Voxengo SPAN: Reliable as an RMS reader? Also differing measurements

[Mm1066]

So I mainly use it as a frequency analyser but I notice that it also has an RMS measurer as well. What I'm wondering is, if it is reliable to use for this type of measurement. There are different options for reading it on it (K-10 etc), and each give fairly different readings which makes me a bit confused with it. I use just the default setting.

Also, this is a bit unrelated but with iTunes, it gives you a volume reading in the 'Get Info' of songs or albums. I'm finding it difficult to decipher what these values are measured in. I was thinking RMS, but from what I've been reading -8 RMS is more squashed and therefore louder than say -12, but if I play two songs next to each other with these values, -12 is louder and more fatiguing whilst -8 is quieter and more dynamic.

Sorry if this is noob central btw!



Edit: Span issue resolved. The iTunes thing is bugging me though, so where are the numbers coming from? Someone must know something.

 

[Mago]

never used iTunes, so I dunno about that, but I use SPAN as roughly guideline for the loudness, but at the end I like to go with the ear, check back with other productions to see if I'm in the reasonable ballpark

 

[Plankis]

http://www.voxengo.com/files/userguides/VoxengoSPAN_en.pdf/getbyname/Voxengo SPAN User Guide en.pdf

Use the DBFS if you want ordinary metering.

 

[Mm1066]

Bump for any iTunes info?

 

[Taurean]

Well RMS is still a numerical value. Your perception of what is loud is based on the psychoacoustics of hearing and the complexity of what makes a sound let alone an entire mix. Think of it this way, a bad mix and/or poorly mastered squashed up to -8 RMS may sound wimpy and lifeless compared to something measuring lower but sounding better, louder with more impact. I don't use iTunes but in general if it is referring to RMS the above surely could explain it. One way to settle it is to find other material to compare. If it's always contradicting with other material value wise, like what you've experienced, then chances are their values mean something else.

 

[Mm1066]

Well RMS is still a numerical value. Your perception of what is loud is based on the psychoacoustics of hearing and the complexity of what makes a sound let alone an entire mix. Think of it this way, a bad mix and/or poorly mastered squashed up to -8 RMS may sound wimpy and lifeless compared to something measuring lower but sounding better, louder with more impact. I don't use iTunes but in general if it is referring to RMS the above surely could explain it. One way to settle it is to find other material to compare. If it's always contradicting with other material value wise, like what you've experienced, then chances are their values mean something else.

Great info, thanks! I do compare, but what I find strange is that it might be a backwards type measurement, with crossover points. Sneap masters at -10 usually, and when I check the info on the stuff he has done it reads -10, but then -8 should technically be more squashed, but it's not in iTunes, it's the opposite.

 

[Mm1066]

Ok, so I figured it out. The volume measurements don't read an RMS value, the previous ideas I had have just been coincidental. They are there to show how much dB needs to be reduced from the songs in order to normalise the volume across all the songs that are there.