DJ Rann, what if your mix does not have alot of dynamic range, just a smooth flat line, is not that what you want to have for your mix?

___________________


http://soundcloud.com/subtara

quote:

Originally posted by Subtle DJ Rann, what if your mix does not have alot of dynamic range, just a smooth flat line, is not that what you want to have for your mix?

Then you probably mastered the sine wave


Seriously though, that's a matter of taste I suppose. Personally, in general, I prefer music (all types) that has real dynamic range, so the quiet parts are quiet and the loud parts really push it, but it all depends on the track.

Some tech house just builds and builds with really complex sounds and a lot going on so the key with them, I feel, is to have separation of the elements (frequency, space, stereo imaging etc.), rather than the overall dynamic range being the prime consideration. So it all depends.

Please don't get the wrong impression - I'm not saying a totally flat mix is the goal - in fact the exact opposite, which is why I try to work as close to 0dbfs as possible for the peaks of the master because that is your dynamic range ("limit").

Classical music (and most melodic EDM), IMO, should have have real dynamic range because of it's content.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ RANN Then you probably mastered the sine wave Seriously though, that's a matter of taste I suppose. Personally, in general, I prefer music (all types) that has real dynamic range, so the quiet parts are quiet and the loud parts really push it, but it all depends on the track. Some tech house just builds and builds with really complex sounds and a lot going on so the key with them, I feel, is to have separation of the elements (frequency, space, stereo imaging etc.), rather than the overall dynamic range being the prime consideration. So it all depends. Please don't get the wrong impression - I'm not saying a totally flat mix is the goal - in fact the exact opposite, which is why I try to work as close to 0dbfs as possible for the peaks of the master because that is your dynamic range ("limit"). Classical music (and most melodic EDM), IMO, should have have real dynamic range because of it's content.

I meant more like flat as little peaks, which means you gain more volume without loosing dynamics.

here is a picture of what i consider a bad and a good mix.

BAD MIX

GOOD MIX

As you can see one of them is spiking like shit, and is a tough track to master at a decent volume, while the other is evened out and is easy mastered to a decent sound level.

___________________


http://soundcloud.com/subtara

Well this is really difficult to answer because it depends on the actual track itself, which I can't tell from the waveform.

I'll answer as best as I can....

In terms of the "loudness" aspect (war) the flatter one (good mix) wins because it will stand out more than the other. It also has dynamic range in that it has an obvious quiet part (breakdown) which in artistic terms gives is variance which is good. Dance music also needs to keep people dancing at it's most basic component so keeping thjose levels equal allow it to be more accessable as the level is constant. If the elements themselves are well mixed (proportionately to each other), then obviously it will help people get in to it.

The bad mix might be more interesting from a artistic point of view, but probably annoying to listen to as they would turn the volume down on loud parts and then have the quiet part too low. On a club system this could be annoying (and I've experienced this myself) to the DJ as the track has very different levels throughout, making mixing and getting the gain right at different point of the track more difficult.

So basically, my guess, all things considered is the flatter mix is the better version, but again I haven't heard it....

hope this helps

quote:

Originally posted by DJ RANN By making the mix quieter, you are then creating the relative noisefloor at that given lower point. Then you bounce/export and when someone wants to hear it loud, they find the mix is proportionately quieter and adjust the volume to louder...and guess what?...the noise floor increase proportionately with it, meaning your mix actually contains more noise than the mix would have it you got as close to unity as possible in the first place. you can choose to disagree all you want but this is fact, and just simple physics at work. Also, It does affect the dynamics, because they are in relation to the overall dynamic range which, as you know, is less if you're not going to unity on the master fader. The dynamics change in directly proportionally to each other - ever heard what happens to perceived frequency band at different levels....? There's a reason unity gain established, and this is it. I'm not arguing with you for the point of arguing. This is the science of audio engineering and I do this for a living where this shit is drilled in to you.

Where does this "noise" you mention come from? Digital Audio files do not develop noise or artifacts over time. They don't have a noise floor, there is sound and when its quiet there is nothing.

You do realize what you are saying is the cause for audio shitness in today's era? I make my music as if that is what the person is going to listen to. What other people do doesn't concern me, nor should it. People will turn the volume up or down anyways. I usually turn it down. I put the volume levels the way I personally enjoy them and others can deal with it. If they do something that destroys the quality, it isn't my fault.

Subtle your "good" picture looks fucking horrible man. It has 0 dynamic range. Its just a big nasty mass of sound.

___________________
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 Its not about levels, clipping only occurs [for me] when a synth hiccups [z3ta] and sends a spike way out of the roof.

Did you put a limiter on it?

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by dj_alfi change your avatar for fucks sake.

quote:

Originally posted by cronodevir Where does this "noise" you mention come from? Digital Audio files do not develop noise or artifacts over time. They don't have a noise floor, there is sound and when its quiet there is nothing.

No but summing them can introduce noise especially if there are any samples or recorded elements involved. All recordings have a noise floor to some degree, and yes even many softsynths are not noise free either. Then you compress and gain those sounds and guess what: even more introduced noise.

The more you post the more I realize you have no idea. Please go find another pro engineer and ask them if it's a good idea to pull the master down because a couple of your tracks are causing the master to clip.

quote:

Originally posted by cronodevir You do realize what you are saying is the cause for audio shitness in today's era? I make my music as if that is what the person is going to listen to. What other people do doesn't concern me, nor should it. People will turn the volume up or down anyways. I usually turn it down. I put the volume levels the way I personally enjoy them and others can deal with it. If they do something that destroys the quality, it isn't my fault.

Who doesn't make music with the listener in mind?

"What other people do?" I'm talking about what veteran pro engineers do, in a professional studio environment. This isn't shit that is just made up - it comes from years (decades) of experience and knowledge, but hey, you know better, making tarnce in your bedroom.
What I'm saying is that the way you're working goes against the proven and tested methods of engineering music properly or at least is not making the most of the potential quality you could achieve.
Do whatever you want, I totally don't care but tell other people to do it your way when it's proven not be the optimum way of working.

quote:

Originally posted by cronodevir Subtle your "good" picture looks fucking horrible man. It has 0 dynamic range. Its just a big nasty mass of sound.

This actually proves you don't understand what dynamic range is. Without hearing the music there's no way to tell is the dynamic range has been compromised in the "busy" parts, epscially at that resolution of the waveform.
(but just so you know, there is dynamic range because there are parts that are dramatically quieter than the louder parts).

quote:

Originally posted by DJ RANN No but summing them can introduce noise especially if there are any samples or recorded elements involved. All recordings have a noise floor to some degree, and yes even many softsynths are not noise free either. Then you compress and gain those sounds and guess what: even more introduced noise. The more you post the more I realize you have no idea. Please go find another pro engineer and ask them if it's a good idea to pull the master down because a couple of your tracks are causing the master to clip. Who doesn't make music with the listener in mind? "What other people do?" I'm talking about what veteran pro engineers do, in a professional studio environment. This isn't shit that is just made up - it comes from years (decades) of experience and knowledge, but hey, you know better, making tarnce in your bedroom. What I'm saying is that the way you're working goes against the proven and tested methods of engineering music properly or at least is not making the most of the potential quality you could achieve. Do whatever you want, I totally don't care but tell other people to do it your way when it's proven not be the optimum way of working. This actually proves you don't understand what dynamic range is. Without hearing the music there's no way to tell is the dynamic range has been compromised in the "busy" parts, epscially at that resolution of the waveform. (but just so you know, there is dynamic range because there are parts that are dramatically quieter than the louder parts).

Except every piece of music or audio from a major studio sounds like shit. Highly compressed garbage. The things they teach are about making your audio stand out, not about the best possible quality.

So sure, you may have went too school and you are a professional engineer, but the fact is 99.9% of "professionally" processed music sounds horrible. And this garbage is brought into the audio when ever a track is sent to be mastered.

So somewhere along the line, something tells me these processes fail at some point. Wether the processes are bad, or they are implemented incorrectly, who knows.

All of that said, as I mentioned before ive never had any problems with my mix from anyone, and I have had a few tracks released on compilations.

Yes ive used limiters on channels before, but sometimes stuff still gets by.

___________________
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

I'm a logic 8 user and I've been trying to find a way to "avoid" mastering - recently I ran into an article which recommended putting;

*Compressor
*EQ
*Compressor

on the master channel - Has anyone done this?

___________________
Official Release Alekos TA Mac OS X Menubar

Cogito, ergo sum.
Your imagination is only the beginning
Bogota Distrito Capital - Millos
Forza Milan

quote:

Originally posted by cronodevir Subtle your "good" picture looks fucking horrible man. It has 0 dynamic range. Its just a big nasty mass of sound.

Seriously, the good mix sounds good, and the bad mix sounds bad mixing wise, why did u think i picked them? Or maybe you got some special ability to hear waveforms you see?

quote:

Originally posted by DJ RANN No but summing them can introduce noise especially if there are any samples or recorded elements involved. All recordings have a noise floor to some degree, and yes even many softsynths are not noise free either. Then you compress and gain those sounds and guess what: even more introduced noise.

Now, this is what i dont understand fully what has to do with the master channel.
How can there be a difference between having having the master channel at higher volume and the individual channels set lower, as opposed to having the individual channels set higher and the master channel lower.
The output should be exactly the same, no ?

___________________


http://soundcloud.com/subtara

Alekos, currently on my master I'm going with compressor - EQ - limiter. I used to never have a compressor on the master channel, but a discussion on here a few months ago prompted me to try it out. I set the ratio low, 1.1:1, and the threshold really low as well, -40dB, so the compressor's always working on the audio. But because the ratio is so low, it doesn't sound heavily compressed. It brings the whole dynamic range in a bit, rather than just working on the peaks the way a limiter does.

Using a master compressor in this way still requires you to mix well - if one of your sounds is too loud the compressor's not going to help you out very much at all.