The production of the loudness wars.

[Doddsy]

I noticed that many of the dance remixes in particular receive a red face if they have been processed via agressive limiting and compression. The result being a louder sounding and pumping remix. If this technique has not been used then usually the reaction to a track is luke warm at best - an average to good rating.

In my opinon this over produced mastering skill makes a remix sound relatively life less by increasing the digital harshness and decreasing the overall dynamic range. I've been listening to commercial mixes from different genres of music and the ones on RKO are sometimes far too overproduced in my opinion. Compare the db of an outstanding RKO remix and a commercial track. I think you'll notice the difference. Commercial are not pushed up that far maybe there is a reason for this? Shouldn't we be taking into account the musical quality and ideas in a remix and although an important factor, not lean too much on how well it's been produced. I've heard remixes that are outstandingly produced but that's all really. I wouldn't listen to them again.

[LMan]

Short answer: You're right.

[Commie_User]

And not just the electronic stuff. People all over the web, from producers to CD-buyers, complain that remixes or remasters have been far too squeezed.

But they're not always right.

The debate goes on but I think this guy talks rubbish on the Beatle box: http://fightloud.blogspot.co.uk/2009/09 ... tered.html

The stereos are spacious and clear, yet the monos sound as over-compressed as they always did.

[Analog-X64]

All you have to do is load a song in "Audacity" free audio editor and you can see the peaks and valleys of songs today vs in the 80's 90's

[Mordi]

I think there's an art to making a tune as loud as possible while still retaining clarity.

[Doddsy]

I agree there Mordi it is an art. Commercial mixes are done with a skilled mastering engineer with top end equipment to get the best results. That's not to say it's not possible you just need to also be a skilled mastering engineer to achieve those pro results without sacrificing the degradation of the track.

[Kate-Z]

I really struggle to get my volume levels right at mastering... I think I've got them all at a correct level, then I listen to my tracks alongside others and feel mine is quieter and needs the volume turned up by comparison. It's a real pain, and I just don't know how to get it "right" ! :/

[Commie_User]

Don't worry Kate, it happens to us all. All of us lacking multi-thousand Pound desks, compressors and limiters (as mentioned by Doddsy). But even so, I've found myself going back to a mix to roll off plenty of the limiting I put on.

You can do bits and bobs though, such as cutting frequencies or whole tracks in exchange for loudness, or compressing / limiting each multitrack in turn before moving to processing the subs and mixes - especially with as many demo-use versions of the top plugins as you can find.

But with chip sound, it's going to be pretty loud. And if it's going on Youtube or similar, too loud a mix can blast peoples' ears off anyway. Too many others can't mix loud so the volume control is already up high.

[Mordi]

I also always stumble upon the same thing as you, Kate. One thing I've done to help that issue is to make the very first few instruments louder, turning their volume up more. That should lead to having a louder mix where you can always monitor any clashes in the frequency range which would otherwise only appear at the mastering stage. It's a real hassle for me to go in and fine-tune EQ, since usually I'm bogging down the machine so much that it gets choppy just to play the tune in FL.
Another tip I've heard is that one shouldn't mix/master with the headphones/speakers at full volume, but keep it around a reasonable level.

[Commie_User]

...I'm bogging down the machine so much that it gets choppy just to play the tune in FL.

I've had that too, expanding your work to fill the horsepower. But I found making submixes and saving them as individual projects can cut the strain on the machine right down. By the end of a large comp, my master mix project can simply be a collection of stereo and mono bounces, any of which can be easily re-done from their own project files.

[Analog-X64]

[quote="Mordi"Another tip I've heard is that one shouldn't mix/master with the headphones/speakers at full volume, but keep it around a reasonable level.[/quote]

Agreed, what I've done is when my ears were well rested (insert joke), I set the Level going to my headphone's via the M-Audio FastTrack Pro audio interface.

And I leave it at that setting for the majority of the time and only increase the volume for certain tasks and bring it back down the lower level.

[Mayhem]

I really struggle to get my volume levels right at mastering... I think I've got them all at a correct level, then I listen to my tracks alongside others and feel mine is quieter and needs the volume turned up by comparison. It's a real pain, and I just don't know how to get it "right" ! :/

Your first mix of Sceptre of Baghdad was noticeably quieter than most other remixes. I'm not saying that's wrong, but you wonder who is "right". A few clicks to the right and it sounded the same, with very good clarity.

[Mordi]

...I'm bogging down the machine so much that it gets choppy just to play the tune in FL.

I've had that too, expanding your work to fill the horsepower. But I found making submixes and saving them as individual projects can cut the strain on the machine right down. By the end of a large comp, my master mix project can simply be a collection of stereo and mono bounces, any of which can be easily re-done from their own project files.

I assume you've rendered the sub-mixes into .wav and then mixed them together? I've experienced that the sound is noticeably altered when I do this. Did you experience this too, or have I done something wrong?

[Commie_User]

I've sometimes noticed subtle EQ differences between WAV and playback mixes. But not often. I assumed it was just Samplitude and just something to get used to.

Nothing an EQ re-adjustment couldn't fix, especially for stuff I only really noticed under the microscope anyway.

[NecroPolo]

Well, 90% of my paying gigs came because I learned during my broadcast decade some dirty tricks to raise the RMS until it blasts folks minds before they know it - so may God bless loudness war

I've sometimes noticed subtle EQ differences between WAV and playback mixes. But not often. I assumed it was just Samplitude and just something to get used to.

If there is some noticeable difference between the rendered wav and playback then maybe it may be time to check your DAW setup screen and rendering options. I have no info about Samplitude as I've never used it but it has a good reputation as far as I know and most proggies grew to be pretty accurate by today. We often use homegrown stem renders to make a final mix on commercial records that are exported with ProTools, Cubase, Sonar, Reaper, Reason or the like using the software rendered tracks only and there is no problem with them unless there is some unintentional dithering or some setting issue comes around.