Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Lingua Funqa - Just One Minute (final and mix versions)
#11
(25-05-2018, 11:27 PM)Digitaldruglord Wrote: There may have been some processing added to the tracks by the producer...

Only some?

I ended up taking out most of my compressors on the v3 mix because of the harsh artifacts they were exacerbating.

Quote:Note: I'm never happy dropping these 24-bit mixes to MP3 for posting here, I try to post links to the master file when I can. Lossless AAC is the only lossy codec I can accept but in the past some users here are not able to play back attached AAC files.

320kbps mp3 is fine for purposes here, so long as there's sufficient pre-process headroom, which is rare. Check your original master. The mix was hot too for a pre master, at 1.8 true peak. Actually, I thought statistically, that your mix would make a better dynamic master than the master itself.

0.0dBFS is a loudness war setting, and will distort and bring unpleasant artifacts, even more so if this is presented at such a level to a lossy codec.

Listening to your 24bit, from my perspective the zone beyond 1kHz needs work, but it's a tempestuous thing to get under control especially if you don't want your ears screwed up for the rest of the day trying to get it somewhere handy Tongue
"Nearly half of all teenagers and young adults (12-35 years old) in middle- and high-income countries are exposed to unsafe levels of sound from the use of personal  audio  devices": https://tinyurl.com/6xeeahc5 Read my bio.
Reply
#12
(26-05-2018, 11:55 AM)Monk Wrote:
(25-05-2018, 11:27 PM)Digitaldruglord Wrote: There may have been some processing added to the tracks by the producer...

Only some?

I ended up taking out most of my compressors on the v3 mix because of the harsh artifacts they were exacerbating.

Quote:Note: I'm never happy dropping these 24-bit mixes to MP3 for posting here, I try to post links to the master file when I can. Lossless AAC is the only lossy codec I can accept but in the past some users here are not able to play back attached AAC files.

320kbps mp3 is fine for purposes here, so long as there's sufficient pre-process headroom, which is rare. Check your original master. The mix was hot too for a pre master, at 1.8 true peak. Actually, I thought statistically, that your mix would make a better dynamic master than the master itself.

0.0dBFS is a loudness war setting, and will distort and bring unpleasant artifacts, even more so if this is presented at such a level to a lossy codec.

Listening to your 24bit, from my perspective the zone beyond 1kHz needs work, but it's a tempestuous thing to get under control especially if you don't want your ears screwed up for the rest of the day trying to get it somewhere handy Tongue

The only MP3 encoder I like is the one in ProTools Ultimate, using real-time bounce.

I used Coldplay’s last album as a listening reference on Tidal HiFi...

The resulting music should also be listened to (in addition to studio montitors) small speakers, iPad, tablet, mobile phone, car stereo... the compression is anti purist, but these strategies are necessary to comply to the spectrum of listening devices.. good earbuds, low cost earbuds, TV speakers, Alexa devices, Google Home Mini..

They all push against the well disciplined rules of pro audio... the trick is finding the common ground where the song can survive well on each diverse listening device.
M1 Pro MBP: is my Hattori Hanzo.
Reply
#13
(26-05-2018, 12:00 PM)Digitaldruglord Wrote: The only MP3 encoder I like is the one in ProTools Ultimate, using real-time bounce.

But it's no good if the codec is being hit at 0dBFS. No brand will work at this level without generating harsh artifacts.

Quote:I used Coldplay’s last album as a listening reference on Tidal HiFi...

Listening isn't good enough. You only need a difference of 0.1dB for your brain to change it's perception subconsciously and just a little more than this for it to do so consciously.

Furthermore, if one's hearing is impaired, which is more common than most people are even aware of, referencing is a total, complete and utter waste of time. Now here's why:-

If a listener can't hear what's happening at 16kHz, 10kHz, or heaven forbid, even less, then it gets overlooked. Actually, if anything, it gets turned up and distorted so they can hear it better.

Quote:The resulting music should also be listened to (in addition to studio montitors) small speakers, iPad, tablet, mobile phone, car stereo... the compression is anti purist, but these strategies are necessary to comply to the spectrum of listening devices.. good earbuds, low cost earbuds, TV speakers, Alexa devices, Google Home Mini..

They all push against the well disciplined rules of pro audio... the trick is finding the common ground where the song can survive well on each diverse listening device.

Everyone talks about speakers and monitors and headphones. Nobody talks about hearing impairment despite it being rife in this industry. It is therefore statistically represented in this forum. Most won't even be aware they have a problem until it's too late.

I've generously given feedback on your work, it's up to you where you go from here.

Take care.
"Nearly half of all teenagers and young adults (12-35 years old) in middle- and high-income countries are exposed to unsafe levels of sound from the use of personal  audio  devices": https://tinyurl.com/6xeeahc5 Read my bio.
Reply
#14
(26-05-2018, 04:16 PM)Monk Wrote:
(26-05-2018, 12:00 PM)Digitaldruglord Wrote: The only MP3 encoder I like is the one in ProTools Ultimate, using real-time bounce.

But it's no good if the codec is being hit at 0dBFS. No brand will work at this level without generating harsh artifacts.

Quote:I used Coldplay’s last album as a listening reference on Tidal HiFi...

Listening isn't good enough. You only need a difference of 0.1dB for your brain to change it's perception subconsciously and just a little more than this for it to do so consciously.

Furthermore, if one's hearing is impaired, which is more common than most people are even aware of, referencing is a total, complete and utter waste of time. Now here's why:-

If a listener can't hear what's happening at 16kHz, 10kHz, or heaven forbid, even less, then it gets overlooked. Actually, if anything, it gets turned up and distorted so they can hear it better.

Quote:The resulting music should also be listened to (in addition to studio montitors) small speakers, iPad, tablet, mobile phone, car stereo... the compression is anti purist, but these strategies are necessary to comply to the spectrum of listening devices.. good earbuds, low cost earbuds, TV speakers, Alexa devices, Google Home Mini..

They all push against the well disciplined rules of pro audio... the trick is finding the common ground where the song can survive well on each diverse listening device.

Everyone talks about speakers and monitors and headphones. Nobody talks about hearing impairment despite it being rife in this industry. It is therefore statistically represented in this forum. Most won't even be aware they have a problem until it's too late.

I've generously given feedback on your work, it's up to you where you go from here.

Take care.

I’ll just say I appreciate your time in commenting.
M1 Pro MBP: is my Hattori Hanzo.
Reply
#15
Re-mixed and mastered "rev4" version added to first post.
M1 Pro MBP: is my Hattori Hanzo.
Reply
#16
(26-05-2018, 06:48 PM)Digitaldruglord Wrote: I appreciate your time in commenting.

Thanks Wink

(19-06-2018, 04:20 PM)Digitaldruglord Wrote: Re-mixed and mastered "rev4" version added to first post.

I recommend using a limiter that displays intersample peaks, and setting it to -1dBFS to avoid distorting the listener's DAC.

If you want to keep up with the loudness war in the forum, you will need to loudness match your mixmaster with Senior's; he's pushing +3.7dBFS and has punishing upper mids and trebles. In pursuing this, you will be waving a middle finger to audio quality, of course. Judging by the feedback, that looks to be an advantage Tongue

Be mindful that louder records, which some associate with commercial competitiveness, don't sell more product. This has been proven. In today's loudness normalised world, the competition is for audio quality not loudness. If I want it loud, I can turn my own amp up.

There is a Point of Tradeoff which each mix possesses. Taking compression beyond this PoT in pursuit of loudness, will degrade the audio quality exponentially for each additional dB in loudness. You've gone way past this point.

Understanding audio quality is one thing, achieving it is another but practise makes perfect so long as we practise the right things, not the wrong things. If we practise doing the wrong things, we only get better at doing wrong. A bit of Monk wisdom there Cool Big Grin Angel

The rev4 wav is unpleasant for me. In today's loudness normalised world, the technicals directly correlate to what we, with unimpaired hearing, hear consciously or subconsciously. The m4a sounds worse because it will contain more intersample peaks than the wav it came from. You know why?

The mixmaster is a mere -3.5dBFS away from things turning to pink noise. Additionally, the artifacts from hitting a DAC with +0.7 intersample peaks, brings harsh white noise-type distortion, contributing to the fatigue caused by the hyhpercompression (and it's subsequent distortion) and lack of dynamics. See the attached. All this distortion adds up, and it's not nice.

The question is, are you imagining your vision as satisfying a client with impaired hearing, as research suggests the majority of musicians are today? Or, are you processing for the needs of the listener, who in the main, has unimpaired hearing?

Just trying to help you and others, brother. Angel


Thumbnail(s)
       
"Nearly half of all teenagers and young adults (12-35 years old) in middle- and high-income countries are exposed to unsafe levels of sound from the use of personal  audio  devices": https://tinyurl.com/6xeeahc5 Read my bio.
Reply
#17
(20-06-2018, 01:35 PM)Monk Wrote:
(26-05-2018, 06:48 PM)Digitaldruglord Wrote: I appreciate your time in commenting.

Thanks Wink

(19-06-2018, 04:20 PM)Digitaldruglord Wrote: Re-mixed and mastered "rev4" version added to first post.

I recommend using a limiter that displays intersample peaks, and setting it to -1dBFS to avoid distorting the listener's DAC.

If you want to keep up with the loudness war in the forum, you will need to loudness match your mixmaster with Senior's; he's pushing +3.7dBFS and has punishing upper mids and trebles. In pursuing this, you will be waving a middle finger to audio quality, of course. Judging by the feedback, that looks to be an advantage Tongue

Be mindful that louder records, which some associate with commercial competitiveness, don't sell more product. This has been proven. In today's loudness normalised world, the competition is for audio quality not loudness. If I want it loud, I can turn my own amp up.

There is a Point of Tradeoff which each mix possesses. Taking compression beyond this PoT in pursuit of loudness, will degrade the audio quality exponentially for each additional dB in loudness. You've gone way past this point.

Understanding audio quality is one thing, achieving it is another but practise makes perfect so long as we practise the right things, not the wrong things. If we practise doing the wrong things, we only get better at doing wrong. A bit of Monk wisdom there Cool Big Grin Angel

The rev4 wav is unpleasant for me. In today's loudness normalised world, the technicals directly correlate to what we, with unimpaired hearing, hear consciously or subconsciously. The m4a sounds worse because it will contain more intersample peaks than the wav it came from. You know why?

The mixmaster is a mere -3.5dBFS away from things turning to pink noise. Additionally, the artifacts from hitting a DAC with +0.7 intersample peaks, brings harsh white noise-type distortion, contributing to the fatigue caused by the hyhpercompression (and it's subsequent distortion) and lack of dynamics. See the attached. All this distortion adds up, and it's not nice.

The question is, are you imagining your vision as satisfying a client with impaired hearing, as research suggests the majority of musicians are today? Or, are you processing for the needs of the listener, who in the main, has unimpaired hearing?

Just trying to help you and others, brother. Angel

I prefer to operate competitively. Feel free to post your version as example, this is an audio based forum, morals and overly tedious technicalities no one in the real world cares about..

You have many more songs to post in this forum before you should feel it prudent to offer such condescending overtones.

I’ve listened to what you’ve offered so far and I’m at a loss on where have you actually applied the technical accumen you focus on?

Please up some more examples of your work so we can better understand how what you’re saying benefit song outcomes.

Here’s my advice to you: your technical comments, all 100% technically correct.. you KNOW your technical audio stuff.. but then the real world of Tidal, Apple Music etc now turns to you and says “So What? This is what’s commercial” - now what? Knowing the rules should only make you a better weapon to break them.. because that’s what “clients” and their listeners respond to..
M1 Pro MBP: is my Hattori Hanzo.
Reply
#18
(21-06-2018, 12:09 PM)Digitaldruglord Wrote: I prefer to operate competitively. [...]

fwiw 2017 and 2018 grammy winners for best engineered album (david bowie - blackstar, bruno mars - 24k magic) have very different tones. bowie being very 'smooth' and mars 'snappy'. in dense parts both are pushing -5 rms or even louder. in my ears they sound great, and i dont think that the 'loudness' is issue with them, or with your (or mine) or any other mixes here. mostly it's just instrument or frequency balance stuff.
Reply
#19
(26-06-2018, 08:25 PM)kapu Wrote:
(21-06-2018, 12:09 PM)Digitaldruglord Wrote: I prefer to operate competitively. [...]

fwiw 2017 and 2018 grammy winners for best engineered album... ...in dense parts both are pushing -5 rms or even louder.

Every time I play the latest Coldplay and Greenday albums.. its like a hard smack of reality of what rules competitive releases are going by... I've calculated some songs going as deep as -3rms.. There's a bit of a trick going around due to 64-bit headroom allowing above meter 0db and guys using the Event Horizon to clip to -1db iTunes guidance ( https://www.stillwellaudio.com/plugins/event-horizon/ ). There's videos on YouTube that teach this method. I use hardware gain staging into a hardware clipper, but still need to -1db it with the Event Horizon once the print is in WaveLab.

I'm personally satisfied with the current techniques and at least having the option to determine what kind of push works for each song's mix goal, on average I try not to exceed -5rms on most pushed masters.
M1 Pro MBP: is my Hattori Hanzo.
Reply
#20
(27-06-2018, 01:49 AM)Digitaldruglord Wrote: Every time I play the latest Coldplay and Greenday albums.. [...]

metoo use event horizon. some tracks, like noisia remix of pendulum - hold your colour are pushing rms (aes17) over zero and still it sounds awesome. funny how you mentioned the -5 rms (aes17), because that seems to be 'goldilocks zone' at least for me. depending from frequency spectrum also. but lower than that, and it usually feels like it should be more dense, and over -5 and it start 'lose sound'. and somehow people who develop workflow for going loud, usually don't go any louder. or if i let client (without any referencing or they knowing nothing about metering) set loudness level, it usually ends up around there if frequency balance is right.
Reply