Oh no, I've heard much bigger amounts of bullshit than this very frequently.

 

Jesus , this is hilarious.... Mix a song without actually listening to it, or pay attention to the relationship of frequencies, or their content.... Gotta love the millenial shortcuts .... just hope you dont think the same for medical surgery proceedings.....

 

There is a "general" slope of about 3 dB per octave for "natural" sounding instruments.

It means each degree of octave harmonics are 3dB less from fundamentals.
Example : 55 Hz A -> 110 Hz -3dB -> 220 Hz -6dB...

When you listen to a "natural" "classic" sounding symphonic mix/master, you get about -3dB/octave.
BUT when you listen to an electro EDM track, you are around -4.5 dB per octave.

Try a sample track in each domain, and watch the global slope. It is obvious.

BUT there are notches and bumps in the final mastered track, and they can be around -0.5 dB AND still be audible in the final balance.

Add to that dynamic.
Add to that taste and style...

So forget about it

YES using a SLOPED pink noise noise can give you an IDEA of what is a "balanced" sound to human ears.
That's all. It is a good trick for ppl with tinnitus, too (or sea waves).

But mixing with pink noise is like painting without eyes. You can...but don't expect anything near what other ppl expect

 

a3c : absolutely rubbish musics and nothing special about the mixes, sorry . maybe you should start mixing with the pink noise

 

This might be useful reading!

http://www.soundonsound.com/techniques/mixing-pink-noise-reference

 

you're right, that's why i'm about to open a bakery

 

@A3C: you homepage is broken on iPad in Landscape mode

 

thanks. I'll report it to the webmaster.

 

Thanks for posting that.

Gotta love the ' I've forgotten more about audio than you will ever know ' attitudes displayed here. Thanks for the entertainment.

 

I have using pink noise as a calibration tool for 20 years mixing. not only mixing but calibration of live sound systems it is equal energy per octave so its pretty perfect.

 

I've started using it and it's amazing when used judiciously and with attention to the amount used. Using the ozone EQ Matching with low mix percentage and fairly high smoothing really REALLY helps with getting a more balanced sound. It's unbelievably useful in electronic music is all I can say anyway, I LOVE IT!!

 

From the link:
"The human hearing system’s frequency response is not linear but logarithmic. In other words, we judge pitch increases by octaves, not by equal increments of frequency; each successive octave spans twice as many Hertz as the previous one down the scale. And this means that when we listen to white noise, it appears to us to increase in level by 3dB per octave"

Actual human hearing response curve:

TL;DR: Garbage_in = Garbage_out.

 

It would seem that opinion is split on whether this is a good idea or not. I guess the simple answer is to try it and see. If it does work then that's great, if it doesn't then you haven't lost anything.

 

Have now used the method on a few projects and must admit that it makes life much easier when it comes to a quick mix that tells you about how to set the levels.

After that, of course, adjustments must be made, but it's a nice little tool to get a picture of how things should be.

Thank you very much for this "little" change that made life a little easier

 

noone said its a see-only mixing technique. it's not.

 

You HAVE to combine pink noise, with
Fletcher–Munson curves

AND some fantastic reference tracks as well. it is one tool in an arsenal there is never going to be a quick 1 or 2 step process but always many variables, but once you put those variables in the equation you will see progress come together for you.
let your mind approach the topic with an understanding of " there are as many variables as ACTUALLY exists in reality in this area, I just have to match my thinking and my technique to the way reality actually works in this area, then success in my endevour is possible."

 

Last edited: Aug 5, 2017

Not sure I'm following. Why combine with pink noise? Equal loudness curves already take all the human hearing response quirks into account, so you'd be adding an extra 3dB/octave attenuation :\

 

PINK NOISE is equal energy per octave, this means it gives you a calibration for your setup, you calibrate speakers with it, settings on amp settings in system. with mixing it is you level 1 ( getting your basic slope.) level II ( adding in some detail to your slope) is fletcher munson curves a broad overall shape to your mix and adjustments. and finally Level III ( adding final detail ) is your reference tracks for that specific genre or maybe just your personal fav tracks to use as reference. each level adds finer level of detail to the level before it. Now say you are calibrating a live sound venue system. you will use level I pink noise ONLY to calibrate the system in room to equal energy per octave. same for studio or mastering speaker calibration. but say you doing a mix you going to start with level I pink noise as basic reference once you get you tracks setup routing buss'es and groups then you move to level II and use fletcher munson curves adding next level of detail to your mix shape, when you get close to the end and fine tuning your mix you use level III your reference tracks, alternating a couple seconds between the reference track and your mix. ( these principles of the three levels apply to mastering as well)
when the goal is to calibrate speakers and room, or to get even response you use only basic slope of pink noise,as you move into finer livel of deatil for a mix itself you move to level II and then level III.
in simple terms the value of using a basic slope of pink noise in mixing situation as level I is to have your ears know what the most basic slope is. the fletcher munson curves are rough estimate of just beginning to add detail to your slope to the point of gain staging and getting mix elements sitting together, then you use your reference tracks as even more level of detail added to what was initially a basic slope.
If your ears cannot get used to the most basic slope of pink noise it has no chance of getting used to finer levels of detail. you want equal energy per octave a "memorized" part of critical listening skills that is burned into memory with zero effort involved.( from that point onto finer levels of adjustments to that slope each person's ability to establish their critical listening skills varies per length of time in profession as well is biological aspects.)
but say a person is at worst case scenereo , they can def STILL no matter what be able to develop pink noise or equal energy per octave burned into memory, form critical listening so that their efforts can be put elsewhere.

as basic example of the value of having pink noise slope burned into memory,
you starting a mix got some 808's in place going to add hihats and lay down vocals, in 2 minutes you can get levels right with each other because your ear "knows" what equal energy per octave is. you did the right adjustments in volume so fast from memory you make more progress and things come together without fumbling and dicking around with all eyes on you wondering why you cannot perform. next when you get more done and turn to fletcher munson curves for a little more detail to your mix shape again it happens real fast you dont have to change much, and you dont make mistakes of having hihat say too loud but you try to eq to makes it quieter because the first level I of pink noise got you your volume already, fletcher munson is for adjusting once you already established your level, then your towards the end and you use your reference tracks and again only have to adjust a few small things very fast, you worked smart not hard did great work from your critical listening skills and the eyes on you this whole time are impressed .


Imagine you are a sculptor making a human head, level I is making a sphere shape to get general shape then level II is just shaping that sphere in order t outline general features and level III is establishing finest details to what you already have done, each build onto each other whether building a bridge making a painting or writing a song we work in increments so that each "next step" is building on what we have done a level before.
try making a sculpture beginning with the fine detail or building a bridge or making a painting starting off with fine detail and you will see very quickly how much time you lose and frustration you gain .

 

Last edited: Aug 5, 2017

Thanks for the explanation @MMJ2017. Slightly hard to read but there are numerous info-gems hidden within those paragraphs.

No, it's pretty evident now only tools, devoid of knowledge, are making fun of this very useful tool.

 

Irrelevant. You can calibrate your speakers with literally anything, from sweep to white noise. When spectrograms match -- what_goes_in = what_comes out, stop; you're done. Don't recalibrate your setup before you mix. You know what your gear sounds like, from which you can [hopefully] extrapolate how your mix will sound on some kid's Dr. Dre Beats, his sister's earbuds, and his parents' stereo.


This is basic.

If you're getting a slope, your system is *not* calibrated. A flat system is ...well, it's *flat* :|

Again, why would I want to add equal loudness curves? What does add "next level of detail to [my] mix shape" even mean? How exactly does one go about doing it? If I want to produce generic rock that sounds like generic rock, why not just go for one of these right away? It's a simple question :\

 

Last edited: Aug 6, 2017