#204

yeah i agree to having a somewhat overly robust and “simple” setup, because the acoustic properties of the venue might not play in favor to precise movements anyway.
for checking mono, i have a switch on the headphones itself, but i agree keeping the bass mono is a sensible idea, or even the whole spectrum in case of a busy dance floor.
but, anyway i think some “improvements” for both live and studio recording is possible, at least i sense step-wise improvements in my setup compared to regular mixing desks. it all depends on how you generate the sound and how much you use gating, side-chains and other type of “playing” the mixer capabilities. for example, just using spectral morphing instead of additive mixing is very interesting, and also adaptive buses that analyze spectral content before sending into fx:s. when you finally have the stereo recording, it’s not really much you can do, better to record a new and better piece :wink:

edit: i just want to say that i view mixing as very much part of the creative process, from good ol’ djing style to a more modular approach, but mastering on the other hand is both ear and time consuming, and unless i get specifically told or paid to do it i won’t haha. it’s also very much dependent on the gear you have to A/B with as you say.
what i see with mid side processing is a more intuitive approach to live bus “programming”, for example i generate everything in mono and use left as dry, and right as wet. then i generate stereo or a binaural mix at a separate bus with weights or some undulating function.
the problem with recording everything live is probably the venue, so i completely agree with what you say, it’s almost as if you have to listen both in heaphones and “on” the venue simultaneously, or ask everyone to simply wear headphones…

#205

I have a mastering question on balancing really big dynamic jumps that I’m not sure how to tackle. I am working on mastering a piece that has a section with some really extreme dynamics (going from very quiet ocean waves, to intense, near clipping high-pitch dental-drilling sounds). Curious how other people approach mastering such scenarios when they cross them (both subjective and more technical advice/ideas would be appreciated).

The goal I’m working towards currently is to keep the feel of these dynamic jumps, while making the wave sounds more audible (especially across playback devices, they seem to be getting lost on my mix cube). And trying to make less “pain” with the dental drill sound at “normal” volumes.

To work on balance, I am experimenting with a very mild low-ratio, low-threshold (slow decay/release), wide-knee compressor to help bring up some of the waves sounds (trying to balance not bringing in too much noise floor), and am trying to reduce the intensity of the dental drill sounds with a severe high-ratio, high-threshold (fast attack/slow release), very small-knee compressor, and no gain compensation. basically a not-quite limiter limiter. When I A/B I really don’t know if I’m making all that much difference. I am afraid to get too intense with it, because I don’t want to mess things up as it isn’t my track.

The other thing I’m thinking, is to try using a multi-band compressor to tackle the two separate compression goals (as those two sounds are in pretty distinct frequency ranges).

2 Likes
#206

I always try to avoid extreme dynamic jumps, because as a listener I find those annoying to deal with. But it depends on the expected listening environment, among other things.

Since it was somebody else’s track I guess I’d just try to reign it in somewhat while still leaving that feel in place.

Maybe dynamic EQ on the dentist’s drill? Or even some sort of FFT-based compressor, like ReaFIR?

1 Like
#207

I have some eq notches that I utilize in this section, but do you know of anything like this I could experiment with in the ableton world (10 suite/max for live). I don’t know if there is anything like the fabfilter proq kind of dynamic stuff (which looks really cool)

#208

Toneboosters EQ4 is one of my favorites (and pretty cheap).

1 Like
#209

@jlmitch5 here’s another eq option you might appreciate (included with the HOFA mastering suite):

1 Like
#210

Extreme dynamics are for the real world, and left to the listeners’ ear muscles to do the compression. Anything else, i.e. recording, benefits from (i’d say requires) compression. To me it looks more like a mixing question.

One way this is approached in film for dramatic effect is to mix as usual but just a few moments before the big noise happens, to pull down the levels a bit lower than they’d normally be. Think of it as micro contrast.

Regarding dental drilling sounds you’ve mentioned, I’d rely on it being subjectively perceived as louder than it actually is. And maybe if those frequencies aren’t as present in the wave sounds, that would make it stick out even further.

So you have a bunch of perceptual tricks at your disposal already, without having to go to complicated dynamics.

9 Likes
#211

When i have to level some wild dynamic material (usually a person speaking without any microphone technique or badly mic’ed and moving), i usually use one of these four solutions:
1/ fastidiously draw gain automation curves (and enjoy a nicely leveled progam)
2/ throw the entire file in an old automatic program (and wonder if it will sound ok-ish this time)
3/ make a creative chain of several wideband compressors, each mostly applying very little gain reduction, with low ratios, using various time constants. (and end up drawing gain automation curves in the most extreme parts anyway)
4/ ditch the file as unfit for the air (and try to provide solutions for the file owner to hand in better material next time).

As to the use of extreme dynamics, i agree it needs to be approached from the start as a question of “how do i create this impression of sudden variations” rather than simply juxtaposing one sound at -40 LUFS and the other at -3 LUFS. I can’t find the reference right now but the actual dynamic range of hearing is much less than 120 dB as the thresholds vary according to the levels and the nature of what is heard. This implies that extreme dynamics will just annoy people (which could be the point) and that the sensation of dynamics is mostly the responsibility of the artist in their compositional choices.

7 Likes
#212

I’m impressed that all the answers are mostly in the “argh, dynamic jumps are such a pain!” camp. Not that I’m at all knowledgeable in this area, far from it, but I always assumed the tendency to compress things was mostly related to trends, and that outlying mastering engineers and mixing artists wouldn’t mind wild(er) dynamic ranges. Seems I’m wrong and that there’s good reason for it. I’d be curious to read as much as possible on how to achieve dramatic dynamic changes, such as the ones done by orchestras, but avoid “irritating the ears of the listeners”.

#213

Just check the crazy amount of work to make venues such as the ones for Berliner Philharmoniker or la Philharmonie de Paris and you’ll quickly realize there are also tones of “real space architectural mixing” involved to allow an orchestra to resonate and deploy its dynamic in full and without losing the lower parts or fatiguing the ears with the more powerful moments. Same goes for the very few recording spaces that allow orchestral performances to be captured like Air Studios. And when you listen to a live recording of an orchestral performance it’s most of time… Compressed at some level.

2 Likes
#214

So, it’s near impossible to achieve this in vitro?

#215

Totally an amateur, but my perspective is the main goal of both mixing and mastering is to help achieve a balance. Mixing, an overall balance of the elements in the piece, and mastering, how the elements (as well as tracks in relation to one another) balance across mediums and playback systems.

As such, very wide dynamic ranges present a potential problem to the listener–you don’t want them to have to turn up the volume dial because they are straining to hear a quiet passage, only to be blasted by a loud thing. That is not to say that the dynamic contrast is a bad thing, as it can definitely be a compelling creative decision (as I believe is the case in this track). Basically, and this is totally my opinion, In essence, it’s up to the mastering engineer to help the listener “appreciate” the creative decisions inherent in the art as much as possible by allowing it to translate across the myriad of scenarios it can be experienced in.

I really appreciate the thoughts and ideas you all have shared. I think I might have been a bit superfluous about how extreme the dynamic jumps were in my initial description (it really didn’t sound “wrong” to me to begin with, I think just needed some slight adjustment to be “ideal” (which is, of course, subjective)–after some more tweaking with the parameters I had mentioned, I am pretty happy across the playback systems I’ve tried at this point, and some feedback I received is positive, so hopefully I got it right.

The use of perceptual tricks in the mixing stage you mention, @eesn are very interesting! I will definitely keep these in mind should I run into this scenario again

2 Likes
#216

I’d be happy to answer any specifics on mastering, either in this thread or via PM, been at it almost a decade now, full time. I very occasionally put Blog posts up on it over at my web site (link in Profile).

3 Likes
#217

(mod edit: moved to Process category)

5 Likes
#218

@gregg I just read through your blog, and I felt like your article on compression was especially great. Thanks for sharing your workflow!

3 Likes
#219

Is it okay for a single element of a mix to make the mix negatively correlated on the phase meter?

I am working with a track that utilizes a backing drone which is pretty negatively correlated when that drone comes in. Compositionally it sounds like a very wide background tone. The percussion elements snap the phase meter into the positive range, and there’s not much else going on, so I’m pretty sure that’s the culprit.

I tested the phase by mono summing, and the drone is definitely quieter when it is summed. In terms of mastering, does it make sense to do anything to the drone to fix the correlation? it doesn’t really seem like a “problem” because it’s just a background element. It’s goal really seems more about providing width than being a prominent sound.

#220

The only reason I can see for “fixing” this is if mono compatibility were an important consideration. If this was a club banger, you’d want to fix it for those massive mono soundsystems. For headphone listening of remixed field recordings? Probably not critical. But someone with more mastering experience than myself could easily have a more informed opinion!

1 Like
#221

There‘s is no problem with this at all, this will make your mixes breath. Of course you‘d have a level drop in mono, thats given. Look at it like mixing intensively with pans-if something is panned hard left, would you pan something hard right to make it sound correct? Its not only very difficult to find a panning buddy, mix-creation wise, you would not do it.
Unless of course you have a pan/phase concept where you have matching buddies.

The only big issue with phase and recirds and clubs is: out of phase bass up to maybe 200hz.
Cutting needles will crumble trying to cut this-so the lathe cutting engineer will want to prevent that upfront and will mono the bass.
Basically, out of phase bass sucks out level in Mastering, nobody wants this.

2 Likes
#222

Thanks! Glad it was helpful.

Others have answered the phase question, no more to add. Not a problem unless you are worried about 100% mono compatibility, or vinyl, and even then maybe OK, all depends on the individual track.

1 Like
#223

Any word on delivery details for Bandcamp?

Also, out of curiosity, if a particular track doesn’t fall within the required Dynamic Range, where do you start? Do you ask for the mix to be adjusted? Is there something that you do at the mastering stage to correct this? Some of the tracks with which I’ve worked have consistently registered around 5 DR.

1 Like