Ok. Hi.

[masteringhouse]

Thanks Tom,
I'll definitely check out that book.. And when I'm done with a track perhaps I'll post it so all you pro's can laugh at me and criticize it.

I would be glad to give you my critique but would need both the mix and the master to make a valid critique since you can't really make a judgement about mastering without knowing how the mix sounded before and the goals that you had in mind for mastering.

I never laugh at anyone who is making a sincere effort at improving their skills.

 

[guitaristic]

OK HI ... back at cha!

Hey Moresound, you should come to the Newbie section and help out my little friend asking about sdc mics! I'm trying to help but don't have much experience with those.

https://homerecording.com/bbs/gener...ding-my-first-home-recording-studio-309412/2/

 

[cobaltaudio]

OK...but then let's imagine that the quieter track is intentionally quiet to begin with, and it slowly builds up to a loud section, then back down again to a quiet section, then back up again to a loud section, and then it finishes off with another very quiet section....
...would you feel the need to constantly adjust your volume between the quiet and loud sections so that everything sounds the same level???

Well yes obviously, I'm not one for destroying the dynamics from over-zealous compression. However, if you do stumble upon a quieter track in your listening, then you recognise it as a quieter piece of music. If however your listening changes genres suddenly, you hear the difference in level. Especially between classical and pop, or dubstep and folk. That's my point, the level of your track needs to relate to the genre it just won't fit, that doesn't mean compressing the hell out of it. I suppose it's because I tend to think more towards the listener on an iPod, and you may tune in more to the radio listener (get it?!.... tune in??)
And no, of course I'm not going to turn up the volume knob every time a piece gets quiet. I got into the industry making classical recordings and am a regular listener myself so I feel that's a slightly harsh thing to insinuate without any foundation for it. But I do get your point.

Although the radio point is a good one, I absolutely agree with that. There are a lot of records that have such hot levels that they sound different on every station you hear it on, because of the multiband compression they've had to apply to it.

 

[miroslav]

... so I feel that's a slightly harsh thing to insinuate without any foundation for it. But I do get your point.

I was being "slightly harsh" just for effect...

Here's another thing to ponder....
It's becoming a growing trend for many to just accept the fact that they will *have to* slam their tracks in order to be as loud as the limitations of digital audio allow.
So it's come to a point where no one has any more choices about that.

Not sure if that's the way people should be making music, since it certainly does have some of that "cookie cutter" mentality that so many frown against...doesn't it?
We'll get very righteous about everyone using something like autotune...but not about everyone having to be LOUD with no other option.
Think about it....

I think the simplest solution would be to include some kind of AGC on all radios, iPods, home stereos...and then the end-user can just choose THEIR loudness preset...and let the AGC adjust the volume control for you...that way musicians no longer need to worry about THEIR stuff being as loud as everyone elses...becuase it would be, according to the end-users preset.