pushing the 0db threshold or not?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Br3n
  • Start date Start date
Br3n

Br3n

New member
hey guys and girls. i have been recording and mixing now for a couple of years and i have seen the 0db threshold being pushed. personally i dont like to push the volume that hard just to get a few more db from the overall volume.

so my question is how would you go about getting the fat track sound without pushing the volume? every band i record are wanting the loadest track they can get.
 
The way I meter my system is through a Dorrough persistance meter plus the dBFS metering in the DAW. The peaks are hitting around 0 dBvu on the Dorrough which translates to -18dBFS in the DAW. That's what the band gets. I hate the "loudest CD on the block" game but if they insist, I'll squash the living shit out of it for them.
 
Well...you certainly can get right up to 0 dBFS on your final mix without squashing anything...it's when you want to go even louder, that you need some form of limiting/squashing.

Tracking at -18 dBFS is one thing...but the final mix should IMO be louder than that, and it can be achieved without an ounce of forced limiting/compression or loss of dynamics.
 
what i have been doing when bands dont ask for the pushing of volume is tracking to around the -2/3 on peaks for the drums then get the rest of the band up as load as possible without over powering the drums. so when i am done mixing the loadest peaks come from drum hits. once the band is happy with the sound i would look at raising the overall volume and tone by bouncing the whole mix down to a stereo mix then looking at some eq, multiband comping and possibly a limiter depending on clipping
 
Individual track levels aren't really going to affect the overall volume if it's recorded and mastered properly. -18db seems to be the general consensus..

I used to track hot - ugly...
 
i agree i hate having to mix things as load as possible it just doesnt sound good.
 
Let's separate tracking, mixing and the final product here though.

The -18dBFS theory for the AVERAGE of you tracks is a very sound principle. This equates to the AVERAGE being 0dBu on a VU meter and leaves lots of room for peaks to go well above that without hitting clipping.

If you start with your tracks averaging around -18dBFS, it helps your mixing because it gives you room to add tracks together. Every time you add an extra track the levels go up. If your tracked levels don't leave room for this, you just have to turn everything down while mixing anyway.

The final product, though, might as well have peaks up right to 0dBFS (I use -.1dB as my top level). Why? Because everybody expects it. Your iPod or car stereo with have the volume set for commercial tracks that are up at that level--and if your final, mastered mix is lower you'll just have to turn up the volume anyway, then get annoyed when the next commercial track booms out and deafens you.

The better debate is "how much dynamic range to leave in your final, mastered mix". For this there's no right answer. A lot of commercial stuff is compressed to within an inch of its life--if you look at the waveform in your DAW it'll just be a rectangular block with no peaks and troughs. This makes it seem loud...but also (to my ear) takes away the life in the music. However, you also have to consider various listening conditions when thinking about how much compression to use. A huge dynamic range sounds great in your home studio, heavily treated room. It also sounds good in you living room on your stereo if the house is quiet.

However, when you listen to you iPod on the bus or stereo in your car, the background noises will soon become problematic. You'll either lose all the quiet bits or have it turned up so much that the loud parts deafen you--perhaps literally if you're on earbud headphones.

This also becomes an issue when I'm doing music or effects for live theatre. Theatres are surprisingly noisy places with air con noise, rustling, breathing, coughing audience members and the modern scourge of moving lights. I have to keep my dynamic range much smaller (through the use of compression) than sounds right in the studio.

But I digress...your final, mastered mix might as well be right up at 0dBFS...but you creep up on this number during the tracking and mixing process...you don't start with every raw track there.

Bob
 
where would you push for the 0db mark to get the best sound? at the mixing stage or the mastering stage? i am currently doing it at the mastering stage and seem to be getting good results from pushing it to say limitied at -.5db should i raise this to say -.1 just for the extra .4db?
 
Well, speaking for myself, I don't mind "creeping up" on the maximum level during the mix, but I leave it to mastering to make the final boost and tweaks. Why? Well mixing is about listening and making things sound exactly as you want, not worrying over the numbers. It would be pretty constraining to have to worry "well, that sound great but I want it louder so now I have to turn each of the 28 tracks up by just a little bit".

As for -.1dB vs -.5dB, the difference would be pretty much inaudible to 99.999% of the population. However, if you're thinking of bumping levels that tiny bit, check some MP3 conversions first before deciding for sure (assuming you use MP3 of course). I've seen a lot of MP3 codecs which, for reasons I've seen detailed elsewhere, sometimes boost levels by a small amount--if your "mastered" level is too high, the MP3 versions can clip just slightly. Whether this is an issue will depend on your specific codec...so it's just a potential issue to be aware of.
 
I learned the hard way not to push it too hard from having tracks returned by the mastering lab after struggling to get the volume the band wanted.
I am in the process of getting some mastering chops together for the cheapskates.
 
Back
Top