound
better", yes, thank you.

Louder = more audible frequencies = more clarity in the upper and lower
ranges = livlier, more energetic sounding music = better MP3s = more fun
= more personal satisfaction = my original argument.

The argument has been whether increasing amplitude in the digital input is a
good thing, not whether louder sounds good. It is the amplifier that makes
the loudness to happen.

Forget everything you think you may have proven. Erase it from your head.
Then try listening to the Gold CD with the volume turned up 6dB.

Why don't I just make a digital copy of my 1994 Capitol remaster to an
Imation CD-R with the digital input gain turned down to -6dB?

In fact, I think I could even make that my standard practice for *every*
CD copy I create. And then if anyone complains about it, I'll just tell
'em to "pump up the volume" because "it's *supposed* to be that low".
How far d'ya think *that'd* fly? It's the same thing.

It would be better thing in my mind. Limiting or even worse, clipping, the
high peaks by increasing the volume makes more harm than the slight amount
of added noise by doing the reverse. I have never seen even a "quiet"
remaster (in pop/rock arena) to not have it's peaks at very close to 0dBFS.

Teemu