Head Room.........but how much???

[swisha31]

ok we all know there has to be head room before mastering engineers do the sprucing up, but how much head room. do we have it just topping out at 0db or -1db to -2db so it wont be muddy when you add all of the compression, eq, and maybe limiting. should we already have bus compression on it to keep it just at 0db and then you all go in and add more? oh and another thing, if someone is ATTEMPTING to master from plugs and have no summing bus, how should we sum tracks up for mastering that still have the analog sound? which plugs are better to use in a chain; ozone, vintage warmer, uad-1, L3(which i dont like), mastercomp, some other EQs and comps. educate me, you have all of my attention.

[narcoman]

i treat forte passages at -20dbFS. Means i never ever ever see an over....

Even the biggest tut-ti hit in the world will only top out at about -5 at this level

[jayfrigo]

Originally Posted by swisha31

ok we all know there has to be head room before mastering engineers do the sprucing up, but how much head room. do we have it just topping out at 0db or -1db to -2db so it wont be muddy when you add all of the compression, eq, and maybe limiting.

Some say keep it to -6 dB FS, some say -3, but really, just leave something. Don't clip or do any limiting or processing purely for level, and even a dB or 2 headroom will do. Mastering engineers can certainly gain stage if they need the level to be different from one stage to the next, so you have some flexibility. Just don't push it all the way to the top and it should all work out.

[swisha31]

Originally Posted by jayfrigo

Some say keep it to -6 dB FS, some say -3, but really, just leave something. Don't clip or do any limiting or processing purely for level, and even a dB or 2 headroom will do. Mastering engineers can certainly gain stage if they need the level to be different from one stage to the next, so you have some flexibility. Just don't push it all the way to the top and it should all work out.

ok so after i have the mix that i want, i should make sure the level should be -6db to -3db to be safe. thats actually rather low, i'm not used to leaving the levels around that area but i will start so the master engineer's can do what they do to them. i used to just have it toping out at 0db but i will have to start changing from there

[Riccardo]

Originally Posted by swisha31

ok so after i have the mix that i want, i should make sure the level should be -6db to -3db to be safe. thats actually rather low, i'm not used to leaving the levels around that area but i will start so the master engineer's can do what they do to them. i used to just have it toping out at 0db but i will have to start changing from there

Are you mixing in the box? If that's the case and -6 to -3 dBfs is rather low for you I'd humbly advise reconsidering your gain staging if you want your music to sound good.

Just my 2 cents

[Riccardo]

Originally Posted by narcoman

i treat forte passages at -20dbFS. Means i never ever ever see an over....

Even the biggest tut-ti hit in the world will only top out at about -5 at this level

Somebody is still out there

[acorneau]

Originally Posted by swisha31

ok so after i have the mix that i want, i should make sure the level should be -6db to -3db to be safe. thats actually rather low, i'm not used to leaving the levels around that area but i will start so the master engineer's can do what they do to them. i used to just have it toping out at 0db but i will have to start changing from there

Are you talking 0dBU or 0dBFS? (You know the difference, right?) That may be the stumbling block in this discussion.

My general recomendations are: Don't clip it, don't limit it. tutt
Once dynamic range is gone, it's gone, so play it on the safe side. (You can always squash it in the mastering if that's what you really want.)

[swisha31]

Originally Posted by Riccardo

Are you mixing in the box? If that's the case and -6 to -3 dBfs is rather low for you I'd humbly advise reconsidering your gain staging if you want your music to sound good.

Just my 2 cents

yeah man im all in the box here. how would you go about maximizing gain without limiting??

[Riccardo]

Originally Posted by swisha31

yeah man im all in the box here. how would you go about maximizing gain without limiting??

First separate the two process:
one is mixing, the other is mastering.

Track at moderately adequate levels, mix at moderately adequate levels and chances are your plug ins will not turn your music into mush and your d/a converters will sound smoother.

Get the mix to sound the way you want.
Once all those things are sorted move on to the next stage. If you will be doing it yourself (the mastering) give at least yourself some time between the two production processes (i.e. put some time maybe a couple of weeks between the mixing and the mastering).
When you get to the mastering stage ask yourself (and you'll have to be as objective in judgement as possible...) what the track needs.

Re: levels.....if you mixed it right (if it is a good mix) you should have no problems in pushing the level up with a limiter.

[HEADROOM]

Why not simply plug in the Mastering Tools in the 2Bus while doing the mix.....You can hear how they interact and effect the overall mix? Done it.....it works...

This will bring me in trouble

[acorneau]

Originally Posted by HEADROOM

Why not simply plug in the Mastering Tools in the 2Bus while doing the mix.....You can hear how they interact and effect the overall mix? Done it.....it works...

Why don't you track, mix, master, and do the artwork all at the same time? The simple answer is you're trying to do too many things at once.

Half of mastering is getting the songs to match up to each other. Can you really do that when you're spending 2-6 hours on a mix before moving on to the next song?

[narcoman]

Originally Posted by Riccardo

Somebody is still out there

its a good place to work at though. Obviously not to be recommended at 16bit or something without good converters.... and yes im 50% sound to pic orchestral. Garage rock for the rest - but then thats only ever tape !!

[HEADROOM]

Originally Posted by acorneau

Why don't you track, mix, master, and do the artwork all at the same time? The simple answer is you're trying to do too many things at once.

Half of mastering is getting the songs to match up to each other. Can you really do that when you're spending 2-6 hours on a mix before moving on to the next song?

The way i ve done this is as follows: I mix ITB so ( Logic Mac- total recall) I can do some adjustements in several phases .I Burn the songs in the right order. Listen to them on different boxes, headphones a cple of days later. Make notes. Go back to song 3 which needs a bit more top, song 5 needs less 200 hz , song 6 gtrsolo bit louder , song 2 less busscompression too squashed , you get the picture...etcetc. Burn a new Cd ....same process till I got it right.
I should mention though I only do this when I do my own stuff and have no customers or deadlines. In waveburner I only do the redbook stuff and thats it.....no more processing....

I sometimes mix several days on one song not 2 or 6 hours, I try different aproaches, sometimes start from scratch like we did in the analog days.....

I understand what you re getting at with doing to much at the same time. but maybe this is just my very personal way of doing things. If I process the audio in any way I like to see_hear what it does to the mix....no surprises at the mastering stage....

I havent thought about doing the artwork at the same time......ill think about it....

[mischa janisch]

headroom,

if it works for you and you're happy with the results - great. I know of a well respected Mix Engineer in Germany who mixes into his mastering chain... it seems to work for him and his high profile clients having done platinum albums that way. As far as I understand, he prefers his sound not beeing altered in mastering...

I personally wouldn't work this way since you easily end up in touble without noticing - especially with the drums. You might fix a frequency related problem with levelchanges (eg. pushing up the fader of your kick, when there is not enough room for your kick in the mix yet).

Putting a Limiter across the MixBus when the mix is finished just to check how things are interacting sometimes is a better way. Remove the Limiter after you've done your final tweaks and print your Mix if you're still happy with it without the Limiter. Repeat the process if you're not happy...

[HEADROOM]

Hi Mischa , You mean Jeo right?

[swisha31]

alright check this out guys, i'm not up on engineer jargan BUT i would like to be informed. Somebody in this post earlier said that they didnt put plugs on the "2bus". now i understand putting effects on the buses but why did he say the "2bus." is that a certain bus set aside for certain dynamics? let me know.

[HEADROOM]

with 2bus I meant the main stereo output, the sum...sorry if that was confusing....

[swisha31]

Originally Posted by HEADROOM

with 2bus I meant the main stereo output, the sum...sorry if that was confusing....

well i'm not used to the engineering jargan but im glad you cleared it up


so now i can go back and read your comment and know what you were talking about now hahaha

[John Moran]

Originally Posted by Riccardo

First separate the two process:
one is mixing, the other is mastering.

Track at moderately adequate levels, mix at moderately adequate levels and chances are your plug ins will not turn your music into mush and your d/a converters will sound smoother.

Get the mix to sound the way you want.

this is so important i had to reiterate what Riccardo said.

Get the mix sounding the way you want. All the internal balances of the instruments and vocals should be where they need to be and if not, adjust your mix to get them that way. If the track isn't hitting hard enough, if the vocals don't come through, if lead instruments aren't standing out when they should, adjust your internal mix balances to make it that way.

DO -NOT- attempt to fix your mix balances with limiting or massive compression across the entire mix to make it loud or cover up a bad mix at this point in the production flow. You have much more discretion and greater ability to fix fundamental problems in a mix while the track is still in discrete elements that are individually adjustable. That is far better than trying to make things work for a poor mix that is just composite stereo.

I've seen these sorts of mixes squashed come into mastering and sometimes I've just handed the track back to the client and said remix it, this is a trainwreck.

Headroom ? leave some for processing, peak levels around 3db below 0ppm isn't a bad place to end up. Levels are easily taken up during mastering if you are concerned about having a loud track. speaking of loud tracks, there are loud tracks that sound like dog doo and tracks with lower average levels that pump and hit harder because the dynamic range is being utilized for impact.

a sine wave can be terribly loud, but it has no punch. you can do the same thing to your music, make it loud but limp with no punch. when that loud, limp track gets played at the same playback volume against other tracks with greater dynamic range and good internal balances , guess which sounds better?

[Jason Poulin]

with a real good ME, all you have to worry about is printing a good mix and that's it.


don't clip... it can be all over the place.


use your ears as to what sounds best.



I stay at around -15dbfs to be say but if it goes in the red at times, it goes in the red.


J.

[swisha31]

Originally Posted by Jason Poulin

with a real good ME, all you have to worry about is printing a good mix and that's it.


don't clip... it can be all over the place.


use your ears as to what sounds best.



I stay at around -15dbfs to be say but if it goes in the red at times, it goes in the red.


J.

yeah but some of the first things i learned were:
1)no clipping ever
2)leave at least some head room for mastering(but i never knew what was ideal which is why i posted)

[Cellotron]

In terms of headroom with in-the-box mixes it's important to realize that as long as the sum is not clipping then the final peak level is not as important as having the individual tracks actually have proper gain staging throughout - i.e. unless the mixer desires for specifically ugly clipped sound then the input channel tracks, aux returns, group busses, 2buss and all plugins should not be going into the "red" (which will vary with the DAW and plugin) at any point.
i.e. I've seen some digital mixes that peaked at say -6dBFs that actually were incredibly flat topped and distorted due to the individual tracks or group busses being heavily clipped themselves!

As long as there is no clipping whatsoever from an overloaded digital gain stage then the actual final mix's peak level setting is usually fairly irrelevant to me when mastering, as I just attenuate this level to an appropriate place so it will not overload the (usually analog) process chain that I choose to use when mastering the tracks.

Best regards,
Steve Berson

[swisha31]

Originally Posted by Cellotron

In terms of headroom with in-the-box mixes it's important to realize that as long as the sum is not clipping then the final peak level is not as important as having the individual tracks actually have proper gain staging throughout - i.e. unless the mixer desires for specifically ugly clipped sound then the input channel tracks, aux returns, group busses, 2buss and all plugins should not be going into the "red" (which will vary with the DAW and plugin) at any point.
i.e. I've seen some digital mixes that peaked at say -6dBFs that actually were incredibly flat topped and distorted due to the individual tracks or group busses being heavily clipped themselves!

As long as there is no clipping whatsoever from an overloaded digital gain stage then the actual final mix's peak level setting is usually fairly irrelevant to me when mastering, as I just attenuate this level to an appropriate place so it will not overload the (usually analog) process chain that I choose to use when mastering the tracks.

Best regards,
Steve Berson

Thanx for the input Steve. I'm a self-taught producer and I interned for a guy that owned a very high end studio here(he moved ) and I had to learn most of that stuff on my own. When I interned though, he taught me about headroom and all of that.

[mischa janisch]

Originally Posted by HEADROOM

Hi Mischa , You mean Jeo right?

... He is the one I've been thinking about. It seems to work for him, but I've had mixes from other guys where it didn't work at all.
The point is - you have to know really well what you are doing, otherwise the result won't be satisfying at all. And who knows - maybe his mixes could benefit from a dedicated mastering step as well...

[HEADROOM]

Originally Posted by mischa janisch

... He is the one I've been thinking about. It seems to work for him, but I've had mixes from other guys where it didn't work at all.
The point is - you have to know really well what you are doing, otherwise the result won't be satisfying at all. And who knows - maybe his mixes could benefit from a dedicated mastering step as well...

It is a small world, J.is living just around the corner here . I guessed he works the same way I do, he mentioned once he doesnt want anybody to interfere with his mixes.
To prevent confusion on this, of course I dont start out with the mastering plugs in the chain. I add them in the final mixing stage when I think I got it right so far and just want to squeeze out the extra punch and volume. I m not saying I choose this path always. But (Im always there when mastering somewhere else) mostly the third party mastering guy does what I would have done too....more or less.
It is always good to have a set of fresh ears in a final stage but there are just more roads to Rom . (is that a n english proverb?)

just my 2c.

[mischa janisch]

Yes, I think so too - a fresh set of ears at the end definitely IS a huge plus. Regarding the sound of the mix being changed too much - I guess you either have to find someone who you trust without attending or simply just attend the session (like you do), which is also the way I usually prefer to work. It does take a little longer, but it's a lot more fun and there is less chance of unnecessary revisions...