levelling songs loudness

[masteringhouse]

I asked about a way to perform a very simple task and you are sending me to the mastering house for that. Since you are running a recording/mastering business I consider such an answer as self-advertisement. Of course, you did not specifically offer your Blue Bear Sound, but your answer is obviously aimed at us amateurs by pushing an idea of using mastering houses for all our needs.
This is not why people are posting questions at this BBS.

Actually this is not a very simple task if done correctly. It can involve various combinations of compressors, limiters, gain riding, not to mention how EQ effects how we percieve "loudness".

Bruce isn't trying to sell his mastering services to you, and without first hearing your material neither am I to tell you the truth. There's a lot more to mastering than making songs the same level and as Bruce mentioned this isn't what you necessarily want to do. This topic constantly comes up on this BBS, in fact I think that you are the second person that asked in the last two days. It gets a bit irritating answering it every week so you'll have to excuse Bruce (and me) if we get a bit terse. Search the site and you'll find several threads if you really want to get a ton of answers.

Ok, off the soapbox.

Here's a cheap, quick and easy way to make all of your songs the same volume if you have Sound Forge:

First get your loudest song and check the RMS level using the normalize function with the equal loudness curve. Once you find the RMS level, set the threshold of the normalizer to this value and apply it to all of your songs.

I don't recommend this however...

The way I do is to listen to all of the songs and get a feel for the overall sound of the CD. Next pick one song that is representative of the "middle ground" in terms of the character of the EQ and dynamics for the CD or go for the loudest in the case of a CD where I know that's what the client is going for. Also using references of similar music helps to hone in on a "goal" for the overall sound. Once you have a good EQ, work with a compressor or compressors to get "fullness" and a limiter for volume. Listen to how the transients are affected by different variations of thresholds, compression ratios, attack and release times. Listen for distortion (all compressors have this to some degree, high quality compressors to a lesser degree of course), pumping, punch, and the bounce of the dynamics of the song. If there are sections (usually Intros) that are low in volume compared to the average try using automation to bring them up if they need it rather than squashing the entire song for the sake of the low points. Once I think that I have this in the ballpark, start working on the other songs in the same way comparing them with a good metering system and more importantly by listening switching back and forth between several of the songs on the CD. Your ear is the best guide in regards to volume since the density and frequency characteristics of a song as well as the average level change our perception of "loudness". Two songs both at the same meter reading can sound radically different in regards to "loudness". After I think I have them nailed I burn a CD and listen to how they sound on several different systems. Each system will bring it's own perspective to it, so go for what sound good on all systems.

That's it in a nutshell, there are other issues with regards to mastering such as imaging, octave balance, editing and other stuff, but that's another thread.

Hope this helps?

 

[giles117]

Hate to disagree with your disagreement. It is not a business Decision, it is an Audio Decision. I do this for a living and even I (knowing how to master and having mastered projects successfully) will send my stuff to a Lab.

A fresh set of ears gives a diff prespective on your project which in most cases will benefit you aurally.

And that is something I would suggest for anyone doing it at home.

Mastering labs can do your entire project for 500 bucks or so now a days. thanks to technology and supply/demand.

And if you can buy a $500 computer to records your project, you can spend $500 to get your project mastered.

A business decision is WHICH mastering house to use based on your BUDGET.

 

[AdrianFly]

I'm just a newbie.. and a silly one at that. However, it took me only one day of reading on the BBS to know what "Do not feed the bear" means.

 

[giles117]

Now to answer his question more accurately....

Technique....

L1, L2 or L3. then listen to each song file bouncing back and forth adjusting your threshold of the Limiter on each file till they all sound about the same in apparent loudness. Cant get any simpler than that. LOL

 

[Farview]

If he doesn't care about it being perfect, let him slap an EQ, compressor and a limiter on his stuff. Sooner or later he will be in a position to do something for real, and he will make the right choice then. I remember using two 4-tracks and trying to record my own version of The Wall. I learned a lot just from the experience.

 

[Farview]

If he doesn't care about it being perfect, let him slap an EQ, compressor and a limiter on his stuff. Sooner or later he will be in a position to do something for real, and he will make the right choice then. I remember using two 4-tracks and trying to record my own version of The Wall. I learned a lot just from the experience.

 

[ryanlikestorock]

Any of the digital equipment that is going to do your mixes any justice at all is going to cost a couple hundred bucks. The EQ in Cool Edit Pro just isn't going to do it. So, if you're going to spend a couple hundred bucks, why not find someone who masters records even as a hobby? They're going to do a lot better work that you would and it'll cost the same amount of money.

A fairly well known producer once said to me: "If you're only going to release this record once, you might as well do it right". He got the project and I keep those words in mind when it comes time to make a big decision related to a project.

 

[kylen]

Hate to disagree with your disagreement. It is not a business Decision, it is an Audio Decision. I do this for a living and even I (knowing how to master and having mastered projects successfully) will send my stuff to a Lab.

A fresh set of ears gives a diff prespective on your project which in most cases will benefit you aurally.

And that is something I would suggest for anyone doing it at home.

Mastering labs can do your entire project for 500 bucks or so now a days. thanks to technology and supply/demand.

And if you can buy a $500 computer to records your project, you can spend $500 to get your project mastered.

A business decision is WHICH mastering house to use based on your BUDGET.

Well OK giles you can have most of that - I still wouldn't call sending stuff to a mastering house a 'technique' though...here's something else I'm noticing - as the means to record and mix gets cheaper and cheaper (translate - easier for everyone in any lifestyle to do) the mixes get worser and worser, hehe. Someone with a $500 computer is not generally gonna have good monitoring conditions to mix in. You wanta clog up mastering houses with that stuff ? Much better for folks to hang out here for a bit - get their questions answered and do research and learn a little. Finally a certain percentage will do it themselves and a certain other percentage will determine recording isn't what they want to do and hire folks like you to track & mix them.

webstop - not a bad day in the Home Mastering Wars...see some of these guys know something and'll tell ya if you poke 'em a little first.

 

[giles117]

Do they really get worse? The Mixes I mean....

You are right. try a $1000 computer LOL

But seriously, to me that is the best technique. Send it off and quit putzing around. better yet find a good mastering Engineer locally and do what i did. Sit in on the sessions and learn

 

[kylen]

... better yet find a good mastering Engineer locally and do what i did. Sit in on the sessions and learn

Yes - I like that idea too !

 

[webstop]

What if someone do not plan or do not have $500 to pay to a mastering engineer? Then what?
Some of the "pro" guys lost ability to understand that there are people who are doing things just for fun. Learning how to do certain things is big part of the fun. Hiring a "pro" may be considered an ultimate solution, but only under certain circumstances.
Here is an idea. I can right a script that every time someone posts a question one of three answers automatically pops up:
1. Don't waste you time. For best results go to a recording studio.
2. Don't bother. For best results go to a mastering house.
3. Don't even think about that. For best results go to a CD duplication and graphics facility.
Wouldn't that be fun?

Kylen: I wouldn't blame cheap computers for crappy mixes. I think that availability of affordable computers and software create an illusion with users that making music is easy.

Anyway, thanks to everyone who took time to make a meaningful suggestion.

 

[masteringhouse]

Here is an idea. I can right a script that every time someone posts a question one of three answers automatically pops up:
1. Don't waste you time. For best results go to a recording studio.
2. Don't bother. For best results go to a mastering house.
3. Don't even think about that. For best results go to a CD duplication and graphics facility.

How about:

1. Search the board for the answers that have been posted previously.
2. Do your research and read books, manuals, and articles on the net.
3. Practice your craft until your ears bleed.

 

[giles117]

Actually I answered the question. Guess you are reading too fast. Go back a few posts.

The word technique is in there. Post #24 to be more specific.

 

[Farview]

How about:

1. Search the board for the answers that have been posted previously.
2. Do your research and read books, manuals, and articles on the net.
3. Practice your craft until your ears bleed.

There are at least 5 threads a week asking this same question. There was 3 floating around as new posts the same day I discovered this one. There is a new one that started today. All of these questions have been answered to death on a daily basis. Use the search function and read the other threads, if you still have questions, (more specific ones) I'm sure someone will be happy to give you more specific help.

 

[webstop]

How about:
1. Search the board for the answers that have been posted previously.

With this kind of logic posting feature may as well be disabled, because practically ANY question has already been asked and answerwed in the past.

2. Do your research and read books, manuals, and articles on the net.

Good suggestion. I am doing it as time permits. Bulletin board are usually good sources of information as well.

3. Practice your craft until your ears bleed.

Thats exactly what I am trying to do. That is why answers like "just hire a pro" are of little help.

 

[webstop]

... if you still have questions, (more specific ones) I'm sure someone will be happy to give you more specific help.

I asked a specific question on what technique people use to make finished songs sound unform.
If you are tired asnwering the same question again and again just skip it, or send a link to another thread, which I may have missed.

 

[AdrianFly]

What bothers me is that I've heard dozens of songs by "Children" in bands who claimed to have recorded their music at home on their computer without the use of a real recording studio nor mastering house. Yet, these "kiddies" have hotter sounding Mp3's that are NEAR if not almost indistiguishable from professional recordings. Even after months of practice I can't even come close to these "punk rockers without pubes" and their "redbook" recordings they do after school and before cartoons, in their bedrooms.

Somebody somewhere is holding out some valuable piece of info regarding a certain computer and program to master with.


That or there are lots of people out there claiming to do this stuff in their bedrooms when in reality they have professionals mixing and mastering it all.


This is why people keep coming here with this question month after month and don't seem to want to accept the answers that are offered.

 

[AdrianFly]

duplicate post..

 

[HangDawg]

What bothers me is that I've heard dozens of songs by "Children" in bands who claimed to have recorded their music at home on their computer without the use of a real recording studio nor mastering house. Yet, these "kiddies" have hotter sounding Mp3's that are NEAR if not almost indistiguishable from professional recordings. Even after months of practice I can't even come close to these "punk rockers without pubes" and their "redbook" recordings they do after school and before cartoons, in their bedrooms.

Somebody somewhere is holding out some valuable piece of info regarding a certain computer and program to master with.


That or there are lots of people out there claiming to do this stuff in their bedrooms when in reality they have professionals mixing and mastering it all.


This is why people keep coming here with this question month after month and don't seem to want to accept the answers that are offered.

]



It really isn't that hard to get a loud mix. Waves multiband comp and L2 limiter will do the job. That's not saying it will sound all that great. But it will be loud.

 

[kylen]

Kylen: I wouldn't blame cheap computers for crappy mixes. I think that availability of affordable computers and software create an illusion with users that making music is easy.

Oh yeah, sorry 'bout that - sometimes it's a bit hard to get everything out in the post...I agree about the illusion or dream that is created about recording/mixing/mastering in a DAW for the average Joe, novice, musician. It is much much more difficult for many folks to get something to sound good in a DAW than it was building and crafting a mix by bouncing down on a 4-track tape deck. Part of the reason for that IMO is the tape media itself - it has a natural EQ/compressor/limiter in it !

Digital - on the other hand - will do EXACTLY what you tell it no questions asked. It's like looking into an old dirty mirror for 30 years and then having your wife 're-silver' it as a present only to find out that your image is too pristine - beyond belief and where did all those wrinkles come from.

You wouldn't think it would be that much harder to get into Digital recording - for some reason it is. Lot's of little things I expect - like until recently my DAW would crash very regularly, ever since Window XP came out and Cakewalk fixed their VST Adapter I haven't crashed for over a year. Little stuff like that takes time and blows your enthusiasm.

But the price of the $500 computer just made me think (in my mind - I should have written it out) that based on that then the monitoring budget [most likely] won't be over $1500 which is something along the lines of what you need to begin to get into reasonable acoustics, D/A, and monitors.

I'm all for the masses expressing themselves by recording themselves, I think most of us got started that way - it is a great outlet for the soul and the first time you or your garage band records themselves it is a joy indeed - or it was when we had tape decks. Now with DAWs it's trickier.

Then you have different software and hardware that gives you the idea that all you have to do is record some track, mix them, and run them thru some mastering hardware or software. Well yes you do, hehe. T-racks comes off like something you hit a button on and your mix (whatever it sounds like) is transformed into some great sounding thing. It's not just them - Roland VS1880 has a 'mastering button' I've got that one and yes it has mastering tools for sure. But a button, hehe...

Anyway that's just part of it...then we have FM radio & TV training our ears daily...don't get me started on that either, hehe

I'm a home recording guy - always will be and proud of it - garage is the life ! But garage can sound very good too in this day and age. And it lets me and my friends express ourselves...as does this forum !