Less Loudness= More Dynamic Range

Wear your heart on your sleeve with pride! A plethora of jams and collobarations and stuff...

Moderator: Capt. Black

User avatar
crowbgood1
Vintage Post Junkie
Vintage Post Junkie
Posts: 2867
meble-kuchenne.warszawa.pl
Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2008 4:19 pm
Location: New Plymouth
Has liked: 341 times
Been liked: 240 times

Less Loudness= More Dynamic Range

Post by crowbgood1 »

I have started to not worry how loud my songs come out and use less compression when mastering...(well home mastering)

It seems to sound better to me than "radio style" mastering ie: squashing the crap out of it.

A sure cure for seasickness is to sit under a tree.

User avatar
sizzlingbadger
Vintage Post Junkie
Vintage Post Junkie
Posts: 8241
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2011 7:12 am
Location: Wire Wrapper
Has liked: 1200 times
Been liked: 1398 times

Re: Less Loudness= More Dynamic Range

Post by sizzlingbadger »

Yes it does, its the one thing that drives me mad with many modern bands....
Tube amp and guitar tones straight from 1958… amazing how believable the sounds were back then, even without the modellers...

User avatar
Danger Mouse
Vintage Post Junkie
Vintage Post Junkie
Posts: 11459
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2006 3:32 pm
Location: Jafa Land
Has liked: 351 times
Been liked: 661 times

Re: Less Loudness= More Dynamic Range

Post by Danger Mouse »

sizzlingbadger wrote:Yes it does, its the one thing that drives me mad with many modern bands....
Yep, me too... don't get me started on brickwalling either...
The older I get, the more disappointed in myself I become.

HANGMAN
Ashton
Ashton
Posts: 258
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 4:39 pm
Location: Kaikohe

Re: Less Loudness= More Dynamic Range

Post by HANGMAN »

+ 1

A good example of good mastering with rock is Tool's 'Undertow' - it comes off as too quiet at first but when you turn it up it comes to life wickedly, unlike most modern rock which is super loud out the gate and simply cant get any louder...

User avatar
bender
Darth Fader
Posts: 11838
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 12:46 pm
Location: Dorkland
Has liked: 415 times
Been liked: 1010 times

Re: Less Loudness= More Dynamic Range

Post by bender »

Danger Mouse wrote:
sizzlingbadger wrote:Yes it does, its the one thing that drives me mad with many modern bands....
Yep, me too... don't get me started on brickwalling either...
The thing with brickwall limiting is that the potential destruction is relative to the input gain. If you don't use a brickwall limiter the same effect is achieved by clipping the main bus (either in the mix stage or at the mastering stage) which results in distortion far quicker than when using a limiter (relative to input gain). Neither tool is inherently bad, as long as you're not trying to make the track too loud in the first place.

I approve of the message in this thread. LLP- Less Loud Please.

Kthxbye.

User avatar
dylan
Gibson
Posts: 627
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 8:24 pm
Location: Wanganui
Has liked: 39 times
Been liked: 25 times

Re: Less Loudness= More Dynamic Range

Post by dylan »

i reckon an average of -13db is a good compromise between using all the bits available and having some dynamic range.

of course, every different program seems to come up with a different average volume for the same song...
:evil: Mids so haunting that demons took over my living room and now my guitar glows! :evil:

User avatar
bender
Darth Fader
Posts: 11838
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 12:46 pm
Location: Dorkland
Has liked: 415 times
Been liked: 1010 times

Re: Less Loudness= More Dynamic Range

Post by bender »

dylan wrote:i reckon an average of -13db is a good compromise between using all the bits available and having some dynamic range.

of course, every different program seems to come up with a different average volume for the same song...
-14dB RMS to -10dB RMS is the accepted target range for reasonable dynamic mixes. -20dB RMS is a good target to aim for if you're going to be having it professionally mastered. Mastered to -10dB RMS still sounds good without sounding smashed to f*ck.

On this topic, I need some mixes to use to work on my mastering chops if anyone is keen. Single songs are fine but an EP would be better. Not looking for any money- just need material to polish my technique on.

User avatar
Rog
The Self-Proclaimed Voice of Reason
Posts: 9258
Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2003 12:30 pm
Location: Under de mountain
Has liked: 7 times
Been liked: 57 times

Re: Less Loudness= More Dynamic Range

Post by Rog »

WTF happened to putting a portable tape recorder on a desk in front of a band at a nice echoey wooden country hall and just letting them play their song, then going whoohoo and playing the tape back to all their mates until the tape shit itself, then streaming it out of the car window until it annoyed people driving behind you? This modern shit is far too tekny, uh tequibk, uh tonkign, ah feck it, far too whatever that shit is.
He hit a chord that rocked the spinet and disappeared into the infinite ...

User avatar
Bg
Site Admin
Posts: 43187
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 12:13 am
Location: Auckland
Has liked: 2254 times
Been liked: 3873 times

Re: Less Loudness= More Dynamic Range

Post by Bg »

we moved forward into the 21st Century.... sad I know.
So, is that low alcohol or no alcohol at all? mmmm, no alcohol, do you want to try it? Noooooooooo.

User avatar
Capt. Black
Vintage Post Junkie
Vintage Post Junkie
Posts: 6510
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2005 12:39 am
Location: Valles Marineris
Has liked: 165 times
Been liked: 245 times

Less Loudness= More Dynamic Range

Post by Capt. Black »

benderissimo wrote:
dylan wrote:i reckon an average of -13db is a good compromise between using all the bits available and having some dynamic range.

of course, every different program seems to come up with a different average volume for the same song...
-14dB RMS to -10dB RMS is the accepted target range for reasonable dynamic mixes. -20dB RMS is a good target to aim for if you're going to be having it professionally mastered. Mastered to -10dB RMS still sounds good without sounding smashed to f*ck.

On this topic, I need some mixes to use to work on my mastering chops if anyone is keen. Single songs are fine but an EP would be better. Not looking for any money- just need material to polish my technique on.
Will be in touch.

User avatar
Capt. Black
Vintage Post Junkie
Vintage Post Junkie
Posts: 6510
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2005 12:39 am
Location: Valles Marineris
Has liked: 165 times
Been liked: 245 times

Less Loudness= More Dynamic Range

Post by Capt. Black »

Ps. Why anyone masters for radio these days is beyond me.....


....Unless you seriously have a shot at AirPlay.....

..... In which case, re-master for radio. No?

User avatar
badmotor
Vintage Post Junkie
Vintage Post Junkie
Posts: 2902
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2007 12:55 pm
Location: Auckland

Re: Less Loudness= More Dynamic Range

Post by badmotor »

Na, they master for iPod... to compete with the radio tracks already on the iPod.
Hot_Grits wrote:Someone should print this thread out and hang it in an art gallery.

User avatar
Capt. Black
Vintage Post Junkie
Vintage Post Junkie
Posts: 6510
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2005 12:39 am
Location: Valles Marineris
Has liked: 165 times
Been liked: 245 times

Re: Less Loudness= More Dynamic Range

Post by Capt. Black »

But iPod has sound check.

Oh well, I like to try to mix for impact anyways...

User avatar
sizzlingbadger
Vintage Post Junkie
Vintage Post Junkie
Posts: 8241
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2011 7:12 am
Location: Wire Wrapper
Has liked: 1200 times
Been liked: 1398 times

Re: Less Loudness= More Dynamic Range

Post by sizzlingbadger »

iPod soundcheck is just an auto volume setting, it does nothing for the dynamic range or compression of the recording as I understand it.
Tube amp and guitar tones straight from 1958… amazing how believable the sounds were back then, even without the modellers...

User avatar
Capt. Black
Vintage Post Junkie
Vintage Post Junkie
Posts: 6510
Joined: Sat Dec 03, 2005 12:39 am
Location: Valles Marineris
Has liked: 165 times
Been liked: 245 times

Less Loudness= More Dynamic Range

Post by Capt. Black »

Yes correct. It simply checks the tracks and reduces the loudest to match the quietest.

Much like a sound check. ;)

Post Reply