It's peaking at average of -8 RMS. It's loud, but not louder than any other commercial cd. Every recent mp3 looks as brickwalled as that in my DAW.
Ordered 300 cd:s and the manufacturer fucked up the track order
- Thread starter Ronixis
- Start date
It's peaking at average of -8 RMS. It's loud, but not louder than any other commercial cd. Every recent mp3 looks as brickwalled as that in my DAW.
+1
-8dbrms is a little too squashed for my tastes! I dont think I would master anything louder than -9, and I usually dont push it any further than -10
getting rms doesnt always mean brickwalling the shit out of your mix either.
kev
Im guybrush threepwood
I don't quite get this waveform bashing. I personally judge audio by hearing it, rather than looking a screenshot of it.
This is what the waveform looks like when compared to a song from Children Of Bodom record Are You Dead Yet
It's the same brickwalled stuff you hear everywhere.
...and I agree it's loud. It's too loud for my personal taste too, but this is a freely distributed promo release to get some attention online. 90% of people will listen to the music through a flash player with shitty computer speakers. It's not meant to be the most dynamic hifi-release of the year.
This is what the waveform looks like when compared to a song from Children Of Bodom record Are You Dead Yet
It's the same brickwalled stuff you hear everywhere.
...and I agree it's loud. It's too loud for my personal taste too, but this is a freely distributed promo release to get some attention online. 90% of people will listen to the music through a flash player with shitty computer speakers. It's not meant to be the most dynamic hifi-release of the year.
kev
Im guybrush threepwood
kaomao
Member
Luckly enough I had positive experiences with ebay shops from Naples lol
Once I bought a power supply for one of my guitar pedals and they even gave me one for free, they wrote "with pleasure we will include another power supply at no extra cost"
I guess it was because those power supply were too cheap and broke easily lol
::XeS::
Member
Uladyne
Greg
I'm working on a "visual audio" project, where all the song's waveforms produce cool images when viewed. Unfortunately all I've been able to produce so far are Zeppelins and Penises.
I don't quite get this waveform bashing. I personally judge audio by hearing it, rather than looking a screenshot of it.
This is what the waveform looks like when compared to a song from Children Of Bodom record Are You Dead Yet
It's the same brickwalled stuff you hear everywhere.
...and I agree it's loud. It's too loud for my personal taste too, but this is a freely distributed promo release to get some attention online. 90% of people will listen to the music through a flash player with shitty computer speakers. It's not meant to be the most dynamic hifi-release of the year.
Its not your fault all the tight pants wearing scene kids want it loud lol I wish there was a single individual I could balme for that
Dude, I don't think the scene kids are listening to AYDY 
(and I happen to fucking love that album, despite all the hate it gets from Bodom fans 
)
(and I happen to fucking love that album, despite all the hate it gets from Bodom fans )
gabriel g.
Member
Just checked the waveforms thoroughly. The first is the one on the cd and the second is the wave file I sent to him.
I'm a bit afraid, that is this company even capable of doing the product I want. It amazes me that there are people in the industry that are this incompetent and still making a living out of it.
same thing happened to me with our first DIY release.
So fucked up. Now you have super compressed songs (-8RMS) on your CD but just turned down (-12RMS) so the sound is the same, but without the volume power
In my situation I didnt have any proof. I only sended them the CD, and kept the .wav files.
They told me that the glass master was identical to the CD I send them.
I CALL BULLSHIT
But I didnt had any proof so we sold the CD´s.
Just checked the waveforms thoroughly. The first is the one on the cd and the second is the wave file I sent to him.
I'm a bit afraid, that is this company even capable of doing the product I want. It amazes me that there are people in the industry that are this incompetent and still making a living out of it.
oh my god, looks like he jsut mormalized the
tracks before burning...it was cheap for a reason.
::XeS::
Member
tarnationsauce2
Member
- Apr 21, 2007
- 116
- 1
- 16
I see failures on both ends here.
The master you sent him was inadequate. Sending .wav files with file names is something I have never done, and would never do.
You need a "Master CD" to send. Not just "mastered" songs. I prefer DDP2.0 or if they cannot support DDP2.0 just an audio CDR with all fades, track pauses, indexes, ISRC codes, dithering, etc exactly how you want the master to be. DDP2.0 has less possibility of data corruption as compared to audio CD master. Audio CD has no sort of error correction, so make sure to use a good quality CD and burner. Also a detailed PQ sheet with all the previously mentioned info as well as contact info so the manufacturer can contact you should any problems arise.
Also mention on the PQ sheet for them to not to apply dither, or any sort of normalization, or in any way tamper with the data. If they find your master unsuitable for any reason (and they should not), they will need to explain the issue and have you correct it, not them. They replicate, not master.
Oh and don't worry about the RMS or Peak levels of what you send for replication. That should not matter to them one bit. Although it sounds like maybe they just sent you duplicates maybe, that is usually the cheapest.
The master you sent him was inadequate. Sending .wav files with file names is something I have never done, and would never do.
You need a "Master CD" to send. Not just "mastered" songs. I prefer DDP2.0 or if they cannot support DDP2.0 just an audio CDR with all fades, track pauses, indexes, ISRC codes, dithering, etc exactly how you want the master to be. DDP2.0 has less possibility of data corruption as compared to audio CD master. Audio CD has no sort of error correction, so make sure to use a good quality CD and burner. Also a detailed PQ sheet with all the previously mentioned info as well as contact info so the manufacturer can contact you should any problems arise.
Also mention on the PQ sheet for them to not to apply dither, or any sort of normalization, or in any way tamper with the data. If they find your master unsuitable for any reason (and they should not), they will need to explain the issue and have you correct it, not them. They replicate, not master.
Oh and don't worry about the RMS or Peak levels of what you send for replication. That should not matter to them one bit. Although it sounds like maybe they just sent you duplicates maybe, that is usually the cheapest.
Jarkko Mattheiszen
The FU guy.
Full refund right fucking now, then take your business elsewhere and provide a proper master CD to be duplicated. IMO the provider you used already proved they can't handle their craft.
Trevoire520
Member
Sorry to go a bit off topic here, but what software is everyone using for doing thier master cd's with pauses, IRSC codes etc? Is there something free out there that can do this?
Similar threads
