Problem with mastering and rms levels

[brette344]

so recently ive recorded this band and now trying to get a the master "loud as hell" as in their terms. the master i have honestly doesnt sound to great to me compared to bands i listen to. ive searched on here and everywhere and have got alot of tips but im having a problem with RMS and perceived loudness. im working with t-racks meter and what im getting as the readings is about -9rms and for perceived loudness only about -13rms. is there a reason for this? heres the master so you can hear it at least. oh and my master chain is api compressor with only between 1 and 2 db of gain reduction, tracks clipper, c4 multiband, tracks limiter, and then another clipper.

https://dl.dropbox.com/u/3175304/bounce for ultimate production tips.mp3

 

[ahjteam]

make a better mix and it's easier to master But yeah, I usually aim for -11 to -10dB RMS, while the mix without master is about -15dB RMS. Beyond that it just takes all the life away from the mix.

 

[brette344]

ok cool thanks but do you know the different readings im getting from the -9rms and the perceived loudness of -13rms. like i dont get why theres a difference because if it was actually -9 rms then id be set but i listened to other music compared to mine and im guessing mine is actually -13rms.

 

[arv_foh]

I find it pretty easy to get really loud mixes with ozone loudness maximizer

 

[laszlozsolt82]

I find it pretty easy to get really loud mixes with ozone loudness maximizer

+1 for Ozone loudness maximizer!

 

[D20]

I was using Ozone, but now i use Voxengo Elephant. It's great IMO!!!

 

[pikachu69]

the frequency range in your mix needs to be well balanced to achieve overall loudness. This is what the mixing phase is for. If it is not balanced at mix down then a mastering engineer will have to re sculpt the eq curve to make it more nominally flat, this will change the overall sound, of course and will not be perceived as a transparent master.

For example: if your bass region has significant amounts of energy compared to say, the mid range, most of the processing you are applying will be first applied to the most predominant frequency range ie, the bass frequencies. If, you managed to push it far enough, eventually the mid range will get some control but the transients from the snare and kick will be gone forever and it will end up sounding like its being sucked through a tube at warp speed.

If your mix is well balanced both in frequency and dynamic content then nothing more than a little bit of compression, limiting and stereo width adjustment should be necessary to achieve a master with loudness levels to make any one happy.

To me (and I may be wrong here but..) I feel the difference between RMS and perceived loudness helps to pin point problems in a mix. If the numbers do not match then some where in your mix there are frequencies out side of a humans nominal hearing range 'soaking up' your RMS. We (humans) hear certain mid range frequencies more predominantly than other frequencies so our ears are more in tune to the sound of other humans voices so we can communicate more effectively from greater distances. What this means is other frequencies such as treble and bass are harder to hear therefore harder to judge their true RMS by ear. Until you can it is worth using something like Waves Spectrum analyzer on your master bus to keep an eye on things. If your mix reads a high RMS but sounds quite there will be too much extreme low end or low mids in your mix.

 

[dale_a_smith]

the frequency range in your mix needs to be well balanced to achieve overall loudness. This is what the mixing phase is for. If it is not balanced at mix down then a mastering engineer will have to re sculpt the eq curve to make it more nominally flat, this will change the overall sound, of course and will not be perceived as a transparent master.

For example: if your bass region has significant amounts of energy compared to say, the mid range, most of the processing you are applying will be first applied to the most predominant frequency range ie, the bass frequencies. If, you managed to push it far enough, eventually the mid range will get some control but the transients from the snare and kick will be gone forever and it will end up sounding like its being sucked through a tube at warp speed.

If your mix is well balanced both in frequency and dynamic content then nothing more than a little bit of compression, limiting and stereo width adjustment should be necessary to achieve a master with loudness levels to make any one happy.

To me (and I may be wrong here but..) I feel the difference between RMS and perceived loudness helps to pin point problems in a mix. If the numbers do not match then some where in your mix there are frequencies out side of a humans nominal hearing range 'soaking up' your RMS. We (humans) hear certain mid range frequencies more predominantly than other frequencies so our ears are more in tune to the sound of other humans voices so we can communicate more effectively from greater distances. What this means is other frequencies such as treble and bass are harder to hear therefore harder to judge their true RMS by ear. Until you can it is worth using something like Waves Spectrum analyzer on your master bus to keep an eye on things. If your mix reads a high RMS but sounds quite there will be too much extreme low end or low mids in your mix.

+1. If your nailing it to the floor, hitting 0db, and its still on the quiet side, its probably excessive bass or scooped mids.. you can't master that shit out, cos you'll lose the Kick and bass guitar. check they have HPF'd everything correctly..

 

[Jaymz]

Don't concentrate on figures, go for a happy medium between "volume" and dynamics.

 

[pikachu69]

Don't concentrate on figures, go for a happy medium between "volume" and dynamics.

It is comments like that and, 'just use your ears' that are hard for a noob to swallow as they normally don't make too much sense.
To me it is also like saying a guitar player doesn't need to learn scales, just muck around and use your ears.
Sure this works, after years of wasted mucking around, but you approach will still not be consistent enough to be rewarding let alone get you to a professional level.
I honestly believe that if I did not spend the time looking and facts and figures and graphs and RMS levels blah blah blah I would not have the understanding of how important it all is. I could see what needed to be fixed well before I could hear it, and now that I can hear it I understand the whole picture and I have a better chance of mixing more consistently and with a faster turn around time too.

I say do all you can to learn what your mixes look like in graphs, RMS levels ETC compared to mixes you love and see for yourself what the difference is and see if you can fix it. You will learn more than you thought possible. Once you can hear it, you will no longer need to look but it will get you to this point faster than just guessing.

 

[Jaymz]

It is comments like that and, 'just use your ears' that are hard for a noob to swallow as they normally don't make too much sense.
To me it is also like saying a guitar player doesn't need to learn scales, just muck around and use your ears.
Sure this works, after years of wasted mucking around, but you approach will still not be consistent enough to be rewarding let alone get you to a professional level.
I honestly believe that if I did not spend the time looking and facts and figures and graphs and RMS levels blah blah blah I would not have the understanding of how important it all is. I could see what needed to be fixed well before I could hear it, and now that I can hear it I understand the whole picture and I have a better chance of mixing more consistently and with a faster turn around time too.

I say do all you can to learn what your mixes look like in graphs, RMS levels ETC compared to mixes you love and see for yourself what the difference is and see if you can fix it. You will learn more than you thought possible.

True though isnt it.

To me after reading and applying all the RMS stuff at "whats commercial" I quickly said fuck it and did it all by ear. I have no idea what RMS half my mixes are, but at the end of the day unless your mixing for a label of which you HAVE to appease with a -10RMS mix then you shouldn't loose sleep over getting the loudest...or should I say most "smashed" mix possible.
Just post up the loudness war thread and video for the "noob" and im sure it will start to become clear that your just going to end up slamming the balls out of your music if you don't have a balanced mix to start with.

Theres so many fundermental variables with getting a certain RMS value...

I say it with the intent of help, not as the easy & most obvious answer.

 

[brette344]

thank you to everyone who got back to me the info you posted is great!

I find it pretty easy to get really loud mixes with ozone loudness maximizer

question to that, how are you using your ozone mazimizer? do you use intelligent, brickwall, or soft.

 

[arv_foh]

thank you to everyone who got back to me the info you posted is great!





question to that, how are you using your ozone mazimizer? do you use intelligent, brickwall, or soft.

intelligent
character: very fast or clip

 

[gabriel g.]

I realy like ozone in combination with softsaturaion.
I first use metric halo softsat to get in the ballpark (around -16-12rms)
Then I use Ozone 4 in intelligent 2, in very fast (0.5) to get in the industry level.
But I never push a mix for the loudness. I only go so far where the mix still sounds good, but has comparable levels.

A well balanced mix gets it loudness very easy. If the mix sucks you will never get it loud and transparent....

 

[paladin shredder]

just mix though gclip on your master bus with 8-10 db of gain boost, nothing else on the master bus, and a/b your track back and forth between a mix you like. keep making changes till it's pretty close or sounds good to you.

btw, i'd cut some 1k out of your overheads.