normilize files before mastering ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter lopie
  • Start date Start date
L

lopie

New member
before i have stereo (export) tracks sent to mastering stuff should i normalize first or should i preserve headroom for mastering processes
 
lopie said:
before i have stereo (export) tracks sent to mastering stuff should i normalize first or should i preserve headroom for mastering processes

Leave the headroom. Normalizing requires the audio to go through an unnecessary set of calculations (causing quantization degradation). Most likely your audio will need to be compressed or limited further if you want an increase in volume (done during the mastering process). At that point in the process the highest level desired should be reached.
 
I would not normalize, but it is important the overall level be as high as it can be. A few "overs" are okay. The mastering process can not make up for "lack of data."
 
well there ya have it! dont normalize...if you do, your pet may be subject to torture
 
AGCurry said:
...but it is important the overall level be as high as it can be. A few "overs" are okay. The mastering process can not make up for "lack of data."
This is REALLY bad advice.......

It isn't that important that the overall level is as high as possible - especially if dealing with 24-bit data.

And "overs" are NEVER ok........
 
yeah blue bear is right... say you have to pay your taxes....its due on April 15th but a few days over wont be too bad right? or you have to go to court so you'll be a few hours late...a few overs on recording isnt life or death but quality may be hurt
 
distortedrumble said:
...a few overs on recording isnt life or death but quality may be hurt

aaah...but it may be life or death to one's career as an engineer.
 
AGCurry said:
I would not normalize, but it is important the overall level be as high as it can be. A few "overs" are okay. The mastering process can not make up for "lack of data."

This is more true for 16 bit than 24 bit. A digital bit translates to approximately a 6 Dbfs range. So if your peaks are only hitting -12 Dbfs (in a 16 bit domain) it would be similar to recording with a 14 bit AD converter. For 24 bit, a 22 bit converter, which is still better than CD.

As far as overs, it would require extrapolation of the data to recover an approximation of what was lost. Since many ME's just limit the crap out of the transients it's similar to having an over anyway (only limited to -.2 Dbfs to prevent the overs from registering). This is one of the reasons everyone is complaining about levels. Basically you're getting a higher level on a CD, but at the expense of distorted audio. Since you are most likely going to turn down the volume anyway, all that mastering 2X4s gives you is hypercompressed distorted audio.
 
espskully said:
What are "overs"?

You must be an analog dude ...

Imagine standing up in a convertable driving down the road toward a low hanging overhead bridge at 100 miles per hour. Before you had time to duck, BANG! your head gets smacked clean off your shoulders and rolls off to parts unknown.

In the digital world that's what's called an over.
 
masteringhouse said:
Imagine standing up in a convertable driving down the road toward a low hanging overhead bridge at 100 miles per hour. Before you had time to duck, BANG! your head gets smacked clean off your shoulders and rolls off to parts unknown.

In the digital world that's what's called an over.
Well put. :)
 
masteringhouse said:
Imagine standing up in a convertable driving down the road toward a low hanging overhead bridge at 100 miles per hour. Before you had time to duck, BANG! your head gets smacked clean off your shoulders and rolls off to parts unknown.

That's Sick!!!
I Love It!!!
 
Thanks guys.

I've been debating about submitting my dither analogy, but it would probably get me banned from the BBS. It involves a lady with a vibrator looking through a fence ...
 
Back
Top