Why don't I get CD loudness in my mixes?

[Robertt8]

Let me explain this more...

When I record, everything sounds good through the speakers nice and loud and everything, but when I mix it down to a CD or a tape why is it that I always need to crank up my stereo volume to get the same "loudness" as the professionally mixed CDs at a lower volume. What am I doing wrong and what is it I can do to give it that ooph?

Thanks! Feel free to email me!
robert@birdsallinteractive.com

[Alchemist3k]

Well as I understand it this is a common question. I have seen this in Sound On Sound magazine, an excellent British publication, and they gave the answer as this.

Basically professional CDs at the mixdown stage are put through a compressor (or even better a master processor like the ones that TC Electronic do i.e. TC Electronic Finalizer). They compress the final mix quite heavily to compensate for that loss in volume that you get on any CD mixdown system.

So basically I suggest that you compress your final mix.

The other thing (not in that mag but my own opinion) is that you may have recorded it pretty low in volume. It is important to record all instruments as loud as possible before peaking. The input mixer is set on VS products to show the peak light at -4 on the screen. This doesn't mean there is actually any peaking!!! You can change it to peak only at levels above 0 in the options. (PS Thanks to the guys on this forum who told me about this. You'll notice that the demo tracks on the VS seem a buit louder than your own recordings. The reason is that all their instrument were recorded with the signal as close to zero as possible. ;P)

[Soundscaper]

This is a common problem. If you are using a DAW for your mastering there is a great plug-in called WAVES L1- ultramaxamizer. It is superb. You will sound like a major label if you utalize it properly. It runs around $350.00. If you are only using the VS compression is a must. You really need to look into getting yourself a mastering unit. T.C. or DBX both are great. Also in your mix pay close attention to your EQ's. Hope this helps.

[Alchemist3k]

Sorry what is DAW? I'm not really familiar with a lot of recording terminology.

[Soundscaper]

A DAW is short for Digital Audio Work station.

In other words are you using a computer for your recording in any way. Do you have a program like cool edit or sound forge 4.5?

[brtaln1]

I was listening to a Tom Petty cd and then a Beatle cd, killing time, when i popped in a cd of a couple rock tunes recorded on my BR8.
I was totaly shocked to hear my songs were a LOT louder than the cds i was listening to. I thought professional recordings were a lot louder than what you could do on just a BR 8 and $9.00 mic. I had spent a lot of time trying to increase the overall volume but is it possible to go to far??

[Blue Bear Sound]

Originally posted by Robertt8
What is it I can do to give it that ooph?

Let a professional master it!




Bruce

[ChuckU]

Good try Bruce. But this is HomeRecording dot com. Not "Mortgage-your-home recording" dot com.

I agree about the Waves L1. It's the closest I've gotten to the holy grail so far at home. Prior to this, my home recorded tracks were mixed down by an expert in ProTools and run through the TC Finalizer.

More recently, my tracking, technique, and ears have all improved, in no small part due to the input I recieved from my local studio guy. People with expertise (like yourself) are a priceless resource, but if you're recording on a BR-8 (in my case it was a VS-880 - now it's Sonar), then you're probably shooting for a more practical solution.

[Blue Bear Sound]

Well... I *WAS* trying to be funny (notice the )

Maybe I should have followed it with a




Bruce

[Track Rat]

brtaln1, depending on the vintage you're listening to, there'll be a big difference to percieved volume on CDs. Damn near any new recording/mastering done will be in the "Loudest CD on the block" style of mastering. There is NO dynamic range in this style. If you rip one of these CDs and look at it in an editor you'll see it looks like a solid strip with peaks at about -.2dBFS. Then find something like an old Almann Bros. CD and rip it and the peaks are more like -3 to -6dBFS and it'll actully look like a wave form.

[imalion]

There has already been some great responses on this topic. But I thought I would throw in my 2 cents anyway.

I ran into the same problems when I first started transferring my BR-8 tunes to my CD burner. Before I bought Cakewalk Home Studio 2002, I had to CRANK the volume on my BR-8 to get a half way decent volume level on my CD. And even when I did that the volume was lower than store bought CDs.

This is why I went out and got some Home Studio software for my computer. Once my song is in Cakewalk I have alot more control over the overall volume and sound. I just bought the inexpensive version of Cakewalk. (Home Studio 2002). But it works great.

Good Luck.

P.S. Feel free to email me with any questions.

imalion@yahoo.com


Steven

[John Sayers]

It helps if you start compressing right from the start by compressing (slightly) each instrument and vocals as you record them. Then you aren't relying on the mastering compression to do it all.

cheers
John

[TexRoadkill]

If you look at your mix in a wavefom editor you will most likely see some stand out peaks in the waveform. There could be only a few that pop out much higher than the others. That is what is causing the loudness problem. When you convert the file to .cda for the CD it will only let you go as loud as the loudest peak in your mix. Take out those peaks and you can get a lot more room to push up the mix.

[GT]

Doesn't all this compression kind of go backwards away from what we all profess to want?

A realistic sounding recording.

Since few of us are going to get rich, why not Damn the compressor, and full speed ahead.

Bruce, I tire of ducks, sell me a compressor.

GT

[Blue Bear Sound]

Originally posted by GT
Bruce, I tire of ducks, sell me a compressor.
GT

No prob.. I have a 3630 here with your name on it!!!

[OrangeGangster]

Originally posted by ChuckU
[...(in my case it was a VS-880 - now it's Sonar), . [/B]

HI there ChuckU..,I´m working with both VS-880EX and Cakewalk 9.0 in Syncr...,could you please be more especific on that quote...I may be lossing something,WHY ,(if its tha case,)have you move into that config.?
thanks...

[ChuckU]

Orange,
Every config has its own pro's and cons. What I like about Sonar (and to me, it's a significant step above PA9) is the visual representation of the wave form, the ease of automated mixing (I never learned this on the 880), the ability to have more than 8 tracks and 2 effects play back at once. The ability to use large inexpensive hard drives, mastering, cd burning all in the PC, expandability, etc.

Now, that being said, the PC, and its fussy nature with respect to configurations, drivers, motherboards, CPU's, etc. can kick anyone's ass, so it's not for everyone. I've got a lot of hours invested in fighting with Bill Gates, and I've got some PC/Windoze knowledgable friends.

I've always had a PC, and I've always had Cakewalk, so I was comfortable with these two components of home recording. When it was apparent to me that Sonar was an audio package with midi and not the other way around like the previous versions(my opinion), then I decided to commit that way.

I still use the 880 in a few ways:
1. I can plug into it with my guitar and go S/PDIF into my PC.
2. I can MTC sync it with Sonar and get 4 more simultaneous tracks and later dump them to the PC (again via S/PDIF)
3. I use it to control faders and pans in Sonar (see my thread "VS-880 as Control Surface")
4. I can also continue to use the effects.

I hope I answered your question and I KNOW I never learned many of the 880's features. Some of that is lack of patience on my part, some is poor product design.