Hacker News Reader

At my wedding, we picked a great band and kept the music at a comfortable level, and most of the guests danced the whole time and even the non-dancing guests clustered around the dance floor. I can't prove causation, but I bet the tolerable volume had a lot to do with it.

I'm a musician, and play in wedding bands. I think I've seen enough weddings to suspect that you're probably right about causation.

Something people don't realize about wedding music is that it's not just for dancing. If done well, it can also serve other purposes as well. There will always be a mixed crowd at a wedding, including people who are either unable to fully participate in the socializing for the duration of the party -- e.g., the elderly and children -- or who are shy, or outsiders, whatever. They band can provide them with a focal point and source of entertainment.

At some weddings, the dance floor was taken over by children just tearing around, and at first it would annoy me, but I eventually realized that I was taking pressure off the parents so they could enjoy socializing with one another instead of trying to restrain their kids.

So maybe the real solution is for people to start trying to figure out why the norm for concerts is to have the volume painfully loud. It's possible that guests just might enjoy them more with quieter music.

Self indulgence and ignorance among the performers, including the sound crew if there is one. Everybody believes that their instrument, or their musical style, is the one that needs to be loud. And I freely admit that playing loud is fun.

I've also noticed a sort of ratchet effect. The musicians gradually get tired, and turn up the volume so they don't have to play as hard. Then they get excited and start playing harder. Then they get tired, and turn up the volume. I think that's one explanation for the ever-escalating volume levels.

> So maybe the real solution is for people to start trying to figure out why the norm for concerts is to have the volume painfully loud.

> The musicians gradually get tired, and turn up the volume so they don't have to play as hard. Then they get excited and start playing harder. Then they get tired, and turn up the volume.

I think you answered it yourself. Also, from someone who played in a local band for a while (And a not-quite-so-local band thereafter), people who actually know how to use a PA are few and far between. I think most of the time people are lazy and just set the master volume to something that cuts over the chit-chat, then they just don't bother to go back and readjust that when things are quieter/louder.

Seriously folks. If you're performing live, or you bring people in live, make sure at least one of you hires a dedicated, trained PA technician. It's the difference between a mediocre band and a great band (One where you can hear all of the performers), and also helps a lot with ear safety. The performers and the attendees will thank you for it.

Indeed, since I play mostly jazz these days, PA is typically optional, and I'd rather play without PA altogether than play with bad PA, no matter the size of the venue. I figure a string quartet can control their mix just fine, and a jazz quartet should be able to as well. But if there needs to be a PA, then it needs to be managed correctly.

At one venue, we just pretended that the house PA was broken.

I think some sound technicians are a bit deaf too.

I agree. I love dancing, especially to live music. And I'm a musician myself.

But I avoid restaurants and places with live music unless the sole purpose is dancing. They advertise live music as a feature but sadly I treat it as a negative.

Maybe it's just me, but I have never been at a restaurant/bar playing live music where I've thought "this is playing at exactly the right level of volume."

It's always set to 11. One louder than necessary.

Our perception of loudness is highly subjective and we quickly acclimatise to loud music. Music sounds superficially better at louder volumes, hence the notorious loudness war in music production [1]. This is one of the big risks of using headphones - it's easy for the volume to creep up to dangerous levels if you're not worried about disturbing the neighbours.

Sound engineers often suffer from a significant degree of noise-induced hearing loss. Hearing loss is highly dose-dependent, so working with live sound equipment on a daily basis is far more damaging than going to the occasional loud concert. As a result, they tend to set the house volume too loud. Noise-induced hearing loss affects the high frequencies first, so live sound is often extremely shrill and trebly to compensate. Those engineers who don't have noise-induced hearing loss have made a habit of wearing ear protection, which has basically the same effect.

The unfortunate solution is to wear ear protection to any amplified live music event. I recommend the Etymotic ER-20xs [2]. You'll hear a better, more balanced sound at a much safer volume level.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loudness_war

[2]https://www.etymotic.com/consumer/hearing-protection/er20xs....

Is there any reason not to use a decibel meter to set up volumes. And perhaps to use computer assistance to balance instrument volumes and profile the sound. Seems like a couple of mics around a room and you could adjust to get the best sound for the whole room rather than [just] the sound desk? I'd guess they're doing that already at big concerts.

It seems very like colour profiling to me. Graphic designers seem to match to objective standards though, whilst sound techs seem instead to use their own perception at the time?

Here in the UK, it's common for venues to have automatic sound limiting devices - exceed a certain threshold and power to the PA system is disconnected [1]. These systems are a source of constant frustration for engineers, performers and clients.

The problem is that good live sound is highly dynamic. If you ran the PA at exactly 85dBa all night, it would sound very flat and unengaging. You want to push the volume during lively upbeat songs and bring it back down for an intimate ballad, you want a bit of a lift during the chorus, you want natural crescendos and diminuendos. Really good engineers can maintain this sense of dynamism while keeping the overall levels under control by using time-averaged metering, but systems capable of that are quite costly.

Achieving a consistent volume level throughout the venue is much easier said than done. Normal loudspeakers follow the inverse square law, so the sound will be much louder close to the PA system. You can't just put a bunch of speakers all over the room, because you'll get weird phase effects - sound moves at about one foot per millisecond, so additional speakers tend to cause very unpleasant delay and comb filtering effects [2]. This can be mitigated by the use of electronic delay compensation for the additional relay speakers, but not eliminated entirely.

The inverse square law can be evaded by using a line array loudspeaker system [3]. Theses systems use multiple loudspeakers in a phased array, which produces a cylindrical rather than spherical wavefront. Line arrays give a much more even distribution of sound and also reduce the amount of energy that is reflected from the ceiling and floor, providing a much clearer sound with more accurate transient response. Historically, line arrays have been expensive and difficult to configure, so they have been confined to large venues and high-end touring systems. Compact integrated line array systems are now available from many manufacturers, so hopefully we should see an improvement in the general standard of live sound over the coming years.

[1] https://noiselimiters.co.uk/scx-noise-limiter-and-contactor-...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comb_filter

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Line_array

> If you ran the PA at exactly 85dBa all night, it would sound very flat and unengaging. //

I was thinking more having an RMS max target dBA/dB(SPL) and a cut-off above that to limit instantaneous volume rather than requiring a particular level for the night.

I'm in the UK; I know a little about phase effects having set up a few room level PAs (5 instruments, 3 mics, 6 speakers, single board; that sort of size). However, I'm not familiar with large set-ups as I've only attended smaller concerts of the order of 100s-1000s of people.

I'm pretty sure they do this. I go to gigs often and most sound tech's now walk around with iPad's/iPhone's during the soundcheck using them to measure levels. I think the problem is more than most venues will have a lot of speakers setup up around the stage (sides, above sometimes too) and that's it. So if it's a big venue the volume is necessary to make sure the people at the back are experiencing it properly too. Sound desks are often centre back of the room so that's where things tend to sound best. If your nearer the speakers you'll often miss things (for example you'll see someone playing a guitar solo and won't be able to hear it, if you go back towards the sound desk it'll be much more balanced).

Thank you for this very detailed write-up and also the specific product recommendation.

Are the ER-20xs a significant step up from the ER-20s?

I used to wear ER-20s and they were fine. Alpine MusicSafe Pro were good too. Both comfortable, and did they job.

Alpine PartyPlugs didn't sounds as good to me, but they were more discrete so great for house parties and stuff.

I switched to Ear Peace HD's about a year ago.

Ear Peace are mentioned below the article. I don't know if it was sponsored. I'm certainly not sponsored by them.

I love EDM, DnB especially, but I'm a mosher at heart. The EPHD's don't hurt as much if an errant crowd-surfer happens to smack into my ear.

The EPHD's are even less noticeable than the Alpine PartyPlugs too.

I started wearing earplugs when I started working with VoIP systems a decade and a half ago. I'd be going to a few metal gigs a month and it was always painfully loud. I'd have ringing in the ears after every gig, and I'd sleep badly and feel almost hungover the next morning.

I have similarly sensitive hearing to the lady in the article, even restaurants and cinemas will cause me to pop my earplugs in. I keep a set attached to my keys. (The EPHD's come with a black metal tube keyring case.)

I couldn't go back to not wearing earplugs. If anything, they made gigs sound better to me.

I haven't used the Ear Peace HDs. The ER-20xs is significantly smaller than the old ER-20, just barely protruding beyond the ear canal. The Ear Peace plugs may be a better option if you're prone to getting whacked in the head. The ER-20xs has an optional neck cord, which I find to be a handy feature. They also work with a range of foam and silicone tips, so are more likely to fit a broad range of ears.

>If anything, they made gigs sound better to me.

As I mentioned in my comment, the sound engineer is almost certainly either wearing ear plugs or half deaf. Either one causes a substantial roll-off of high frequencies, so the engineer is likely to subconsciously compensate by boosting the treble in the mix. If you've got plugs in, you're hearing something much closer to his intended mix. It's a totally perverse situation, but gigs almost always sound better with ear protection.

Cool, thanks! I'll grab a set of ER-20xs to try too.

This sounds like the most probable explanation for some experiences I had which I couldn't explain so far.

I've visited festivals that obviously hired professional people for their sound and had rather well-known bands on their line up (Iron Maiden and Hammerfall, for example) and that had terrible sound.

The volume would be cranked up way to much, proving to be even beyond the limits of the equipment, which led to the sound mostly being very obviously oversaturated. All the while I couldn't imagine being near the place without ear protection, which made the whole thing even more pointless.

Honestly, setups like that only ruin the experience of the paying customer. I can't fathom the idea that no-one who is organizing such events isn't having a sincere word with their sound crew after the first song.

This article is from Resident Advisor, a website focused on (electronic) dance music culture. Most of the audience go to clubs and festivals with massive speaker systems much louder than your average wedding. It's a pretty central part of the culture - this article exists because of the number of people who enjoy standing in front of loud speakers for extended periods of time.

Electronic music itself is the problem too. If you go and see a live band there's some dynamic range but when you see a DJ the music is at it's peak level for 95% of the time.

There was a music festival about 2 miles from my home a few years ago. On the night the Foo Fighters played we could hear some noise occasionally but never for more than a few seconds. It went up and down. The second night Avicii played. I could hear it clear all night. It wasn't louder (as it was in a residential area so volume was limited) but it was at the peak level for most of the night.

Please don't tar all electronic musicians with that brush :)

There is a big and varied universe of electronic, most of which is a lot more dynamic than radio-pop artists like Avicii.

I'm a huge electronic music fan (and of much less commercial stuff than my example) so it's not a slight on it at all. The problem isn't the style of music. The problem is that DJ's play recorded music and all recorded music (regardless of genre) is heavily compressed so has much less dynamic range. A live band will be much less compressed so there will be much greater and more frequent variety in volume. If a metal band were to get up and play their CD instead of playing live the same issue would occur.

I feel it has at least something to do with the style of music and culture, it can't entirely be due to compression. There is a unique obsession with overwhelming, earth-shaking bass in electronic music. Sure, metal bands can be loud, but they're usually working in somewhat higher frequencies, and I do think the music itself generally has more range. The constant thumping sub-bass of house music is going to travel a lot further and be more noticeable.

A funny thing regarding compression: I realized I'm even accustomed to it (to some degree).

If you listen to classical music (e.g. recordings of "Das deutsche Grammophon"), you'll realize that often, the opposite effect is true: The music has such a high dynamic range that you inevitably have to raise the volume in order to be able to discern the details in a pianissimo-part, which makes the fortissimo-parts deafening. So, there are not only upsides to low compression ;-)

Maybe that's how the pianissimo sections are supposed to work. They're quiet so that you have to pay close attention and strain slightly to hear them so that when the forte part returns you are giving it your full attention :)

I think there's a huge range of what's enjoyable and, like many things in life, it's all about set and setting. A wedding band playing at a skilfully appropriate volume can be the right answer - so can the intense effect of body-shaking sub bass at something like a Iration Steppas or Channel One show [1]. But, yeah, take care of your hearing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AvKTMv4E09Y

True, but "body-shaking sub bass" arguably doesn't cause hearing damage. Because you can't hear it. I still love loud music. But I don't love those squealing harmonics so much as I used to.

A music lover here. I do not like loud music one bit.

There are physical and psychological euphoric and stress-reducing effects that come from cranking up the volume. But I agree with the article that they're best employed more selectively, and not pegging the whole session (and midrange!) at that volume.

maybe all the people who go to live concerts are a bit deaf already.

Louder music sounds better if you have shitty speakers. When I bought my set of studio monitors, I realized that I (unconsciously) listened at a much lower volume, simply because the clarity was already close to perfect at that volume.

FWIW, I've anecdotally had pretty much the opposite experience. I've played and written music my entire life, but I'm not very well-versed in sound systems. My roommate has invested several years and several thousand dollars in the sound system that we currently have in our living room.

After he and the sound system moved in, I listen to music (of all kinds) quite a bit louder in our living room: My earlier crappy sound system just didn't sound good at high volumes while this system sounds beautiful as high as we care to crank it before we decide that we're being too unreasonably inconsiderate to our neighbors.

Your shitty speakers simply were not shitty enough :)

Haha I dunno, it was literally just my TV. I didn't know anything at all about sound systems.