quote:

Originally posted by Theran And again, what you are saying makes no sence. If you set the masterfader at 15% (btw, the masterfader is the last chain in the mixer), your track will probably end up -20dB (or more), the masterfader should be at 0dB, don't adjust it.

Not sure i agree with this, my master channel is always set between -10 to -20 db, and the rest of the faders are set to around 0 -10 db average. And then the master channel despite being set so low, still peaks at around 0db to -2db.

Does not make a difference whatsoever what the master channel is actually set to, what matters is that it is not peaking.

___________________


http://soundcloud.com/subtara

guys, i have to agree with Theran. it's not only about headroom, it's about summing truncaning in the signal path. why do you think external summers solely exist for this purpose.

do yourself a favour: leave the main mix and subgroups @ unity gain (0dbfs) and mix towards -12RMS on K14 scale.

___________________
Analogue Mastering
Esoteric sound for the discerning ear

That's the point. At least in the sequencer I work in it seems like I don't truncate anything unless the master is clipping. If a channel peaks above 0 dB and I lower the master it doesn't change a thing to it's sound. I literally boosted a signal 27dB on a channel. Whilst the channel volume was seemingly 1 big clipping festival the master did not clip and the signal did not sound different either. When I pulled up the master clipping became obvious (visually and sound-wise) as soon as the clipping signal lit up.

I don't see the point in this mixing below blabla, and whilst I know how to mix according to regular guidelines I don't feel like doing it as it doesn't make any difference in the end result and it's less work to pull the master down instead of 20 other faders.

EQ-ing to create more headroom is a different issue though. I'm purely responding to the posts above about the `importance` of volume control in a digital environment which is way less than it was before in the analog domain.

___________________

Storyteller Website | Storyteller @ Facebook | Storyteller @ Beatport | Storyteller @ Soundcloud | Stephen J. Kroos - Europa (Storyteller Remix)
Anthony Mea - Get It On (Storyteller Remix)

quote:

If less is more think about how much more more would be. -Frasier

Last edited by Storyteller on Apr-06-2009 at 14:04

quote:

Originally posted by Storyteller That's the point. At least in the sequencer I work in it seems like I don't truncate anything unless the master is clipping. If a channel peaks above 0 dB and I lower the master it doesn't change a thing to it's sound. I literally boosted a signal 27dB on a channel. Whilst the channel volume was seemingly 1 big clipping festival the master did not clip and the signal did not sound different either. When I pulled up the master clipping became obvious (visually and sound-wise) as soon as the clipping signal lit up.

Maybe true, but if you lower your masterfader, how do you know what the end volume is? I think a limiter (not squashing the signal ofcourse!) on the endmix can control the 'master' volume, not the fader, but I guess that's just a different way of working for everyone. personally, I can't stand it if I have to work with a constant red clipping signal on.

___________________
Upcoming releases:
Hernandes ft. Stine Groove - Without You (Kyota remix) (Redux Recordings)
Kyota - Senegal (Flashover Recordings)

quote:

Originally posted by Theran Maybe true, but if you lower your masterfader, how do you know what the end volume is? I think a limiter (not squashing the signal ofcourse!) on the endmix can control the 'master' volume, not the fader, but I guess that's just a different way of working for everyone. personally, I can't stand it if I have to work with a constant red clipping signal on.

It says on the mixer what the current maximum peak is.

I dont see the point in using a limiter on the master channel, even if it clips here and there due to a huge spike somewhere it has no effect on what im doing, atleast i know there isnt a limiter that flattens the sound for me when i dont want it to.

Usually i turn the master channel down so much that it doesnt clip anyways, and when it does i can see where and then solve the problem on the given channel instead.

Anyways, i guess this is a matter of habit and preferences anyways, as long as the end result doesnt clip none of us are wrong or right.

___________________


http://soundcloud.com/subtara

quote:

Originally posted by Subtle none of us are wrong or right.

NO, YOU ARE WRONG.

___________________
i'm the alchemist without the cyst without a doubt out of the mist
dig out the grout expose the pest to take it out without the rest

they will attest my patients restorations from the best

i'm from the west i'm not an acmeist only the alchemist

quote:

Originally posted by cronodevir NO, YOU ARE WRONG.

YES, YOU ARE RIGHT.

___________________


http://soundcloud.com/subtara

quote:

Originally posted by Theran Maybe true, but if you lower your masterfader, how do you know what the end volume is? I think a limiter (not squashing the signal ofcourse!) on the endmix can control the 'master' volume, not the fader, but I guess that's just a different way of working for everyone. personally, I can't stand it if I have to work with a constant red clipping signal on.

I am no expert, but wouldn't it make more sense to put the limiter/maximizer POST-fader then. Then you can still change the master volume, the maximizer will determine the end volume, ain't that so? I believe that's what the Cubase manual recommends. What do you think?

When I mix, I set the kick to peak at -6db. I try to then never change the level of kick, and build the rest of the mix around that. If I ever find that I am reaching for the kick slider to increase its level, it usually indicates that either the other tracks should be lowered, or EQ'd better to not clash. If I mix carefully enough like this, with the kick at -6db, then I always end up with a track peaking between -3db and 0db, which is pretty good for a mix. Mastering then addresses the final maximum peak, and apparent loudness.

___________________

Monsoon - Astrosurf

well all you guys semm like you know what your talking about so quick question.. is it preferable to mix in a way so that the end mix on the master channel is MAX a 0dB . . . .

because i been making a track at the moment and put every channel at low volume but the master was still hittin +4dB etc.

so to stop this i pulled down the master volume ( on logic the level on the far right)

that made it not peak and brought the master to 0dB
and every other level was in -dB


im guessing by what you guys are saying this is bad ? ?

let me know please... haha

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by davedresden it's a good thing your tits have no bearing on the outcome of my career

JDC
JDC Website
JDC Facebook
JDC Soundcloud
J Cannons Facebook
J Cannons Soundcloud

Again, I just don't know why there is so much misinformation about this subject.
firstly read these two thread (They go a long way to explain why you don't need to touch the master fader):


http://www.tranceaddict.com/forums/...threadid=512627

http://www.tranceaddict.com/forums/...e=&pagenumber=8

Basically:

Number one thread is that your monitor system should be calibrated to a set specific reference. Unity on the master fader is completely relative to this........

.....The second thread explains why it is best (in most circumstances), especially baring in mind the first thread, as to why you should produce to just below -3dbfs.

Heh, between my master and the actual speakers there are like 5 volume sliders. The master really becomes irrelevent in everything other than the volume of the end mix.

PS I learned what I do from the thread YOU [DJ RANN] started.

___________________
i'm the alchemist without the cyst without a doubt out of the mist
dig out the grout expose the pest to take it out without the rest

they will attest my patients restorations from the best

i'm from the west i'm not an acmeist only the alchemist