loudness

[atlasproaudio]

thats the new weezer, my gawd. i cant listen to it... it makes the songs boring

I think the new Weezer is incredible. Music and Production both. But I suppose I will get flamed for disagreeing with the Mob Oh just for name slinging fun that was produced by Rick Ocasic and mixed by Lord-Alge

Best Regards,
Nathan Eldred
Atlas Pro Audio, Inc.
http://www.atlasproaudio.com

 

[drumsound]

Originally posted by alphajerk:
. everything is always at the same volume all the time. nuts! thats the new weezer, my gawd. i cant listen to it... it makes the songs boring.[/QB]

I think you're on to something here Alphajerk. I like some things to be soft, some loud and others in the middle. I like the Weezer record, Rivers Cuomo writes great songs, and the band plays great. It's not grabbing me like their Pinkerton did. The green album all kinda sounds the same, except "Hash Pipe."

My $.02

 

[MadMoose]

Originally posted by Brad Blackwood:
[QB]

I think we hit the level wall about the time RHCP was released. It's sounded crappy for a while, but that was probably the limit. So much stuff is clipped *way* past distortion right now, but it's going to take one of two things for this to change.

1) Big hit with dynamic range.

2) NAB sets a limit on RMS level (could be happening behind the scenes as we speak).

But on most of the major label rock stuff I've done recently, level wasn't really as much an issue to the band as it wasa year ago. The label's are driving it right now. The producer/band usually tells me to 'do what you did on so-and-so's record' or 'match it to this CD'.
QB]

I recently had a friend come to me to master his album. While doing the peak limiting at his place and using Wavelab I noticed that the average RMS value was around -13 but at some points the average RMS was around -5 for a half of a chorus or something that that.

So, if you were going to reccomend an NAB limit to RMS value what would it be? We are talking about a whole song right and not just a piece of it right? What are the chances that an RMS "limit" could be enforced?

 

[brad]

....

 

[Jon Best]

Originally posted by atlasproaudio:


I think the new Weezer is incredible. Music and Production both. But I suppose I will get flamed for disagreeing with the Mob Oh just for name slinging fun that was produced by Rick Ocasic and mixed by Lord-Alge
]

Well, there it is, then. TLA mixed one tune off of my brother in law's last album, and came really close to good- the tones and sounds were great (as were the raw tracks), but it's just ridiculous how much flatter than the rest of the album (mostly mixed by Don Smith) it sounds, even though it's a little louder. Just compressed into submission. Someone make that guy mix without compression just once- bet it'll sound like $*^t.

 

[e-cue]

I used to get this from my clients after printing them a test cd-r- "Your mix sounds good, but when I put it in my car, the other cd's I play are so much louder". Now, I run everything through MasterX 5... They stopped complaining. To my clients, louder is better. So they think a shitty-over compressed TLA mix sounds good. I always print a "Safety Down" (with no master X) for the mastering plant. I also don't do a fade on this pass, because fade outs sound really eff'ed up when you 'finalize' your mixes. I always fear hearing the other guy's song on the radio louder than mine.

 

[Jon Best]

Originally posted by e-cue:
I used to get this from my clients after printing them a test cd-r- "Your mix sounds good, but when I put it in my car, the other cd's I play are so much louder". Now, I run everything through MasterX 5... They stopped complaining. To my clients, louder is better. So they think a shitty-over compressed TLA mix sounds good. I always print a "Safety Down" (with no master X) for the mastering plant. I also don't do a fade on this pass, because fade outs sound really eff'ed up when you 'finalize' your mixes. I always fear hearing the other guy's song on the radio louder than mine.

See, that's part of the point, though- it's just not necessary to worry about 'enough compression for radio.' A couple of months ago, a local band had a song we did here played on local radio, and I happened to be in the car when it came on. It was off of a DAT, was not bus compressed, and it peaked at -3 or -4. The new Chili Peppers came on right after it. Funny thing was, the radio processing more than took care of it- the RHCP was so loud (I guess) that it got pushed down _below_ the level of my unmastered mix. I got a laugh out of that one!

 

[audiowkstation]

I know it is a little late in the thread but FWIW, in the early 80's the average was to be at -17. Then some analog folks being new to digital decided...Hey...we can actually push the meters on the DAT to zero and with analog in using the DAT's A/D we can keep pushing without digital overload...Using the DAT as a compressor.(Absurd thinking) This is when the standard changed. My early CD's run close to -22 RMS and peak at -7.

My mastering ..even on Heavy Rock usually runs an average of -18 with peaks of 0.3dB.

Sustained passages will run the -9 to -7 but I do what sounds best. Nary a complaint. I do spend enough time with my clients explaining translation. They just have to trust that I know what the deal is.

If a standard were to be set..I would be for -10(RMS)...that will give 10dB headroom for peaks...(But I like my RMS for the whole track in Rock/Pop to actually about -19) Of course it depends on the track!

If -10 was the broadcast standard for brick wall RMS...then you would see much better sounding recordings overall.

 

[alphajerk]

"""I always fear hearing the other guy's song on the radio louder than mine. """

well i got this one track on the radio right now that is quite a bit lower [-19dBFS RMS] than modern albums, not even "mastered" but on the radio sounds just as loud as everything else. go figure i also have two other songs from two different HEAVY bands, one is mastered and fairly hot [althouigh WAY too bassy, it was the bassists fault more me syndrome] and the other is unmastered and both loudness sound similar coming off the station into my receiver.


about that weezer cd, its really weird. hash pipe sounds great but every song after it basically sounds like they got the levels for one song and let it run with the same mix for the rest of the program. i just listen to it and get mad because i hear so many things that could of made the songs so much cooler.

same thing happens on the new black crowes. the songs CLA mixed sound like doo doo compared to the don was mixing team... although that album is a major disappointment [but i have some friends who LOVE it], just so uninspired to me. im starting to think the BC were a fluke with SHAMC being their only great cd. amorica is okay, the first one is mediocre. i think the two brothers fighting is more interesting than their music.


but it certainly is difficult these days with modern CD's... my tastes span time and genres that in a cd changer on random, the levels are OBSCENELY different. do you really want to be the one with the "quieter" cd?

another thing i notice besides the radio is that the louder cd's dont crank up the volume as well. they sound better at lower volumes IMO but totally lose out to more dynamic ones at loud volumes.

 

[jeremy hesford]

Don't you think that converters on a standered CD player would sound better if there not being pushed to the limit constantly by a super hot CD? The problem is on a multi CD player, bands don't want there CD to be any less louder than the CD played before. Radio doesn't matter. Mastering a CD with alot of harsh artifacts already there well make it almost un-listenable after smastering it.

 

[Rog]

Maybe bands should start putting a little note on the artwork

"This CD needs to be turned up, the material contained within is more dynamic than that Backstreet Boys CD you hide when your friends come around. Please enjoy at maximum volume."

Failing that, a CD player that reads ahead and calculates RMS and adjusts the levels accordingly?

 

[brad]

Absolutely - it's the analog stage in the DAC that craps out - we're asking the converters to overshoot 0dbfs by as much as 8 db! And this doesn't apply to cheap players only - even the best DACs sound bad with this stuff, only a little more tolerable.

 

[MadMoose]

Originally posted by Brad Blackwood:


Absolutely - it's the analog stage in the DAC that craps out - we're asking the converters to overshoot 0dbfs by as much as 8 db! And this doesn't apply to cheap players only - even the best DACs sound bad with this stuff, only a little more tolerable.

Brad, do you ever listen through cheap D/As when your mastering for a minute or two as a real world check? I would imagine that a mastering engineer doing that is like using Auratones for a second to see how a mix translates.

 

[brad]

....