At the moment, I'm wanting to convert some wav files to MP3. However they all have differnt levels. I know I have to normalize them, but I'm unsure what the best setting is. I'm using Soundforgre which gives me some presets for normailizing. One is for music which is around -16dB the other is -6dB, which gives a very strong signal, which one is best?
Normailizing settings
- Thread starter jaffy
- Start date
Don't normailize? I thought that was the done thing. Ok, using compression myself is a bit scary. the settings again just baffle me more than normailizing. How should I use compression to make all tracks have the same volume? Is there one setting for all tracks, or do I have to set compression for each track individually? I'd appreciate any tips you can give. Thanks.
Cheers,
Jaffy
Cheers,
Jaffy
I usually question everything, but avoiding normalization is one of those rare times where I blindly follow others' advice. I don't recall why, but too many people I trust and respect have said not to do it, so I don't. Compression settings baffled me at first, but I'm slowly getting the hang of it with enough reading and experimentation. For matching levels, there are plenty of "mastering compressor" plug-ins that are pretty much a no-brainer to use. They can be a bit pricy, though. I'm sure a search would find a lot on the topic since this comes up a lot.
Tom Hicks
Well-known member
Normalizing just multiplies all the various volume values by a factor so that the highest peak will be to a specified level (you set -6 dB , -3 etc. or some will say "normalize to X percent").The rap against it is that all the noise in the wave gets multiplied too,that's all.
With compression,the overall dynamic range is squished.Then what?You turn it up again!So the noise gets raised that way too.No advantage either way by those criteria.
The big beef against normalization is more philosophical rather than audible.If you are leaving too much space free it indicates poor level setting choices prior to tracking.
With the increased dynamic range of today's digital gear its not that big a deal.
Tom
With compression,the overall dynamic range is squished.Then what?You turn it up again!So the noise gets raised that way too.No advantage either way by those criteria.
The big beef against normalization is more philosophical rather than audible.If you are leaving too much space free it indicates poor level setting choices prior to tracking.
With the increased dynamic range of today's digital gear its not that big a deal.
Tom
zip
New member
good compression article...
read this.....It helped me a lot.
http://www.geocities.com/Shailat2000/
happy compressing! A great mastering compressor I found has at http://www.sonictimeworks.com. It is a couple hundred bucks but works really well. You can try a demo for 14 days free - which is what I am doing.
zip
read this.....It helped me a lot.
http://www.geocities.com/Shailat2000/
happy compressing! A great mastering compressor I found has at http://www.sonictimeworks.com. It is a couple hundred bucks but works really well. You can try a demo for 14 days free - which is what I am doing.
zip
zip
New member
jaffy...
cool. Check out the sonicTW programs...at first I was skeptical at $180 for a plug-in but I am sold on it. I used the Mastering compressor on a friends' studio CD and it improved the quality 10 times.
BTW - I don't sell for STW...I'm just a little excited 'cause I just did my taxes and have enough for the program!! YeeeeeeHawwwwww!
Anyway it's worth using free killer software for 14 days even if you don't buy it.
zip >>
cool. Check out the sonicTW programs...at first I was skeptical at $180 for a plug-in but I am sold on it. I used the Mastering compressor on a friends' studio CD and it improved the quality 10 times.
BTW - I don't sell for STW...I'm just a little excited 'cause I just did my taxes and have enough for the program!! YeeeeeeHawwwwww!
Anyway it's worth using free killer software for 14 days even if you don't buy it.
zip >>
Blue Bear Sound
New member
The problem people have with normalizing...
...is not so much in the actual normalization (which as Tom mentioned, simply increases the overall signal level by a factor), but that if you have established the appropriate level balances from song to song on a cd, using normalization will absolutely kill those balances.
For example, if track 1 is a hard-rockin' tune, and track 2 is a ballad. It's a given that track 2's overall level should be lower than that of track 1 (since, in real life, when will a ballad be as loud as a full-out, hard hitting tune!?!?!). If you normalize track 1 and track 2 separately, that carefully balanced level relationship will be destroyed, resulting in an unnatural-sounding CD!
Bruce
...is not so much in the actual normalization (which as Tom mentioned, simply increases the overall signal level by a factor), but that if you have established the appropriate level balances from song to song on a cd, using normalization will absolutely kill those balances.
For example, if track 1 is a hard-rockin' tune, and track 2 is a ballad. It's a given that track 2's overall level should be lower than that of track 1 (since, in real life, when will a ballad be as loud as a full-out, hard hitting tune!?!?!). If you normalize track 1 and track 2 separately, that carefully balanced level relationship will be destroyed, resulting in an unnatural-sounding CD!
Bruce