mastering and why the -1dBFS recommendation

I find -11dB RMS/LUFS to be around the right feel for me. Not crushed to the point of distortion, but also not so dynamic that it's going back and forth between hard-to-hear and ear-splitting.

I really don't know how folks can get it into the -8dB RMS or even the -6dB RMS range without it getting so far out of balance, not even taking the distortion stuff into account. I've had folks ask for LOUD and I've been yet unable to get into that territory without it seeming impossible to make sound right.

There are even records now sold to teenage girls where the kick hits the limiter and pumps down the vocal lower so that it's lower than the vocal fx send. The balance can be even worse than the L2 and clip everything era. The multiband limiters do so many stupid things.

"Penetration" from the 1997 Raw Power remix CD (0dBFS 99.9999% of the time), converted to 192K mp3.  I don't have the WAV on hand to see what it looks like.

 I like that -11dBFS to -12dBFS RMS range for a sense of dynamics.  If something is really steady state without much, I can get to -10 no problem but it's clearly strained in comparison.  I'm sure if we dug into mastering full time we'd start figuring out louder.  

It's all LUFS to me. Isn't the 2022-2024 standard -7 anyhow ?

If we're already setting levels based on true peaks, does this mean that something like -1dbfs on the master bus is still okay? Or are you suggesting -1.5dbfs even taking true peak into account? This also might sound like a weird question, but who isn't checking final levels based on true peak these days?

Also, what meter program are you using for those numbers?

This is why I used TP limiting at -1 was for conversion intersample peaks.

But TP limiting can sound...not as good. And a VAST amount of people seem to not care about it and just send it with a limiter set to -0.5.

And they can get away with it because the only time it "matters" is if you do an ADM file and have to certify that it doesn't do any intersample peaks after Apples AAC conversion. Which is not checked by any means. You just have to say it's okay and then they get the stamp of approval. So it's kind of a joke.

Most true peak limiters are just over sampled clippers tacked onto normal crappy limiters. Just l2 with another clipper or oversampling the clipper portion like fabfilter pro l or limitless. Or are another limiter on the backend like Oxford and tdr. Lowering gain or backing off a limiter is better than using them or clipper usually.

Or it can be just a better limiter. The tdr “limiter” portion js a better true peak limiter (as in fast compressor) than most supposedly brick wall true peak limiters. Then again so is kotelnikov on ultra fast attacks on insane

What’s really stupid if you don’t limit the crap out of it with something nasty, they will say it sounds dull. Because acoustic limiters are functional generally until they go so much faster than the tonal content that they horribly distort it or clip it (for ones with clippers for brief peaks). The aliased digital garbage sample limiters just misapply the fast volume modulation and the clipper and crap up the highs with aliasing in a way that nothing acoustic or better programmed for modern cpus can. They crap regions impossible to harmonically distort in non aliased processors or even to the human ear in analog or sound waves propagating in air because the first harmonic of any fundamental above 10 kHz or so will be above 20 kHz.

Add in most older or cheaper equipment like api, behringer, dbx, and rme and the like often just rolled off or distorting from older and cheaper opamps and they will just get duller usually until the stupid phase shift from crappy converters messes up cymbals. Then even a lot of better stuff from the 80s onward can have a bit of a fog to the air and now since 2000s we have insane opamps, killer remote Pres, and very good canned parts from THAT corp. you used to not really be able to get clean highs or really any sort of detail in the highs unless you had a lot of money. Now for a couplei thousand bucks, you can get clean stuff, and with digital we can bypass a lot of the stuff that had to be perfect like tape and mixer line level circuitry to not dull things without having to patching it around and hope their wasn’t noise and get a very clean high end that reveals all flaws of bad mics, filters, circuits, transformers, voices, and amps. But still even then, they do not have the massive distortion.



It has to be added in from insane and idiotic aggressive and dysfunctional digital dynamics processing. The early functional digital compressors did not have this. They smoothed the attack and usually were dark or mid forward like Waves Renaissance Compressor, Sony / Sonnox Oxford Dynamics, and the current Fir Comp which takes pointers from them. The modern stuff capable of compressing highs and brief transients cleanly doesn’t have the insane high frequency distortion. The pcm limiters and awful aliased analog emulations add it. Whatever nice analog distortion or digital artifact free slight digital distortion you add pretty much doesn’t matter versus the horrible distorting and pumping of the pcm limiters. This is one of the reasons for analog gear becoming mostly stupid sounding toys instead of tools. Otherwise you can barely hear it through the digital bullshit. The same with the most popular digital distortions being insanely aggressive like decapitator or vintage warmer or incredibly stupid sounding like avid lofi.

I’m trying Weiss DS1 (more distortion!) and then if that doesn’t work, simply inserting Oxford limiter with enhance cranked on a mix instead of brand spanking new but dulling MDWDRC2 or boring the glue or glowing Molot GE that fed the very pretty U-he Satin and just sending it in. Previous complaint was too clean then after a bunch of distortion added… too dull. Well time to kick this up a notch with a something that sounds like a synth envelope follower added to a clean comp and if that doesn’t work, the SSL bus comp meets L2 meets a high gain crack pipe amp that is the Oxford Limiter. The more modern Elevate is your typical multiband garbage that remixes tracks and undoes your moves. Meanwhile Waves makes everything crinkly like aluminum foil and Fabfilter Pro L polycarbonate microplastic faced pop star sheen. They all suck but at least the single band stuff doesn’t totally undo your mix moves.

Dan

Above is Apple's conversion from Music. VBR, highest, smart encoding adjustments, filter below 10Hz. I clarified in the OP.

Some other variations, sticking with roughly 128 range. I looked at a couple other 256K range, and across all types, every variation and conversion software gives a different result. 


Apple 128K


Apple 128K VBR 10Hz filtered smart mp3 - same as above


Apple 128K VBR smart - lose the 10Hz filtering, slightly lower peak


RX11 128 - highest RX but lower clipped than RX VBR, true peak most similar to Apple 128K VBR smart


RX11 115 VBR - barely lower but much higher possible clipped samples


RX11 115 VBR limit - this was about a 1 minute render on a 6:30 file. Lower limited levels all around.


XLD LAME 128 - highest true peak level, sample level, possible clipped count of any tried

Thanks Doug and Dan for all the info, I'm going to go dig through and experiment with more codecs on the hottest masters I've received as well as some blown out audio I was sent to master (as a side note it's great to see Thimeo mentioned in here as that's a lifesaver when mixers insist on sending sausages and you need to make some space and bring some life back to it).

I love crushing the bejeezuz out of a mix. Multiband too. 8 to 7 lufz all day. If the playing is dynamic you’ll still hear the dynamics in the timbre without the silly volume fluctuations - forcing the listener to have to turn it up to hear the soft parts - lame.

Interesting topic. I remember when folks started talking about leaving -0.3 db headroom on the master, then -0.5, and recently -1. Now some are doing more?

I can’t say I’ve ever heard the problem demonstrated, or circled back to test my work post publishing beyond casual streaming. Does this manifest as harshness? Cloudiness? Dullness? What is the aesthetic problem we’re avoiding, since as Pueblo pointed out there’s distortion happening regardless?