electro-music.com   Dedicated to experimental electro-acoustic
and electronic music
 
    Front Page  |  Articles  |  Radio
 |  Media  |  Forum  |  Wiki  |  Links  |  Store
Forum with support of Syndicator RSS
 FAQFAQ   CalendarCalendar   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   LinksLinks
 RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in  Chat RoomChat Room 
Live streaming at radio.electro-music.com

  host / artist show at your time
  Rob Adventures in Sound
Please visit the chat
 Forum index » Reviews, Editorials and Commentary » Commentary and Editorials
Let's all sit in a circle and talk about mastering
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Page 1 of 5 [108 Posts]
View unread posts
View new posts in the last week
Mark the topic unread :: View previous topic :: View next topic
Goto page: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next
Author Message
Cyxeris



Joined: Oct 30, 2003
Posts: 1125
Location: Louisville, KY

PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:53 pm    Post subject: Let's all sit in a circle and talk about mastering Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Would anyone be interested in discussing mastering chains? Since I'm almost at that point, I thought it would be timely to open a discussion about it. Here's the basic rundown of my preliminary efforts at piecing one together to suit my needs.

Each track:

Waves LinEQ Lowband, low cut/rolloff circa 35-45 hz
Waves LinMultiband compression

Mains:

Waves LinEQ Lowband, low cut/rolloff circa 35-45 hz for DC elim.
Waves LinEQ Broadband, for overall balancing and shaping
Waves L2 for finalization

I'm still playing with other ideas like mastering reverb and so forth, but I am trying to approach it as minimalisticly as can be afforded. I'm also playing with issues like should I eq pre or post-multiband compression, should I bother low-cutting twice, and so on. Really, these are issues of taste, but this is the most holistic part in the process, the bottleneck, the funnel, so getting this right is far more important than, say, getting the EQ on one of the synth parts in one of the songs right.

Since I can hardly come close to imagining the idea of thinking about beginning to consider referring to myself as anything remotely like a mastering engineer, I figured "hey, let's touch base with the gang, and see how long it takes for the thread to mutate into a discussion about globalism and the New World Order!" Wink

Cyx

_________________
∆ Cyx ∆

"Yeah right, who's the only one here who knows secret illegal ninja moves from the government?"
-Napoleon Dynamite
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
mosc
Site Admin


Joined: Jan 31, 2003
Posts: 17611
Location: Allentown, PA
Audio files: 125
G2 patch files: 60

PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2004 2:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

I don't know how one can make rules on how to do mastering. I think it depends on the nature of the material. My bias would be to do nothing but normalize the digital information. Then, and only then, take actions to improve areas where you perceive problems. No problems, no actions.

Compression, reverb, and eq all either remove something or add something. They can be good, but just because we have them isn't necessarilly justification enough to use them.

As for DC removal. If you don't have a DC problem, why worry about it? Some people have expensive playback gear that can really handle low frequencies in the 20 Hz range. Why roll off?

Since the 1950s, pop music recording engineers have been compressing the hell out of vocals. I'm not saying this is bad, but we've ended up with people singing very badly because they know the compressor will take care of their inability to control their voices.

Guitar players are like singers in this regard. Often the overdrive their amps. This is a form of compression. Many guitar players can't control dynamics by playing their instruments.

As you can tell, I think all this is a sad state of affairs. So put away your reverb, eq, compression and all those other gimmicks.

If you are mastering for music to be played in a car, please disregard this post. Compress the hell out of it, roll off the bass, and even if the music doesn't have it, add a beat. Wink
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
Kruge



Joined: Dec 28, 2003
Posts: 106
Location: Bonn, Germany, Europe, Earth, Sol System, Milky Way, Universe, Multiverse etc...

PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2004 2:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

I like kittens.


scnr Very Happy

_________________
brielmusik myspace reverb nation twitter
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Cyxeris



Joined: Oct 30, 2003
Posts: 1125
Location: Louisville, KY

PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2004 2:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Kruge wrote:
I like kittens.


And the Award is issued!

Posted Image, might have been reduced in size. Click Image to view fullscreen.
The Official Fastest and Most Off-Topic Post of the Day Award

Twisted Evil

Cyx

_________________
∆ Cyx ∆

"Yeah right, who's the only one here who knows secret illegal ninja moves from the government?"
-Napoleon Dynamite
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
mosc
Site Admin


Joined: Jan 31, 2003
Posts: 17611
Location: Allentown, PA
Audio files: 125
G2 patch files: 60

PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2004 2:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Congrats, Kruge...
Well done...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address
Cyxeris



Joined: Oct 30, 2003
Posts: 1125
Location: Louisville, KY

PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2004 3:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

I have a minimalist mentality about things. Use what you need, and that's all. I haven't decided if I need the glossy sheen of a 0.3 second mastering verb or not. I do, however, mix with the intent of mastering, so certain decisions are made during mixdown that take into consideration what will happen at the mastering stage, so that the two processes become more like a single process, which I prefer. Compression in the mix is sparse. in a 40 track mix, I may use compression on 3 tracks, for instance. Eq is used just enough to balance things out and emphasize specific tonal elements. Mixing is like sculpture to me, I love it. I love the change of pace from composing and polishing to molding and finalizing. Both can get old and tedious, but the see-sawing of processes keeps things fresh.

Cyx

_________________
∆ Cyx ∆

"Yeah right, who's the only one here who knows secret illegal ninja moves from the government?"
-Napoleon Dynamite
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
elektro80
Site Admin


Joined: Mar 25, 2003
Posts: 21977
Location: Norway
Audio files: 14

PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2004 3:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

mastering chains? I guess some mastering engineers have basic chains they use over and over,, but you should tune this for your music.. not use other people´s multipurpose setups.

You can sort out some "probs" before final mix and mastering. check for excessive energy in voices.. in the multitracks.. which are outside the essential signal band you think you really need in there. Like.. are there any subbass flops or growls.. fliterflapping.. whatever.. which peaks a signal.. or adds to its "energy" outside of what you want there.. such happens all the time.. controlling those can be smart.

You should decide for how loud this is going to sound. Too loud means too little true dynamics.. and this means too compressed.. but.. what you actually do with the mix is not always what is percived. if you lift sections which one musically thinks of as soft.. or expressive.. these sections van often work better... or not.. it all depends.

Multiband compression is smart.. but it is a lot harder than the product blurbs tell you.

You might want to use a compressor like that Waves l thingie for both lifting the overall loudness.. but also for the soft and subtle tasks like rounding off excessive peaks.

What usually makes the most mess are all those peaks all over the place which pushes the main volume of the track down. I guess you should plan the track in loudness and see what happens if you do this or that in various sections. It can often be smart to work with a copy of the project at this stage and try to compress and process parts which should match each other.

if you decide to use single band compressors for certain types of processing you should test this using an eq at the input stage.. and try even a 5 or 10 band fiter.. changing the bandwidth composition of the signal before you compress it can often help a lot.

Subbass is cool. You can plan several types of bass in the songs.. like some are compressed like in modern music.. with a hard rolloff.. and others start below the usual rolloff.. The big problem is the typical resonance frequencies of ordinary budget stereo speakers. This is typically just below the ordinarry pressure peak of pop music which is at 85-95Hz. What you can do is test this with various home speakers and try to develop your own technique to fade the bass in hard.. below where ordinary speakers give up.. and at the same time control the overall loudness in the song.. like if you add a lot of shit down there which ordinary speakers do not handle at all.. the energy from this added bass will steal from the overall dynamics bandwidth. Well.. chances are you can manage to make a mix and master which has that extra sub oooompf when played on good stereo speakers.. but hopefully doing this in a way that does not hurt budget gear.. without making the budget gear explode. many radiostations over here have their own "mastering chains" just for this type of use.. they run all music thru filters and limiters and multibandcompressors in order to make the shit sound even louder.. but also removing all that very very deep bass. Subbass is not radiofriendly.

What you can do is get some CDs and LPs made by artists you like.. and throw these into your DAW.. and check out on meters and virtual scopes and whatever.. how they really work.. look for clues and tricks. there are only clear rules when it comes to certain genres.. like various strains of pop. Well.. classical music is a bit special.. It is a lot harder to record and master classical music than what one might think.

When it comes to reverb.. you can use this in order to create effects.. which have noithing to do with creating more room in there.. rather to create tails here and there to make details more "detailed" etc.
You could try to sidechain the reverb from certain voices and run the pure reverb output thru some limiters.. compressors.. whatever.. and play around with this.
An old trick with modules/ modulars is using seperate signal chains with envelopes in order to shape stuff like reverb .. like.. you run a heavily compressed/brickwall limited reverb signal thru an envelope which behaves slightly different than what the main synth signal does. ( the heavy reverb can roll off before the main signal does.. ? like just snapping past the main bass boom when the main signal envelope enters the "sustain" step..? You figure out something.. ) And you can even sidechain this and run a feed into a filter set up to change filter settings for every 16th or whatever. ..Mmm what I mean to say is .. you can use reverb as an integrated part of the instrument.. rather than throw it in later. You can use reverb in order to create fatter signals without really add what people usually percieves as reverb.

Budget speakers and resonance.. read up a bit on speaker design and like.. bass reflex theory .. You will be amazed.

_________________
A Charity Pantomime in aid of Paranoid Schizophrenics descended into chaos yesterday when someone shouted, "He's behind you!"

MySpace
SoundCloud
Flickr
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Cyxeris



Joined: Oct 30, 2003
Posts: 1125
Location: Louisville, KY

PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2004 4:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

elektro80 wrote:
You should decide for how loud this is going to sound. Too loud means too little true dynamics.. and this means too compressed.. but.. what you actually do with the mix is not always what is percived. if you lift sections which one musically thinks of as soft.. or expressive.. these sections van often work better... or not.. it all depends.

Multiband compression is smart.. but it is a lot harder than the product blurbs tell you.


They're touted as panaceas, yes, and they certainly can be, but their sophistication and subtlety are understated, for sure. I've spent alot of time just fiddling with them and pursuing specific results until I figured out how to achieve them.

elektro80 wrote:
You might want to use a compressor like that Waves l thingie for both lifting the overall loudness.. but also for the soft and subtle tasks like rounding off excessive peaks.

What usually makes the most mess are all those peaks all over the place which pushes the main volume of the track down. I guess you should plan the track in loudness and see what happens if you do this or that in various sections. It can often be smart to work with a copy of the project at this stage and try to compress and process parts which should match each other.


I dont like using alot of compression in a mix, as even when used well, still tends to, in my opinion, disjoint most of the tracks in the mix, with the absolute exception of the kicks and the bass. Since I know I'm going to get my peaks and freqs undercontrol with the multiband, I try to leave the individual tracks as natural as possible, ans sculpt with EQ when necessary.

Of course, with the way I work and sequnence and record, by the time I have each track in the machine as audio, the placement and intensity in relation to the other instruments is pretty well established. It's funny, by the time I get to tracking, the mix is already half done. Thus is a fine luxury of being able to tweak any note to whatever degree works for you and the piece. This is non-existant when working with live recording.

elektro80 wrote:
many radiostations over here have their own "mastering chains" just for this type of use.. they run all music thru filters and limiters and multibandcompressors in order to make the shit sound even louder.. but also removing all that very very deep bass. Subbass is not radiofriendly.


Multiband compressors actually originated in the field of broadcast.

elektro80 wrote:
What you can do is get some CDs and LPs made by artists you like.. and throw these into your DAW.. and check out on meters and virtual scopes and whatever.. how they really work.. look for clues and tricks. there are only clear rules when it comes to certain genres.. like various strains of pop.


Analyzing contemporary CD's is more like criminal forensics than audio analysis, hypercompressed and limited audio with an RMS of like -7db, and everything-but-completely-clipped-peaks as far as the ear can see. Nasty nasty stuff they're doing to music these days.

elektro80 wrote:
When it comes to reverb.. you can use this in order to create effects.. which have noithing to do with creating more room in there.. rather to create tails here and there to make details more "detailed" etc.


In this instance I would be using a low level very short verb to "fill in" the cracks and create a homogeny across the CD in terms of atmosphere. The odds that I will actually use one in the final is very very slip, I'm just investigating the possibilities and necessities.

God I love this stuff.

Cyx

_________________
∆ Cyx ∆

"Yeah right, who's the only one here who knows secret illegal ninja moves from the government?"
-Napoleon Dynamite
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
elektro80
Site Admin


Joined: Mar 25, 2003
Posts: 21977
Location: Norway
Audio files: 14

PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2004 5:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

I was not thinking about "modern" stuff.. rather the music you love and cherish whatever its age. LPs have pretty bad dynamic range.. so you probably learn how they did what they did by listening some of those old LPs you like.

Personally i use a lot of compression and limiting and such, but I started with this for live use in order to make a better mix. It is quite possible to use compression as a part of the patch and you will figure this out if you listen to some old LPs. My favorite setup is having at least one compression chain for each and every synth. i use compression as part of the patch.. and then for controlling all those filter howls and flipflops...
There are a lot of classic synth sounds you cannot create without using some extra limiters and compressors. Also, in certain kinds of patches you MUSt have limiting/compression in order to control the signal before you route it into the next device/module/efx processor.

Anyway, this has nothing to do with mastering as such...


Very Happy

_________________
A Charity Pantomime in aid of Paranoid Schizophrenics descended into chaos yesterday when someone shouted, "He's behind you!"

MySpace
SoundCloud
Flickr
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Cyxeris



Joined: Oct 30, 2003
Posts: 1125
Location: Louisville, KY

PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2004 5:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

elektro80 wrote:
Anyway, this has nothing to do with mastering as such...


That's ok, that is a cool discussion as well.

I have to use a compressor sometimes with my Oberheim on overly resonant patches. I generally use wither Wave Hammer or Waves RComp for track compression. I've just never developed a taste for compression with my own music. I'll resort to it if EQ alone is inadequate to sole a problem. I may play more with compression as an effect on the second album.

Another thing to note is that if I have the CPU overhead available and I have a situation where detailed eq and compression work is required, I'll often just pop a multiband compressor on the track, like the C4, and the sculpt the eq and compression (or expansion or de-essing or noise reduction) all in one go. That is rare, but I have resorted to that some 3 or 4 times on this CD to get some problem parts corrected. This has helped especially in situations where specific notes are amplified around the cutoff freq of a part. I just slice that range out in the multiband and apply a different compression setting to that range than to the rest of the part. That has solved some serious problems, most notably on One Again and Becoming. I had some crazy wack out-of-control crap going on in those.

Cyx

_________________
∆ Cyx ∆

"Yeah right, who's the only one here who knows secret illegal ninja moves from the government?"
-Napoleon Dynamite
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
elektro80
Site Admin


Joined: Mar 25, 2003
Posts: 21977
Location: Norway
Audio files: 14

PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2004 6:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Cyxeris wrote:
I've just never developed a taste for compression with my own music. I'll resort to it if EQ alone is inadequate to sole a problem. I may play more with compression as an effect on the second album.


Much of the traditional "pop" music use of compression is pretty over the top. Applying heavy compression and brickwall limiting on the whole track.. all voices.. in order to max the volume.. is a bit too much.. but since this is the way to do pop.. well.. how can we complain.. we don´t make pop. These days they use the full dynamic range of the CD format for making the music LOUD.. amazing what they did on LP. I wonder.. the effective dynamic range of an LP is like 46-48dB?

_________________
A Charity Pantomime in aid of Paranoid Schizophrenics descended into chaos yesterday when someone shouted, "He's behind you!"

MySpace
SoundCloud
Flickr
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
themoors



Joined: Dec 15, 2003
Posts: 148
Location: northern england

PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2004 7:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

I t like the presets in t-racks, thats about as close as i get to mastering, I also admit to being the owner of an aural exciter.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Cyxeris



Joined: Oct 30, 2003
Posts: 1125
Location: Louisville, KY

PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2004 7:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

elektro80 wrote:
Much of the traditional "pop" music use of compression is pretty over the top. Applying heavy compression and brickwall limiting on the whole track.. all voices.. in order to max the volume.. is a bit too much.. but since this is the way to do pop.. well.. how can we complain.. we don´t make pop. These days they use the full dynamic range of the CD format for making the music LOUD.. amazing what they did on LP. I wonder.. the effective dynamic range of an LP is like 46-48dB?


Also, with pop, they use the brickwall limiting to achieve ungodly sound pressure levels at the expense of dynamics and musicality. It doesnt need to be that way, of course. I'm very comfortable with an RMS of between -13 and -11 db durring strong forte passages with my own work, and beyond that the musicality diminishes quickly.

A better way to say "These days they use the full dynamic range of the CD format for making the music LOUD" would be "These days they chush everything into the top 12 db of the dynamic range of the CD format for making the music LOUD." You know there is something wrong when "soft" intros to songs on a CD are topping your meters off at -0.5 db and up.

It's like being able to partake of special mushrooms but only being able to partake in doses of 12 grams a pop. Does nobody appreciate subtlety and depth? Contrast? Drama?

Cyx

_________________
∆ Cyx ∆

"Yeah right, who's the only one here who knows secret illegal ninja moves from the government?"
-Napoleon Dynamite
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
Cyxeris



Joined: Oct 30, 2003
Posts: 1125
Location: Louisville, KY

PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2004 7:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

themoors wrote:
I t like the presets in t-racks, thats about as close as i get to mastering, I also admit to being the owner of an aural exciter.


T-Racks is an excellent tool for the price and simplicity. Excellent. I would use it if only they would scrap this standalone-only noise and step into the plug-in age.

So that, you know, I can use it and stuff.

Cyx

_________________
∆ Cyx ∆

"Yeah right, who's the only one here who knows secret illegal ninja moves from the government?"
-Napoleon Dynamite
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
paul e.



Joined: Sep 22, 2003
Posts: 1567
Location: toronto, canada
Audio files: 2

PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2004 8:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

rock music is loud and sounds best when driven by volume..not much dynamics in rock music to begin with

the best classic rock is often the result of distortion [even distorting the mixing boards inputs] and tapesatuartion and 'maxing the vu meters' beyond 0db to get that fat signal spreading out beyond the track lanes on the tape

but today, with 0db brickwall in digital, loud rock music often ends up clipped and somewhat harsh and maxing the 'vu meteres' means 'forceful' sounding mixes- as the naturally louder signals like drums and guitar cannot 'saturate' beyond the 0db limit

but the problem now is, naturally loud and sonic sounds like heavy guitar/drums will sound limp and wimpy if you record them at a an RMS of -12db..they will lack a lot of the spunk the should have

so, what happens is most of the sounds in rock/pop music really only has a range of about -10db to 0db to operate in...making for very limited dynamics in a mix


this is the fault of the digital recording realm and not rock music per se

_________________
Spiral Recordings
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
paul e.



Joined: Sep 22, 2003
Posts: 1567
Location: toronto, canada
Audio files: 2

PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2004 8:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

a further point about vocals and compressing

ofetn compressors are used to bring up the volume and presence of a vocal track in relativity to the other sounds

if you have a 24 track rock mix, compression on the vocals will be absolutely neccessary in order to hear them

because, with all that energy generated by amplified distorted instruments, a lone voice or two will be like screaming in to the eye of a storm...and you might have to scream just to hear your self

so often compression is to give the vocals enough gain to sit up above a huge amount of loud sounds..and to increase intelligibitly of sibilants that can gets lots in dense mixes

and mosc, i know many people who can sing very very well and do not use compresors to compensate for a lack of talent, but need to use them for the above reason [especially in particularily dense mixes]

as well as guitarists who use overdrive sounds but also know how to control dynamics [john scofield comes to mind]

in fact jimi hendrix showed us all how to use distortion dymaincs . [ i.e. riding a feedback wave] so the two are not mutually exclusive

_________________
Spiral Recordings
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Cyxeris



Joined: Oct 30, 2003
Posts: 1125
Location: Louisville, KY

PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2004 8:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

sudden wrote:
this is the fault of the digital recording realm and not rock music per se


Not to disagree, per se, but I would say the problem is with the utilization of the available dynamic range. For example, when people move over to DVD-A, if they continue to persue these completely un-natural sound pressure levels, then there will be virtually no improvement in sound over CDs, as the whole advantage to the digital mediums is the range from 0db down, as opposed to noise-floor up.

What needs to happen here is an agreed upon standard for RMS levels in mastered music, so that a consistency can be achieved. Converting a pristine recording and mix into a square wave to compete in the SPL-envy game is a substantial step backwards in quality.

Cyx

_________________
∆ Cyx ∆

"Yeah right, who's the only one here who knows secret illegal ninja moves from the government?"
-Napoleon Dynamite
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
paul e.



Joined: Sep 22, 2003
Posts: 1567
Location: toronto, canada
Audio files: 2

PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2004 8:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

what i am saying is that current digital standards are not allowed to go passed 0db, but certain music *needs* to..like rock music..like it did in the analog days

which is why we are hearing so many clipped waveforms in dense rock mixes. not really as a result of spl wars..[the radio station's limiter keeps all songs the same volume mainly anyway]

dvd a will make the situation better as you will have increased headroom, perhaps allowing enough sonic space for these naturally very loud sounds to exist as loud sounds without being square waved

as for electronic music, this is not a problem generally

_________________
Spiral Recordings
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Cyxeris



Joined: Oct 30, 2003
Posts: 1125
Location: Louisville, KY

PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2004 9:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Also, anyone, do feel free to correct any of my technical points if I am in error. Thanks. Wink

Cyx

_________________
∆ Cyx ∆

"Yeah right, who's the only one here who knows secret illegal ninja moves from the government?"
-Napoleon Dynamite
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
elektro80
Site Admin


Joined: Mar 25, 2003
Posts: 21977
Location: Norway
Audio files: 14

PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2004 9:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

DVD_A ... arrrgh.... I will try to find you guys some info and opinions on this.. it is not as great as it is supposed to be.

The O dB limit.. well..

Sure.. in DAW speak this is where there are no numbers left.. and pushing the level above 0dB creates digital clipping.

Old analog gear added softclipping/saturation/artifacts when pushed close to selfcombustion. It is mainly in our own minds that we have created the idea that these artifacts means "loud".. and this can be done in the DAW too. - and without overcompression..

Compression is in itself just.. compression.. but compressors are used for adding "analog warmth" or whatever the ads say... You can use compressors in other ways too

_________________
A Charity Pantomime in aid of Paranoid Schizophrenics descended into chaos yesterday when someone shouted, "He's behind you!"

MySpace
SoundCloud
Flickr
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
paul e.



Joined: Sep 22, 2003
Posts: 1567
Location: toronto, canada
Audio files: 2

PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2004 10:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Quote:
Old analog gear added softclipping/saturation/artifacts when pushed close to selfcombustion. It is mainly in our own minds that we have created the idea that these artifacts means "loud".. and this can be done in the DAW too. -


interesting

can you outline a technique for achieving the analog style saturation effects witout hard clipping in the digital realm Question

_________________
Spiral Recordings
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
paul e.



Joined: Sep 22, 2003
Posts: 1567
Location: toronto, canada
Audio files: 2

PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2004 10:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

adding this caveat. 'without using plug ins emulating analog gear'

as these in my opinion are silly and do not work

_________________
Spiral Recordings
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Cyxeris



Joined: Oct 30, 2003
Posts: 1125
Location: Louisville, KY

PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2004 10:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

sudden wrote:
adding this caveat. 'without using plug ins emulating analog gear'

as these in my opinion are silly and do not work


Yeah, like Magneto. If anything, they are convenient, and passable, at best. The absolute best way to achieve that goal is to work in the analog domain, the real analog domain, and when you get your sound exactly as you want it in the analog, convert that to digital with your highest peaks topping out at about -1 db to -0.3 db, if you can manage that. Then maybe run that though something like the L2 with your threshhold at about -1 to -1.5 db just to top it off in the digital domain. That way, you get the sound of your hot and spicy analog saturation beyond the 0 db point, and can package that within the digital domain.

The problem would be if you then ran the signal through a brickwall limiter with a -8 db threshhold, or, even worse, 2 in a row, to CHUSH your music to be as "loud" as possible digitally.

Cyx

_________________
∆ Cyx ∆

"Yeah right, who's the only one here who knows secret illegal ninja moves from the government?"
-Napoleon Dynamite

Last edited by Cyxeris on Thu Jan 29, 2004 10:23 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
paul e.



Joined: Sep 22, 2003
Posts: 1567
Location: toronto, canada
Audio files: 2

PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2004 10:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

cyxeris

Quote:
The absolute best way to achieve that goal is to work in the analog domain, the real analog domain, and when you get your sound exactly as you want it in the analog, convert that to digital


that makes total sense.. i agree

well, maybe elektro 80 will be able point us to another way to do it in the digital domain

but otherwise, i think you are right on target

sigh...now i need 2 inch tape hehe..then an ultra good a/d to preserve that analog magic...

then we need a great daw that does not mess with the audio in the mixing stage or editing

among other things....[/quote]

_________________
Spiral Recordings

Last edited by paul e. on Thu Jan 29, 2004 10:27 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
paul e.



Joined: Sep 22, 2003
Posts: 1567
Location: toronto, canada
Audio files: 2

PostPosted: Thu Jan 29, 2004 10:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote  Mark this post and the followings unread

Quote:
the problem would be if you then ran the [analog sourced] signal through a brickwall limiter with a -8 db threshhold, or, even worse, 2 in a row, to CHUSH your music to be as "loud" as possible digitally.


also another excellent point

_________________
Spiral Recordings
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Page 1 of 5 [108 Posts]
View unread posts
View new posts in the last week
Goto page: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next
Mark the topic unread :: View previous topic :: View next topic
 Forum index » Reviews, Editorials and Commentary » Commentary and Editorials
Jump to:  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
e-m mkii

Please support our site. If you click through and buy from
our affiliate partners, we earn a small commission.


Forum with support of Syndicator RSS
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Copyright © 2003 through 2009 by electro-music.com - Conditions Of Use