Limiting / Waveform differences?

[miro]

I'm doing techno music since many years but there's something I never figured out:

I've noticed that "professional" mastering waveform mostly look balanced while they're still loud (compared to an average loudness in that genre) although in breakdown parts where most of the beat goes away (esp. kickdrum) the waveform is definitely below the max. at 0dB!
In other words: when the kickdrum is not there the waveform decreases around 3-5 dB at least.

My problem when i master for myself (need it for unreleased tracks when playing live) using some EQ, maybe a bit comp and a limiter at the end (never extremely!), the parts where the kickdrum is gone (often hihat+snare or clap still going) the waveform is still too high because the limiter pulls up hihat+snare or clap too much

I can't imagine that most ME's in that genre work with limiter automations or something similar. Is it an EQ thing? Should i reduce the high end or upper mids after pushing the treshold on the limiter?

My mixing skills aren't bad at all and the original waveforms look as the should. it's just after doing my personal mastering!

hope someone has a little advice


thanks alot!

[Lagerfeldt]

You're probably using too much limiting and your compressor is set wrong. There are certainly instances where you use automation in mastering, but usually that's simply for lowering or raising volume. If you need to automate limiters and eq in most of your masters you need to look at your whole approach again.

But you also have to remember that when you listen to and look at good commercial dance tracks, they have been produced and mixed to near perfection before mastering takes place.

The producer and mixer (often the same person in this type of music) has absolutely control over each sound in the mix, much more so than with rock or acoustic music. Mastering a good dance track is more about minimizing the side effects of compression and limiting than anything else. You'll rarely be limiting more than 2 dB, perhaps 3 dB in total.

The good dance mixes I get in for mastering (and the productions and mixes I make myself) are tightly controlled in terms of peaks, so little limiting is needed on the master in order to increase volume. It primarily comes from the mix itself.

My advice for you is to see if you can get a really good unmastered dance track to examine, and then experiment more with your compressor (and limiter).

[miro]

yes, i thought so! only prob is that all of my older tracks ( and also other reference tracks i'm comparing with) are louder if i go more subtile with the limiter to have it all more balanced.

only choice would be to redo ALL my tracks again (some are older than 2 years) which is almost impossible...!

i guess i will start a new chapter with pre-mastering my stuff (it's really hard to stay moderate with it since esp. in electr. music the loudness war is quiet intense) and maybe have no other choice than redo all the past stuff..

thanks for the reply

[miro]

Originally Posted by Lagerfeldt

Mastering a good dance track is more about minimizing the side effects of compression and limiting than anything else.
.

i'll keep that on mind!

[Lagerfeldt]

If you're producing and mixing the tracks yourself, that's place to start - not the mastering. At least do that from now on.

A good production and mix is 3/4 of a good final master.

· Try to make everything perfect in the production and mix without even thinking of the master bus or the mastering process.

· You can add a touch of broadband compressor to the master bus while mixing if you want though, but it can be misleading.

· Instead try using more sum compression on your submixes.

· Sidechain compression is your friend when mixing dance music, not just for effect but for volume. Fast attack, peak mode, then duck.

· As always: Good EQ, compression, and prioritizing in the mix will do wonders...

Don't try to guess what's going to happen in the mastering, and don't think "I'll be better when it's mastered" while you're mixing. It's like sucking on a binkie.

[miro]

Originally Posted by Lagerfeldt

If you're producing and mixing the tracks yourself, that's place to start - not the mastering. At least do that from now on.

A good production and mix is 3/4 of a good final master.

· Try to make everything perfect in the production and mix without even thinking of the master bus or the mastering process.

· You can add a touch of broadband compressor to the master bus while mixing if you want though, but it can be misleading.

· Instead try using more sum compression on your submixes.

· Sidechain compression is your friend when mixing dance music, not just for effect but for volume. Fast attack, peak mode, then duck.

· As always: Good EQ, compression, and prioritizing in the mix will do wonders...

Don't try to guess what's going to happen in the mastering, and don't think "I'll be better when it's mastered" while you're mixing. It's like sucking on a binkie.

thanks lagerfeldt for getting into this
you are absolutely right!! i know about bus compression and soft limiting etc....i guess all the incorrect over-limited productions (with way too much high end) i hear on the beatport top 10 charts (made by new style-amateur labels etc) were influencing me after all even if i should know better.

after writing this thread i was comparing my stuff to the "real" mastered top productions and i realized they are NOT super over-loud with 20 tons of high end freq!.....

this can be confusing when you pay too much attention to what may be not competent in the end....



thank you allthough...

cheers from berlin
M

[Jesse Skeens]

Agree with Lagerfeldt here.. Sounds like you might be over limiting the master buss due to the mixdown not being as efficient as it could be. As you noted the volume in a lot of mastered mixes goes down 3-5db in breakdowns. So this means that if you just overlimit a few db too much, which can easily be done when trying to 'brute force' the track, then you'll end up with the type of waveform that you're talking about here.

Also agree to shoot for only a few db of limiting on the master, anymore and there's problems that should be dealt with in the mix.

Also go through all your channels looking for sub freqs that don't need to be there. that's probably one of the most common errors I come across and can easily eat up headroom causing the comps/limiters to work too hard.

[miro]

Originally Posted by Jesse Skeens

Agree with Lagerfeldt here.. Sounds like you might be over limiting the master buss due to the mixdown not being as efficient as it could be. As you noted the volume in a lot of mastered mixes goes down 3-5db in breakdowns. So this means that if you just overlimit a few db too much, which can easily be done when trying to 'brute force' the track, then you'll end up with the type of waveform that you're talking about here.

Also agree to shoot for only a few db of limiting on the master, anymore and there's problems that should be dealt with in the mix.

Also go through all your channels looking for sub freqs that don't need to be there. that's probably one of the most common errors I come across and can easily eat up headroom causing the comps/limiters to work too hard.

with the last 2-3 tracks i've got way better results...very happy about it.
before bumpin' into gearsluts some weeks ago (taught me SO much..esp. about digital stuff!) i had no clue about going to "hot" on the individual channels and about the summing process since i worked with hardware all my life and just started about 2 years ago going digi only.

now my master buss is never too packed and without any process max at -5dB. i never put a limiter on the mixbuss (just using the airwindows classic channel for soft warming and very very soft compression at max. -2dB GR)

and also i usually cut low ends on every channel even if the sound seems to not be bassy at all.

i guess my problem was not to make a sort of surgical "taking away frequencies" (esp. being carefull on the higher ends since they easily can be emphasized when limiting) in combination with the limiting/mastering process.


now i'm much more happy and the waveform looks just nice on the last track(s) i worked on!


thanks for the answers!

[miro]

Originally Posted by SafeandSound

I am not 100 pct sure what the main issue is for you, if it's side effects
of compression and limiting it might be the tools themselves, or how they are set up or as pointed out the mix itself.

If it's just that the breakdowns either peak or "sound" too loud then I would employ an automated/manual (probably hybrid) fader ride(dip), to increase the dynamic range of the file, if that is what is required.

You can very quickly lose punch in techno/dance if overlimiting, you want that forward drive in the beat
and that "rhythm" is shaded quicky with overlimiting or wrong time contants.

cheers

yes, IF i notice this kind of problem i'll do a bit on automation in the breakdowns!

thanks!

[UnderTow]

I tend not to use much compression at all when producing/mixing electronic dance tracks. There is no need. You have full control of all the sounds. I don't really use side-chain compression on the bass either. Instead I use the velocity of each bass note to get the desired effect. (This doesn't work for all types of basslines).

Something I have been (re)working on recently runs at around -9dB FS RMS according to iXL. This is the mix, not the master. It is mixed into Mastercomp on the master bus catching max 2 dB on the loudest peaks. There are no other compressors in the project.

PS: And the bits without a beat are as soft as they should be.

Alistair

[Delta Heavy]

Originally Posted by UnderTow

There is no need. You have full control of all the sounds

bit of a sweeping generalisation there

part of this 'full control' is often compression, imo

[miro]

well it's also a matter of tastes in sound. i love compressing stuff for shaping and sometimes sidechaining.
anyway...the whole thing has turned out to be all cool now
thanks for all the replies

[UnderTow]

Originally Posted by miro

well it's also a matter of tastes in sound. i love compressing stuff for shaping and sometimes sidechaining.

Oh sure. But then it isn't a necessity but a choice.

anyway...the whole thing has turned out to be all cool now

Great.

Alistair

[miro]

Originally Posted by UnderTow

Oh sure. But then it isn't a necessity but a choice.



Great.

Alistair

[bbuyuk]

Originally Posted by Lagerfeldt

· Sidechain compression is your friend when mixing dance music, not just for effect but for volume.

Lagerfeldt, do you prefer to use Sidechain (hipass) compression or M/S compression (and may be M/S EQing too) for keeping the sound of kick "tight" on mastering the dance tracks?

BB

[Lagerfeldt]

Originally Posted by bbuyuk

Lagerfeldt, do you prefer to use Sidechain (hipass) compression or M/S compression (and may be M/S EQing too) for keeping the sound of kick "tight" on mastering the dance tracks?

BB

I was referring to mixing, not mastering. External sidechain compression in mixing where you control the bass with the kick for instance. Not only can it give you 2-3 dB of extra headroom when setup correctly, but it can make the whole track seem tighter and "faster" since you avoid the heavy downbeats on 1 and 3.

In mastering, using an internal sidechain HP filter isn't the answer for getting a tight kick, on the contrary I would say, since it lets low frequencies through uncompressed. It could be the solution in other cases, but not for this problem. M/S compression/equalizing could work well but generally speaking it's simply a question of good eq and broadband compression.

Multiband compression on the low band could the answer in some cases too, but it all depends.

[space2012]

Originally Posted by miro

I'm doing techno music since many years .../...
I've noticed that "professional" mastering waveform mostly look balanced while they're still loud (compared to an average loudness in that genre) although in breakdown parts where most of the beat goes away (esp. kickdrum) the waveform is definitely below the max. at 0dB!
In other words: when the kickdrum is not there the waveform decreases around 3-5 dB at least.

... when i master for myself .../... the waveform is still too high because the limiter pulls up hihat+snare or clap too much

I can't imagine that most ME's in that genre work with limiter automations or something similar. Is it an EQ thing? Should i reduce the high end or upper mids after pushing the treshold on the limiter?

#1. get an easy to see/understand RMS & Peak Meter like T-Racks 3

#2. use multiband compression,
#3. or aux send the kick and bass, and master them in another group channel, and just add an small limiter at master.
something like Aphex Dominator 2 720 does,
splits 3-way limits each separatelly, then adds a 4th limiter/soft clipper at the out/end.
#4. or master the song but do not bounce.... then backward/reverse the audio, bounce, and then reverse/backward again. then bounce the master normally, and test A/B what you like more.

or see other techniques:
Found: Drawmer DC2476 Masterflow vs. PSPAudioware Vintage Warmer vs. original files!

thers others in GS, search.

[Jesse Graffam]

miro, I couldn't help but notice in your original post that you are talking about EQing/etc your tracks for the purpose of playing them live.

Why are you compressing or limiting them at all then?

[Delta Heavy]

Originally Posted by uncajesse

miro, I couldn't help but notice in your original post that you are talking about EQing/etc your tracks for the purpose of playing them live.

Why are you compressing or limiting them at all then?

i think he's probably talking about playing the tracks out in a dj set, and hence is doing a bit of limiting/home-mastering for the purposes of getting his tracks to a similar level of the other released tracks he is playing

this is pretty much the norm in dance music now

[Jesse Graffam]

Originally Posted by Delta Heavy

i think he's probably talking about playing the tracks out in a dj set

DJ mixers have faders for the levels, so you don't need to compress or limit the tracks at all during mastering for that purpose. and it sounds better on a large system that way.

just because something might be the norm, doesn't mean you have to comply to the lowest common denominator. why NOT hold yourself to a higher standard, and see what happens?

anyways i disagree that it's being done is the norm. what i think is not the norm is doing specific masters just for DJing to begin with. that is unfortunately not the norm, because the digital "dubs" and singles that producers are doing these days are so loud that they even have to compromise the spectral balance just to "compete" on sites like Beatport. I'm well aware of this, because I deal with it on a daily basis. The problem is when DJs go to a club and play back that trash, it sounds SOOO grating on a large powerful audio system.

[UnderTow]

Originally Posted by uncajesse

DJ mixers have faders for the levels, so you don't need to compress or limit the tracks at all during mastering for that purpose. and it sounds better on a large system that way.

The problem is that more often than not, the previous DJ will be maxing out the system. If you then play a DJ set that is much softer, the crowd will not be happy.

just because something might be the norm, doesn't mean you have to comply to the lowest common denominator. why NOT hold yourself to a higher standard, and see what happens?

The dance floor might empty out. That is not exactly what a DJ wants.

anyways i disagree that it's being done is the norm. what i think is not the norm is doing specific masters just for DJing to begin with. that is unfortunately not the norm, because the digital "dubs" and singles that producers are doing these days are so loud that they even have to compromise the spectral balance just to "compete" on sites like Beatport. I'm well aware of this, because I deal with it on a daily basis. The problem is when DJs go to a club and play back that trash, it sounds SOOO grating on a large powerful audio system.

Agreed... but the crowd often doesn't know, care or understand. All they know is that the music has suddenly become much softer. They don't like that. Of course if the headroom is available and there is a good sound guy keeping an ear on things, things are different.

Also if you are mixing your own productions with mastered releases, you will have trouble with the levels unless you play everything much softer than the previous and next DJ. (Again, assuming that there is lack of headroom in the system).

In the parties we used to organise, we always over specified the PA by as large a factor as possible. This gave plenty of headroom. I usually had to keep the levels on the amps relatively low as DJs tend to use up whatever headroom they are given. The nice side of this is that I could up the amp levels considerably for my own sets and keep plenty of headroom. I wasn't playing any louder than anyone else but it did sound better.

Unfortunately most promoters and DJs don't think like this so some loudness processing is needed for your own productions if you want to play them in your own DJ sets and keep energy levels on the dance floor.

Alistair

[space2012]

Originally Posted by uncajesse

DJ mixers have faders for the levels, so you don't need to compress or limit the tracks at all during mastering for that purpose. and it sounds better on a large system that way.

too much dynamic range in the mids, sounds annoing in large systems.
for lows sounds pleasant,
for highs...is music dependant.