Compresser/Limiters?

[Avatar74]

Hold on, I thought you were advising mixing in 16 bit? Have I misunderstood?

I'm not advocating mixing in 16-bit. I'm advocating not keeping your signals too hot for a downmix and master to a 16-bit listening format (e.g. Compact Disc).

Mixing in a higher resolution is essential, as is recording in a higher resolution... but do so while keeping the limitations of the final format in mind. e.g. You'll still want to implement a 20kHz lowpass filter for anti-aliasing. You'll still want to avoid recording signals so hot that their amplitude values exceed the dynamic range of 16-bit, even if you're recording in 24-bit.

But by all means record at 24-bit and mix in 32-bit floating to take advantage of high resolution DSP effects.

 

[Tarkovsky]

Ah. Thanks for the clarification.

 

[manosaurus]

I don't consider mixes like Fall Out Boy to be technnically proficient in the least.

I am not a fan of this band. It is one thing that came to mind. BUT, there is no arguing that a song from this band will kick the sonic ass of some low volume mix. In terms of pure sound it is ALWAYS going to sound to the average listener bigger and louder which is often equated with "better" in the mind of people who don't give a **** about the amazing chord change at 1:35 that you spent you spent 5 hours mixing and automating.

What I am saying is that the answer is always in the middle. And this is not going to be any exception. Fall Out Boy might be over the top sonically and Cotton Mather (or whoever) might be an audiophiles mixing dream but somewhere in the middle is going to be the optimum place to reach in order to have a mix with the most immediate sonic impact as far as audience.

I think that I sould know how to do things both ways. I want to try recording with really hot levels. The best sounding recordings (ask and you shall recieve) I have done, well that I think have the biggest impact on my tiny audience, were recorded very hot and sound loud but I can never quite achieve that "the real thing" quality because of pain-in-the-ass clipping. This could be facilitated with some device. I don't know what it is.

So...................

I respect everyone's views here. Really. But I want to know both ways and be proficiant at both extremes.

 

[zimv20]

The best sounding recordings (ask and you shall recieve) I have done, well that I think have the biggest impact on my tiny audience, were recorded very hot and sound loud but I can never quite achieve that "the real thing" quality because of pain-in-the-ass clipping.

it's interesting that you feel that way. are these productions which have been mastered, professionally or otherwise? if not, and you're comparing a loud mix to a quiet one, generally people will prefer the louder one (hence the loudness wars).

i still maintain that the job of loudening lies with the mastering engineer, not with the tracking or mix engineer.

 

[Tarkovsky]

What about plugins? If you record it quiet and then compress it into a hacksaw later won't you get the same effect but with the transients?

I've found that my pre sounds better at levels than cook my interface - so i've started to use the -10db switch on my mics.

 

[theSeaHawk]

viewing waveforms on a Mac

there are a lot of theories why modern music, when viewed as a waveform, is basically a rectangle. in addition to the loudness wars, i think a lot of it has to do with keeping a song audible in a wide variety of listening environments: in the car with the window down, piped into a store or restaurant, as a bed under video, fighting street noise when played from an ipod. with some older material, there are times where the quieter parts just disappear. i guess they figure it's too much trouble for us to reach for a volume knob

Listen to some of the better recordings of the 1970's and 1980's with sound engineers who knew what they were doing... The process of manipulating the spatial and dynamic characteristics of the overall mix to produce a superb listening experience is referred to as "sweetening". Not sure if you've heard this expression... but sweetening is almost a lost art these days.

Thanks for these posts, I know I'm in the right thread to ask this:

I'd like to be able to examine the waveforms of CDs of classic rock mastered and issued in the 80s (like early Atlantic pressings of Genesis and Led Zeppelin mastered by Barry Diament) and compare them to the brickwalled "remasters" done later. Over at the Steve Hoffman forums members who use PCs use EAC to provide screenshots of waveforms like this, but my question for you is which Mac program(s) would let me rip tracks and then view the audio as waveforms?

Example below: the left channel of the 1973 Genesis song 'Cinema Show' from, top to bottom:
Virgin/Charisma CD - ca. 1984
Definitive Edition - 1994
Platinum Edition - 2005
Mail On Sunday sampler CD (the mastering for the forthcoming 1970-75 boxset) - 2008