Normalising is good?

  • Thread starter Thread starter goldfish
  • Start date Start date
Its a huge no no no because

4. corrupts EQ, compression

3. raises noise

2. risks distortion

but the biggest is definetly

1. all speakers/stereos have different headrooms! anotherwords, your monitors may sound fine, but some boombox may be totally distorted..


headroom is good!
 
Does 32 bit floating point calculations introduce rounding errors? I read something that once said if you worked in this realm there should be no problems with normalization. I wish I could find the article as it seemed pretty convincing.
 
Well... the whole point of increased internal wordsizes is to minimize any degradation due to rounding error....

So I beleive there will always be *some* error -- but it can be minimized with algorithms and well-structured internal handling.
 
let me summarize this, correct me if I'm wrong:

normallizing=bad because it causes caculation errors that can be avoided/achieved by raising the volume nub

correct?

Al
 
That's my point of view, yes.... plus - the "need" to normalize (especially for novices) probably points to poor tracking methodology.
 
normalizing is like compression. If its used right it can HELP, but it can also totally destroy your mixes. Usually its a BAD THING!
 
so..Test #3

after reading this post...i went back and re-tracked the mixes of the two songs, recorded at different dates.

yes, paying more attention to the mixdown, board levels going to the CDR..etc..tracking..
I was able to match the "normalized" and both songs were at the same volume. (no manually adjusting the volume knob!)
...again no mixdown compressor or limiter is available...still saving for a RNC..pathetic finances really.

then compared this new mix to the NERO Normalize and Compressor at 2:1, processed mix.

Listening tools & Results:
Crap plastic computer monitors- no difference (not surprised)
Car stereo- loud volumes, some compressor type pumping sound on the Normilized -1/Compressor 2:1 lightest available (I'd call the pumping a negative)

Sony MDR Headphones- both sounded nice, but the software pumping was again noticeable)
RAM 2-way studio monitors- no major difference
Optimus 7's- small nicecrap speaker- sounded similar to the car.

No high end equipment available...but would EXPECT to hear a larger difference.

with that said I still don't think Normalizing destroys mixes and if your listening thru plastic computer speakers and sht boomboxes...wht the fhk difference does it make.
 
Re: so..Test #3

COOLCAT said:
... if your listening thru plastic computer speakers and sht boomboxes...wht the fhk difference does it make...
Click to expand...
If it didn't make a difference, then you could use the same argument to record at the lowest common denominator (MP3s or worse), since the majority of listeners hear music on mostly inferior systems....

*sheesh* ....maintaining audio quality -- who the hell needs that?!?! What a waste of friggin' time! Hell -- why not just go back to AM radio standards, then!

:eek:
 
Re: Re: so..Test #3

Blue Bear Sound said:
*sheesh* ....maintaining audio quality -- who the hell needs that?!?! What a waste of friggin' time! Hell -- why not just go back to AM radio standards, then!

:eek:
Click to expand...

This reminds me of that Coldplay article:
http://www.apple.com/hotnews/articles/2002/11/coldplay/

The bassist of Coldplay says this:
“We started putting it onto tape, but we got frustrated with the time consumption that it takes, you know, like if you want to do a take, you’ve gotta rewind the tape,” says Berryman. “Or if you want to drop in, you have to rewind the tape and find the right spot...The thing you’ve gotta remember,” says Berryman, “is that even if you record to analog tape, it’s gonna get bumped to a CD anyway — it’s gonna get digitized at some point down the line.”

Yeah, forget recording to the tape? What's the point? I mean it's gonna get digitized at some point down the line. What a moron.
 
Hey, Bruce,

I get your point now. So every audio process introduces some kind of round-off errors, correct? Does changing the volume cause any roundoff errors? Also, does normalization mess up as much as a limiter in terms of roundoff errors or more? If so, I fail to see why someone would perfer using a compressor/limiter to do the same job instead of nomalizing (I'm not talking about for the sake of changing the dynamic, but just to raise the volume)


thanks

Al
 
Al,

Yes - *any* DSP (including volume/level) will introduce round-off error. The amount of the error depends very much on the internals of the s/w or system in question.

The advantage that limiting has over normalizing is usually due to the intended result. Many times, the end result that the user is looking for is an increase in gain. Normalizing tends to handle this poorly because the amount of gain may be marginal if there are a lot of transient peaks. Limiting removes those peaks and allows the gain to be increased to a much larger degree...
 
Last edited:
Bruce,

thanks for the explainations. If you don't mind, let's talk about limiting vs nomalizing for mastering purposes (or the final process of mixdown for us home musicians). If the ME gets a nice mix that doesn't have anything jumping out in the mix, in order to maximumize the volume of the mix without messing with the dynamic, is it safe to say that nomalizing is just as effective as limiting in this situation?
With my experience, Waves L2 can bring the volume up before it starts to limit, that's where I couldn't see the difference between a limiter and a nomalizer in that particular situation.

Al
 
No... there are often transient peaks that are not noticeable to you, but they defintely impact the amount of normalizing gain that could be applied (sometimes on the order of less than a dB)..... using that same example but using limiting (which will remove transients long before any impact tot he musical dynamics occur) will result in a much larger gain "potential" (on the order of several dB or more).
 
Ok then, BB

Say I'm a home recc'r and I have an FMR RNC, a mixer, and input ready Cakewalk computer. On some tracks, I'm getting some of those peaks that I don't want. Perhaps the drummer hits a bit harder on a couple hits, etc., whatever. (Is that even what might cause something like that?

I'm limiter-less. What are my best options? Can the RNC help this situation out if my budget says that no matter what, I've got to work with what I've got?

Or are there limiter plug ins that are worth downloading? Or if the budget says it's ok, but limited, (as most home recc'rs), what should I grab for limiting? Is there an external hardware unit you'd recommend, or is there something software side that you'd recommend?

OR... is it something thath is helped in a different manner altogether, like mic placement, or smacking the drummer, etc?

My initial guess is that it could be parts of several of the above options. I know the situation is a vague one, so I apologize. I'm just trying to figure out if my RNC will do what I would need it to do to help tame those peaks that one might have from time to time.

-Speedy
 
I need an education...

I've read a bit about the RNC specifically, and compressors in general, but still lack enough brains, it seems, to really wrap my brain around what this device is doing for me, or can potentialy do for me.

As of right now, I can successfully use the RNC as more of a gate device than anything. It works great for this, limiting excess noise under a certain level, and then only activating once that threshold is hit.

I understand that part of it. Throw that down on a snare mic and it can help keep a lot of bleed from other drums, and cymbals out of the track, focusing only on the sound that the snare itself makes.

I'm positive that there's much more to it than that. The ratio is what I struggle with. I certainly understand math enough to realize what ratios are, I just have a hard time grappling with how to use them in this context. If I'm using a 2:1 ratio, are the levels going to be increased by a factor of 2? Therefore making the signal that runs through it double in db level? It doesn't seem like that's the case, since 25:1 would be just about useless at that point.

And, from what I've read in the manual for the RNC, which was pretty bare bones, the supernice mode pretty much streamlines the settings for you, making almost impossible for it to sound really bad when in use. It might not do exactly what an experienced person would like, but it won't sound like ass. That doesn't help me know what it is, though, so I haven't used it, except for short experiments. Only because I don't like doing something that changes my end result, and not really knowing what it is that I'm doing. If I'm running an experiment, or I want repeatability, I want as much control as possible, and I don't feel like I have it with my RNC.

Yet. I will someday. Is time working with it the only thing that I'm missing?

-Speedy
 
I need an education...

I've read a bit about the RNC specifically, and compressors in general, but still lack enough brains, it seems, to really wrap my brain around what this device is doing for me, or can potentialy do for me.

As of right now, I can successfully use the RNC as more of a gate device than anything. It works great for this, limiting excess noise under a certain level, and then only activating once that threshold is hit.

I understand that part of it. Throw that down on a snare mic and it can help keep a lot of bleed from other drums, and cymbals out of the track, focusing only on the sound that the snare itself makes.

I'm positive that there's much more to it than that. The ratio is what I struggle with. I certainly understand math enough to realize what ratios are, I just have a hard time grappling with how to use them in this context. If I'm using a 2:1 ratio, are the levels going to be increased by a factor of 2? Therefore making the signal that runs through it double in db level? It doesn't seem like that's the case, since 25:1 would be just about useless at that point.

And, from what I've read in the manual for the RNC, which was pretty bare bones, the supernice mode pretty much streamlines the settings for you, making almost impossible for it to sound really bad when in use. It might not do exactly what an experienced person would like, but it won't sound like ass. That doesn't help me know what it is, though, so I haven't used it, except for short experiments. Only because I don't like doing something that changes my end result, and not really knowing what it is that I'm doing. If I'm running an experiment, or I want repeatability, I want as much control as possible, and I don't feel like I have it with my RNC.

Yet. I will someday. Is time working with it the only thing that I'm missing?

-Speedy
 
Just run a track through it - and experiment with extreme settings! How else are you going to understand what it's doing to your signal unless you hear it?! You gotta play!!!! ;)
 
Re: Re: so..Test #3

Blue Bear Sound said:
If it didn't make a difference, then you could use the same argument to record at the lowest common denominator (MP3s or worse), since the majority of listeners hear music on mostly inferior systems....

*sheesh* ....maintaining audio quality -- who the hell needs that?!?! What a waste of friggin' time! Hell -- why not just go back to AM radio standards, then!

:eek:
Click to expand...

hmm?
but if you record at the lowest denominator..then when it was played in a high end system or even an average car system...it would sound like ASS X2. :)

so no can do... can't do the recording/tracking in Mpthree AND playback in crapplasticcomputerspeakers ..then you definitely couldn't tell if it was normailized or not.

COLDPLAY whoooa......but do they use Normailizing..Spinal Tap comes to mind.

whats the point?!exactly....
thats why i quite playing my mixes in my wifes Boom box...whats the point? waste of time....the boom box makes everything sound like ear bleed. Normailized or not.

Ex. I knew a bass player that had a rear blown out speaker in his car and he was listening to one of my tunes I had spent three weeks working on..and he said "sounds good man"..as he inhaled heavily from the smoking device.
He then turned up the volume.. and gave me a positive nod.

so, hell, maybe there is a bright side to plastic MP3 speakers for the masses!

my home mixes will sound just as good as Abbey Road thru those puke boxes!

does that mean i can start charging people to record??$$$$$:)

Mixing Monitors: LABTEC 2" plastic speaker.
$20 extra for Normalizing at 44Khz in the digital domain.

so whats COLDPLAYS bassist phone number?
that cracks me up...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top