How loud do you mix and master at

How loud

  • 70 db and lower

    Votes: 6 12.2%

  • 71 to 80 db

    Votes: 8 16.3%

  • 81 to 85 db

    Votes: 19 38.8%

  • 86 to 90 db

    Votes: 6 12.2%

  • 90 to 95 db

    Votes: 1 2.0%

  • 96 to 100 db

    Votes: 1 2.0%

  • over 100 db

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Turn it up to 11

    Votes: 8 16.3%
  • Total voters
    49
timboZ

timboZ

New member
When mixing and mastering how loud is it in your chair.
Do you mix at the same volume you do when mastering?

Also what weighting and response do you go by.
 
85dBSPL, C weighted, with both speakers on. Response doesn't matter as I calibrate using pink noise.

Actual program material will play a bit quieter than that, as pink noise with 0dBFS peaks is a little above -12dBRMS. So mixes will play at 81dBSPL, and masters . . . well, somewhere north of that :o
 
I wouldn't know exactly, as I just listen.....but I'd guess about 85....not overly loud, but it drowns out all the background noise. I don't listen to music very loud, so I just try and keep it all level. I like my ears.
 
85 dB C weighted, slow response. I use commercial tunes as play back reference and measurment rather than pink noise.
 
I've never measured the volume but I prefer to mix at a whisper, going on "if I can hear everything quietly" it should sound almost right loud

I turn it up loud when I'm getting things nailed & have a walk around the house & see if anything jumps or drops in volume
 
I frankly haven't the slightest idea what SPL I monitor at. It's certainly not louder than 80-85dBSPL at the loudest, and can go down to probably 50-55dBSPL at the lowest.

Numbers are for people with insufficient ears :).

G.
 
I don't have anything to tell me how loud I'm listening apart from my ears, which basically have 3 points on the guage. 1) "Too quiet" 2) "Too Loud" 3) "Fine". I usually listen at option 3.
 
SouthSIDE Glen said:
Numbers are for people with insufficient ears :).

G.
Click to expand...

Respectfully, sir, there is a standard for monitoring, used primarily in video and cinema. It would probably help us wankers a lot to adopt it. Massive Master and mshilarious (who is rapidly moving up the list of the smartest people I know) seem to be referencing that standard.
 
apl said:
Respectfully, sir, there is a standard for monitoring, used primarily in video and cinema. It would probably help us wankers a lot to adopt it.
Click to expand...

I agree. It's interesting to see all the paperwork/articles on the standards in the film/broadcast industry...and to see that there have been attempts to do the same in the music industry but no one seems to follow it.
I think a lot of this has to do with the actual companies who have created working standards (Dolby, JBL, etc.) and also how much impact the home recording market has had on music.

New rule, someone on this site write a white paper on music monitoring levels and we'll make that a standard. Problem solved
:D
 
Last edited:
bennychico11 said:
New rule, someone on this site write a white paper on music monitoring levels and we'll make that a standard. Problem solved
:D
Click to expand...

I'll wait for the Behringer Ultra-White Tube Paper :D
 
apl said:
Respectfully, sir, there is a standard for monitoring, used primarily in video and cinema. It would probably help us wankers a lot to adopt it. Massive Master and mshilarious (who is rapidly moving up the list of the smartest people I know) seem to be referencing that standard.
Click to expand...
I understand that position, apl.

I also know that many engineers with much more experience than you and I put together undertand that the 85dB "standard" is a theoretical guideline based upon audiology theory. It is to be considered a starting point that is modified by many variables, not the least of which include the performance of the individual's ears, the amount of ambient noise in the listening environment, and the style of audio being engineered.

To say that one should monitor at 85dBSPL C weighted is tantamount to saying that one should add a 400Hz cut and a 4k boost to their kick, or that they should compress their vocal track to achieve a 4-6dB peak reduction. While those are all good general guidelines that can often work well, they are not something that should be considered specifications to be followed without modification or consideration for the content.

For every instance where one reads that "85/C" recommendation, one reads a professional engineer (mixing and/or mastering) who regularly breaks that recommendation. I remember reading in one of Owsinski's "Handbook" series of books, I honestly don't remember for sure if it was the mixing or the mastering one but I belive it was the mixing one (maybe somebidy can look this up for us?) that the A-list engineer being interviewed did all his monitoring at "normal conversation level", which - unless shouting is what this guy considers "normal conversation" :) - equates out to a good 20dB (+/-5dB) less than the standard recommendation. And if I had a dollar for the number of times I have read or heard someone with real pro experience on this board (or in magazine or book interviews) recommend that one check their mixes at low volume as well as high volume, I'd be able to go out and get that DM 3200 that I have my eyes on :).

I know for myself that I do a lot of mixing in the 80-85dBSPL range, but that I also do a lot at something more like 65-70dBSPL or even less. Even when I am up in the 80s, I'll ofen wind up bringing it down 5-10dB after a while because, for my ears, 85dB is LOUD. Not only do I not necessarily have to go that high in order to get the proper bass level as recommended by the Fletcher-Munson curve (a curve, BTW, which is not chiseled in stone, but is different for everybody's ears), but I find that sustained listening at that volume is very fatiguing. My mixes turn out better when I have one hand on the CR volume control than if I decide to follow some theory of averages on a piece of paper.

What I was trying to say with my riff about numbers is, one needs to learn one's ears the same way they need to learn one's monitoring chain. I have a cut-rate SPL meter like everybody else does. When I first got my gear in it's current configuration I did the pink noise measurements and made note of where in my CR volume control that level was located. That was some severn years ago. Other than to occasionaly show others or to just take some test readings at some of my live shows for the hell of it, I have not had that meter out of storage since that time. And while I use that noted point on my volume control as a base reference, I set the volume to what works for my ears on that day with that material.

That is how it works for me and many others, and is, IMHO, how it should work in general. To say that one should set their monitoring environment to "X" is one of those generalizations that is a good baseline to work from, but often just does not follow reality any more than any other simplistic "preset" remedy in the engineering chain does. To me the answer is to learn one's monitors and learn one's ears so thay can make mixes and/or masters that translate the best to the greater world. Once you have that fundamental of engineering down, the actual numbers you wind up at are irrelevant to you and not necessarily applicable to your neighbor with different ears in a different situation.

So don't hate me, sir, for calling the Emperors Fletcher and Munson for being only partially clothed. You already hate me for being a Sox fan...isn't that enough? :D

G.
 
Last edited:
for once I actually agree with Glen (what is the world coming to?). For my ears, 85 is way too loud. maybe the response is flatter but with that much air coming at me I can't even think.
 
While I honestly do prefer to listen at my calibrated level, I am not that strict about it. However I do have a rule that a full-volume listen is mandatory before I consider anything finished, otherwise I would be unable to hear the quietest parts of the mix--that is, for a CD with 96dB of dynamic range, the loudest peak better be 96dBSPL. That puts the average level right back at the standard--very handy!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top