TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Production Studio
-- Why do people say things like "I'm mixing at -4db"?
Pages (3): [1] 2 3 »

Why do people say things like "I'm mixing at -4db"?

I'm in danger of sounding like a nooob but I'm now getting around to considering the 'what level should I mix at debate'.

Anyway, a guy I respect a lot who remixed my latest release was saying this to me >

" Still a loit to learn but getting more and more brutal at the initial phase of adding sounds is the way to go - if you add a sound and it causes the master to jump over 0dB then you compress, EQ or get rid until you're back at 0dB. At the moment I think my best effort has been mixing down at -4dB (so the spikes dont jump over 0dB) but trying to get that to -1dB, then I think my mix quality should be up there with the best. Takes a lot of patience!"

I have NO knowledge about this mixing at a lower level lark and trying to ensure you don't exceed -1 (or whatever). Why is this important? REMEMBER HE MEANS WITHOUT ANYTHING ON THE MASTER BUSS - NO COMPRESSOR - JUST PURE MIXING - HE DOES LATER MASTER IT.

So he has enough headroom for the mastering process.
It's also very obvious that the master bus shouldn't peak over 0dB as that will cause distortion already in the mixing stage.

Because you have absolutely nothing to gain but mixing at -1 dBfs , and you allow the mastering engineer 0 headroom. Even - 3 dBfs is excessive. I would say for really loud music, -6 dBfs is probably a good starting point. When you are working at 24 bit, those 6 dB are meaningless and you would be doing yourself an incredible disservice trying to reach 0.

I set my kick to about -7db, mix everything round that then stick a mahusive limiter on the master when I'm done.

That's why everything I do sounds so excellent.

I've been sticking to that -6dB rule. I follow it by placing a dedicated db meter on the master that is always visible, and just make sure nothing exceeds -6dB. Before compressing anything I accept -4 or -5 peaks.

SO THAT'S BASICALLY IT JUNO.

Re: Why do people say things like "I'm mixing at -4db"?

quote:

Originally posted by Richard Butler I'm in danger of sounding like a nooob but I'm now getting around to considering the 'what level should I mix at debate'. Anyway, a guy I respect a lot who remixed my latest release was saying this to me > " Still a loit to learn but getting more and more brutal at the initial phase of adding sounds is the way to go - if you add a sound and it causes the master to jump over 0dB then you compress, EQ or get rid until you're back at 0dB. At the moment I think my best effort has been mixing down at -4dB (so the spikes dont jump over 0dB) but trying to get that to -1dB, then I think my mix quality should be up there with the best. Takes a lot of patience!" I have NO knowledge about this mixing at a lower level lark and trying to ensure you don't exceed -1 (or whatever). Why is this important? REMEMBER HE MEANS WITHOUT ANYTHING ON THE MASTER BUSS - NO COMPRESSOR - JUST PURE MIXING - HE DOES LATER MASTER IT.

Everyone is always learning.

Levels in digital don't have that same significance as they do in analog. Most DAWs are 32 bit float, including Cubase so they only thing you have to worry about is that your master does not clip and any channels you overload on your plug ins can handle. Most plug ins can handle overs, so that's not usually a problem.

If the master starts clipping, all you have to do is lower the master channel. With this in mind, my guess is that the mixer was trying to rely on individual treatment of sounds to try and get it sounding louder rather than relying on some sort of dynamic treatment on the master channel.

Some people mix at a lower volume on their monitors so that they have compensate for the lack of volume with judicious amounts of compression, and that raises the loudness of the song.

Re: Re: Why do people say things like "I'm mixing at -4db"?

quote:

Originally posted by Beatflux Some people mix at a lower volume on their monitors so that they have compensate for the lack of volume with judicious amounts of compression, and that raises the loudness of the song.

QFE

I mix around my kickdrum and usually my kick is around -12 then when I'm gonna bounce to audio I'll bump it up to like -10. All said and done I try not to peak over -4 maybe -3.5 on the master with nothing on it.

My mixes have been so much better since I started doing this.

Lower your master

^Noob

I've always just left the master where it is and lower the channels rather than the master if things get too hot. Some plugins will distort despite the fact that the program is floating 32 bit. The Sony Oxford series comes to mind.

Fuck me. This again?

Please read this thread:

http://www.tranceaddict.com/forums/...ighlight=master

Then read this:

http://www.tranceaddict.com/forums/...ighlight=master

To simplify, don't touch the master fader until you have exhausted all other options.

If you plan to master leave it a -6 if you are not going to release it or know how to master leave it at -2 or so, this way you can mix it without clipping and reverb and filters won't get out the meters.

quote:

Originally posted by tehlord That's why everything I do sounds so excellent.

Haha nice!

quote:

Originally posted by Rodri Santos If you plan to master leave it a -6 if you are not going to release it or know how to master leave it at -2 or so, this way you can mix it without clipping and reverb and filters won't get out the meters.

Not great advice at all. There are no rules when it comes to this.

If you're going to give it to a mastering engineer then ask them what they want and give them that.

You're also not clarifying what you mean by -6.

-6 what? DBFS is probably what you mean. But peak or RMS?

However, if the mastering is all in the box I have no idea why they need given to them at -6db. In a purely digital mastering system (and lets face it, most EDM tracks don't get mastered with shadow hills compressors) there is no need for the headroom allowance before 0dbfs as 32bit floating environment.

If you were to give them a file that does not clip but has been mixed perfectly to just below 0dbfs, the mastering engineer has so many options to make the track -6dbfs if that's what they want, including just pulling down the track faders or doing a gain change.

Why you should have to mix at a target of -6dbfs, and in turn screwing your relative signal chain gain staging is beyond me.

That is of course unless you have already calibrated you monitors and signal chain to accommodate that reference which I seriously doubt anyone on here has.

Isn't the same shit if you mix the track to 0db and then lower the volume for 3db before you send it to master (if you're even sending it)?

Can someone confirm this please?

quote:

Originally posted by chick Isn't the same shit if you mix the track to 0db and then lower the volume for 3db before you send it to master (if you're even sending it)? Can someone confirm this please?

The simply answer is yes.

I calibrate my system to the K system and mix to as close 0dbfs as possible.

If someone then wants it at -3dbfs then I'll do a gain change on the final rendered file.

But just be careful about the terminology: are you saying -3dbfs is the highest peak or the RMS figure?

quote:

Originally posted by DJ RANN But just be careful about the terminology: are you saying -3dbfs is the highest peak or the RMS figure?

Not saying anything because I don't know this theoretical stuff. I don't even know what you are asking me.

I just wanted to know if I could just lower the master for few Db in case I ever make a song that will be worth sending to mastering

quote:

Originally posted by chick Not saying anything because I don't know this theoretical stuff. I don't even know what you are asking me. I just wanted to know if I could just lower the master for few Db in case I ever make a song that will be worth sending to mastering

Then don't ever listen to people telling you that your mix needs to be at -3db.

Just mix to as loud as you can without clipping - any mastering engineer should be able work with 0db. Some may prefer -3 or -6 but nay who say they can't wok at 0db are not worth hiring. And again, if they then tell you that it must be -3db or -6db, take the final file and render a gain change appropriately.

I'm mixing at +120db SPL RMS.











On my headphones

quote:

Originally posted by DJ RANN Then don't ever listen to people telling you that your mix needs to be at -3db. Just mix to as loud as you can without clipping - any mastering engineer should be able work with 0db. Some may prefer -3 or -6 but nay who say they can't wok at 0db are not worth hiring. And again, if they then tell you that it must be -3db or -6db, take the final file and render a gain change appropriately.

is it really worth the risk ? Seems like an awful strategy when you can just lower your target goal and not suffer any degradation. 24 bit has such a large dynamic range that those dB's shaved from the top seem kinda pointless especially with loud music such as EDM.

^^^
Its worth the risk because you get more resolution on your meters the higher you mix. There's very little visual difference between -60 and -70, but a whole lot between -3 and -1. So it makes sense in terms of being able to see what your mix is doing to just mix at a certain high level and then pull everything down immediately before exporting.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ RANN Not great advice at all. There are no rules when it comes to this. If you're going to give it to a mastering engineer then ask them what they want and give them that. You're also not clarifying what you mean by -6. -6 what? DBFS is probably what you mean. But peak or RMS? However, if the mastering is all in the box I have no idea why they need given to them at -6db. In a purely digital mastering system (and lets face it, most EDM tracks don't get mastered with shadow hills compressors) there is no need for the headroom allowance before 0dbfs as 32bit floating environment. If you were to give them a file that does not clip but has been mixed perfectly to just below 0dbfs, the mastering engineer has so many options to make the track -6dbfs if that's what they want, including just pulling down the track faders or doing a gain change. Why you should have to mix at a target of -6dbfs, and in turn screwing your relative signal chain gain staging is beyond me. That is of course unless you have already calibrated you monitors and signal chain to accommodate that reference which I seriously doubt anyone on here has.

I was going to come in here and say exactly this. How many times do we need to have this same thread??

And honestly, all these debates are a bit ridiculous considering the quality of most of the productions in EDM. I can count on one hand the number of producers out there who actually have the mixing skills to even be worried about these sorts of tiny, highly academic nitpicks.

quote:

Originally posted by kitphillips ^^^ Its worth the risk because you get more resolution on your meters the higher you mix. There's very little visual difference between -60 and -70, but a whole lot between -3 and -1. So it makes sense in terms of being able to see what your mix is doing to just mix at a certain high level and then pull everything down immediately before exporting.

So just to clarify: Up to now I have been mixing aiming to leave 5 or 6 db of headroom for mastering. But instead I can just mix as close to 0 as possible and then at the end, just stick at a gain utility on the master and turn that down to -6?

What about rendering the file as I have originally mixed it (close to 0) and then taking the rendered file, turning it down -6 and then rendering that? Or would rendering twice cause potential problems?

There are a few caveats regarding what I said that you should be aware of.

Some plugins and hosts do clip if you put a signal above 0 dbfs into them, usually these are the ones that aren't 64/32 bit capable. So you could have clipping within a plugin on a channel. This is rarely an issue now since most plugins leave additional headroom for clipping signals, so it doesn't matter if you send a clipping signal into them. If you do have a plugin that clips, you can put a gain which doesn't clip before it and bring the signal down before putting it into that plugin. Channels themselves in 32 bit hosts won't clip either.

As far as rendering twice, I wouldn't recommend it. Generally, when you render, you put dither on your master channel, dithering twice is bad (in theory). Also, you don't GAIN any quality if the file is already 16 bit, althoug you would gain quality if you have a 24 bit file at -6, then re render it at 0 dbfs in 16 bit because you'd be using up more of the dynamic range.

So to answer question one: if you have no plugins that are going to clip getting hit with signals above 0 db, then YES you can just turn down your master. You basically have completely freedom in gain staging AFAIK.

For your second question: I don't know why you would do this, but if you haven't dithered at any point, then you can theoretically do this. But you'll lose some quality because you won't be using up the dynamic range as well as you would have been if you'd rendered it at 0 db. The quality losses will be less at 24 bit because it has more resolution, and almost nil at 32 bit.

Again, all of this is highly academic, and I doubt anyone can hear the difference either way.

ok cool. Think from now on I will mix as close to 0 as possible then. Think I'd prefer this as any little spikes in volume would cause my master to clip which I can then fix. Where as now, little spikes can go unnoticed when I'm mixing nearer -6.

I asked about rendering twice, purely so I could render the file near 0. Then if and when I decided to send to a mastering engineer, I can load up the rendered wav and drop the volume down and render which would be much quicker than loading up and rendering the entire project. However, based on your advice, I will just render the original project again if required.

Like you say, its probably all pointless anyway, I'm sure my own production skills will be the cause of any lack of quality to the listener rather than sample rates/dithering/bit-depth etc etc.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.