Anyone Using K-14 Metering?

[Brian Foraker]

BK and all,

Anything to consider differently about using the K System for mastering only?

I'm using the Penguin meters mainly.


Thank you!

brian f

[SawCompression]

~I have a question.
I am use K-14 METER(ELEMENTAL).somebody tell me :"if the mixing's rms exceed -15dB,the mixing was a waster!"

Before mastring ,my song's rms sometimes exceed -15dB of rms(in the k-14 meter the rms about +2 dB).At the moment ,my song is waster??

My English is bad!Fogiving me ,please.




Learner SawCompression.

[Thor]

Hi Bob,

If I recall correctly from when I set up my monitoring, you recommended (or specified) bandwidth limited pink noise. I don't remember the exact frequencies (250Hz - 3kHz?).

Is this something you still recommend, or can 'full range' pink noise be used just as well?

Cheers,
Thor

Originally Posted by bob katz

I'm very excited to hear so many people who understand the system and realize the importance of the monitor calibration as well as the metering.

To set the record straight, the calibration point is 83 dBFS C weighted, slow, ONE speaker at a time. The test signal is -20 dBFS RMS. This sets up the 0 dB point of the monitor, but that point will be VERY VERY VERY loud for all but some classical music recordings, dynamic home theatre, and some audiophile records.

You will have to attenuate and somewhere between -6 and -8 dB on the monitor controller will correspond with approximately a K-14 for many types of pop music.

Does this guarantee a good-sounding, "musical" result? Of course not. How it sounds is the key in the end. I'm just helping to provide some tools that can be good guidance.

BK

[bob katz]

Originally Posted by Thor

Hi Bob,

If I recall correctly from when I set up my monitoring, you recommended (or specified) bandwidth limited pink noise. I don't remember the exact frequencies (250Hz - 3kHz?).

Is this something you still recommend, or can 'full range' pink noise be used just as well?

Cheers,
Thor

I do recommend the bandwidth-limited pink noise. The main reason I haven't been using it here is there is a difference in the calibration and I got used to a given monitor gain setting. But for portability of references between different systems and people saying "I listen to this recording at this monitor position", band-limited noise should produce even more consistent results. I'll have to revise the p.n. file at our website to be band-limited noise. If you want to roll your own, it's not difficult, just be sure to use a guranteed accurate RMS-measurement instrument that is repeatable to 0.1 dB.

The RME meter is one such meter, as is Spectrafoo, Elemental Audio's Inspector, and Pinguin's meters. I'm sure there are more, but remember, there is a difference between RMS and median averaging, and many meters are "rms calibrated' but not true RMS-reading.

[stellar]

bob,

i want to do this, but i am just confused on one thing.

you said,

"If a client tells me in advance----that he would like his master to be as "loud" as Green Day---I know EXACTLY where to preset my monitor attenuator before going to work, and without having to put Green Day back in the CD player or reference again to it. "

i am trying to understand this. do you mean that you remember exactly at what volume the Green Day CD sounded like?

"In other words, if I have previously played Green Day on my reference monitor system and I know where the attenuator falls for this "genre" of music, then it eliminates both the guesswork AND the comparative listening process. I can preset my attenuator and get right to work!"

are you saying that your ears naturally tend to mix towards this one specific volume level? that you can consistently remember on an hour by hour basis and day to day?

"f I put on a pop or rock CD in my room, and to make it "pleasantly loud" I find I have to attenuate the control to, say, -10 dB, I KNOW OBJECTIVELY that this recording has been moderately "squashed". "

are you saying that you have the ability to level match every single thing that you listen to? even if days or months apart?

Or am I totally off here?

i don't get it?

"we can preset the monitor control to the position we would like the master to end up working at, and then master with our eyes closed, knowing we will be making a record with X absolute loudness and X amount of compression. "


okay. I just don't see myself being able to match levels this consistenly day in and day out. or even from one hour to the next. or from one genre to another. Is there something I am missing because I just don't get this? is it something you just train yourself to do? are we always naturally mixing towards the same volume and never realized it? i guess i am just so confused.

help?

[bob katz]

Originally Posted by stellar

bob,

i want to do this, but i am just confused on one thing.

you said,

[i]"If a client tells me in advance----that he would like his master to be as "loud" as Green Day---I


snip

Yesterday I thought I wrote a good reply to Stellar, explaining how I'm not perfect (at a long shot!) and I'm usually within about 1-2 dB... and explaining what we can know and what we cannot know (Green-day wise) from the monitor position. But I can't find my post. Did it get lost?

[stellar]

oh no!

i think it must have!!

dangit.....nevermind.

i guess i was just wondering how you consistently mix at the same exact volume day in and day out? I have to constantly change mine....

i also agree that 83 db is LOUD. i measured someone talking to me in my studio yesterday while they didn't know it and it measured 62 db.

i guess i also fail to see how you would never have an over with your system. I mean, unless you have already set the limiter at 0. otherwise, if I am mixing at a -14db or even a =20 db average level, at a specific monitoring level, i am still liable to get overs, no matter what monitoring level. i guess i should just try it because these verbal descriptions are making no sense to me.

[bob katz]

Originally Posted by stellar

oh no!

i think it must have!!

dangit.....nevermind.

You're sorry! I'm sorry... I think I covered your questions to a "T", but it was so much work to write once!

i guess i was just wondering how you consistently mix at the same exact volume day in and day out? I have to constantly change mine....

Mixing, yes, it's critical to hear your mix at different volumes throughout, though I do suggest you return to a standard or your bass response will wobble.

Mastering, I am very consistent, as I tried to write but lost that other post, within 1-2 dB. I wrote (but lost) something like---- I can't walk into my room cold turkey and get it right, but after about 10 minutes getting used to any given recording again, I can blindly set the monitor pot and then look at it and find it's within 1-2 dB of the setting I had already logged.

i also agree that 83 db is LOUD. i measured someone talking to me in my studio yesterday while they didn't know it and it measured 62 db.

Yes, 83 is loud, and on FORTISSIMO (whichis above Forte) passages in my room, both speakers running, I can get 83-86. But the more compressed the material, the less loud that seems because the transients seem to be gone, and the more dynamic the material, the less damaging it is because you only get those SPLs on the occasional peak. But there's nothing wrong with going for a lower if that sounds too loud for you! Nearfields would kill the ears at that SPL. Don't forget I'm working with a full range system that is not thin or bright at about 9 foot distance in a pretty large room.

i guess i also fail to see how you would never have an over with your system. I mean, unless you have already set the limiter at 0. otherwise, if I am mixing at a -14db or even a =20 db average level, at a specific monitoring level, i am still liable to get overs, no matter what monitoring level. i guess i should just try it because these verbal descriptions are making no sense to me.

K-20 monitor gains would ensure that you won't get an over because if it sounds too loud it's got to be going over! That's the magic of mixing K-20, it liberates you from those questions and you can concentrate on the sound. That's what they do in the film studios. And my engineer mixer friends who mix on analog consoles and watch their VU meters and set their gains so 0 VU is - 20 dBFS NEVER get an over either!

But turn down the monitor gain, say, a K-14 monitor gain (83 dB at 0 level) and you have to use a peak limiter or other protection, so suddenly you feel forced to use that bus processing for overload reasons----not necessarily for the sound, but it's going to affect the sound. If that's what you want, and you're doing it for the sound, fine, but I firmly believe it is the misuse of the system, the desire to get those meters to the top that makes people think they need a compressor or a limiter.

BK

[johnlink]

Originally Posted by bob katz

But turn down the monitor gain, say, a K-14 monitor gain (83 dB at 0 level) and you have to use a peak limiter or other protection

Shouldn't that 83 be 77? My understanding is that K-14 has the monitor gain at -6 db relative to K-20 which is calibrated at 0 db.

John Link

[bob katz]

Originally Posted by johnlink

Shouldn't that 83 be 77? My understanding is that K-14 has the monitor gain at -6 db relative to K-20 which is calibrated at 0 db.

John Link

It's just semantics and arithmetic. 0 dB on the meter in the K-System is ALWAYS 83 dB at the correct monitor control position. That's part of the design. You were talking about a pink noise signal of -20 dBFS, yes, it would yield 77 dB with a 6 dB monitor attenuation. But I was talking about a pink noise signal at 0 dB on the meter, which would yield 83 dB.

BK

[johnlink]

Originally Posted by bob katz

It's just semantics and arithmetic. 0 dB on the meter in the K-System is ALWAYS 83 dB at the correct monitor control position. That's part of the design. You were talking about a pink noise signal of -20 dBFS, yes, it would yield 77 dB with a 6 dB monitor attenuation. But I was talking about a pink noise signal at 0 dB on the meter, which would yield 83 dB.

BK

Then what is the meaning of "turn down the monitor gain"? My understanding is that K-20 would have the monitor gain at 0 and K-14 would have it at -6. Moving from 0 to -6 is obviously turning down the monitor gain. Is that what you meant by "turn down the monitor gain", or did you mean something else?

If you had written "But turn down the monitor gain, say, to -6 and you have to use a peak limiter or other protection" I would have thought "Yeah, that's how it works". Or if you had written "But turn down the monitor gain, say, for K-14, and you have to use a peak limiter or other protection" again I would have thought "Yeah, that's how it works". But the "83 dB at 0 level" following "K-14 monitor gain" looked to me like you intended it as a definition of of the K-14 monitor gain, which it can't be because we ALWAYS have 83 db SPL when a K-N meter reads 0 as long as the monitor gain is set correctly (i.e., at 0 for K-20, at -6 for K-14, and -8 for K-12).

Is my description of the monitor gain for each of the K-N meters correct? If not, then I'm afraid I'm really lost.

I think I'm not lost. I believe that in "83 dB at 0 level" the "level" referred to the monitor position when in fact you were referring to the K-14 meter. Is that right?

John Link

[bob katz]

Originally Posted by johnlink

Then what is the meaning of "turn down the monitor gain"? My understanding is that K-20 would have the monitor gain at 0 and K-14 would have it at -6. Moving from 0 to -6 is obviously turning down the monitor gain. Is that what you meant by "turn down the monitor gain", or did you mean something else?

Yes, that's what I meant by "turn down the monitor gain."

For those who are eavesdropping in this thread....

The idea is if you start with a monitor gain (position would be a better term) of 0 dB and you close your eyes and you mix, you'll never get an over. Because if it sounds loud, it's also going to be too high on the meters. And there's enough headroom to allow peaks not to overload, even with a very loud RMS.

But as soon as you turn down the monitor gain, you will be tempted to turn up the mix, thereby inviting a higher recorded level and overs because there won't be enough digital headroom as you keep on pushing up your RMS to get the same perceived loudness out of the speakers.

Does that explain it?

Your description as I recall it was spot on so we're probably just dealing with semantics.

BK

[johnlink]

Originally Posted by bob katz

Yes, that's what I meant by "turn down the monitor gain."

For those who are eavesdropping in this thread....

The idea is if you start with a monitor gain (position would be a better term) of 0 dB and you close your eyes and you mix, you'll never get an over. Because if it sounds loud, it's also going to be too high on the meters. And there's enough headroom to allow peaks not to overload, even with a very loud RMS.

But as soon as you turn down the monitor gain, you will be tempted to turn up the mix, thereby inviting a higher recorded level and overs because there won't be enough digital headroom as you keep on pushing up your RMS to get the same perceived loudness out of the speakers.

Does that explain it?

It does.

Your description as I recall it was spot on so we're probably just dealing with semantics.

I think that what you refer to as semantics is important because if engineers are going to adopt calibrated monitoring they have to understand exactly what it is.

Note that I've revised my previous post to clarify my reading of what you wrote.

JL

[stellar]

ok ok....this is exactly what I don't get. !

Originally Posted by bob katz

The idea is if you start with a monitor gain (position would be a better term) of 0 dB and you close your eyes and you mix, you'll never get an over. Because if it sounds loud, it's also going to be too high on the meters. And there's enough headroom to allow peaks not to overload, even with a very loud RMS.

isn't this subjective? "sounds loud" ? that is supposed to be more liberating than a peak LED? what if in my mixing I drift and turn it up? and i'm actually mixing at -15 rms instead of -20 because its been a few hours and those faders just seem to creep up? how am I supposed to know "that sounded loud enough to be an over". i just don't get it?

...is this one of those things where if i stop thinking about it and just try it it will make sense? it just seems to me that you are talking about a system of repeatability that is solely dependent on MY ears being accurate to within 1-2 db perception of loudness. which is really, really scary to me, because I know I'm no bob katz.

[johnlink]

Originally Posted by stellar

how am I supposed to know "that sounded loud enough to be an over". i just don't get it?

If you have your monitor gain at -6 (which is what you would use for K-14) and you have an over then you will experience a peak of at least 97 db SPL. That's LOUD!!!!! If you have your monitor gain at 0 (which is what you would use for K-20) and you have an over then you will experience a peak of at least 103 db SPL. THAT'S LOUD!!!!!!!!!!!!!

...is this one of those things where if i stop thinking about it and just try it it will make sense?

Try it out. You don't need a K meter, just a Radio Shack SPL meter. Play this pink noise file http://www.digido.com/User/Assets/Ac...cor_st_441.WAV in one speaker at a time and set your monitor gain so that the SPL meter (C weighting, slow response) reads 77 (This will be for K-14, but like I said, you don't need a K-meter.). With the monitor gain at that position, do your mixing or mastering, and just try to have an over. Your ears won't let you do it.

JL

[mars]

Originally Posted by SawCompression

~I have a question.
I am use K-14 METER(ELEMENTAL).somebody tell me :"if the mixing's rms exceed -15dB,the mixing was a waster!"

Before mastring ,my song's rms sometimes exceed -15dB of rms(in the k-14 meter the rms about +2 dB).At the moment ,my song is waster??

My English is bad!Fogiving me ,please.

Learner SawCompression.

Your English isn't too bad. Also, at -15dB (give or take a few dB), your mix is definitely not a 'waster". Just keep reading this forum and thread and asking questions and you'll be allright.

[Mitch Manger]

Thanks for the direct link to the pink noise.

[Dor]

Do I have this right? Import the -20db wave file to my DAW and push the fader until the meter on my master bus is at 0db peak. From there I calibrate my monitors to 83db .

Thanks,

Dor

[rufus13]

Originally Posted by Lupo

The radioshark meter works fine for this purpose. The actual level will probably vary a bit from person to person and room to room anyway.

If it's the digital meter, it also have a RCA for output, which makes it sort of useable as a measurement mic. It's far from accurate, but that can be compensated for by the use of a radioshark SPL meter profile, if available, in the analysis software.
Andreas

Beg to differ about RS spl meter. I took mine to work (Calibration Lab) and ran it against the standard. After trimming the one adjustment, it --easily-- met the published specifications and was often +/-1 least significant digit. Failure to use the meter correctly/carefully will cause more error than the meter itself.

Where it doesn't stand up to a B&K or GR meter is in construction, traceable calibration, and being specified for use outdoors (high and low temperatures). It's also way-way-way cheaper than the low-end "instrumentation-grade" spl meters from the best companies, meaning that regular folks with home/project studios can buy them. A cheap (and never calibrated) RS spl meter is MUCH better than no meter.

The next step up from the RS SPL meter is to have it calbrated at a local lab. Then you will have a standard to compare to.

Karl

[lematrix]

Hello from Berlin/Germany.....

I read this Thread and after buying the Book from Mr. Katz i tried out the K14 Metering and i´m blowing away about how good and eficence it works. I calibrated it at 79 DB, 83 was to loud for my ears.

I can tell everyone who don´t use it: "Try it Out"




Thanks, Mr. Katz !!!

[chester]

Originally Posted by bob katz

Yes, 83 is loud, and on FORTISSIMO (whichis above Forte) passages in my room, both speakers running, I can get 83-86. But the more compressed the material, the less loud that seems because the transients seem to be gone, and the more dynamic the material, the less damaging it is because you only get those SPLs on the occasional peak. But there's nothing wrong with going for a lower if that sounds too loud for you! Nearfields would kill the ears at that SPL. Don't forget I'm working with a full range system that is not thin or bright at about 9 foot distance in a pretty large room.


BK

hello, if i am not wrong , ears can work over a time of 8 hours on 80db without a damage. So my question, if i measure 80db on my nearfields ( 1.2 meter distance), are those 80db good or bad for my ears. Your answer confused me a little bit. Normally I measure it where I sit with 80db is the figure to aim for. on the SPL-Meter ?!?!?
Thus I hear mostly on very small levels, but for professional work i want to know that right. thanks

[bob katz]

Originally Posted by chester

hello, if i am not wrong , ears can work over a time of 8 hours on 80db without a damage. So my question, if i measure 80db on my nearfields ( 1.2 meter distance), are those 80db good or bad for my ears. Your answer confused me a little bit. Normally I measure it where I sit with 80db is the figure to aim for. on the SPL-Meter ?!?!?
Thus I hear mostly on very small levels, but for professional work i want to know that right. thanks

These questions come to mind:

80 dB sustained? 80 dB on mezzo forte passages or the occasional forte? Continuously loud music or dynamic music? Highly distorted music? How many breaks do you take during the day?

You see, there is no definitive answer. But I would rate it like the exposure film that you wear on your chest in the nuclear lab to tell you when you have been overdosed. Your answers to the questions above would help determine if you are in trouble or not. The higher the SPL and the more continuous it is, the shorter your exposure should be. If your ears are fatigued after an hour, then you are in trouble already.

BK

[chester]

Originally Posted by bob katz

These questions come to mind:

80 dB sustained? 80 dB on mezzo forte passages or the occasional forte? Continuously loud music or dynamic music? Highly distorted music? How many breaks do you take during the day?

You see, there is no definitive answer. But I would rate it like the exposure film that you wear on your chest in the nuclear lab to tell you when you have been overdosed. Your answers to the questions above would help determine if you are in trouble or not. The higher the SPL and the more continuous it is, the shorter your exposure should be. If your ears are fatigued after an hour, then you are in trouble already.

BK

hi Bob,

I do have alot of breaks a day ( i f not i take a break every 45mintues ). I normally hear not loud as i`ve already written on the other post. Only for a check I take it little bit louder to ~80db, mixing dynamic music. So my question is , is the SPL dependently to the distance to the monitors ? I don`t feel fatiqued hearing over a time of 45minutes and more.

thanks

[rufus13]

Originally Posted by chester

hi Bob,
So my question is , is the SPL dependently to the distance to the monitors ?
thanks

I'm not BK, but I can answer your question.

Sound Pressure Level is measured at the head position of the listener. Follow the K-system set up procedure of measuring one loudspeaker playing at a time.

Little speakers close or big speakers far, should be adjusted for the correct/comfortable level. Measuring close to the speakers will give an indication of much higher SPL than the listener is exposed to sitting in the normal mixing position.

Karl

[bob katz]

Originally Posted by rufus13

I'm not BK, but I can answer your question.

Sound Pressure Level is measured at the head position of the listener. Follow the K-system set up procedure of measuring one loudspeaker playing at a time.

Little speakers close or big speakers far, should be adjusted for the correct/comfortable level. Measuring close to the speakers will give an indication of much higher SPL than the listener is exposed to sitting in the normal mixing position.

Karl

Yes, the SPL should be measured at the listening position. The actual loudness perceived and the potential damage cannot easily be measured by an SPL meter, the SPL meter is a guide to how "dangerous" it is getting, but the ear responds in loudness to: RMS level, short duration peak content, distortion, high frequencies more than low response... and total duration of exposure reduces our sensitivity and makes us vulnerable, complicating the matter.

There are standards set up by OSHA, but if we all followed that, we'd be mixing at 70 dB SPL for 3 hours and then going home till tomorrow (I'm exagerrating the exact numbers, but OSHA's specifications, the last I read them, are extremely conservative, and in our profession we're breaking those rules all the time... I hope OSHA is wrong, for our sake)

BK

[chester]

thanks bob and rufus for he fast repsonses. First I will measure with a SPL-Meter after that I will judge with my ears and feel to it, cause 83db is a way to loud for me.

good week to you both.

bye chester

[dcollins]

Originally Posted by bob katz

There are standards set up by OSHA, but if we all followed that, we'd be mixing at 70 dB SPL for 3 hours and then going home till tomorrow (I'm exagerrating the exact numbers, but OSHA's specifications, the last I read them, are extremely conservative, and in our profession we're breaking those rules all the time... I hope OSHA is wrong, for our sake)

http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owad...able=STANDARDS

90dB for eight hours.

110 for a half hour!


Fortunately, if you listen too loudly or too quietly you'll be making wrong EQ decisions, so sticking to something like 80-90 will both improve your work and preserve hearing..........

DC

[bob katz]

Originally Posted by dcollins

http://www.osha.