-
Posts
458 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
9
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
8Tracks
Events
Blogs
Everything posted by Master Mi
-
I got into a pretty interesting topic concerning mixing lately. There's obviously a big difference between using integrated VSTi effects and insert effects (blend original signal and effect together into a new sound) and using AUX/effect sends (adds an additional signal like just the reverb on a separate AUX bus track to the original signal). https://l2pnet.com/insert-effects-vs-send-effects-2/ 1) Integrated VSTi effects and insert effects ------------------------------------------------------- For my tracks I was used to create some MIDI stuff, add a virtual instrument or synthesizer for this track and mostly use some VSTi-integrated reverb and delay effects or some external reverb and delay VST plugin effects as an separate insert on the VST plugin slots within this track. The problem with this combination is that the original & pure sound of the VSTi/synthesizer loses its former power and blends together with the reverb/delay effects (although the reverb might be the most problematic effect in this case) into a new (and in this case less powerful, less assertive) sound. So, it 's not like "instrument + effect" - it 's much more like "instrument * effect" or "instrument x effect". With my new 3-way studio speaker system I can perceive this issue much clearer than before and I notice much better if the sound of an instrument or synthesizer gets too thin, gets lost in the reverb or shifts too much into the backround/depth of the room. It's not that you can't do it this way if you want to use some reverb in your tracks - but it doesn't seem to be the very best way of creating clean, assertive mixes on a professional production level. Nevertheless using reverb as an insert effect could be useful if you want to create a more spatial offset in depth in your soundtrack. However, it's a bit strange that I haven't got into the obviously very important topic of using AUX/effect sends for creating reverberating and highly assertive sounds at the same time - until now, after almost 5 years of music production. But after looking up a few things in my DAW manual some time ago I stumbled over this topic and tried it out. 2) AUX/effect sends ------------------------- If you want to use AUX/effect sends you have to create a new separate AUX bus track (like if you want to create an additional MIDI track in your mix - but instead you choose to create an additional AUX bus). On this AUX bus track you only use the desired effect (or even more than one effect at once - let's take a good reverb effect in this case) in one of the plugin slots and set up the plugin in the way you want to use it in your soundtrack. Several producers recommend to set up the plugin of the AUX track 100 % wet because the drier the effect gets the more it will mostly raise just the volume within the combinated interaction of VSTi/synthesizer and effect sends. Now you choose the track with the instrument or synthesizer with which you want to connect the AUX/effect send and try to set up the instrument as pure and raw as possible (especially turn off all reverb and delay effects, additional VST plugins and everything that makes the VSTi/synthesizer sound thinner, less assertive or moves the raw sound out into the room). Then you open your mixer and look for this instrument track, look for "AUX" within this instrument track and there you choose/activate the prepared AUX track with the desired effect in one of the free AUX slots. In my DAW I can draw a bar with my mouse below each of the AUX slots within the instrument tracks in the mixer view where you can regulate the volume of the additional effect send (don't worry about the volume of the instrument track, it makes no changes there - it just controls the volume of the effect sends on the AUX bus track there). So, if you play just the instrument track in solo mode afterwards you will hear the raw, unprocessed and highly assertive instrument sound. And if you play just the AUX bus track in solo mode you will just hear the separate effect of the instrument (so, just the reverb in this case). (If you turn up this AUX send effect on other instrument tracks in the mixer as well you will hear different effects (reverb from different instruments in this case) on the same AUX bus track.) With this method you can create really strong reverb effects without loosing the power and assertiveness of the raw source instrument/synthesizer. I am not quite sure how I should handle the panorama setting at the AUX bus track - I guess it would make sense to pan it the same way like the instrument. Maybe you can be a little creative there (for example if the reverb effects of two intruments who are pretty close in the mix interfere too much with each other you could take the reverb effect sends of one instrument more to the left/right side). If you plan to use an AUX/effect send on more than one instrument at the same time it could be problematic to deal with effects from different instruments at one AUX bus track with the same panorama. On the other side it will be pretty effortful, confusing and CPU/DSP-intensive to create individual AUX/effect sends for each instrument/MIDI track. And as it seems I can only put 10 different AUX/effect sends in the slots of the instrument tracks in my mixer. So, it might be useful to take the AUX/effect sends just for some instruments who really have to shine with effects (like reverb in this case) and be highly assertive at the same time (for example drums or leads). (EDIT: I could manage to create an infinite number of AUX/effect sends in my project within my DAW settings - so, technically I could create an effect send for each instrument/MIDI track.) What is your opinion about this topic and what kind of experiences do you have made with this?
-
Samplitude Music Studio >>> versatile & well-equipped semi-professional DAW for beginners and advanced music producers Samplitude Pro X (Suite) >>> professional DAW for expert music producers and audio engineers (with huge extra content in the enhanced Suite version) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Since there's already a thread for the DAW FL Studio, this might be interesting for everybody who wants to get into music production with a pretty powerful, well-equipped and still pretty low-priced semi-professionell DAW you can get for just 99 euros. I'm talking about the new Samplitude Music Studio (2019) - the smaller brother of the Samplitude Pro X3 (Suite) version. I was working with previous Samplitude Music Studio versions years before I upgraded it to the professional version Samplitude Pro X3 suite later on. And since my beginning with the Samplitude Music Studio versions I was always a big fan of the included, very versatile and pretty realistically sampled VSTis (software instruments) which have been recorded with real instruments, a nice amount of different articulations (like legato/long notes, slides, staccatos, tremolos, fall-offs etc.), presets and effects (like drumming on a guitar body with the hands etc.) - dependening on the chosen VST instrument. You often have a huge amount of those virtual instruments (up to 20 and more in the newer versions) in the basic equipment of the Samplitude Music Studio with which you can produce music within a pretty wide variety of musical genres. Some of those intruments are actually a whole set of instruments (like Vita World Flutes oder Vita Folk or Vita Soundtrack Percussion) or even huger synthesizer sample stations (like Vita Analog Synths, DN-e1 or Revolta²) where each one contains hundreds of pretty nice synthesizers within different categories (like lead synths, chords, basses, synths, pads, voices, winds, drums or effects). Besides the usual standard DAW functions, a really powerful and stable audio engine, some really useful metering devices or some good VST plugins that usually come with the Samplitude Pro (X/Suite) versions one of the biggest enhancements in Samplitude Music Studio 2019 is the possibility of using up to 32 different instruments (MIDI tracks) in a music project (former Music Studio versions were limited to 16 instruments - or to circumvent this you could bounce MIDI into audio tracks which was pretty annoying for your workflow if you had to change something afterwards). Now - with the 32 instrument (MIDI) tracks per music project - you can realize much more comprehensive projects even as a beginner and without working around that much. If you need up to 999 MIDI tracks for a music project, much more VST instruments, synthesizers, VST plugins or a really awesome virtual guitar amp called Vandal you can upgrade the Samplitude Music Studio into the professional Samplitude Pro X (Suite) versions later on if you want. Sometimes there are also really compelling special upgrade offers (like some months before where users of a Samplitude Music Studio version could upgrade to Samplitude Pro X3 Suite for just about 150 bucks - instead of about 600 or the usual price of nearly 1000 bucks). With each Samplitude Music Studio version you can also collect new Vita VST instruments (even if you buy some cheap older versions with some rare stuff and install all versions in the chronological order) you can accumulate a huge amount of good VST instruments which you can also keep if you upgrade the Samplitude Music Studio version to a Samplitude Pro X (Suite) version someday. I really like the logical structure of these DAWs - even without reading the whole manual and without having any experiences with DAWs in those days I was still able to discover lots of different functions just by exploring the task bar of the very smartly structured DAW interface and by trying out several things. I am also a big fan of the clear interface, the free adjustable working place (depending on your momentary needs concerning the current stage of your music production process) and of course the pretty stylish and badass looking carbon skin. The only negative things I could say about these DAWs are that it can crash sometimes if you have opened your browser and work with the DAW at the same time and that one or two of my virtual instruments tended to crash on my former AMD AM3 Phenom II X4 955 quad-core PC with 8 GB RAM (no problems with that on my newer Intel i7-6700 quad-core PC with 32 GB RAM). If you got interested in the latest version of Samplitude Music Studio (2019) as a beginning or advanced composer and music producer check out the following link for additional informations: >>> https://www.magix.com/us/music/samplitude-music-studio/#c844272 ... If you wanna go for the Samplitude Pro (X/Suite) versions as a more advanced or expert composer, music producer and audio engineer with a strong passion for sound design at a professional level someday, check out this link for additional informations: >>> https://www.magix.com/us/music/samplitude/ Even if you can find out a lot of functions just by exploring and doing make sure you have some time to read in the digital manual with nearly 1000 pages to get into all the functions this DAW has to offer. ... There's also something like a really expensive ultimate version Sequoia (the company's flagship so far called), which contains some pretty luxurious (but not desperately necessary) music production tools (like audio to MIDI conversion - although there 's something similar in the Pro X Suite versions already), the whole set of VST instruments and some enhanced features for broadcasting. But since I'm not a member of a highly successful band who can drop the money like bees may drop the honey, I would never be thinking about paying around 1500 to 3000 bucks for this one if I can do all the music production stuff already with the Samplitude Pro X Suite versions. ... If somebody wants to have some further informations or personal experiences from my side just let me know. And if somebody is interested in getting a version of Samplitude Music Studio or maybe Samplitude Pro X3 Suite, I could also give some hints for using these DAWs with most of its functions here in this thread.
-
Correct use of loudness metering for CD mastering?
Master Mi replied to Master Mi's topic in Music Composition & Production
Since we've talked about the 70s already I can show you a cover of a soundtrack from the 80s called "I'm always here" - by Jimi Jamison which was also played as the misical intro theme of the Baywatch series. >>> https://soundcloud.com/master-mi/baywatch-opening-theme-master-mi-remix Or maybe check out the Youtube version (cause I think Youtube offers a slightly better audio steaming quality with an higher audio bitrate of 192 kbit/s (compared to the 128 kbit/s audio bitrate streaming "quality" of Soundcloud): >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9xbQHulo8h4 If you want to listen to one of my video game remixes I'm working at I would recommend my remix of the soundtrack The Price Of Freedom from Crisis Core: Final Fantasy 7: >>> ...or maybe my Star Tropics remix called "The Fire Of The Southern Cross" - if you want to listen to some more tropically summerly South Sea Island beats. )) >>> All the soundtracks are mastered at the EBU R128 loudness standard. -
Correct use of loudness metering for CD mastering?
Master Mi replied to Master Mi's topic in Music Composition & Production
But couldn't this already be an hint on how much compressed music can damage your sense of hearing - especially in the fine ability to distinguish between loud and less loud? I mean... I often get the chance to listen to soundtracks on my MP3 player at work - at least as long as I don't have to verbally communicate with my colleagues and if I can work on my own most of the time. And I've made an experiment today and a few times before. I was listening to music made without compressors/limters (my own soundtracks I'm working at) - and I was listening to other video game remixes where often compressors and limiters are used. I've listened to both kind of soundtracks at an adequate loudness level (to do this I had to listen to my soundtracks an my MP3 player on volume level 17 and to the other tracks on about volume level 9 - just for giving you an impression on how big the difference between mastering at EBU R128 standards and modern loudness war mastering relating to the volume/loudness levels can be). If I listen a whole day to my own soundtracks there won't be a significant difference in my sense of hearing at the end of the day. But if I listen just a few hours to other video game remixes where compressors and limiters are often used quite a lot and switch again to my soundtracks later on I often recognize that my sense of hearing has decreased a bit - just temporarily... but I won't hear all the details in my tracks for some time (maybe for some minutes until an half hour or so) afterwards and I don't perceive my own tracks as loud as if I would listen only to these the whole day. Besides - the dude in the video didn't do the mastering for EBU R128 loudness standards in a correct way. Since the metered loudness always means the average loudness of the part you have measured you always have go through the whole soundtrack before adjusting the master volume. So, if the loudness meter - after starting the metering at the beginning of the track - shows a loudness of - 20 LUFS (dB) at the end of the track you would have to lower the master volume for about 3 dB to get at least into the right (average) loudness levels for EBU R128 standards. And then you should also be concerned about the other important EBU R128 parameters like: - Max. Momentary in LUFS (refering to a time period of 400 milliseconds) - Max. Short-Term in LUFS (refering to a time period of 3 seconds) - Max. True Peak in dBTP (...although you won't really have to bother with this parameter if you keep an eye on all the other parameters before) -
Hm - but somehow the streaming quality on Youtube seems to be slightly better than on Soundcloud - and Soundcloud already allows just 128 kbit/s. You can often hear the slightly worse sound quality on Soundcloud by listening to the higher drum sections like cymbals (cymbals often sound a bit raspy, distorted, less defined and less full in their whole frequency spectrum). On Youtube cymbals still sound pretty clean - even the reverb of those. Just compare my solo drums track on these two streaming platforms: Soundcloud >>> https://soundcloud.com/master-mi/drum-grooves-lvl-2-composed-by-master-mi Youtube >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9MIzC_oe38 In addition to that I've converted some videogame remixes on Youtube into MP3 files - and most of them come up with an audio bitrate of 192 kbit/s. Don't know if this alone gives a small hint on the real streaming audio bitrate on Youtube. But just by listening to soundtracks on both platforms I get the impression Youtube seems to have a slightly better streaming audio quality than Soundcloud. But to get back to my question... What do you think? Is there a difference of the sound quality between uploading a video with 192 kbit/s audio stuff (if that would be the maximum audio bitrate Youtube allows) and a video with uncompressed wave audio stuff on Youtube or will these two options result in the same audio streaming quality - or.. will the upload with the just 192 kbit/s audio stuff get compressed once again a little bit which could lead into a slightly worse audio streaming quality after uploading the file (compared to the file before the upload)?
-
I'm not a too big fan of adapting my cosy living room for my speaker system (especially not with those unesthetic dark wall absorber mats) - I rather prefer buying a speaker system that really fits my room. Unfortunately the store won't get the whole new speaker system until late August 2018 - so it seems like I have to wait over 2 months to get my first chance to give ya a little review of this obviously pretty awesome small-size studio speaker system combo.
-
Correct use of loudness metering for CD mastering?
Master Mi replied to Master Mi's topic in Music Composition & Production
And that' s the reason why EBU R 128 can and should be used in music industry as well. Not just because of uniformly loud music all across the internet - but also because you don't have to bother with useless sound chirugy or use of compressors or limiters for mere loudness gaining anymore - just as it nearly was in the 70s and early 80s. If you master your tracks always at EBU R128 you won't have to watch the peaks all the time because there's always enough headroom that the peaks can come and flow. Even in some of my soundtracks with higher dymanics the peaks won't go easily over - 7 dB. The peaks have always enough headroom to breathe and sound natural. -
Correct use of loudness metering for CD mastering?
Master Mi replied to Master Mi's topic in Music Composition & Production
Thanks for the answer. )) I had thought pretty much about this topic in the last time and I even talked to a mastering professional - and I guess you 're right. Although he seemed to be one of the new kind of mastering engineers who are more afraid of given away headroom than given away sound quality or a consistent loudness of audio programs he also said that you would do the loudness metering for each track intead of metering the whole CD in one shot. And it makes totally sense to me now - because later I had found out that the metered loudness is the AVERAGE loudness of the specific part in or maybe the whole track you have metered (and not something like the momentary loudness). So, if you start metering the track from 0:00 to 2:32 it will show you the average loudness of this part when finishing the metering at exactly 2:32. If you start metering the track from 0:32 to 0:50 it will show you the average loudness of this little part when finishing the metering at exactly 0:50. (That's where the strange measuring differences of the two methods I mentioned in the posting have come from.) And this also implicates that it wouldn't really make sense to meter the loudness over the length of the whole CD - because the differences of the loudness between each track could be too big (one track a bit too silent, another track a bit too loud could also result in the same average loudness if you meter the whole CD in one shot). But to factor in the different compression levels of the different tracks (could have been already caused in the production process of the tracks or maybe during the production of some nasty remastered versions) within different genres for my CD I still have to do something. EBU R128 (that's the loudness metering method at which I wanted to master the tracks of the CD) defines that the (average) loudness of the track should be at a target level of -23 LUFS (dB) +/- 1 LU (dB). So, I had a maximum range of 2 dB for the average loudness of each track to overcome the problem of different compression levels at different tracks on a CD. This could be quite enough. I guess the developers and audio engineers behind EBU R128 could have included this range of 2 dB for exactly these kinds of problems. But since I don't know if a range of 2 dB will be always enough for mastering CD and since I've mastered all my other track at slightly below - 23 LUFS or dB (rather between -23,1 dB to -23, 3 dB) I guess I will keep it this way for this special CD: 1) leaving the loudness ratio of the tracks to each other as it already is (according to my perception of hearing when I was adjusting the fitting volume/loudness of the tracks back then) 2) metering each track and writing down the average loudness of all tracks to get the track with the highest average loudness 3) adjusting the loudness of all tracks together by keeping the loudness ratio between all tracks until the track with the highest average loudness hits the - 23 LUFS (dB) mark (or rather the - 23,1 to 23,3 dB mark) and all other tracks will be below that (so, the track with the lowest average loudness might be around - 25 or - 26 dB)... I'm sure this could be a good way to keep it with all CD masterings with highly different and differently compressed tracks in the future. If I want to bring out a CD with just my own tracks it will be mastered easily at an average loudness of -23,1 to -23,3 dB of each track because I don't use any compressors or limiters in my soundtracks - so there won't arise problems like these. -
@timaeus222 Yeah, I've tried FL Studio some time ago because a friend of a friend wanted to talk to me about music production and he brought his FL studio on his notebook to me. But after some hours I didn't want to work with this program anymore and I showed him some production stuff on my DAW. After 10 years of working with FL Studio (!!!) he couldn't even tell me how to set up a normal MIDI track layer with the standard piano roll (because he just worked with that annoying pattern system all the time) - and I was really pissed off to look up all the stuff separately because I wasn't able to get into that program just by intuitive searching and exploring. And then I was like: "Never FL Studio again - if the game already starts like this you probably won't see the best ending." Even in those days back then when I was starting with music theory and music production I got pretty easy into DAWs like Cubase without too big knowledge about Digital Audio Workstations - just by intuition within a few minutes/hours I could set up some basic MIDI stuff. ...compared to FL Studio where I couldn't get in just by intuition after many hours and after working with my own DAW for over 4 years now. But if you are already used to the program and got all the necessary 3rd-party VST plugins, synthesizers and VSTIs you need for music production just keep with this program. Because in the end your skills and passion as a composer are often much more important that getting the very very best DAW with the best all-inclusive-high-end equipment on planet earth. But for newcomers I would recommend other DAWs like Cubase, Reason, Ableton - or my DAW Samplitude Pro X3 Suite. Although it's not that massively advertised in the music production mainstream media it's by far one of the best DAWs with the most comprehensive features, functions and equipment for professional music production out there. Just have a look at it and compare (contains main features of the Samplitude Pro X(1) series): >>> Here you have some informations about the latest Pro X3 (Suite) version: >>> https://www.magix.com/gb/music/samplitude/music-production-composition/#c711245 >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JC2udZIzf5o
-
Hey, guys. I just want to know if streaming platforms like Youtube do a further compression on your uploaded sountrack content if you have already exported your video from your video cutting program with the best settings Youtube allows. The problem is >>> with my built-in video cutting program Movie Maker from Microsoft (in which I load my uncompressed WAVE audio file from my music project) I can only export videos (I use WMV format for videos) with a maximum audio bitrate of 192 kbit/s. Seems to be no problem because Youtube obviously allows only max. 192 kbit/s for the audio stuff in the video. Or is it still a disadvantage for the sound quality and does Youtube make a further compression on the uploaded 192 kbit/s stuff which would justify buying a more professional video editing software where you can export videos with uncompressed WAVE audio quality before you upload your soundtrack/video content?
-
I 've never really been a fan of Fruity Loops or FL Studio. Compared to other DAWs it doesn't seem have that great performance (seems to use a lot of hardware power - even on mid or high-end PC systems). It might contain some good synthesizers - but the VSTIs (software instruments) in the FL Studio repertoire seem to be not that realistic/useful. It's even lacking in some really useful metering systems which nearly every good DAW contains - even in its standard version. And they still seem to not have managed to remove that crappy pattern system as they promised. Compared to the normal track system the pattern system has no additional use and it's just annoying not to get straight to the track if you are a newcomer. Inconvenient, less intuitive software interface for beginners to get in, lacking in some higher quality VSTI stuff and in many points totally overrated - that 's FL Studio in my opinion, compared to ther DAWs. There are much better DAWs out there for the price of the FL studio All Plugins Bundle.
-
1. work-in-progress Lufia 2 - Tyrant Breaker (Master Mi Remix)
Master Mi replied to Master Mi's topic in Post Your Game ReMixes!
Thanks. )) I've already thought about some calm reverberating cymbal sounds at this point or some slow orchestral/industrial bass drum or snare percussion - but I'm not quite sure about this. Maybe a drum-free, mystically melodic part isn't that bad at all - but I'll try some percussion stuff before. One more question - what do you think about the rock/metal part from the beginning of this video until 0:30? Is there a bit too much hall or interference in the lower section and should it be a more dry, thick 'n tight or is it okay according to your ears and studio technology? -
Insane - found a nice combo of a smaller 3-way-speaker system with subwoofer for my sharp-eared flat that might be good for mixing and music production purposes - though its smaller size. 1) Presonus Eris 3.5 Speakers >>> https://www.thomann.de/gb/presonus_eris_e3.5.htm?ref=intl&shp=eyJjb3VudHJ5IjoiZ2IiLCJjdXJyZW5jeSI6IjIiLCJsYW5ndWFnZSI6ImVuIn0%3D >>> https://www.amazon.com/PreSonus-Eris-E3-5-Professional-Multimedia/dp/B075QVMBT9/ref=sr_1_1_sspa?s=musical-instruments&ie=UTF8&qid=1526725108&sr=1-1-spons&keywords=presonus+eris+3.5&psc=1 and 2) Fostex PM-SUBmini 2 >>> https://www.thomann.de/gb/fostex_pm_submini_2.htm?ref=intl&shp=eyJjb3VudHJ5IjoiZ2IiLCJjdXJyZW5jeSI6IjIiLCJsYW5ndWFnZSI6ImVuIn0%3D I guess this could work even for ordinary flats with noise-sensitive people around - within a smaller studio environment where you still can hear a good amount of details with an hopefully flat frequency response at the right hardware settings. I ordered the stuff after checking lots of alternatives in the smaller studio size sections and will be able to test the new stuff in about two weeks - will leave ya a feedback if somebody is interested. What's your opinion about (or maybe your experience with) those two components for smaller studio environments? And what do you think sounds better and more natural with a good flat frequency response - Presonus Eris 3.5 or 4.5? I tend to go for Presonus Eris 3.5 because there the mids don't seem to mix up with the bass in the speakers so much - so it could be working excellently with the subwoofer as a separate bass unit. ))
-
Dudes - I've checked out the Adam T5V. They were awesome in the store to listen to (even in comparison with the A7X, T5V seem to make a deeper bass and a cleaner sound somehow) - and now at least I know that I've mixed my coming Lufia remix already very well with my headphones and my Logitech Z533 speaker system. I bought the Adam T5V studio monitors - but in my room I recognized that they are roaring so much that this would probably mean war with my neighborhood. The sound is really too heavy for my flat. So, I guess I'll bring them back and stick with my Logitech Z533 speaker system which has obviously the perfect size and sound for my production room in my flat. It's really annoying because I was really on fire to go for some high quality studio monitors. But maybe somebody has another tip for me what could be a good quality 3-way speaker system (high & mid speakers + subwoofer bass) that could be useful for production purposes in a medium-sized flat as well (primarily an energy-saving speaker system with good sound quality, flat frequency response, black/dark colour and a cool design) instead - at least something which has a bit smaller size than studio monitors and which doesn't roar that heavy... What do you guys think about a combination of: 1) Presonus Eris 3.5 Monitor Speakers >>> https://www.amazon.com/PreSonus-Eris-E3-5-Professional-Multimedia/dp/B075QVMBT9 >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2o9GCtaimjU and 2) Yamaha NS SW 50 Subwoofer >>> https://www.amazon.com/YAMAHA-subwoofer-NS-SW050-B-Black/dp/B01LZRLF6E/ref=sr_1_7?ie=UTF8&qid=1526718076&sr=8-7&keywords=Yamaha+NS+50 Subwoofer could be a bit smaller - but wouldn't this be a great 3-way studio speaker as well (compared to my Logitech Z533) to hear most of the details in a mix within a small room and without my professional headphones?
-
Yo, dudes. I already have some good studio headphones (Sony MDR 7506 as well as the legendary Beyerdynamic DT 880 Pro, already connected to a Lake People G109-P headphone amp - I'll definitely keep up with those!) and I had at least a not too bad multimedia desktop speaker system (Logitech Z533) some time ago. But then I was lookin' for a real studio monitor speaker system because it can be still a big difference concerning accurate listening experience and improving my mixing skills. I've tested some studio monitors in a store before, but I wasn't really that satisfied with lots of studio monitors because the bass was often far to heavy or not defined enough. And in general, a lot of them didn't have the crystal clear sound quality I was expecting, with the exception of some really big and expensive concert speakers that I couldn't afford and didn't have enough room for (not to mention the potential electricity bill if I used those things :D). I really had my eye on Yamaha NS-10-like studio monitors because some top producers would probably say that a mix that sounds good on these speakers would also sound good on any other speaker system. Ultimately, I was looking for a speaker system with the following characteristics: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) truthful and crystal clear high-definition sound with a great frequency range and a frequency response that is as flat as possible 2) want to trust my ears and hear all the little details you don't hear on every speaker system or with most headphones exactly (like if there's too much or too less reverb, if the bass is tight enough or if similar frequencies or their reverb effects bleed into each other) 3) shouldn't make any unwanted operating noises (with quite a few studio monitor speakers, I have experienced some really annoying inherent noises such as tweeter hiss or woofer hum, some of which could still be heard from a few meters away when the speakers were in idle mode at normal listening volume - for me an absolute no-go for professional audio tools that should be suitable for working on high-quality, precise mixes as well as for undisturbed, sophisticated music listening pleasure) 4) not too big in size - should easily fit on my desk, so a fitting size would be around >>> 20 cm * 25 cm * 20 cm (width/height/depth) at the maximum size 5) should be energy-saving speakers (around 100 to 150 W for the whole pair of speakers) 6) should have something like front bass ports ('cause the rear of the speakers would be directly at the wall or maybe a few centimeters away from the wall) 7) should have a stylish design and the colour should be a mostly dark/black ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Perhaps you also have extensive experience with this topic and can give me and all the others who deal with studio monitors or loudspeaker systems some good additional advice. ... With my current level of knowledge and experience with studio monitors, I would choose between the following models if you have a larger or specially treated producer room for room acoustics: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) Neumann KH 120 II --------------------------------------- >>> https://www.thomann.co.uk/neumann_kh_120_ii.htm - successor to the Neumann KH 120 - high-end German quality with one of the best sound quality you might get at this size and in this price range - excellent audio definition with well-presented mids - extremely clean, truthful and natural sound - really flat and accurate frequency response - good frequency range of around 44 to 21000 Hz - faithful impulse fidelity as well as excellent reproduction of stereo panorama, depth and spatiality - DSP-controlled electronics - room-adaptive calibration (via optional Neumann Automatic Monitor Alignment MA 1) - front bass ports - kinda average design with a rather greyish than black colour (also available in white, but they rather look like the albino version of the dark greyish ones and I'm really not sure if you should expose them to the sunlight for too long - nah, just kidding a bit with the last one, but with white studio monitors you never really know whether they will stay white or turn yellow over the years) - very energy-wasting with an excessively high power consumption of around 245 W per speaker - very expensive with around 700 euros per speaker 2) Yamaha MSP5 Studio ------------------------------------------ >>> https://uk.yamaha.com/en/products/proaudio/speakers/msp_studio_series/index.html - amazing successor series of the legendary Yamaha NS-10 and professional studio version of the Yamaha HS studio monitors - top Japanese quality - pretty solid 'n' heavy stuff - one of the best (maybe even the best) and most detailed high-definition audio in the world of studio monitors including really tight, well-defined bass (no muddy, roaring or room-flooding bass - might be very useful for medium-sized, untreated rooms as well) - entire Yamaha MSP series has a crystal clear sound as long as you're listening to professional mixes - but on the other hand, these professional studio tools will show you right in the face if even the smallest detail in your mix isn't right - one of the quietest studio monitor series, which does not cause annoying tweeter hissing or woofer hum even at close range (a serious problem with many studio monitor speakers, which should not actually occur in the professional audio sector, but which I have unfortunately noticed quite often) - really flat and accurate frequency response - great frequency range of around 50 to 40000 Hz for their compact size - faithful impulse fidelity and excellent stereo panorama reproduction - front bass ports - kinda stylish black design - pretty energy-saving devices with only around 60 to 70 W per speaker - can't remember the exact original price, but an MSP5 studio monitor speakers cost around 300 to 350 euros back then, which is a pretty good price for such sophisticated high-end audio tools as Yamaha's flagship studio monitors Unfortunately, the production of the legendary MSP series, at least the larger MSP10, MSP7, MSP5 and now also the smaller MSP3 models, has been discontinued for the time being (I read somewhere that this was probably due to the departure of the retired designer of the MSP series, Akira Nakamura), although the successors to the smaller MSP3, the MSP3A, are still being produced. Nevertheless, I found a store here in Germany that apparently still sells these legendary studio monitor speakers as new at a slightly lower price (possibly the last remaining stock of this series): https://cmlstudioshop.cmlshop.de/contents/en-us/p7722_Yamaha_MSP_5_STUDIO.html 3) Genelec 8020 DPM --------------------------------------- >>> https://www.thomann.de/gb/genelec_8020_dpm.htm - well-known high-end studio monitors made in Finland - highly impressing sound quality, accuracy und pretty even frequency response for its compact size - sufficient frequency range of around 62 to 20000 Hz - kinda unstylish design for my taste, but this rounded design might be really good for room acoustics - rear bass ports - around 100 W per speaker - kinda expensive with around 440 euros per speaker 4) Adam A4V ----------------------- >>> https://www.thomann.co.uk/adam_a4v.htm - successor to the Adam A5X - also high-end German quality - kinda accurate flat frequency response (seems to be slightly boosted at bass frequencies and might have some harsher high frequencies) - unique, but more machine-like than natural sound - one of the widest frequency ranges of around 52 to 45000 Hz - pretty stylish design (although they often remind me of a tank or war machine instead of studio monitors) - real-time control of DSP-based functions via Ethernet - front bass ports - around 130 W per speaker (about 30 W more than the former Adam A5X) - kinda expensive with around 430 euros per speaker 5) Yamaha HS5 -------------------------- >>> https://www.thomann.co.uk/yamaha_hs_5.htm - solid Japanese home studio monitor speakers and famous standard series in the tradition of the legendary Yamaha NS-10 - typical high, kaizen-style Japanese product quality and some real audio tools made to last - excellent audio definition with a more relaxed but really tight and truthful bass response (very useful for smaller studio rooms with no or less acoustic treatment) and slightly overemphasized higher mids (really useful for mixing true to the saying: "If you nail the mids, you nail the mix.") - won't hide the weaknesses in your mix, but show them directly to your ears - extremely wide frequency range of around 54 to 30000 Hz - faithful impulse fidelity and good stereo panorama reproduction - rear bass ports - pretty energy-saving devices with only around 70 W per speaker - very affordable price of just around 170 euros for these high-quality audio tools At this point it might be interesting to compare the sound of the Yamaha HS series with that of the legendary Yamaha NS-10: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xcQQOpjAos https://www.youtube.com/shorts/dPVUkRgs2uw I somehow still like the extremely high-resolution, detailed mids as well as the relaxed and really dynamic sound of the Yamaha NS-10, even by today's standards. And from my perception, I would say that within the Yamaha HS series, the Yamaha HS5s come closest to the NS-10 in terms of frequency response and sound image. It should also be noted that the Yamaha NS-10 appeared in various versions, which were primarily in the hi-fi segment or in the studio monitor speaker segment: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcU_GCDom2E 6) Presonus Eris E5 --------------------------------- >>> http://digitalstereophony.blogspot.com/2017/02/presonus-eris-e5-review-eris-e5-fights.html - pretty solid newcomer from USA - really good sound quality (nevertheless, there were comments from users about hissing tweeter noise - something I didn't experience with the smaller Presonus E4.5 and Presonus E3.5 models) - kinda flat frequency response - great frequency range of around 53 to 22000 Hz - probably one of the most stylish designs among studio monitors - very compact size - front bass ports - around 80 W per speaker - a really unbeatable price of around 130 to 150 euros per speaker With the new Presonus Eris Studio 5, there is already a successor to the Presonus Eris E5 model (which is apparently no longer produced and can only be purchased occasionally in specialist music stores or online): https://www.thomann.co.uk/presonus_eris_studio_5.htm But for mixing, I would rather recommend the old Presonus Eris E5 in this case because it apparently has a more neutral frequency response and a larger frequency range than the new Presonus Eris Studio 5 version. Nevertheless, it doesn't seem to have any too serious effects on the mixing result, as you can hear in this video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRWVZemyKPo 7) JBL LSR 305 MKII ---------------------------------- >>> https://www.thomann.de/gb/jbl_lsr_305p_mkii.htm - decent studio monitors with a good sound quality (however, some users complain about minimal hissing noise and that you have to turn the volume up a bit to hear everything you need to hear) - nice frequency range of around 43 to 24000 Hz - solid design and acceptable size - rear bass ports - around 82 W per speaker - really nice price with around 140 euros per speaker (already seen an offer of a bundle speaker pair and 2 stands for only 249 euros) 8) Adam T5V or T7V ----------------------------------- >>> https://www.thomann.de/gb/adam_t5v.htm >>> https://www.thomann.de/gb/adam_t7v.htm - were actually some of my favorite studio monitors back then 'cause of the impressive, really powerful sound and the solid German quality - very good sound quality (however, I experienced kinda annoying tweeter hissing sounds at a close range and a distance of less than one meter) - might sound a little bit harsh, bass-heavy and machine-like, pretty hard to listen to at even lower volumes, as the powerful bass causes strong room modes - huge and low-end-heavy frequency range of around 45 to 25000 Hz (T5V) or even around 39 to 25000 Hz (T7V) - awesome design - but the size (depth around 30 cm!!!) and the rear bass ports with the strong bass could be a problem - really low wattage with only around 70 W per speaker (both sizes) - very affordable price of around 160 euros per speaker ... If you have a smaller music production room and/or don't want to treat your studio environment specifically for room acoustics, I would definitely go for a smaller set of studio monitors, as larger studio monitors in too small, acoustically untreated rooms can cause lots of room modes (where the room can literally drown in bass waves) and make the perceived sound experience worse (and kind of useless for mixing) than some of the better PC desktop speakers. In this case, you should take a look at these smaller studio monitors: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1) Yamaha MSP3 or the newer model Yamaha MSP3A --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> https://uk.yamaha.com/en/products/proaudio/speakers/msp3/index.html >>> https://www.thomann.co.uk/yamaha_msp3_a.htm - typical Japanese high-end studio monitors in their smallest version within the Yamaha MSP series - heavy and solid building quality - amazing, really outstanding audio definition (one of the best in the world of studio monitors) - crystal clear and natural sound (really love the well presented and very detailed mid and high frequencies with the very pleasant, smooth and airy sound feeling - really made for listening to atmospheric and complex soundscapes) - but don't be fooled by the excellent sound of these studio monitors just because a professional mix on them sounds really good and extremely detailed, as even the smallest weaknesses in your own mix will show up right in your face with these little professional audio tools - really nice to listen to and mixing with even on lower volumes - MSP series won't annoy you with any kind of strange inherent noises, not even at close range (not only in this respect the perfect near-field monitors) - for lacking lower bass a proper subwoofer might be added - kinda useful frequency response for its highly compact size - good frequency range of around 65 to 22000 Hz (MSP3) or around 67 to 22000 Hz (MSP3A) for this small size - faithful impulse fidelity as well as really good spaciousness and stereo panorama reproduction for this size - front bass ports (MSP3) or rear bass ports (MSP3A) - some of the most energy-efficient studio monitors with only around 20 to 30 W per speaker - kinda affordable price of around 210 euros per speaker, especially for professional audio tools like these The production of the Yamaha MSP3 model has been discontinued (might still be available on the global market) in favor of the new Yamaha MSP3A model with an enhanced Twisted Flare Port technology that reduces air turbulence noise in the bass reflex port, providing an even clearer and more accurate bass. 2) Genelec 8010 AP ---------------------------------- >>> https://www.thomann.de/gb/genelec_8010_ap.htm - perhaps some of the most space-saving high-end studio monitors in the world, made in Finland - very clear, detailed and accurate sound - sound much bigger than these small studio monitors are - decent frequency range of around 74 to 20000 Hz, although this is unlikely to be suitable for really critical mixing - for this small set of studio monitors, the design seems much more agreeable than the similar design of the much bigger studio monitor brothers from Genelec - rear bass ports - only around 50 W per speaker - still kinda affordable price of around 280 euros per speaker 3) Adam A3X ----------------------- >>> https://www.adam-audio.com/en/ax-series/a3x/ - solid high-end studio monitors made in Germany - typical sound of Adam studio monitors - a somewhat machine-like sound with kinda harsh higher frequencies and tight, pumping bass frequencies - by far the largest frequency range among the smaller studio monitors with an incredible range of around 60 to 50000 Hz - pretty futuristic design (but still look a bit like war machines) - front bass ports - only around 50 W per speaker - still kinda affordable price of around 280 euros per speaker Since production of the Adam AX series has apparently been discontinued, the only option in this case is probably to switch to the successor series with the slightly larger Adam A4V (description of the Adam A4V can be found a little further up in the list of recommended larger studio monitor speakers). However, if your room conditions are not sufficient for such larger and probably also really bass-intensive studio monitor speakers and you have a rather smaller music production room without special acoustic treatment, you can also take a look at the Adam D3V, a more upmarket studio desktop speaker solution that should meet even advanced monitoring and mixing requirements: https://www.thomann.co.uk/adam_audio_d3v_black.htm 4) Yamaha HS3 or HS4 ---------------------------------------- >>> https://www.thomann.co.uk/yamaha_hs_3.htm >>> https://www.thomann.co.uk/yamaha_hs_4.htm - the latest models within the famous Yamaha HS series - now also available in two smaller sizes and with the patented Twisted Flare Port technology that reduces air turbulence noise and provides even clearer and more accurate bass - solid Japanese building quality - excellent audio definition with a more relaxed but really tight and slightly recessed bass response (very useful for smaller studio rooms with no or less acoustic treatment) and a very linear frequency response - won't hide the weaknesses in your mix, but show them directly to your ears - useful frequency range of around 70 to 22000 Hz (HS3) or around 60 to 22000 Hz (HS4) - faithful impulse fidelity and good stereo panorama reproduction - unfortunately not bi-amped - rear bass ports - some of the most energy-efficient studio monitors with only around 20 W per speaker (both sizes) - very affordable price of just around 230 euros for a whole pair of the Yamaha HS3 or around 260 euros for a whole pair of the Yamaha HS4 5) Presonus Eris 3.5BT 2nd Gen or Eris 4.5BT 2nd Gen ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> https://www.thomann.co.uk/presonus_eris_3.5bt_2nd_gen.htm >>> https://www.thomann.co.uk/presonus_eris_4.5bt_2nd_gen.htm - successor models of the Presonus Eris E3.5 and the Presonus Eris E4.5 studio monitor speakers, now with Bluetooth function, a standby feature and just a slightly different sound - pretty good and well-defined sound quality for these 2 pairs of studio monitors - not too heavy, both with sizes that might fit on nearly every desk - good audio definition and sound quality (might sound a bit too good and polished for professional mixing purposes) - Presonus Eris 3.5BT 2nd Gen have a brighter and more crystal-clear sound with more higher frequencies and less low-end bass, while Presonus Eris 4.5BT 2nd Gen have a fuller, more truthful sound and a flatter frequency response - frequency range of around 80 to 20000 Hz (Eris 3.5BT 2nd Gen) or around 70 to 20000 Hz (Eris 4.5BT 2nd Gen), which, however, is no longer really suitable for critical mixing (especially the Presonus Eris 3.5BT 2nd Gen, while the Presonus Eris 4.5BT 2nd Gen might be still useful for creating critical mixes) - only a very low level of inherent noises on moderate volume levels if you get with your ears close to the tweeters - pleasant to listen to and mixing with even on lower volumes - unfortunately not bi-amped - very stylish design - rear bass ports - also some of the most energy-saving studio monitors with only around 25 W per speaker (both sizes) - unbeatable price with only around 120 euros for a whole pair of the Presonus Eris 3.5BT 2nd Gen or around 175 euros for a whole pair of the Presonus Eris 4.5BT 2nd Gen ... If you are going to buy some of those smaller studio monitors, I would recommend to buy an additional smaller subwoofer which can generate a really clean, accurate, highly defined, tight and dry bass and sub-bass down to around 40 Hz. If you add a subwoofer and set it up carefully (better a little more restrained setting with less bass, but deeper bass), you also get a pretty decent 3-way speaker system (or let's say an enhanced 2-way speaker system) with fairly clean and very well separated bass, mids and treble. In this case, I would definitely recommend the smaller but quite powerful Japanese subwoofer Fostex PM-SUBmini 2, which is also a very energy-efficient subwoofer with an output of only around 50 W: >>> https://www.thomann.de/gb/fostex_pm_submini_2.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- If you want to compare the sound and frequency response of different studio monitors with your own ears and eyes even far away from music stores, there is also a very useful YouTube channel where the uploader with the channel name "Digital Stereophony" (or "DSAUDIOreview" these days) does kinda useful comparisons between many studio monitors and hi-fi speakers within a number of different soundtracks. In his more recent uploads, he has added the original sound of the soundtracks to better compare the speakers. He has also added some useful frequency response diagrams for the speakers in his newer videos. According to him, these are obviously the frequency response curves of the speakers in a semi-treated room. So if you are still looking for studio monitors, you should take a close look at his speaker sound comparisons: >>> https://www.youtube.com/user/skubny/videos ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ... My own speakers and studio monitor equipment over the years -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- To conclude, I would like to briefly describe how my speaker and studio monitor equipment has changed and developed over the years, from my very early days in sound engineering and music production to the present day. And it started around 2013/2014, when I finally bought my first DAW full of curiosity and anticipation, but had practically no relevant knowledge about DAWs, music theory, composition, mixing, mastering, sound design or audio engineering. At that time, I didn't even know that there was such a thing as "studio monitor speakers" - it was a completely new world for me, a completely unknown universe. Accordingly, I began my musical journey at that time with the simplest PC desktop speakers, which I gradually replaced over the years with reliable studio monitors as professional tools for sound engineers. Here's a brief timeline of my speaker equipment since 2013: I) Fujitsu Siemens Soundsystem DS 2100 - a rather ordinary desktop speaker system with subwoofer, which was apparently so irrelevant that I could hardly find it again even in the depths of the internet - can't even really remember the sound, but I don't think you could even create a usable rough mix with it (in principle, you didn't really know what you were doing in your mix with this speaker system - a kind of paper sword for the adventurous hobby composer) II) Logitech Z533 Multimedia Speaker System - definitely one of my best desktop speaker systems with integrated subwoofer, volume control and separate bass control, a quite impressive sound for the time and charming satellite speakers with a really cool retro look - was able to create reasonably usable rough mixes with it, even without in-depth mixing knowledge and, according to my memory, I even mixed an early version of my Star Tropics remix "The Fire Of The Southern Cross" with it, which didn't sound bad at all (Logitech Z533 speaker system was quite the sound engineering yoyo among the early weapons on the great South Sea island adventure trip) III) Adam T5V - my first real studio monitors, whose impressive, powerful and extremely beautiful sound I fell in love with during a demonstration in a music store - however, joy only lasted a short time after I realized that they didn't sound so nice at home and, in addition to a really annoying tweeter hiss that could be heard even a few meters away, they had such a powerful bass that it literally drowned my acoustically untreated room in bass reflections, making neither proper mixing nor relaxed music enjoyment possible - as a result, oversized studio monitors babies went back to the music store a few days later IV) Presonus Eris E3.5 + Fostex PM-SUBmini 2 - decided to try out a few smaller studio monitors after this experience and soon bought the Presonus Eris E3.5 after a lot of research on the internet, which were brand-new on the market at the time - were my first studio monitors that really impressed me with their sound and at the same time harmonized well with my acoustically untreated room - additional extension of the low bass range down to 40 Hz via a small, extremely compact Japanese subwoofer called Fostex PM-SUBmini 2 (although I only turned it up subliminally at a low volume in relation to the volume of the studio monitors and with the lowest crossover frequency setting) - mixings of my soundtracks and remixes subsequently experienced a significant improvement, although the mixes still didn't always sound as good and impressive as they could have on other audio playback systems (mainly because the Presonus Eris E3.5 tend to cover up some relevant weaknesses in the mix and always made the mix sound a little nicer and more impressive than it actually was) - have used this studio monitor system to mix almost all the soundtracks and remixes I've made and uploaded up until about 2020 (until at some point I felt the desire to buy some really professional sound equipment in the form of studio monitor speakers of a similar size that would harmonize just as well with my room conditions) V) Yamaha MSP3 + Fostex PM-SUBmini 2 - insider tip from an employee in a music store and further in-depth research led me to the legendary Japanese Yamaha MSP studio monitor series (the professional version of the much better known Yamaha HS series), which fortunately also included a smaller model with a nearly 4-inch woofer, the Yamaha MSP3 - together with Japanese Fostex PM-SUBmini2 subwoofer, it became a kind of studio monitor system of two rising suns for me, the Niten Ichiryū of future sound engineering sword fights, so to speak - didn't really like the MSP3 at first despite the incomparably high sound definition (because my previous mixes, which I had created on my previous speakers, suddenly didn't sound so good on the Yamaha MSP3), but when I mixed my first remix on the MSP3 until it sounded halfway acceptable, it suddenly sounded worlds better, sharper, crisper and much more defined than my previous mixes on all other audio playback systems - MSP3 as professional sound engineering tools really taught me how to hear and subsequently how to mix properly with much more precision, sensitivity and a healthy trust in my sense of hearing, which was a fundamental building block and a necessary prerequisite for the development of my dynamic mixing concept called "Life Force" during the last years Yeah, and since I've been working with the Yamaha MSP3, I've had no real interest in looking around for more studio monitors for my small, cozy and fairly well-equipped home studio. When I moved into my new apartment, I bought a set of Presonus Eris E4.5 studio monitors, but I primarily use them for my gamer and movie corner or as secondary control studio monitors for final listening to my mixes. Now that my studio equipment and my mixing concept have finally been satisfactorily completed and implemented, I can put a lot more of my time, energy and creativity into developing my compositional skills in the coming years, which I'm really looking forward to. ))
-
1. work-in-progress Lufia 2 - Tyrant Breaker (Master Mi Remix)
Master Mi replied to Master Mi's topic in Post Your Game ReMixes!
Thanks for the feedback. )) And yeah, the guitar articulations of the clean electric guitar I still have to program for each note (they 're only step-sequenced for this review, so some notes might sound a bit off - but I'm glad I removed the slides before :DD). The length of this part could be fitting - 'cause the whole track might go about 7 minutes and the rest of the track will contain some heavy rock/metal stuff. So this calm, mystical part could be an adequate break before the heavy musical final with the battle against Daos kicks in. I'm still unsure if I add some drums in this melodic section of the preview - but I feel that this part without drums and with lots of melodic synths and VSTIs instead has its own charme somehow. -
1. work-in-progress Lufia 2 - Tyrant Breaker (Master Mi Remix)
Master Mi replied to Master Mi's topic in Post Your Game ReMixes!
As far as I'm not ready with the track yet I still wanted to show ya a small preview of the coming version. The track is already completely overworked compared to the last version (1.5) and this preview contains a little deep melodious break apart from the heavy rock/metal tunes within the rest of the track that will go something over 7 minutes. I'm still working on this part as well - but tell me how you like the rough conception of the calm break (before it will go in the heavy final part with the battle against Daos afterwards). -
I prefer Youtube because of the better audio streaming quality (audio streaming bitrate of 128 kbit/s at Soundcloud vs 192 kbit/s at Youtube can make a noticeable difference in sound quality) and the possibility of underlining the audio material with some fitting video material (own gameplay scenes of video games for video game remixes, for example).
-
Haha, Americans can't get surprised that easily. They're already used to false flag attacks. ;D
-
Correct use of loudness metering for CD mastering?
Master Mi replied to Master Mi's topic in Music Composition & Production
C 'mon, guys - really nobody any kind of an idea? Maybe some further informations about my loudness metering unit and why I guess that method 2) is the right one. If I would start to messure the loudness right within a track for example it would show me a pretty higher max. loudness than if I messure the loudness of a track or another audio program right from the beginning to the end. And that's why I guess that I have to messure the loudness of a whole CD right from the beginning to the end, too. But I'm not quite sure if there might be another measuring technique for CD loudness mastering as well. -
I've got a question concerning the right use of the loudness metering unit in my DAW (Samplitude Pro X3 Suite) for CD mastering. All soundtracks for my CD are already loaded into the music project file on track 1 one after another. The loudness ratio between all tracks is already set via object volume editing (couldn't build just on loudness metering there - had to do this by ear because of different music genres and different dynamic ranges of the soundtracks). And now I want to bring the loudest part of this CD mix at around - 23 dB. For this purpose do I have to: 1) ...check the loudness metering for each track anew from each track start to rise or lower the volume of all tracks together until the loudest part of the loudest track reaches -23 dB? or 2) ... let the loudness metering do its job by playing the whole CD (all soundtracks in a row) without pausing while checking the loudest part, memorize the highest loudness and rise or lower the volume of all tracks together until the loudest point of the whole CD loudness metering is set at -23 dB? It's really strange that it can make differences up to 2 dB of loudness in LUFS between these 2 methods. At method 2) the loudness differences according to the loudness metering unit seem to get smaller and nearly stable/unchanged after the first few tracks. If you meter each soundtrack track just from the beginning (method 1)) the loudness differences according to the loudness metering unit are much bigger and the loudness metering seems to react much more sensitive. Although I'm pretty sure method 2) is the right one for mastering the loudness of a CD I want to ask the OCRemix community about this phenomenon and the correct use of the loudness metering for this purpose.
-
Hm, thx for the hint. They must have changed it recently - some time before it was 320kbit/s and some time before this you could upload and stream wave data content... with a free account. But seems to be a general problem in the last years of western capitalism. Lots of those halfhearted businessmen and private investors obviously try to buy up good content platforms (like formerly free music platforms, mail providers etc.) and want to drag max. profits outta this and every poop that accidentally sniffs its first fresh air... from the "Fresh Air Company". So, I guess one of the best free audiovisual content platforms that doesn't change its essential rules for a very long time is still Youtube. There seems to be still a good audio bitrate of about 192 kbit/s, you can implement (for example) gameplay videos into your musical videogame remix content and its always nice to get some feedback there (compared to simpler, more unknown and now pretty expensive platforms like Clyp).