how to get more volume out of my mixes
- Thread starter jimistone
- Start date
- Status
MrWrenchey
New member
I typically use either Vintage Warmer 2, Slate's FG-X, or both for my mastering/loudening.
Honestly, I highly suggest the Slate FG-X. At $100, I use that more than any other brickwall limiter I've ever had before. It's the cleanest "mastering" limiter I've heard. It definitely keeps your low-end punch intact, and it doesn't mush your snare so that it disappears like many other brickwall limiters tend to do.
Honestly, I highly suggest the Slate FG-X. At $100, I use that more than any other brickwall limiter I've ever had before. It's the cleanest "mastering" limiter I've heard. It definitely keeps your low-end punch intact, and it doesn't mush your snare so that it disappears like many other brickwall limiters tend to do.
bouldersoundguy
Well-known member
You can only get so much loudness from a given mix by mastering before it falls apart. Loudness potential is built into a mix, so mixing is where you need to do the most work to get it loud.
I find multiband compression useful mostly for problematic mixes that can't be redone, but anything I do with multiband on the 2-track can be done better at the multitrack level.
I'll second the recommendation for the Slate FG-X, excellent for mastering rock. I've used the Vintage Warmer but have not found it to be that great as a mastering limiter. I've also found the Brainworx bx-digital V2 useful.
If you want to be picky, dithering and truncating should be the absolute last two things done. If you're going from a 24 bit file other than 44.1 to CD quality you need to be sure that sample rate conversion isn't being done after the dither/truncate process, or at least that it's not being done between dithering and truncating.
I find multiband compression useful mostly for problematic mixes that can't be redone, but anything I do with multiband on the 2-track can be done better at the multitrack level.
I'll second the recommendation for the Slate FG-X, excellent for mastering rock. I've used the Vintage Warmer but have not found it to be that great as a mastering limiter. I've also found the Brainworx bx-digital V2 useful.
If you want to be picky, dithering and truncating should be the absolute last two things done. If you're going from a 24 bit file other than 44.1 to CD quality you need to be sure that sample rate conversion isn't being done after the dither/truncate process, or at least that it's not being done between dithering and truncating.
kindafishy
Member
The SWS extensions add RMS normalization and analysis to REAPER. These are a "day one" add on to many REAPER users.
SWS / S&M Extension
Once they are installed, open your action list and filter by RMS. Voila!
There is so much good stuff in SWS. They should really be part of REAPER by default.
R
RAMI
Guest
I just installed it, thanx!!!! I had no idea and never even went into my "actions" menu.
But I don't real understand what this is doing for me. I can Normalize all the items, but I don't see the point in doing that. I don't care how loud my items are.
Also, REAPER already has RMS analysis on the master fader. The top shows peaks and the bottom shows RMS. I'm not sure how to use this SWS thing in a way that REAPER isn't already doing for me.
R
RAMI
Guest
OK, I'm reading the SWS manual. I can see how a lot of that stuff can be useful for many people, but I don't see much use for myself. I don't use "markers", I don't use "Takes", I don't see the point in normalizing my tracks, I don't care if my ruler turns red while I'm recording, etc....REAPER already has RMS level on the master, which is the only place it matters to me. I run REAPER pretty much like a tape recorder and keep it simple. I can see a lot of these things being useful, though, but not for the way I record and mix.
Paschalis I.
Banned
Many newcomers to recording (not implying you're a newcomer just mentioning it in general) think that slamming a maximizer on the master channel would get them the same volume as the commercial volume.
When they do that they realize that the maximizer is starting to work so hard and destroy the mix and then they are forced to either:
1) Squash the dynamics of the song to get to that commercial level
2) Ease off the limiter , keep the dynamics but the song would be quieter.
The problem lies in the mix though.
When you've got tracks that've got peaks "jumping" here and there it's pretty logical for the maximizer to "meet" these peaks
and work against them.
So make sure that if you want to get the loudness (I assume the genre is asking for loudness) then compress/shave peak right during mixing
and the final maximizer would not have to meet all these transients that'd got nothing musical to offer to the listener.
Go back , re-mix , fix stuff and you're on the right path to loudness without destroying the dynamics of your mix.
Hope this helps!
Last edited:
R
RAMI
Guest
First of all, I'm not a new comer, far from it. Neither are most of the people that responded to this thread. He asked a question and it was answered, I think you're a little arrogant. Nothing wrong with giving him more details as far as how to prepare a mix, but the question was about how to get more volume out of a final mix. The simple answer is with a limiter.
Get off your high horse.
R
RAMI
Guest
Yes there is.
Paschalis I.
Banned
Really? Are you kidding me?
Did you take the time to read the whole answer?
I said: not implying you're a newcomer just mentioning it in general
That was just a general sentence I was not referring to someone and of course I never implied you.
I also mentioned I wasn't referring to anyone... And you neg repped me? For real?
That's a nice and easy way of using your power there sir.
And even if I was referring to someone - but I didn't - did you hear your name?
he who smelt it, dealt it i suppose
Paschalis I.
Banned
I was listening to your songs when you neg repped me for something your mind had created.
You sir let me down. So sad.
Anyway, no hard feelings.
But please when someone is saying "newcomers usually do this" don't just go and neg rep him assuming he's talking about you
that shows your lack of confidence.
Peace.
CFox
Banned
kindafishy
Member
The main thing I use SWS RMS normalizing for is setting a starting point for gain staging. I set all my tracks at the beginning of the mix to -18 peak for things with super dynamics like drums and -18 rms for tracks with more even levels like bass, guitars, etc. I do this mainly because I use Nebula a lot and my understanding is that it requires this level generally to process as the developer intends. It also ensures that Nebula doesn't clip, which is an absolutely awful experience, not unlike a hideous screaming banshee directing her full force into your ear from 2 inches away.
I don't know if other plugins would benefit from this. I didn't worry about this type of gain staging before selling my soul to Acustica, but maybe someone else with more experience and knowledge would know whether or not this benefits.
I'm not familiar with SWS to a tremendous depth, but a couple other features that I do use pretty regularly are "Renumber marker IDs" and "Close all floating FX windows".
Others use them to great effect, I believe.
Paschalis I.
Banned
+1
A good mix will only need a maximizer during mastering...
Maybe some gentle glue compression but still yeah, mastering is not mixing.
R
RAMI
Guest
Nobody's crying, you Bozos. 
When someone starts a post with "New comers will usually say....." and then quotes what pretty much everyone in the thread just said, I assume it's a passive-aggressive way of saying "Don't listen to these guys". I wasn't taking it as if it was only directed at me. I took it as if it was directed at everyone who tried to help.
When someone starts a post with "New comers will usually say....." and then quotes what pretty much everyone in the thread just said, I assume it's a passive-aggressive way of saying "Don't listen to these guys". I wasn't taking it as if it was only directed at me. I took it as if it was directed at everyone who tried to help.
How did I let you down? By speaking the truth about your arrogance? Boo hoo. So sad, indeed. Lol.
bouldersoundguy
Well-known member
Except that he was dead on correct. Loudness has to be addressed in the mix first.
R
RAMI
Guest
Your link just goes to the first post of this thread. I don't see any parenthesis. As far as crying is concerned, I seem to remember making you cry to the point where you sent me a PM, still crying. So, yeah....no crying bro,
---------- Update ----------
I didn't say he was not correct. Read my post again.
---------- Update ----------
That's what most of us already said.+1
A good mix will only need a maximizer during mastering...
Maybe some gentle glue compression but still yeah, mastering is not mixing.
- Status