Posts: 1,327
Threads: 139
Joined: Jun 2013
Posts: 1,088
Threads: 175
Joined: Apr 2013
I don't know Olli... I think that you should keep it in the usual range and if someone wants to hear it louder and burst his own ears, let him turn up the volume of his ipod or stereo. I want to keep mine safe so I can keep on mixing
mixing since April 2013
Posts: 1,075
Threads: 92
Joined: Jul 2013
Its an interesting topic Olli. I know a master engineer who can master extremely loud, and somehow still create the illusion that there are dynamics left. I dont know how he does that, but its an artform. My politic in the master department is I raise the limiter till I think it sounds squeezed and then back off a bit. Not very bright or revolutionary but thats how i do :-)
I´ll hopefully get a chance to listen to your mix soon and comment on how it translate to my ears.
Old ears, old gear, little boy inside love music and sounds and my wife, not necessarily in that order
Posts: 2,381
Threads: 548
Joined: Feb 2013
Sounds ok to me,the mix could have a bit more space and the vox up a bit
The backing vox are very low.There seems to be a fair bit of build up in the middle
and the vox are having a struggle to cut
Posts: 46
Threads: 12
Joined: Mar 2013
The bass and low mids seem to overpower everything a bit, might be because of the mastering you did. By limiting that hard you push down the peaks and bring up the decay of bassdrums and bassguitars and stuff
Posts: 1,327
Threads: 139
Joined: Jun 2013
Thanks for listening, everybody.
I wanted to fix some of the problems you mentioned. So there 's a new loud2 version now in the first post.
I fixed
- some mud problems
- vocal level
- opened limiter just a little bit here and there
- changed the bass compression
I tried to keep the sound balance somewhat similar to Foo Fighters, where there's lot of low mid range (but no mud).
I' planning to do another version with with a 9-14 db dynamic range. I try to keep the frequency balance, levels and sound similar to version 2, but I'll let the transients breath and so on.
Posts: 1,327
Threads: 139
Joined: Jun 2013
(11-09-2013, 07:37 PM)Voelund Wrote: Its an interesting topic Olli. I know a master engineer who can master extremely loud, and somehow still create the illusion that there are dynamics left. I dont know how he does that, but its an artform.
That's very difficult and certainly needs special tools and talent. Foo Fighters had the illusion of dynamics although the meters were not moving.
I couldn't do anything just by "mastering". It sounded totally awful when I reach 7 dB dynamic range. Then backed off with mastering limiter andd I added plenty of limiters here and there to some tracks and busses. But that's not mastering, it's just poor man's cheap tricks to imitate the sound of talents.
It would be very intersting here some real life examples of big hits:
mixers unmastered version / mastered version. I haven't found any where examples. Most of the time we are comparing our own unmastered mixes to mastered cd versions. And there's a danger to learn wrong kind of mixing habbits.
(11-09-2013, 07:37 PM)Voelund Wrote: My politic in the master department is I raise the limiter till I think it sounds squeezed and then back off a bit. Not very bright or revolutionary but thats how i do :-)
Sounds very familiar to me.
I'll do just the same, and probably will do it also in future, after this test is done.
Posts: 2,381
Threads: 548
Joined: Feb 2013
you can pay a lot of money for mastering,but most of the power and volume are in the mix in the first place
when mixed by top mixers
Posts: 1,327
Threads: 139
Joined: Jun 2013
I made the another version, where I aimed at 10 dB dynamic range (DR10). Dynamic range varies between 8-14 db. (Added to first post. revox-DR-10dB-olli-h.mp3 . It's a pity that those file names don't line up correctly with the player)
Only thing that I did is that I changed the limiter and compression settings on those tracks and busses where I had used them quite heavily. So exactly the same EQ settings everywhere. I tried to make it so that the audible level of that track remained about the same. I didn't touch faders at all, except with background vocals.
In the last version compressors where taking only 0-4 dB here and there. Limiters where doing the same, but only very small moments. So very moderate settings everywhere.
After that I got two versions. DR 5 and DR 10.
I put those tracks side by side and reduced the level of DR5 version -4.6dB so that RMS level of those tracks were the about the same in main verse.
The comparison version jumps from version to another. (Added to first post, revox-comparison.mp3) Huge difference is in the low end. DR 10 version sound much stronger. DR5 version sounds flatter in many places.
This is just my quick test and id do know that it doesn't prove anything. If someone else did the same kind of test, the results could be different. But it was fun to do. Well, maybe this test proves, that I don't have the needed skill to do decent DR5-mix. Meanwhile I'll continue to do DR10 and DR12 mixes.
Posts: 512
Threads: 139
Joined: Apr 2013
I will agree with takka on this one, the volume and the rms lvl comes mostly from the mix it self.
For example if you mix your instruments individually loud, mostly eq wise when the drums drop the instrumentation it will not go dip down.
Offcorse automation plays a big part for it.
For my experience so far i can say eq ing and making space for everything is the most difficult part of a mix and need a lot of practice, to some point "master it".