That's insane. Are you sure about that?

And yes, it differs from mix to mix.

An "average" that has decent dynamics and decent sound for your average rock/pop tune? I rarely find anything over -14 or so that doesn't irritate the hell out of me (not that I'm not "gently forced" to go beyond that point quite often).

I"ve NEVER heard anything over around -10 that didn't sound like a trainwreck.

John,

I haven't paid too much attention lately, but do you know what the average major label release is coming in at? Seems to me that last time I surveyed a couple, they were at about -8 or -10 db RMS. And yes, I find those very fatiguing, and downright aggravating to listen to.

I'm thinking about CD's by the likes of the Chili Peppers and Audioslave.

i guess i worded it wrong..... my avg has been between-9.4 and -11.6 my max has been between -5.5 and -7.7.... are these numbers bad..... if so is there a way to set a plug.... maybe l2 or somthing to fix it?

I would think it would take an L2 a lot of work just to get *to* those numbers.

Have you read your manuals...?

Its not hard to get there with a compressor then a limiter, but it sounds like poop of course and should be advised against. The highest I've ever been pushed to get was -10 on some material that was harsh and distorted in the first place (and easier to get away with the squashing I guess).

I'd say my average is around -13 or -14 but it would be a whole different story if some jazz or classical recordings would actually come thru.

Average here is around -15 dB RMS. On one really nice Mix Rock project that I had last week, it sounded amazing at -15 but the client wanted it at -12dB and it killed the beauty of it and all the mixing engineer hard and talented work. :evil:

I just checked the avg rms of 3 cds that I like with wave labs

LAGWAGON lets talk about leftovers
Max -6.06
min-68.54
avg-11.14

Weezer make believe
max -4.84
min-56.62
avg -9.93

Fall Out Boy
max -5.37
min -17.04
avg -10.18

this is louder than avg?

Alot of metal albums these days are around -10 / -8db RMS through entire songs and its downright fatiguing...

I've even heard some rock albums that are as bad (Coldplay) and worse (At The Drive-In)

The most I can stand is around -12db RMS for metal...

wizaynecarter wrote: this is louder than avg?

Those are louder than average, but unusually typical.

Keep in mind that those recordings are mega-buck projects with teams of seasoned professionals at every step of the production... "Maximum potential volume" is something that takes a fairly serious amount of planning from the pre-production level all the way up through tracking, mixing and mastering. Those are NOT the kind of levels that most "budget" recordings with rookie engineers can attain.

what tools are you using to "see" the RMS?

I use the Waves PAZ metering plugin.

My mastering results usually falls between -12 to -8dB rms.
Something not pleasant when boosted over -8dB rms.

I tend not to move the needle on my VU meter over the 0 dBVU for the average level.

Best,

i try and stay at -10. its not TOO squished but its loud enough. pretty much the way my music is, its solid sound anyway, DI guitars along with nothing but screaming, yeah. for my electronica type stuff.. i have no idea as reason doesnt have RMS meter, just VU and peak, but it probably rests around -15 to -11 at most now that i have mastering tools (yay for 3.0).

not that experienced but everything under 12-11rms is really insane to listen to.... a few songs and your head blows off miles away
that's really too bad 'cause one of the cd's I prefer this year was the new Comeback Kid but what a pain to listen to....I was surprised it was "only" about +-10rms, makes your ears scream
btw lowering average level means getting everything in the mix at the same level? or am I wrong? so if you limit the hell out of it you can hear each thing better (but worse in th end?) it's a question I've been wondering but I think I know the answer I just need confirmation ( I like to know the truth.....or what's anything near, I'm still seeking the truth of life but that is another story....youth, that's nice, I better use it while I got it ;o)

I just thought about it but if your mix has a lot of bass, meaning something under 100hz, it is easier to go on lower rms levels, always carefully watch the balance between bass/highs.... for example if your mix has way too much bass and is at 5rms, lower the bass and you will see that the rms level will significantly decrease...
damn it I really suck in english, sorry for my mistakes (grammar and soundwise)

The worst examples of over limiting I have heard that come to mind are Rush's Vapor Trails and the Velvet Revolver album. Both hurt my ears they are clipped so badly.

livin la vida loca is solid black just about. you almost dont see peaks as much as a waveform that looks like someones driving home with one too many beers (more like 20 too many).

i was about to say what i-quality said, but since he did, saves me time. use a spectrum analyzer and match it with your RMS read and you can see how much headroom you have compared to how much you SHOULD have, it helps point out potential problems (NOTE: helps point out, its up to you to fix it on your own).

TheArchitect wrote: The worst examples of over limiting I have heard that come to mind are Rush's Vapor Trails and the Velvet Revolver album. Both hurt my ears they are clipped so badly.

I hate 'clipping'.. they doesn't exist in some ears :?

who cares for numbers?!

for rock music I turn it up just before it starts sounding bad (methinks this is mostly about -12dB rms avg), but depends on the mix I get.

X

enlighten me.... not too sure what rms is....

i've seen it mentioned near the abbreviation for decibles but i dont understand what it is.

thanx in advance,

-cjj2

Hey Clayjrjr2!

Welcome to RO Dude!! (or chick if you happen to be...)

RMS = Root Means Squared

I know, what does that mean.

In the case of output from a recording, the very basic, yet slightly flawwed description of the term is sort of an average output level. It takes into account the occassional dips into the low-level and all of the peaks.

This is a VERY rudimentary definition of the term (again, more a description of its use than a literal definition.)

Obviously, an average level of -6dBfs or so would mean that there is so much "loud" or nearly clipped content, that there is in essence NO dynamic range.

Similarly (or conversly I guess) if the RMS level is too low, say -20 dBfs, that probably means that there is a lot of stuff down in the proverbial weeds, but not too much stuff near the ceiling. (Classical is the great equalizer here - much classical music stays around -20 dBfs RMS with regular peaks at 0dBfs (or close)).

Just out of curiosity - are you at UIUC??? I have a dear friend, dare I say, near-brother attending there now.

J. 8-)

thanx for clearing that up.

and to answer your question, nope. i know only like... 20 people who go there. so, i probably don't know the guy. but just incase, what's his name?

but, i have another question. how can you find out your rms in a song?

PS. I'm a guy.

Clayjrjr2 wrote:
PS. I'm a guy.

Funny :lol:

I assumed as much, but you know what happens when you assume. :wink:

His name is DeWayne, he's a bassoon player. (Also, I have another buddy up there named Jason who's an oboe/english horn player too.)

J.

nah, i don't know them.

... is there a way i can find the rms of one of my songs?... like a plugin or something?

Clayjrjr2 wrote: nah, i don't know them.

... is there a way i can find the rms of one of my songs?... like a plugin or something?

Cool.

Sure there are ways - You can use an external program meter or most DAWs have a way of determining it. What DAW are you using?

BTW - FWIW, I think a lot of guys use these as crutches. The big boys (including many of the dudes here) will do their voodoo without really paying much attention to the meters and really only look at them at the end or occassionally to make sure they haven't slipped into a state of insanity.

The concept behind things like the K-system of monitoring is simple:
Meters are important tools, but master it until it sounds right. There is a point of critical mass, if you will, at which a song(err, piece of music) no longer sounds right - IOW, dynamics are lost, punch or drama is gone. Usually the line between awesome/dynamic/dramatic/powerful is a very fine line and crossing that line takes you to dull/lifeless/LOUD/annoying/fatiguing mixes.

If you're getting into mastering, you will definitely need a way to determine RMS levels. If not, send your good mixes (with plenty of headroom) to your mastering engineer and they will (hopefully) get it to the right RMS level and you really shouldn't have to worry about it.

J. 8-)

thank you,
I'm definitely going to seek out a way of doing this myself. I like mastering.

& no, i'm not a know-it-all like JP22, but I do like to learn new things and take on those things musically, & production wise.... and before JP22 came along, I had no idea what dynamics were. & still now don't know the full scoop on dynamics. but at least i know that EQualizers eat away at dynamics, and compressors manipulate dynamics....

anyway, if you or anyone else can school me on things like this,and get into more detail, I would be very appreciative.

thanx again,
-CJJ2

I have been recently testing some of my mixes in Wavelab (which I just got and think I like it alot... I had been doing my "mastering" with Ozone in Sonar4)... most of my "final masters" are coming in at around -13rms with peaks anywhere from -6 to -9/10... is that ok for a final mix?? I find when I test them against other cds (and I don't listen to much new music except for indie stuff which isn't done with the big budgets like some of the records mentioned earlier in the thread...) they usually match up pretty well... however what I'm wondering is... would taking them down to -15 or so make them alot more listenable... my new approach is to use the L2 at the end of the chain and push it until it starts attenuating at the peaks and then pull it back until its not... so I'm using the limiter to raise the volume but not do any extra compression - is that right??

Mike

yes, that is the really correct way to use a limiter.

Michael Fossenkemper wrote: yes, that is the really correct way to use a limiter.

BUT!
Godblessyou if you can get the really hot levels without limiting about 2-3 db worth.

Reggie, do you mean 2-3db of gain reduction/attenuation or a threshold setting on L2 of -2 or -3db??? I find that if I mix it well i can only set the threshold on the L2 about -1.5 to -2db before I START getting slight attenuations at the very peaks...

Mike

He probably meant attenuation.

TrilliumSound wrote: He probably meant attenuation.

You got it man. Gain reduction to some. Threshold is dependant on the material. But a few "shaved" peaks will be missed by few. A lot of them go by so fast you wouldn't know they're gone. Might as well push them down with a limiter IMO. If you aren't pushing any gain reduction, then your L2 isn't doing much at all. Just an overblown volume knob. Just don't have like a constant gain reduction thing going on, or things will start to sound real crunchy in a bad way.

Sorry to further the whole volume crushing thing, but I thought homeboy should know.

Clayjrjr2 wrote: nah, i don't know them.

... is there a way i can find the rms of one of my songs?... like a plugin or something?

http://www.elementalaudio.com/products/inspector/

I am usually between 12-13.5. I use wavelab. It has a global testing tool.