Lingua Funqa - Just One Minute (final and mix versions)

[Digitaldruglord]

I appreciate your time in commenting.

Thanks

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

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

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.

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..