|
|
Post by sozocaps on Feb 28, 2014 21:41:50 GMT -6
What plugin or hardware do you use to get your mix louder!!!!  ? |
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Feb 28, 2014 21:43:17 GMT -6
FabFilter Pro-L.
|
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Feb 28, 2014 21:48:34 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Feb 28, 2014 22:34:36 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Feb 28, 2014 23:06:09 GMT -6
In step "2" I'm guessing that will be a new session at 44.1 16 bit |
|
|
|
Post by svart on Mar 1, 2014 9:01:39 GMT -6
In step "2" I'm guessing that will be a new session at 44.1 16 bit I think step 4 is the dither conversion to 16bit. I assume he means that prior to this it's at 24bit. |
|
|
|
Post by henge on Mar 1, 2014 9:19:12 GMT -6
In step "2" I'm guessing that will be a new session at 44.1 16 bit I think step 4 is the dither conversion to 16bit. I assume he means that prior to this it's at 24bit. Correct. Step 2 should probably be 24 bit/44.1 if I read this correctly. |
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Mar 1, 2014 11:22:35 GMT -6
Yes. And the "if applicable" in step2 means if your project wasn't 44.1 to start with. When it is, you just pull it back into the same project. The only reason for a new project in the whole process is a sample rate change...which, frankly going to CD, I make an assumption there is. You know assumptions...
Anyway, there's never a need to change project bit depth ever. Which FWIW...is only changing the bit depth of new tracks recorded...the software mixer should live at 32bit float regardless.
I'm really kinda surprised DAW's don't just implement with like a check box on render/export "optimize level for delivery".
Anyway, I chime in to say there are two components to getting a track "louder"...one is compression and limiting which changes the mix balance. Maybe for the better in some cases--no judgement in that, I'm simply saying that the RMS loudness of modern masters is one thing...but, the puny sound you'd get exporting a DAWmix straight to mp3/CD 6-12db below full scale is a completely different issue.
|
|
|
|
Post by henge on Mar 1, 2014 11:38:30 GMT -6
Cool! Thanks for that Pop. Going to start doing this today.
|
|
|
|
Post by adogg4629 on Mar 1, 2014 12:26:43 GMT -6
I like Pro L, but also use FLUX Elixer, Pro MB. I don't like to hit any of them particularly hard though.
|
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Mar 1, 2014 13:23:31 GMT -6
I get it to sound nice, leave a nice dynamic range, then use a vo lume knob to make it louder...  |
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Mar 1, 2014 13:29:53 GMT -6
I'm gonna have to try this popmann...... So I just export out of my current session into one that is 44.1 32 float, then normalize to -.04, then dither using 16bit. I think I understand it.... it's just seems like a lot of work, if this is actually making mixes sound puny why the hell someone hasn't figured out a way to make this a one step process..... |
|
|
|
Post by svart on Mar 1, 2014 13:56:18 GMT -6
This is good information. However, i believe that a tiny mix is mixed that way, not a result of not doing a step in a process.
For me, it's small amounts of compression on multiple channels and buses, in addition to proper levels and choosing how to fit the instruments together. All of that makes a mix big or tiny.
|
|
|
|
Post by henge on Mar 1, 2014 14:06:06 GMT -6
This is good information. However, i believe that a tiny mix is mixed that way, not a result of not doing a step in a process. For me, it's small amounts of compression on multiple channels and buses, in addition to proper levels and choosing how to fit the instruments together. All of that makes a mix big or tiny. Yup! If your mix is big at a low volume it'll be big at high volume. But in terms of maximizing the volume on on a file this technique seems pretty cool. Just about to finalize todays mix and I'll give it a try before final limiting. One question, what happens if I want to limit to -1 db. My file is will have more peaks above my limit than if I push the volume into my limiter. |
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Mar 1, 2014 14:33:29 GMT -6
Phase also...... amazing how when I'm mixing if things just don't seem big and they should be, I'll start flipping the phase on certain things and eventually find a culprit.... voila
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on Mar 1, 2014 17:27:46 GMT -6
This is good information. However, i believe that a tiny mix is mixed that way, not a result of not doing a step in a process. For me, it's small amounts of compression on multiple channels and buses, in addition to proper levels and choosing how to fit the instruments together. All of that makes a mix big or tiny. Yup! If your mix is big at a low volume it'll be big at high volume. But in terms of maximizing the volume on on a file this technique seems pretty cool. Just about to finalize todays mix and I'll give it a try before final limiting. One question, what happens if I want to limit to -1 db. My file is will have more peaks above my limit than if I push the volume into my limiter. I find that more often that not, people will either try to find bigness by boosting lows, or limiting the hell out of something. Compressors are dumb and only see power across the bandwidth, and because lows have more power, compressors act on them more. This causes the mids to come up in the mix and make the mix sound thin and midrange-y. The highs suffer because compressors are generally acting hard upon the lows so they can't reproduce the highs well. The solution is to mix into a compressor and get your balance right to begin with. |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Mar 1, 2014 19:33:55 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Mar 1, 2014 20:06:47 GMT -6
This is good information. However, i believe that a tiny mix is mixed that way, not a result of not doing a step in a process. For me, it's small amounts of compression on multiple channels and buses, in addition to proper levels and choosing how to fit the instruments together. All of that makes a mix big or tiny. I agree totally, some other things, some mentioned... Phase accuracy, nice dynamic range and good cross talk specs from your rig, will give you a big wide punchy tool set to begin with. |
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Mar 1, 2014 20:31:21 GMT -6
Yup! If your mix is big at a low volume it'll be big at high volume. But in terms of maximizing the volume on on a file this technique seems pretty cool. Just about to finalize todays mix and I'll give it a try before final limiting. One question, what happens if I want to limit to -1 db. My file is will have more peaks above my limit than if I push the volume into my limiter. I find that more often that not, people will either try to find bigness by boosting lows, or limiting the hell out of something. Compressors are dumb and only see power across the bandwidth, and because lows have more power, compressors act on them more. This causes the mids to come up in the mix and make the mix sound thin and midrange-y. The highs suffer because compressors are generally acting hard upon the lows so they can't reproduce the highs well. The solution is to mix into a compressor and get your balance right to begin with. LPF on the comp no? |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Mar 1, 2014 20:33:58 GMT -6
Oh - btw - for home mastering...Slate FG-x, FF Pro-L...
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on Mar 1, 2014 21:48:38 GMT -6
I find that more often that not, people will either try to find bigness by boosting lows, or limiting the hell out of something. Compressors are dumb and only see power across the bandwidth, and because lows have more power, compressors act on them more. This causes the mids to come up in the mix and make the mix sound thin and midrange-y. The highs suffer because compressors are generally acting hard upon the lows so they can't reproduce the highs well. The solution is to mix into a compressor and get your balance right to begin with. LPF on the comp no? Nope. Instead of manipulating the detection frequencies, I simply worked on finding how to balance the instruments. It's harder to learn but I think I've started to get the hang of it, and my mixes are better for it. |
|
|
|
Post by donr on Mar 1, 2014 23:54:32 GMT -6
How loud is is typical for rock/pop 2trk mixes among this crowd? If I don't 'make' a mix louder with 2bus processing, I'm usually about 16-14dB peak to RMS difference. I can take that mix and get it to 12-8 dB with FG-X and it may still sound like good music, but to my old-timer ears it's sounding cramped at that point.
Part of what I admire about the skill of top tier mixers is how they can get a 2mix louder and still make it sound musical. Not that I want it louder, but there's apparently a market demand for it, and I don't know how to do it. If I did, I'd make better mixes with more dynamic range.
|
|
|
|
Post by cowboycoalminer on Mar 2, 2014 0:17:49 GMT -6
donr I agree. I don't much like anything under -10 RMS. Just starts to sound nasty. -12 for me with FG-X
|
|
|
|
Post by jimwilliams on Mar 2, 2014 12:35:21 GMT -6
Are people still doing this?
My solution is to adjust the volume control when listening.
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Mar 2, 2014 12:46:27 GMT -6
How loud is is typical for rock/pop 2trk mixes among this crowd? If I don't 'make' a mix louder with 2bus processing, I'm usually about 16-14dB peak to RMS difference. I can take that mix and get it to 12-8 dB with FG-X and it may still sound like good music, but to my old-timer ears it's sounding cramped at that point. Part of what I admire about the skill of top tier mixers is how they can get a 2mix louder and still make it sound musical. Not that I want it louder, but there's apparently a market demand for it, and I don't know how to do it. If I did, I'd make better mixes with more dynamic range. Yep - I shoot for -12 to -10. |
|
?
