volume problem

[daveblue222]

hey. ive finally got everything up and running through my alesis multimix (firewire) into cubase. the only problem i am having is when i record/play the volume seems considerably lower than say an mp3 file or cubase metronome. the gains/s on the mixer are all set at the right level. maybe it just seems like the volume is lower because im only recording guitar and vox at the moment. has anyone else found this to be a problem?


-dave

 

[Massive Master]

If you're saying "lower" against a finished, mastered commercial release, then yes, that's normal. If you're talking levels around -24 to -20dBRMS, it's wonderfully normal.

If you're talking levels around -40 or -35dBRMS, then yeah, you might want to look into something. Although it wouldn't be "wrong" there's probably something in there that could be tweaked.

 

[daveblue222]

i dont know to much about the tech side but yeah its lower than a mastered song/mp3. how do i get the volumes louder other than using the mixer in cubase?


thanks

 

[TelePaul]

i dont know to much about the tech side but yeah its lower than a mastered song/mp3. how do i get the volumes louder other than using the mixer in cubase?


thanks

Take it to a Mastering House I guess...are there any plug-ins for mastering? I got the Kjaerhouse Master Limiter, I like how it affects the finished article.

 

[Farview]

You either have to have it professionally mastered or just ram it through a limiter and be done with it.

 

[TelePaul]

ram it through a limiter and be done with it.

Wooo! Farview why can't mastering be done at home? Is the process a million miles away from recording, yes?

 

[Farview]

Wooo! Farview why can't mastering be done at home? Is the process a million miles away from recording, yes?

Yes. I never master my own stuff. A second set of ears is essential. Also, if you do it in the same room through the same speakers that you mixed the songs, how are you going to catch anything that you didn't while you were mixing. Not to mention the fact that actual mastering equipment is special made just for mastering, it's not the same as the EQ's and compressors that you use in the mix.

 

[TelePaul]

Yes. I never master my own stuff. A second set of ears is essential. Also, if you do it in the same room through the same speakers that you mixed the songs, how are you going to catch anything that you didn't while you were mixing. Not to mention the fact that actual mastering equipment is special made just for mastering, it's not the same as the EQ's and compressors that you use in the mix.

Seems there'd be a greater demand for home mastering than recording. So how good will my master limiter get things?

 

[Massive Master]

So how good will my master limiter get things?

That depends on what you're putting into it.

 

[Nick98338]

Yes. I never master my own stuff. A second set of ears is essential. Also, if you do it in the same room through the same speakers that you mixed the songs, how are you going to catch anything that you didn't while you were mixing. Not to mention the fact that actual mastering equipment is special made just for mastering, it's not the same as the EQ's and compressors that you use in the mix.

Second set of ears?... absolutely. That's another name for the MP3 Mixing Clinic forum. How are you going to catch anything that you didn't while you were mixing?... same answer. Let folks in the MP3 Mixing Clinic catch them for you. Mastering equipment different?... I'll agree with this, but there is no reason why we can't do this, ourselves, at home.

 

[TelePaul]

Second set of ears?... absolutely. That's another name for the MP3 Mixing Clinic forum. How are you going to catch anything that you didn't while you were mixing?... same answer. Let folks in the MP3 Mixing Clinic catch them for you. Mastering equipment different?... I'll agree with this, but there is no reason why we can't do this, ourselves, at home.

i think Farviews gonna smite you!!!

 

[TelePaul]

That depends on what you're putting into it.

Yeah guess you're right..i'll work on my translations first. Need good monitors sooo bad.

 

[Farview]

Second set of ears?... absolutely. That's another name for the MP3 Mixing Clinic forum. How are you going to catch anything that you didn't while you were mixing?... same answer. Let folks in the MP3 Mixing Clinic catch them for you. Mastering equipment different?... I'll agree with this, but there is no reason why we can't do this, ourselves, at home.

I think you might be confusing mastering with simply making stuff loud.

The mp3 clinic isn't going to help you master anything. By the time you turn it into an mp3 you have already lost a lot of fidelity, that makes it useless for critical listening.

Who, in the mp3 clinic, is going to tell you that you need to get rid of 1.2db of 150hz with a Q of 12? Or anything else for that matter. How do you know what these people are listening on?

I have a commercial studio and I don't master my own stuff. John at Massive Mastering doesn't master his own stuff, and he has a MASTERING studio. What does that tell you?

 

[TelePaul]

with a Q of 12?

What's a Q?

I have a commercial studio and I don't master my own stuff. John at Massive Mastering doesn't master his own stuff, and he has a MASTERING studio. What does that tell you?

That mastering is hard?

 

[Farview]

What's a Q?

The bandwidth on a parametric EQ

 

[Nick98338]

Who, in the mp3 clinic, is going to tell you that you need to get rid of 1.2db of 150hz with a Q of 12? Or anything else for that matter. How do you know what these people are listening on?

I have a commercial studio and I don't master my own stuff. John at Massive Mastering doesn't master his own stuff, and he has a MASTERING studio. What does that tell you?

Who, among the average listening audience, would know that 1.2 db needed to be cut? Or even care that it needed to be? Most folks just want music that sounds good. Doesn't need to be perfect.

For the commercial music business, I believe that professional mastering is necessary. It's expected that commercial music will be "the best it can be". But, for the vast majority of us "non-commercial" music producers, I believe we can do a decent job of making our music sound pretty good without professional help.

 

[TelePaul]

Who, among the average listening audience, would know that 1.2 db needed to be cut? Or even care that it needed to be? Most folks just want music that sounds good. Doesn't need to be perfect.

For the commercial music business, I believe that professional mastering is necessary. It's expected that commercial music will be "the best it can be". But, for the vast majority of us "non-commercial" music producers, I believe we can do a decent job of making our music sound pretty good without professional help.

The thing is, some people here aspire to commercial release.

 

[Nick98338]

Anyway, to answer the original question, directly... This "low volume" thing with Cubase is a common lament. I've also seen this in the Cubase LE that I use. I record, at what I think is a decent level, but the playback level is quite low. I found out that I really wasn't recording at the level I thought I was. I know that I want to record at an average of about -12db to -15db on the scale. What makes that difficult, is that the Cubase LE level meters, in the track view, don't have db markings next to the LED meters. Just a vertical meter that has green, yellow, and red areas. From experience, I've discovered that I want the meter to just barely bump into the yellow during the loudest parts of the recording. The meter starts to go yellow at -6db. So, if the very loudest sounds hit about -6db, then the rest of the sounds will be below that. How much below depends on the dynamics of the sounds. But, in general, the recording tends to average between -6db and -20db. And, during playback, the levels are what I expect. Later, I can always bring the levels up by using gain, or compression, or limiting.

Also, I can see the actual db numbers in the Mixer View. In the Mixer, for each channel there is a level meter. Above and below each level meter are db numbers. The number at the bottom shows the slider level. The number at the top shows the level of the signal. That's the number I want to know. To reset the top number, I reset the bottom number to (0.0). The top number will then show the db level of the loudest peak that the signal hits.

 

[Farview]

Who, among the average listening audience, would know that 1.2 db needed to be cut? Or even care that it needed to be? Most folks just want music that sounds good. Doesn't need to be perfect.

That 1.2 db of 150hz would be described as "a little muddy" to the average listener. That 1.2db would keep your music from sounding good.

But, for the vast majority of us "non-commercial" music producers, I believe we can do a decent job of making our music sound pretty good without professional help.

Yes you probably can, but don't confuse that with mastering.

 

[Farview]

Anyway, to answer the original question, directly... This "low volume" thing with Cubase is a common lament. I've also seen this in the Cubase LE that I use. I record, at what I think is a decent level, but the playback level is quite low. I found out that I really wasn't recording at the level I thought I was. I know that I want to record at an average of about -12db to -15db on the scale. What makes that difficult, is that the Cubase LE level meters, in the track view, don't have db markings next to the LED meters. Just a vertical meter that has green, yellow, and red areas. From experience, I've discovered that I want the meter to just barely bump into the yellow during the loudest parts of the recording. The meter starts to go yellow at -6db. So, if the very loudest sounds hit about -6db, then the rest of the sounds will be below that. How much below depends on the dynamics of the sounds. But, in general, the recording tends to average between -6db and -20db. And, during playback, the levels are what I expect. Later, I can always bring the levels up by using gain, or compression, or limiting.

Also, I can see the actual db numbers in the Mixer View. In the Mixer, for each channel there is a level meter. Above and below each level meter are db numbers. The number at the bottom shows the slider level. The number at the top shows the level of the signal. That's the number I want to know. To reset the top number, I reset the bottom number to (0.0). The top number will then show the db level of the loudest peak that the signal hits.

Mixes are supposed to be "quiet" by commercial CD satndards. Mixes should have an average level of somewhere between -15dbFS and -20dbfs. Commercial CDs have an average level upwards of -8dbfs. The mixes on the CD were at -18dbfs or so until mastering. Through judicious use of EQ, compression, (sometimes) De-essing, and limiting, the final volume of the CD is reached. Can you accomplish that with a couple of plugins while listening on $200 'studio monitors'? No. Can you make something listenable that averages about -12dbfs? Yes.

If your goal is to make music for yourself that isn't annoying to listen to, you can do that at home. If you want to compete with commercial releases, you are going to have to do the same thing that the big boys do.