Comparative volumes

[NationalSandwic]

Hello everyone, hope you can help.

I'm not sure how to get my tracks (some only recorded instruments, some only soft synths, some both) up to a final level where they are at least as loud as, for example, my other mp3's. Writing my music to CD as is gives me a disc that I have to crank my sound system up a fair bit to get it as loud as my other CDs. I've tried mixing stuff to just below clip-level on the individual tracks, but the overall mixdown is still too soft.

I'm sure that this is all to do with mastering, but I don't imagine it's too complicated to get right?

My system:
AMD64bit 2800+; 512meg RAM; ESI Waveterminal 192M.
Running Logic Pro 5; Cool Edit Pro 2.

Advice? Help? PLEASE?
Thanks
Anthony

[Massive Master]

A lot of it has to do with mastering (which is actually far too complex to get into in any short of "quick" matter).

However, a lot of it has to do with everything else - From long before the "RECORD" button is ever pressed, your "ideal maximum volume" is being decided. The raw sounds, the arrangement, mic selection and recording technique, processing on the way in, during the mix, the mix itself, the dynamics in the original tracks and how they're dealt with...

ALL these things are of paramount importance when trying to achieve a "loud, punchy" mix. Coming up short on any of them along the way can affect that "ideal maximum volume" more than mastering.

Mastering can "bring out" and attain that level, but if the potential to reach that level isn't there, it's just not going to happen without seriously compromising the sound.

[NationalSandwic]

ok, thanks, i understand that. but what do I do from here?
soft synths are completely internal and shouldn't be affected by any recording techniques, cos there aren't any...

[NationalSandwic]

ok ok... so, not much being generated here. are there any websites you could recommend? and source of info about how to get volume without clipping?

[radiorickm]

actually, there are probably thousand of posts here on hr.com about this.
just do a little research, especially here in the mixing/mastering forum.

there is LOTS of useful info in some of the past posts

[kylen]

As long as we're talking about demo grade quality here try this...you have Cool Edit 2 (is it 2.1 ? you have an effects rack on the multitracker - if not then you can do this in 2 steps on the editor side).

Take your balanced final stereo mix (allow Cool Edit 2 to open the mixdown as 32bit float file) insert a dynamics processor into the FX rack (or apply the effect in the editor) of the stereo track. Choose a preset that will make it compress and pump a bit. Next insert another instance of dynamics processor in the fx rack following the compressor - make this one limit (you can even use the hardlimiter if you want). Both of these steps can and will change your mix'd balance to some degree - it may not be much or it could be a lot - depends how 'hard' you push your stereo mix into those effects.

Try that on a few dozen songs to get a feel for what sound you want. Once you do that on your full mixes for a while you'll begin to get an idea about which instruments or tracks you may want to individually process with dynamics during the mix itself so that your mixes are pumpin and happening.

That way - if your mixes are cool you have to do less and less to full mixes to get them to balance with other music - eventually. In other words with the best possible mix your 'mastering' steps may just include some broad EQ strokes and adjusting FS headroom and even maybe tweaking the loudness a bit with a mastering limiter. Then you can line upp the songs you want to 'master' in Cool Edit Pro, match the volumes to a 'reference' song using the volume handles and encode your mp3s.

If you have a VST adapter you can grab the free Classic Compressor and Classic Limiter and use those as 'mastering' compressor and 'mastering' limiter they're a little easier to work with than the CEP dynamics processor IMO. Later you can try those effects on your tracks and try all the cool tricks to get pumping bass, smooth vocals, whatever you're looking for. Parametric EQ is a great tool too - CEP has that one...

Here is the Classic series:
http://www.kjaerhusaudio.com/classic-series.php

Now go crazy for a few months and post some results !

[LRosario]

There is a simple reason for all that:


Someone mentioned what I was thinking, "it starts before you begin recording".


Take into account that the better your equipment gets, the more you can push your dynamic range. Average monitoring volume is around 92db, and for good reason.


Lower volume tends to drop off freqs on the human ear, so you don't hear a true sound. Too loud; however, will distort your tracks.

The best thing to do, record as hot (loud) as possible. Push it just under the red with a tiny bit of head room.

[Farview]

Originally Posted by LRosario

Take into account that the better your equipment gets, the more you can push your dynamic range. Average monitoring volume is around 92db, and for good reason.

92db will blow your ears pretty quickly, 80 to 85 is much safer and still just as good.

Originally Posted by LRosario

Lower volume tends to drop off freqs on the human ear, so you don't hear a true sound. Too loud; however, will distort your tracks.

What would your monitoring volume have to do with recording level? You sound confused.

Originally Posted by LRosario

The best thing to do, record as hot (loud) as possible. Push it just under the red with a tiny bit of head room.

That's a fine idea but it has very little to do with the volume of a mix overall. The instrumentation and arrangement of some songs prevent them from being louder than loud.

[Massive Master]

Originally Posted by LRosario

The best thing to do, record as hot (loud) as possible. Push it just under the red with a tiny bit of head room.

No comment...

[Blue Bear Sound]

Originally Posted by LRosario

Take into account that the better your equipment gets, the more you can push your dynamic range. Average monitoring volume is around 92db, and for good reason.

Nope - 80-85dB for better reasons!

Originally Posted by LRosario

Lower volume tends to drop off freqs on the human ear, so you don't hear a true sound. Too loud; however, will distort your tracks.

I don't get this comment....... monitoring level is not recording level.

Originally Posted by LRosario

The best thing to do, record as hot (loud) as possible. Push it just under the red with a tiny bit of head room.

This is wrong on so many levels.......

[Cloneboy Studio]

Originally Posted by Farview

The best thing to do, record as hot (loud) as possible. Push it just under the red with a tiny bit of head room.

Only if you like clipping and no headroom. Personally I suggest a -6db peak with the RMS somewhere around -12db to -15db. It's served me very well for capturing clean digital audio that mixes down nicely.

[masteringhouse]

Originally Posted by Cloneboy Studio

Only if you like clipping and no headroom. Personally I suggest a -6db peak with the RMS somewhere around -12db to -15db. It's served me very well for capturing clean digital audio that mixes down nicely.

I keep seeing comments about keeping the peak at -6 or -4 dB(FS?). Not really sure where this is coming from if we're talking about digital recording.

The main issue is that you want to avoid overs. Many recorders and DAWs register overs differently. Usually the standard is that 3 consecutive samples at the highest value are an over. Some machines are calibrated differently however. To ensure that you don't have an over I would think that a -1 dBFS peak should be sufficient to prevent any clipping. Recording at -6 means that you are only recording at 23 bits instead of 24. Not that it's a big deal, but might as well use the full range if you can.

I do agree however that average levels should be well below -10 dBFS(finished level for average pop song in my book).

[Massive Master]

Cloneboy - In fairness to Farview, he was quoting LRosario on that one. It just didn't come out right.

Otherwise, I think something that a lot of people forget (and it bugs me a lot) is that you can lower a 0dBfs 24-bit signal to -47dB and you're STILL getting better resolution than a 16-bit recording. Back in the (16-bit) day, getting those levels reasonably hot was "fairly" important. With 24-bit, I'm with Cloneboy in a big way. -6dB PEAKS is more than enough. According to several studies that I hardly understand you're doing a LOT more harm than good running individual tracks at hot levels. It does NOT contribute to the overall volume of the mix. It DOES add distortion that takes away from the track, and builds up in the mix.

If you want your final product to be open, airy and punchy with the *potential* to be louder AND dynamic, keep those levels within reason.

[Farview]

That's the way it was supposed to be.

[masteringhouse]

John -

If we're talking about individual tracks in a DAW I can understand the reasoning for summing and to avoid unnecessary processing of levels (though it's probably going to happen anyway). In regards to an overall final mix, I would like to see some sort of proof.

Thanks,
T

[NationalSandwic]

sorry, can i get some definitions of "RMS" and "FS"? not quite sure what it's all about...
feeling very amateur here...

[masteringhouse]

Originally Posted by NationalSandwic

sorry, can i get some definitions of "RMS" and "FS"? not quite sure what it's all about...
feeling very amateur here...

This may help:

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articl...19/ai_95904308

[Farview]

Originally Posted by NationalSandwic

sorry, can i get some definitions of "RMS" and "FS"? not quite sure what it's all about...
feeling very amateur here...

RMS (stands for root mean squared) is like the average volume of a track. This is what the VU meters on old cassette decks measured. When you set the levels on an old cassette deck (or any analog gear with vu meters) you woud set it so that the needle would be bouncing right around 0Db. That 0Db is about -12dbfs in digital land.

fs is full scale. This is what digital peak meters measure. Dbfs will always be a negative number because 0Dbfs is as high as you can go.

[Massive Master]

Tom - Yeah, I'm mainly referring to individual tracks - The white's I read were a little confusing, but made sense to a point - I'll post if I can dig them up. It was basically covering the distortion that builds up in hot digital recordings, and why (especially tracking) levels should ideally be kept at under a -6dBfs peak.

For mixes, it's not "as" bad, because you're only hearing it once. On tracking, it builds up track by track.

[masteringhouse]

Originally Posted by Massive Master

Tom - Yeah, I'm mainly referring to individual tracks - The white's I read were a little confusing, but made sense to a point - I'll post if I can dig them up. It was basically covering the distortion that builds up in hot digital recordings, and why (especially tracking) levels should ideally be kept at under a -6dBfs peak.

For mixes, it's not "as" bad, because you're only hearing it once. On tracking, it builds up track by track.

Cool, thanks.

One of my students said the same thing last week about peaking at -4 dBFS on a complete mix. If you can dig up any of the white papers I'd like to hear what they say about this issue in regards to pre-mastered mixes, I can't see any logical reason for this, in fact the opposite.

[volltreffer]

I assume that this may have two reasons:

a) former digital mixers might have had not too much headroom. Staying a factor of two below the limits seems reasonable. (And if two peaks add, they're still within the limit).

b) the meters often act a little slower, so reaching -4 may be 0 fast peaks...

Just ideas..

aXel

[masteringhouse]

Originally Posted by volltreffer

I assume that this may have two reasons:

a) former digital mixers might have had not too much headroom. Staying a factor of two below the limits seems reasonable. (And if two peaks add, they're still within the limit).

b) the meters often act a little slower, so reaching -4 may be 0 fast peaks...

Just ideas..

aXel

This is true for an anlog or VU meter, but not for a digital or peak meter. They should be instantaneous since there aren't any ballistics involved. As far as headroom, anything below 0dBFS is fine in the digital world.

[Farview]

Originally Posted by masteringhouse

This is true for an anlog or VU meter, but not for a digital or peak meter. They should be instantaneous since there aren't any ballistics involved. As far as headroom, anything below 0dBFS is fine in the digital world.

The peak meters do have ballistics (of sorts) involved. Technically, you can't go over 0db so there is no way to measure an 'over' other than by counting consecutive full scale samples. Some meters will turn the red light on after 4 (for example) consecutive full scale samples, some after 8, or 10. (These number are just examples, I don't know what the exact numbers are for any meters in particular)

The other headroom comment was refering to digital mixers that have a fixed bit depth mix bus. If you have 2 signals that peak at -6 at the same time, they add together and you get 0. As you can see, 24 tracks that peak at -6 is going to run you out of headroom quickly. This isn't really a problem with 32 bit floating point mix busses in a daw.

[masteringhouse]

Originally Posted by Farview

The peak meters do have ballistics (of sorts) involved.

Last I looked a digital meter had no moving parts, hence no "ballistics". You can program a digital meter react like a VU but there still are no ballistics per se.

Originally Posted by Farview

Technically, you can't go over 0db so there is no way to measure an 'over' other than by counting consecutive full scale samples. Some meters will turn the red light on after 4 (for example) consecutive full scale samples, some after 8, or 10. (These number are just examples, I don't know what the exact numbers are for any meters in particular).

If your meter is reading 8 consecutive samples as an over you better throw it away let alone 10. 3 is what I've seen as a standard in most high end gear.

Originally Posted by Farview

The other headroom comment was refering to digital mixers that have a fixed bit depth mix bus. If you have 2 signals that peak at -6 at the same time, they add together and you get 0. As you can see, 24 tracks that peak at -6 is going to run you out of headroom quickly. This isn't really a problem with 32 bit floating point mix busses in a daw.

We're talking about recording a final mix at -4dBFS or less. And yes it's still a problem with 32 bit floating point too. Floating point doesn't allow you to record an infinite amount of gain, so there is still a limit. Also very likely most folks here will be going into plugins that are 24 bit. What happens with a floating point input when you exceed the the range of 24 bit with a 24 bit plugin?

Clipping ...

[kylen]

Originally Posted by masteringhouse

... Also very likely most folks here will be going into plugins that are 24 bit...

I'm using Audition and Sonar apps which have 32bit float internal busses, my plugs are mainly Voxengo which use 64bit float internal processing. So I guess the LCD is 32bit float in my case...plus I use 32bit float wave files in Audition, Sonar will do that later this month in SOnar4 (I think!).