Frequencies, Levels of a Mix and Mastering Tips

Discussion in 'Mixing and Mastering' started by The Drum King, Jun 7, 2011.

  1. simpler

    simpler Newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2015
    Messages:
    30
    Likes Received:
    2
    thanks for posting this
     
  2. sexyman

    sexyman Ultrasonic

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2015
    Messages:
    96
    Likes Received:
    23
  3. wasgedn

    wasgedn Audiosexual

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2014
    Messages:
    2,387
    Likes Received:
    846
    Location:
    Germany
    great post.....thanx a lot
     
  4. Trevor Gordon

    Trevor Gordon Platinum Record

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2016
    Messages:
    431
    Likes Received:
    254
    Location:
    Canada
    That chart is freakin brilliant!
     
  5. JayMixx

    JayMixx Newbie

    Joined:
    May 15, 2016
    Messages:
    13
    Likes Received:
    2
    Thanks for this post .... definitely insightful
     
  6. Kwissbeats

    Kwissbeats Rock Star

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2014
    Messages:
    1,153
    Likes Received:
    458
    pretty meh and a waste of time if you ask me, learning charts is something foster would do.

    with proper metering you can see what frequency's instruments are/have?
    I don't know what a chart is gonna make easier?

    U guys have some kind of ocd that you pitch all you material permanent so you need to find out where it belonged?

    also there is all kind of faulty information, Asio isn't less videlity only arguably more
    Buffer sizes are not in mb's but samples.

    I don't see why, so enlighten me
     
  7. TeonKan

    TeonKan Noisemaker

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2015
    Messages:
    18
    Likes Received:
    5
    thank you so much for posting this wonderful informations :D

    Long Live AudioSex2
     
  8. AntagonistHero

    AntagonistHero Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2016
    Messages:
    34
    Likes Received:
    10
    Thank you, bookmarked
     
  9. ZUK

    ZUK Producer

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2011
    Messages:
    343
    Likes Received:
    130
  10. MMJ2017

    MMJ2017 Audiosexual

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2017
    Messages:
    2,313
    Likes Received:
    1,234
    its is so over complicating things.

    you have to work with spectrum analyzers to get used to the frequency response what area sounds like what to recognize it
    take a track play it while making a tall narrow eq band you sweep through the frequencies to see what is happening for that particular audio track there

    regarding eq you want to eq after you get your transient response for a track set perfect and even through the frequency response, next eq in broad strokes you never need to have deep cuts or thin boosts and cuts that means you didnt follow the step before eqing.

    bandpassing should have at the very end of mixing not at the beginning
     
  11. kukuruku

    kukuruku Newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2014
    Messages:
    8
    Likes Received:
    1
  12. No Avenger

    No Avenger Audiosexual

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2017
    Messages:
    1,857
    Likes Received:
    1,296
    Location:
    Europe
    Any secret message in your post? When I click the link it shows:

    AudioSEX - Professional Audio Forum - Error
    The requested conversation could not be found.
     
  13. kukuruku

    kukuruku Newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2014
    Messages:
    8
    Likes Received:
    1
    no avenger
    :dunno:
     
  14. SineWave

    SineWave Audiosexual

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2011
    Messages:
    2,642
    Likes Received:
    1,536
    Location:
    The darkest pit of my mind
    This is helpful, but it makes it sound too simple. Neither mixing nor mastering is so simple to make the best of it. However, it is very helpful for somebody doing home recording, or even semi-pro. Knowledge piles up. Work and pile up the knowledge. If you don't work, you won't have much knowledge. It's like every other work, I suppose.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Love it! Love it! x 1
    • List
  15. Classic

    Classic Ultrasonic

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2018
    Messages:
    197
    Likes Received:
    26
    I made an song with frequency's
     
  16. AltCtrl

    AltCtrl Noisemaker

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2018
    Messages:
    5
    Likes Received:
    3
    " Many artists are now aware of streaming services being loudness normalized. However, until: (1) Apple music and iTunes on the computer and IOS becomes normalized by default; (2) the mysteries of YouTube get answered by Google themselves; (3) Spotify stops peak limiting and starts using such a high target level; (4) Tidal normalizes their MQA service; and (5) Cenelec upgrades their restrictions on mobile devices in Europe, then movement in the loudness area is still stalled, and the situation is still quite frustrating.

    In general, my loudness practices have not changed. I always go for the best-sounding master. This means far more than just loudness—it means dynamics, sound quality, stereo separation, warmth, tonality, impact, and many other qualities. If the client complains about the master’s loudness, I discuss the normalization situation with them and, after discussion, either raise the master or leave it alone. More often than in previous years, we leave it alone. More often the client takes my word about the loudness. It’s a bit less of a struggle than before.

    I do pay a bit more attention to the integrated LUFS measurement. That is, I check it. But my monitor gain and the perceived loudness of the album governs my decision whether I should raise the master before sending it to the client, NOT the integrated LUFS measure. I also do not conform to the “lowest common denominator.” My nominal loudness target is that of iTunes, −16 LUFS, which is lower than YouTube and lower than Spotify. However, the integrated LUFS is just a guide. In other words, for a popular music recording, I often use a consistent monitor gain of −9 or −10 dB. This is measured relative to 0 dB = 83 dB SPL C-weighted, Slow per channel with −20 dBFS narrow-band RMS pink noise; −9 monitor gain conforms roughly with a “K-14.” I sometimes find an integrated album level thatBob Katz 57

    reads as low as −17 LUFS but that simply does not worry me if two things are the case:

    1. The sound is loud enough to my ears at the −9 monitor gain, especially when mastering acoustic music that has the acoustic advantage. Most of my acoustic clients do not hear an issue in this case—only the clients who actively compare the loudness of their album against other acoustic releases that have been over-compressed.

    2. The short-term loudness measures several dB above the integrated programme loudness. This is a very important key to the perceived loudness of the programme. In other words, even if the integrated loudness measures −17 LUFS, if the short-term loudness reads several dB higher than the integrated, this indicates dynamic movement. Short-term loudness is what the ear keys into. This raises our perception of the album loudness, even if there are soft passages as well. We should all credit Ian Shepherd as the first to make this discovery. But I had long ago realized that “something was up” with the integrated measurement, because my own masters, which are often more dynamic than the competition, sound louder than their integrated loudness would seem to indicate. In other words, the short-term to integrated loudness ratio of my material is higher than a lot of the competition, so my material competes quite well, especially after normalization.

    The −17 LUFS average figure simply indicates that there are enough soft passages to offset the short-term passages in the integrated measure, not that the album is too low. "

    Bob Katz.
     
  17. kukuruku

    kukuruku Newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2014
    Messages:
    8
    Likes Received:
    1
    how to create depth in a mix special in low frequency
    thanks for your advice
     
  18. No Avenger

    No Avenger Audiosexual

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2017
    Messages:
    1,857
    Likes Received:
    1,296
    Location:
    Europe
    On principle and not frequency specific, lower transients, don't add saturation, lower high freqs, compress more, add room/ambience/ER with short predelay.
    TBH ad hoc I don't know of any method to create depth especially in the low freq range. IAW, is there really any?
     
  19. SineWave

    SineWave Audiosexual

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2011
    Messages:
    2,642
    Likes Received:
    1,536
    Location:
    The darkest pit of my mind
Loading...
Similar Threads - Frequencies Levels Mastering Forum Date
Different ways and chains to tame those high frequencies.. (Advanced levels) Mixing and Mastering Jun 13, 2017
Best 'Q' Setting for sweeping & cutting unwanted frequencies Mixing and Mastering Nov 27, 2018
Please, Listen for Odd Frequencies and Stuff - New Setup in my Room Mixing and Mastering Oct 3, 2018
Visual feedback, adjusting frequencies, balancing chorus Mixing and Mastering Sep 16, 2018
Overlapping frequencies question Working with Sound Sep 7, 2018
Loading...