\n
To prevent the background noise<\/b> and other disorders inherent in recording media <\/b>(for example, the rustle<\/b> of analogue tapes) the following was sought:<\/p>\n In subsequent years, particularly in the pop music sector, the production industry gradually reduced the dynamic range, compressing it more and more in order to increase the volume of the lowest moments of the performance dynamics, to the point of reducing the dynamic range used to just a few dB.<\/p>\n As we shall see, this phenomenon has accelerated significantly with the advent of digital media.<\/p>\n Over the course of approximately 20 years (from the 1990s to the 2010s), the need to compress music to ensure more convenient enjoyment gradually turned into a frantic race to Perceivable volume<\/b>.<\/p>\n The aim, encouraged by producers, was to use loudness to overcome the sound impact of competing music productions, which triggered a veritable Volume War<\/b>, defined precisely as \u201cLoudness War\u201d<\/b>.<\/p>\n The term loudness war<\/b> It therefore refers to the tendency of the music industry, fuelled by artists and producers, to produce and publish music using high levels of loudness<\/b>, which have become increasingly higher year after year, in a continuous attempt to exceed the volume of productions released by \u201ccompeting\u201d artists and record labels.<\/p>\n The introduction of processors<\/b> digital signals and limiters<\/b> The improved quality and extreme precision allowed sound engineers to significantly increase the perceived volume<\/b> in a recording; and since \u201cstronger\u201d<\/b> was generally perceived by users as \u201cbest\u201d<\/b>, the sound engineer<\/b>, due to \u201cpressure\u201d from producers, they tried to \u201cpush\u201d the volume to the maximum possible limit, which led the recording industry to\u00a0volume war<\/b>.<\/p>\n Many music professionals, especially sound engineers and artists, believe that this trend has led to the sacrifice of sound quality<\/b> and of the dynamic expression<\/b> to obtain high volume levels<\/b> in audio support<\/b>.<\/p>\n Above are the waveforms of a track released in 1980 and remastered several times in subsequent years, with a tendency towards increased loudness in 2001 until the peak of the loudness war in 2005, then returning to a high but more moderate intensity in 2011.<\/i><\/p>\n This procedure was not used before the advent of digital technology, partly due to the physical limitations inherent in the system of mechanical engraving of vinyl<\/b>.<\/p>\n In truth, even with vinyl, some records sounded louder than others, depending on the natural dynamics of the various musical genres and thanks to the different mastering techniques<\/b> then in use, but each disc was \u201can island unto itself\u201d, and the only perceived need was to:\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n In the case of compilation albums (containing previously released tracks from different albums and sometimes even by different artists), a remastering<\/b>, in order to level the volume and tonal balance perceived during listening<\/b> of the various tracks, in order to achieve greater \u201chomogeneity\u201d between the contents of the album.<\/p>\n In the\u2019analogue era<\/b>, those who wanted to listen to it \u201clouder\u201d could simply increase the amplification volume<\/b> of their own reproduction system, adjusting the listening volume<\/b> each time you change the record on the turntable, so that you can adjust it to suit your listening needs at that moment.<\/p>\n The only limitation was determined by the amplification power and the mechanical resistance of the loudspeakers in the reproduction system.<\/p>\n With the advent of audio cassettes<\/b>, the criterion for use by users did not change substantially, leaving it still up to the volume knob<\/b> the individual end user the task of levelling the\u2019intensity <\/b>sound, according to the listener's preferences.<\/p>\n For a certain period, by convention, listening to CDs was also characterised essentially by the same listening procedures on the part of users, and this routine continued for most of the 1980s, which was a decade characterised in any case by a significant increase in the loudness<\/b>, but gradual and moderate.<\/p>\n There \u201cVolume War\u201d<\/b> It seems to have really begun in the 1990s, with the spread of multiple CD players installed in cars, which allowed users to skip from one track to another and even from one CD to another. This mode of use highlighted the differences in volume between one disc and another.<\/p>\n Specifically, the race for volume intensified when manufacturers realised that users with multiple CD players often used a \u201cfree\u201d playback mode, switching between tracks on different CDs, forcing them to constantly \u201cadjust\u201d the listening volume, which was particularly unpleasant when driving.<\/p>\n If the user did not change the listening volume, tracks with greater dynamic range (which were perceived as having a lower average volume) were penalised, appearing \u201cthinner\u201d in comparison to others that sounded louder.<\/p>\n This observation was the decisive factor that prompted various producers and artists to demand a solution from sound engineers, namely extreme compression of the master, pushing it to ever higher levels.<\/p>\n The phenomenon continued with the advent of portable players and USB sticks, becoming unsustainable within a few years and provoking complaints from many sound engineers and artists, who called for the identification of a reference standard that would better respect sound quality, music and its dynamics.<\/p>\n Since the sound level of an audio file cannot exceed a certain limit (0 dB digital), the overall volume can only be increased by reducing the dynamic range<\/b> and subsequently \u201cnormalising the level of the track\u201d<\/b> (thus bringing the maximum peak<\/b> at the point of maximum tolerance of digital sampling, i.e. close to 0 db<\/b>).\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n The above was therefore achieved by \u201ccompressing upwards\u201d and in an increasingly extreme manner the \u201cdynamics\u201d, with the result of increasingly compromising the peaks and causing acoustic distortions of various kinds and the almost total loss of dynamic expressive modulation.<\/b><\/p>\n N.B.<\/b><\/p>\n For years, sound engineers have been forced to \u201cclimb up the mirror\u201d to satisfy the demands of their clients.\u00a0<\/span><\/b><\/p>\n In order to minimise the damage caused by excessive compression, they have learned to optimise processes as much as possible, including through:<\/b><\/p>\n However, this has also resulted in the production of \u201csound monsters\u201d which, in the opinion of many, are intolerable.<\/b><\/p>\n Eager to put an end to the volume war, towards the end of the 1990s, the sound engineer Bob Katz<\/b> developed a criterion called K-System<\/b>.<\/p>\n The K-System<\/b> (Katz Bob System) is a protocol for setting up mix and monitor calibrations in an audio studio.<\/p>\n Although the standards of loudness<\/b>\u00a0such as EBU R128<\/b>, as we shall see, are more widely used today using a scale in LUFS\/dB, the K-System<\/b> , which uses an RMS\/dB scale, is still a good way to adjust audio levels.<\/p>\n This system uses three different standards, known as K-20<\/b>, K-14<\/b> e K-12<\/b>.<\/p>\n These numbers express the amplitude of the song's dynamic range in dB RMS, so that at each step (from K-20 to K-12), the available dynamic range decreases and the loudness (understood as the perceived average volume) increases.<\/p>\n The \u201clabel\u201d display at the top of the meter scale must indicate the maximum level expected for the target (20 dB or 14 dB or 12 dB) and, just as with normal measurement, corresponds to the digital signal at full scale.<\/p>\n In order to function properly, the system requires that the monitor's listening level be carefully calibrated so that its perceptible level, when standing on the label, is 0 dB<\/b> of the meter, corresponds to 85 dB SPL<\/b>.<\/p>\n The above is, in fact, the ideal reference condition for mixing and mastering at K-20<\/b>, to K-14<\/b> and to K-12<\/b>.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n The gauges of the K-System<\/b> show both the peak level<\/b> that one RMS<\/b>.<\/p>\n The red upper part of the meters is the area of maximum intensity.<\/p>\n In music recording, the RMS level should only reach the red zone during the most intense passages, at climaxes, and during occasional peaks.\u00a0<\/b><\/p>\n In fact, according to the average results of tests carried out by Katz himself with\u00a0 <\/span>Based on user samples, it has been found that if you always use the red zone, you may feel the need to reduce the monitor's gain.<\/b><\/p>\n Here are some details of the three measurements:<\/p>\n K-12<\/b><\/p>\n This level was designed exclusively for radio broadcasting.<\/p>\n With this, it follows that -12 dBFS = 0 VU = 85 dB SPL.<\/p>\n The headroom limited to just 12 dB explains its exclusive use for compressed audio material intended solely for broadcast transmission (although it was subsequently also used for finalising more intense musical genres, such as dance music (especially electronic dance music) and a certain type of pop music).<\/p>\n K-14<\/b><\/p>\n This was to be the standard for most commercial pop recordings, created for home and private listening in general.<\/p>\n Pop music mixes are examples of material suitable for K-14, where -14 dBFS = 0 VU = 85 dB SPL.<\/p>\n The headroom margin is 14 dB.<\/p>\n The K-14 scale was probably the most widely used of the three standards.<\/p>\n K-20<\/b><\/p>\n This scale offers the widest dynamic range available among the three systems.<\/p>\n It was designed primarily for large theatre mixes, dynamic music mixes, cinema, television broadcasting, and mixes of classical and traditional styles.<\/p>\n Any audio programme with a wide dynamic range should have been aligned with the K-20 standard.<\/p>\n This means that -20 dBFS = 0 VU = 85 dB SPL, with a headroom of 20 dB.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n Schematic representation of the loudness scale devised by Bob Katz. A good alternative reference for countering the loudness war, later replaced by LUFS measurement following broadcasting regulations and the advent of streaming platforms. The three highest points of the red zones (shown here in dark grey) are aligned with the 0 dB level of the digital scale.<\/i><\/p>\n In short, the aim was to establish the reference dynamic range for various types of listening. For years, some sound engineers (few, in truth) aligned themselves with the criteria proposed by Engineer Katz, while most of them, pressured by producers, continued to operate with loudness \u201cat full throttle\u201d.<\/p>\n Meanwhile, since 2006, institutions ITU<\/b> and European Broadcasting Union<\/b> they gradually developed a protocol aimed at limiting the dynamic warfare<\/b>, finally defining a measurement standard<\/b> with relative unit of measurement<\/b>, which would allow for better analysis of the audio signal, interpreting it primarily in terms of perception, in order to produce masters with standard characteristics.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n The unit of measurement in question was called LKFS<\/b>, then redefined and renamed LUFS<\/b> from European Broadcasting Union<\/b> (European Broadcasting Union<\/b>) in the document EBU R128<\/b> of 2014<\/b>.<\/p>\n This current measurement system allows audio files to be analysed no longer on the basis of the scale RMS<\/b>, but rather by using a different protocol, with a measurement criterion that is very similar to the\u2019RMS<\/b>, but with added variables that take into account the psychoacoustic perception of the average user.<\/p>\n The acronym LUFS\u00a0 <\/span>means \u201cunit of measurement of volume relative to full scale\u201d.<\/b><\/p>\n It was originally a volume standard designed to enable the normalisation of audio levels for television broadcasting.<\/b><\/p>\n LUFS is standardised in a set of algorithms designed to measure the volume of the audio programme and its \u201creal peak\u201d level (for further information, please refer to ITU-R BS 1770 and subsequent amendments introduced between 2011 and 2015).<\/b><\/p>\n LUFS are measured on an absolute scale and correspond to one decibel (dB).<\/b><\/p>\n The new system was perfected in the following years, and the standard of:<\/p>\n -23 LUFS (European Broadcasting Union)<\/b><\/p>\n it established itself in broadcasting contexts, also involving (in part) the film industry.<\/b><\/p>\n The level of:<\/p>\n -1 dBTP<\/b><\/p>\n Instead, it became the standard for the maximum peak of the audio programme, thus ensuring ample margins to prevent any risk of clipping.<\/b><\/p>\n Soon the standard became statutory provision<\/b>, but only obliging operators in this regard. broadcasting<\/b>.<\/p>\n L'recording industry<\/b>, However, he turned a deaf ear to this suggestion, as no producer would want to release recordings that sound \u201clower\u201d than those of their competitors.<\/p>\n A new element was therefore needed, one so decisive that it would dissuade the\u2019recording industry <\/b>from continuing with the loudness war<\/b>.<\/p>\n The opportunity arose with the spread of streaming platforms<\/b>, a phenomenon that had already spread worldwide in 2019, and therefore had enormous power in determining the \u201cde facto\u201d imposition of a standard.<\/p>\n Le streaming platforms<\/b>, in order to ensure extreme homogeneity<\/b> In terms of audio reproduction, they must be able to reproduce every musical genre sufficiently well, from the most rarefied and delicate classical music to the densest and most intense heavy metal.<\/p>\n These platforms must offer:<\/b><\/p>\n This has led to the \u201cde facto\u201d imposition of certain loudness standard<\/b> with very similar values, but not identical for all platforms at present.<\/p>\n Whatever the loudness<\/b> original of the musical pieces featured in the streaming platforms<\/b>, they will always suffer some automatic control processes<\/b> and, if not compliant with standard criteria<\/b> imposed by the specific streaming platform, will be automatically processed in order to make them suitable for the required loudness values<\/b>.<\/p>\n To this end, the platform will automatically reduce the overall volume of audio files with excessive loudness in order to achieve a satisfactory listening level for all tracks in the platform's catalogue.<\/p>\n It is clear that, considering the above, including songs characterised by a excessive compression of the audio file<\/b> will only serve to flatten its dynamics, thereby also affecting the purity of the sound<\/b>, without having any real effect on loudness<\/b> that will be perceived<\/b> by users listening.<\/p>\n This is gradually discouraging producers from continuing with the senseless Volume War<\/b>, directing them to produce their masters with broader and more relaxed dynamics<\/b>.<\/p>\n N.B.<\/b><\/p>\n While volume reduction is guaranteed, there is no guarantee that audio files with a loudness below the standard will be enhanced.\u00a0<\/span><\/b><\/p>\n Consequently, it will generally be preferable to give tracks a slight excess of loudness rather than the opposite (for example, assuming that -14.0 is the standard for a specific platform, a loudness between -13.5 and -14.0 would be advisable rather than between -14.0 and -14.5).<\/b><\/p>\n Le streaming platforms<\/b> at the moment they are not perfectly aligned according to one common standard<\/b>, but currently range from -13 LUFS (e.g. YouTube, which has the most compressed dynamics) to -16.5 LUFS (e.g. Apple Music, which has the most extended dynamics).<\/p>\n The trend seems to be settling around a possible single standard of -14 LUFS<\/b>, which is the one proposed by Spotify, currently the most important music streaming platform<\/b> of the world.<\/p>\n For this reason, other \u201cminor\u201d streaming companies tend to align themselves with it, further promoting the definitive establishment of this measure, which will likely become the sole and definitive standard.<\/p>\n For this reason, the leading producers of plugins intended for dynamic finalisation of the master<\/b> set by default to -23 LUFS for broadcasting and -14 LUFS for streaming<\/b> musical, and in this sense they prepare the software utilities, often equipping them with a special level indicator, thus contributing to the establishment of this standard.<\/p>\n This does not exclude the possibility of completing multiple specific master's degrees, with levels of loudness<\/b> different, to better adapt to each of the platforms of streaming<\/b>.<\/p>\n Before finalising, it is first necessary to clarify the three types of measurement in LUFS<\/b> useful for the purposes of our analysis:<\/p>\n Similar to traditional vu meter<\/b> analogue, expresses volume fluctuations in real time, imposing a moderate reactive inertia (approximately 400 ms), ideal for convenient level reading.<\/p>\n Very useful for viewing peak levels in order to assess the need for more or less significant interventions in the preliminary limiting of the mix.<\/b><\/p>\n It expresses the average sound level, calculated over a short time pattern of approximately 3 seconds.<\/p>\n Very useful for easily and smoothly monitoring the overall audio levels.<\/b><\/p>\n It is characterised by a reactive braking speed, somewhat similar to the \u2019temporary memory\u2019 of many LED meters.<\/b><\/p>\n Expresses the actual target, according to reference and regulatory parameters. EBU \u2013 ITU<\/b><\/p>\n N.B.<\/b><\/p>\n In the revision of the ITU-R BS.1770 standard, the concept of \u201cLoudness Gated\u201d measurement was added, which \u201cintelligently\u201d reduces the measurement of performance pauses and musical passages with a particularly low level.<\/b><\/p>\n A good integrated loudness meter will take this parameter into account in order to avoid obtaining abnormal results.<\/b><\/p>\n Digital audio processing, partly due to ultra-fast limiting and problematic clipping, can produce inter-sample peaks<\/b> (inter-sample peaks<\/b>).<\/p>\n N.B.<\/b><\/p>\n Its analogue equivalent, after D\/A conversion, would reveal a signal higher than the actual value of the sample, as clearly shown in the figure below.\u00a0<\/span><\/b><\/p>\n A peak like this is also called actual peak level<\/b> (True Peak Level<\/b>).<\/p>\n Depending on the quality of the D\/A converter<\/b> When used in playback, these peaks could cause audible distortion.<\/p>\n Of course, it will always be better to prevent or minimise inter-sample peaks<\/b> and at the same time ensure that every audio peak, normal and inter-sample, remains \u201ctruly\u201d within the maximum undistorted limit of the 0 digital decibels<\/b>.<\/p>\n A good dynamic finalisation plugin for mastering should have a function for containing True Peaks<\/b> (True Peak Limiting<\/b>), compliant with EBU R128 and ITU-R BS 1770 standards.<\/p>\n Please note that true peak (TP) measurement is not an exact science: there are many different ways to implement ITU-R BS 1770-compliant measurement, which may yield slightly different results.\u00a0<\/b><\/p>\n In fact, it is not unusual to find differences of a few tenths of a dB TP between different true peak meters.\u00a0<\/b><\/p>\n High oversampling values, the ability to interact in \u201clook-ahead\u201d mode, and the overall high quality of the plugin could guarantee greater precision and\u00a0 <\/span>reliability in containing true peaks.<\/b><\/p>\n Please note that the system's regulations and conventions require or recommend using a True Peak attenuation value equal to or less than -1 LUFS; some streaming platforms even require a TP attenuation value of -2 dB; in commercial mastering for audio CDs, on the other hand, TP adjustment is usually less conservative, with values of -0.5, -0.3, -0.2 dB, which exposes the master to the risk of transient distortion.<\/p>\n The meters of a complete LUFS measurement system. On the left is the classic reference meter with 0 dB digital, and next to it is the dB measurement of the level reduction determined by the limiter. On the right are the three meters of the LUFS system: short term (S), momentary (M) and integrated (I). At the bottom left is the True Pick enable button and on the right is its level adjustment (not yet set to the standard value of -1 dB).<\/i><\/p>\n To draw a conclusion, we can say that nowadays the trend is to use the following reference standards in LUFS:<\/p>\n N.B.<\/b><\/p>\n Personally, even in these cases, I usually keep the TP at -1 dB.<\/b><\/p>\n Other more \u201cexpressive\u201d musical genres, even for CDs, tend to choose solutions that allow for greater dynamic range:<\/p>\n Schematic representation of useful dynamics and relative loudness levels used as standards in the most common applications. It is clear that, by normalising to levels close to 0 dB, we will have little useful dynamics and high loudness. Without any compression (on the right), the natural dynamics, with expressions ranging from 20 to 50 dB and above (depending on the case), will be fully respected. Note also that the normalisation level for pop music CDs is generally set to peak levels of a few decimal points, without the control of the True Peak \u2019circuit\u201c.<\/i><\/p>\n For cinema, significant fluctuations are observed, between -27 and -21 LUFS (with a short-term loudness of up to -6 LUFS).<\/p>\n\n
Loudness war<\/h2>\n
![\"\"](\"http:\/\/alessandrofois.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/01-Loudness-war-1.jpg\")
<\/p>\nThe analogue era<\/b><\/h3>\n
\n
The digital era<\/b><\/h3>\n
Consequences on audio<\/h2>\n
Adverse effects<\/b><\/h3>\n
\n
Concrete positive effects<\/b><\/h3>\n
\n
\n
The solutions<\/b><\/h3>\n
K-System<\/b><\/h2>\n
![\"\"](\"http:\/\/alessandrofois.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/02-The-K-system-1.jpg\")
<\/p>\nLUFS<\/h2>\n
The streaming revolution<\/h2>\n
\n
Reference loudness<\/h2>\n
Momentary loudness meter<\/b><\/h3>\n
Short-term loudness meter<\/b><\/h3>\n
Integrated loudness meter<\/b><\/h3>\n
True Peak level<\/h2>\n
![\"\"](\"http:\/\/alessandrofois.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/03-TPL-249x300.jpg\")
<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"http:\/\/alessandrofois.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/04-LUFS.jpg\")
<\/p>\nThe new standards<\/h2>\n
Audio CD<\/b><\/h3>\n
\n
\n
![\"\"](\"http:\/\/alessandrofois.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/05-Dinamica-utile-1.jpg\")
<\/p>\nStreaming<\/b><\/h3>\n
\n
Broadcasting and Cinema<\/b><\/h3>\n
\n
\nFor more information on Digital Audio Mastering<\/h2>\n