The DijonStock Digital Home Recording Support Forum

*** USER REGISTRATION DISABLED! FOR ACCESS TO THE BOARD, MAIL TO registration AT dijonstock DOT com. THANK YOU ***
It is currently Thu Apr 19, 2018 1:56 pm

All times are UTC + 1 hour [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 12 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri May 09, 2014 2:59 am 
Offline
Tinhorn

Joined: Fri Mar 22, 2013 3:33 pm
Posts: 238
Favourite food: Jägerschnitzel
Machine type: AW16G
Hey Guys,

Dang, I miss the File Exchange function. I would like to share some recordings, but I don't use a third party music file site like Soundclick.

So I've finished tracking a bunch of tunes, and I keep filling up the hard drive of the G. I've optimized and backed up some very old stuff, but I have 20-some tunes in various stages of completion and need to finalize, back up, and then delete some stuff from the G. Burning CDs of various mixes and various tunes is a snap on the G itself, but once those .wav files have been backed up and deleted, is it practical to assemble playing CDs of various CDA files on the PC? I haven't experimented yet; does anyone do this with their aw16g tunes?

Re: the mastering library, I've only tried Soft Comp so far, and I'm not sure that I like the result, although it does make my -6db mixes a little louder. I'm not concerned about achieving commercial CD volume, but I would like to standardize the levels of the tunes that I'll put on this CD collection.

Finally, I'd like to shake my head in wonderment about the bizarre posts that I see in some of the sections, mostly in Related Equipment. I realize these are perpetrated by the bots that Robbie fights, but it's almost as if these messages emanate from deep within the earth itself, perhaps from one of those buried Aztec pyramids. What on earth has caused these aliens to come to life and start beaming out their demented communications: cheese . . . cheese . . . cheese . . . cheddar . . . chartreuse spandex leotards - €6.95 . . . cheese . . .

Wow, that's pretty freaky, Robbie - type in "chee(s)e", and it renders "the most wonderful stuff on the planet". "Ched-dar" yields "solidified diesel". Those mummified aliens are real, I tell ya - this is proof! :-k

Randy

_________________
Y me preguntan por qué bebo.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 09, 2014 1:37 pm 
Offline
Robbie The Botkiller
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jun 19, 2004 12:46 pm
Posts: 5073
Location: Netherlands
Favourite food: Ria's cheesecake
Machine type: AW16G
Heya Randy,

You should be able to access the file exchange section, open a new topic and attach a file.

http://forum.dijonstock.com/viewforum.php?f=84

If it doesn't work, let me know!

Chee(r)se

_________________

Don't judge the coffee by its cup.
The proof of the cheese is in the eating


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat May 10, 2014 7:04 pm 
Offline
Marker Magician
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 4:20 pm
Posts: 3421
Machine type: AW2400
if you are going to assemble on the PC is is best you have copies of the final mix on your PC's hard Drive. I would transfer these as .wav files from the G, rather than using CDA files but I don't think that is a big deal really. You will need audio editing software on your PC. Audacity is free and functional.

These mixes will (may) have differing average volume levels (measured using the RMS unit when you analyze the file using audio editing software). If you have been mixing with peaks to -6 then they may be very quiet (-25 dB RMS would be typical). You would want to get as much as +10 dB increase ( - 15 RMS is close to much produced music, but it depends on the production. You can possibly get more volume by simply normalizing the files, but if there are spikes above your -6 threshold (even a single one), then normalizing will only get you the difference between the spike and 0 dB. There are usually spikes; Unless your performance is very controlled and/or the music has a narrow dynamic range. So Normalizing does not always do the trick, and definitely can not be used to match levels efficiently across a broad range of mixes, as some songs have spikes, and some spikes may already hit 0 dB and so normalizing those files would not accomplish anything, leaving them as they were. As amateurs our mixes generally are apt to be all of the map as we experiment and develop

You can get a Plugin for your editor. It will have the the word limiter in its title. A mastering limiter is what you will want, and there are such plugins available. Rather than continue here on this particular topic, you could Private Message me and I could perhaps help you get started on this route.

Another option to accomplish track leveling this is to stay in the G environment. A stereo mix can be moved to a pair of tracks. This mix can then be further processed by re-recording it, using the effects inserted in the stereo channel chain and the EQ. The mastering library on the G is a good place to start to understand the settings and what they will do.

Your message did not tell how/when you had used the Mastering Library - was it during a "final" mix, or had you first transferred your "final " to a stereo pair as suggested above, and then applied the mastering library???

Thinking about it there is no reason to think that a mix on a CD, whose files are backed up and no longer exist on the G, could not be re-imported into a new song and then "mastered".

PM me if you would like to ask specific questions privately, or continue the conversation here. Level matching is very important to the overall "listenability" of a compiled cd and so is a worthwhile topic about which to learn.

_________________
Byron


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 11, 2014 3:41 pm 
Offline
Tinhorn

Joined: Fri Mar 22, 2013 3:33 pm
Posts: 238
Favourite food: Jägerschnitzel
Machine type: AW16G
Hi Byron,

I'm using the technique I saw posted here for mastering: I do my final mixdown to the stereo track, edit/copy the stereo track to an unused stereo virtual track, and then mix that stereo pair back to the stereo track with the Soft Comp mastering preset engaged.

I would prefer to do my compilation directly on the G, but the hard drive space limit is making me consider the necessity of compiling on the PC. I'll send you a PM with more detail and questions.

Thanks, Randy

_________________
Y me preguntan por qué bebo.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 11, 2014 3:56 pm 
Offline
Ranch Hand
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 5:39 pm
Posts: 1141
Machine type: AW4416
I have`nt tried mixing a stereo track with the same stereo track in mastering, I have a feeling you may have problems with phase doing it that way, I suppose it`s not unlike parallel compression or New York compression as some call it, two tracks of the same content, compress one to death and mix in the other without compression.
I`d be interested to hear the outcome should you try it.
Good luck.

T.

_________________
http://tmacstudio.wix.com/tmac

http://www.soundcloud.com/t-mac-12

http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCmCjAzN ... ture=watch

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1GETYJUJKu0

https://www.reverbnation.com/tmac


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun May 11, 2014 6:06 pm 
Offline
Marker Magician
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 4:20 pm
Posts: 3421
Machine type: AW2400
urbando1 wrote:
Hi Byron,

I'm using the technique I saw posted here for mastering: I do my final mixdown to the stereo track, edit/copy the stereo track to an unused stereo virtual track, and then mix that stereo pair back to the stereo track with the Soft Comp mastering preset engaged.

I would prefer to do my compilation directly on the G, but the hard drive space limit is making me consider the necessity of compiling on the PC. I'll send you a PM with more detail and questions.

Thanks, Randy


What you describe is definitely a workflow that will work to bump the volume levels up a bit, if I understand you correctly. You are moving the mixdown back to a paired track, and then rerecording the mix, processing it as you go. Your description was/is a bit confusing when you said you copy back to an "unused stereo virtual track" I think T. Mac thought you were describing mixing two identical stereo tracks, one processed, the other not. Hence his thought that there may be phasing (chorusing) issues. But his description of "New York", parallel compression sounds interesting too. I have used such technique with individual tracks within a mix, but never on a "complete (final)" mix. I am going to give that a go.

But if you are working as I described, back to the stereo track (rather than mixing two stereo tracks), then I would suggest you apply the Soft Comp Mastering Library and then go to the individual processing screens for the stereo track and see what the parameters look like. (EQ, DYN and check out the EFF too) The Mastering Library presets might adjust any of these three,(usually just the EQ and Dyn). Compare these preset parameters in various ways. Soft Comp, Hard Comp, Vital etc. Listen to your material run back through each of these and then start tweeking. You will find that the very wide EQ settings and where they are centered can have great influence, even though there is seemingly very little gain and/or cut. The threshold of the DYN presets often need adjustment as your material may be louder or softer than was envisioned by the creator of the preset. Aim to see the the compressor's meter indicate about 3 dB of compression and set the makeup gain to boost the overall volume. All the while keeping the eye on the output meter and your ear on the product you are influencing. You may be pleased with what you hear, and your tweeks may bring further satisfaction (or you may find yourself waltzing down the wrong path too). Ear fatigue and the understanding that louder is not always better (despite first impression) need be kept in mind. rest is important before making final decisions.

All this said, if you are trying to push the track up quite a bit, the G has limitations, largely depending on characteristics of your final mix, which in turn are products of your tracking and processing of the individual components. Those spikes, of which I spoke in an earlier message, can be very difficult to control on the G as the DYN setting seem not establish a "brickwall", beyond which no samples sneak. Software editing on you computer, using "mastering" or "brickwall" limiter plugins will/may place a tighter grip if they are configured effectively.

Fiddle with these techniques as you become very familiar with the track you are using for comparison. Once you begin to hear the subtle nuance, >> push the limit, pull it back, tweek, listen, rest >> go back and listen to what you started with. Over and over. Do the same with another mix. You will gain understanding and confidence in the techniques you develop and these then will become your "go to" steps as you polish up your tracks, aiming for similar overall average (RMS) volumes, mix to mix. This is where this whole thread was heading, based upon your original topic.

Don't be afraid to invest the time needed to build confidence in your process.

_________________
Byron


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 12, 2014 2:34 am 
Offline
Tinhorn

Joined: Fri Mar 22, 2013 3:33 pm
Posts: 238
Favourite food: Jägerschnitzel
Machine type: AW16G
Dang, Byron, I was sure that you were going to reveal the location of the Instant Karma button on sub-screen 26 of the greyhound bus.

Yes, I apologize for muddying the waters; I was indeed just moving the mixdown back to a paired track, and then rerecording the mix, applying a mastering preset from the library on the re-record. You are absolutely right, of course; the only way to understand the parameters in these presets is to apply them, one at a time, and listen to the results. Ditto with editing the parameters.

I am biased against trying most of the mastering presets because of horrible reviews here at Dijonstock, but I guess that they are all worthy of being auditioned.

I don't quite understand why you would want to EQ the entire mix while mastering, as normally everyone seems to apply corrective EQ during the mixdown prior to mastering. For instance, I found that using Soft Comp, with it's EQ adjustment, made some of the high end become a little harsh to the ears. Is there some kind of different auditory effect caused by EQing the whole mix, as opposed to EQing the individual tracks to play nicely with each other? Yes, I know; try it and see what happens.

Always something new to learn . . .

Cheers, Randy

_________________
Y me preguntan por qué bebo.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 12, 2014 11:28 am 
Offline
Ranch Hand
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 5:39 pm
Posts: 1141
Machine type: AW4416
Sorry for the misunderstanding Byron, I thought the discussion was about mixing down the stereo file, then sending it back in to be blended in with the stereo mix again, that would`nt be good :) .
If I can just say a couple of things while your both on the subject.
Firstly the better you can get your mix sounding before mastering the better.
The mastering eq is only there (once again imo) to maybe raise or lower a shelf slightly, to try to balance it out, if there`s any corrective eq to be done it`s always best to go back to the mix and do it there.
It`s also best to do a HF and LF eq cut before the compressor so the compressor is`nt working on frequencies that are`nt going to be in the mix, gives a more natural sound as it`s not having to work as hard.
The other thing is, there`s normally a saturation of some sort at the mastering stage, not a lot just a little which gives the whole mix an excellent lift, I should also say it`s not unusual to have more than one compressor at the mastering stage, I`ve seen some that have used three, the theory is if you need to reduce 6db of peaks, it`s better to have two comps reducing 3db each or three reducing 2db each, unless of course the sound your after is the over compressed sound.
Ok sorry for the interuption guy`s.

T.

_________________
http://tmacstudio.wix.com/tmac

http://www.soundcloud.com/t-mac-12

http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCmCjAzN ... ture=watch

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1GETYJUJKu0

https://www.reverbnation.com/tmac


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 12, 2014 1:22 pm 
Offline
Tinhorn

Joined: Fri Mar 22, 2013 3:33 pm
Posts: 238
Favourite food: Jägerschnitzel
Machine type: AW16G
Hi T.,

It`s also best to do a HF and LF eq cut before the compressor so the compressor is`nt working on frequencies that are`nt going to be in the mix, gives a more natural sound as it`s not having to work as hard.


In the g, is EQ always applied pre-compression? Or do I have to do something to ensure that the HPF and LPF happens before the signal is compressed? Just so that I understand, do you think it is advisable to set a hi-pass cut and a low-pass cut for the entire mix before compression?

As stated above, I am copying my mix to a stereo pair and then mastering that pair back to the stereo track. So do I set the HPF and LPF on my mastering pass (along with compression from the g's Mastering Library)?

Thanks, Randy

_________________
Y me preguntan por qué bebo.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 12, 2014 1:39 pm 
Offline
Marker Magician
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 4:20 pm
Posts: 3421
Machine type: AW2400
T.Mac. wrote:
If I can just say a couple of things while your both on the subject.
Firstly the better you can get your mix sounding before mastering the better.
The mastering eq is only there (once again imo) to maybe raise or lower a shelf slightly, to try to balance it out, if there`s any corrective eq to be done it`s always best to go back to the mix and do it there.
It`s also best to do a HF and LF eq cut before the compressor so the compressor is`nt working on frequencies that are`nt going to be in the mix, gives a more natural sound as it`s not having to work as hard.
The other thing is, there`s normally a saturation of some sort at the mastering stage, not a lot just a little which gives the whole mix an excellent lift, I should also say it`s not unusual to have more than one compressor at the mastering stage, I`ve seen some that have used three, the theory is if you need to reduce 6db of peaks, it`s better to have two comps reducing 3db each or three reducing 2db each, unless of course the sound your after is the over compressed sound.


T.


No interruption. You are making the best points. Agreement on all points. I would especially note the value in the HPF at the "polishing stage". And learning to "hear" the quality you have referred to as "a saturation point of some sort" being appropriate (to the material) >> that is important too.

In line compressors can get the job done, as you suggest. Multiband compression can be useful too.

A VERY VERY gentle verb wash sometimes can help "define" the sense space for a mix.

As you suggested, one must be careful with the EQ, but the HPF is part of that aspect too, so EQ is not "bad". For e.g. A very gentle, wide cut in the low mids can sometimes smooth out a mix that was purposefully mixed to have vocals "up front", but as a result does not have an even spectral balance. No one track is creating the "imbalance" and it is better to cut some of it in the mix than to add to upper mids. going back to the mix is not always an option because of time or how far the mix has moved beyond being able to surgically "fix" things back at the track level.

A giant learning curve ..... and as you say, the less you do, the better. The skill becomes knowing when to keep your hands off and when your applications make the mix sound "better or best" as opposed to "different", which can often be just "louder" if you are not careful.

_________________
Byron


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 12, 2014 7:36 pm 
Offline
Ranch Hand
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 5:39 pm
Posts: 1141
Machine type: AW4416
Hi Randy.


In the g, is EQ always applied pre-compression? Or do I have to do something to ensure that the HPF and LPF happens before the signal is compressed? Just so that I understand, do you think it is advisable to set a hi-pass cut and a low-pass cut for the entire mix before compression?

As stated above, I am copying my mix to a stereo pair and then mastering that pair back to the stereo track. So do I set the HPF and LPF on my mastering pass (along with compression from the g's Mastering Library)?


I`m not sure the order of the EQ and Comp on any of the machines Randy to be honest, I`ve never looked into it, I record on the AW1600 and then ship out the stereo mix to pc and do the mastering there, all I know is I always try to do it that way whenever possible, compressors just seem to sound so much sweeter that way.

I would HPF and LPF just before it hits your mastering compressor.

Byron
Regarding the saturation topic, with it being a form of distortion, I believe it`s possible to use the distortion effect that`s built into the Yamaha`s, obvious not at full throttle, but tweaked sensibly there`s no reason why not.
Or you could import it into a pc and use one of the bucket loads of free software sats available for download. :)

Good luck.

T.

_________________
http://tmacstudio.wix.com/tmac

http://www.soundcloud.com/t-mac-12

http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCmCjAzN ... ture=watch

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1GETYJUJKu0

https://www.reverbnation.com/tmac


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue May 13, 2014 3:12 pm 
Offline
Marker Magician
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 4:20 pm
Posts: 3421
Machine type: AW2400
On the G and 1600 the signal chain is fixed input > attenuator > insert > EQ > Dyn.

The 2400 allows the user to establish position in the chain of both the EFF (insert point) and DYN. this is, at times, very useful.

As for HPF. I set a filter on many individual tracks within the mix > the frequency being dependent on the material and the other elements with which a track is "competing". I also often HPF the mix at a very low number, such as 37.5 khZ. This can be done as part of the mixdown and/or again at the time you work towards "mastering" the two track.

_________________
Byron


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 12 posts ] 

All times are UTC + 1 hour [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group