+6 db ... from terminology, to clipping

[eman kayker]

I worked as a tracking/mix engineer for a funk band and the band decided to have the master done in Canada, via ftp.
When we contacted the technician, she asked us to give her some examples of music as reference. So the band sent some extracts of Prince and stuff of that caliber. The comment was: ¨ok, we'll go for a +6db mastering¨
Then, when I got the files back, I thought it sounded nice as far as eq and ballance, but heard some audible clips in the transients, and some attacks were distorted. I looked into the waves graphs and saw that there was consecutive clippings, for about 20 samples and more if I recall
But when I sent my comments the answer was ¨look at Prince waves and you'll also see long clipping¨
That's what I did, and she was right... the only difference was that he's album doen't sound distorted. And our master got even worst when converted to mp3
So my question is:
What is a +6 db master?
How do you do a (good) +6 db master
I've search gearslutz and all the web and couldn't find any information about +6db
Cheers
ek

[Darius van H]

If you try to match the apparent volume of a very well played, arranged, recorded and mixed album with a project of lesser quality, then you could run into trouble (if the ref. album has hot level).

I'm not saying that your product is of lesser quality (i haven't heard it), I'm just saying what i found out from personal experience.....maybe your mixes didn't have the same loudness potential as the Prince tracks......... (BTW I hope you're not trying to match the volume of Prince's "Rainbow Children" 'cause that sounds ridiculously fat while extremely loud - "Musicology" sound like shite (IMHO)

Also, not all clips are equal..try clipping solo piano with 20 consecutive clips - where as 20 overs on a snare drum might sound fine. But on bass it could be clearly audible.

A "+6" mastering doesn't mean anything to me........it's no good if you're only looking at the average level over 300ms if you're not hearing or caring about the distortion on the transients!

Did you give the Prince as a loudness ref or a sound ref?

D

[Masterer]

Every recording has a "loudness potential", or a point before which the level is causing unwanted audible artifacts. Every stage in the production process has a determining effect and sets up the recordings loudness potential.

At the mastering stage the instructions from the client should be simple [that is if you want it to sound good]. Tell the mastering engineer "make this record as loud as you can without audible artifacts or compromise [like over compressing/limiting the record for that extra db].

And there you go. The result will be the culmination of all the production stages. It will be as loud as it can be and sound as good as possible [all other things being equal].

Giving other records as examples can be interesting but often do more harm than good.

The bottom line is the extra db or two will not help you sell any more records [you're gonna have to trust me] but it might make your record sound like crap. Not a fair trade off in my opinion.

You should ask the ME to redo the record without having to make it as loud as Prince's.

Good luck.

[ed littman]

I have never heard that as any standard procedure.
I feel a good ME will explain the pros & cons in attemting to match a reference in both sound & level. If your mix cannot hold up at levels as good as the reference, by listening not looking, you should have beed told. if you then decided to go for it that way then it's your call to do so.

isn't our job a ballance of making things sound better & to do what the client asks for? If so, a better line of communiction should have been in place.
Ed

[PMDUBS]

As the other posts say, best to avoid any template solutions (ie 'make it a +6'). I'm thinking they used the '+6' term as derived from vinyl mastering where *generally* a +6dbvu transfer (0vu=+4dbm) is the loudest transfer thats practical. If this guess is right then +6 would mean 'maximum'........

Cheers,

Erik

[eman kayker]

yes, thank you guys...
so to recap... no! neither me nor the band sounded like prince, the npg or " "
but we did our best and that was quite good, recorded in good conditions etc...
and yes that was the rainbow children, and we sent that just as a reference, because they asked for it... we didn't asked to match that sound or quality, just to tell what the band liked.
and i agree with the communication problem... working far away and sending brief, and de-brief through email can get quickly borderline
and thank you for the vinyl comparaison... this might be it... even though we didn't want to go to LP... :)
isn't that weird?

[mrlouie]

Originally Posted by eman kayker

yes, thank you guys...
so to recap... no! neither me nor the band sounded like prince, the npg or " "
but we did our best and that was quite good, recorded in good conditions etc...
and yes that was the rainbow children, and we sent that just as a reference, because they asked for it... we didn't asked to match that sound or quality, just to tell what the band liked.
and i agree with the communication problem... working far away and sending brief, and de-brief through email can get quickly borderline
and thank you for the vinyl comparaison... this might be it... even though we didn't want to go to LP... :)
isn't that weird?

seems kinda like a problem of someone being too technical and not understanding "vibe" .. they wanted the CD to match instead of listening to it to get a feel of what you liked .. i think thats a problem now a days...

just my 2cents ..

[tmcconnell]

for another victim of loudness wars. Seems like the mastering company assumed it was loudness rather than vibe that was the goal - but that the customer was equally guilty of using a technical reference that may have been assumed to be an instruction to max loudness. Seems like a phone call to clarify that would be the least the mastering house should do.

[Darius van H]

I always take ref. cd's that people bring with a very big pinch of salt.

Normally the artist hasn't thought at all about loudness (or is even aware of the problem in general)

They normally just bring CD's of music they like (and why not?) - often one completely smashed from last year and one from like 1992.

(i remember once someone who was doing a rock album brought in a CD of some french music from the 50's - johnny halliday or something - i asked him why he'd brought that as a reference and he said 'cause he liked it! LOL)

I find the bringing of ref's is just a handy way to get into a conversation about loudness........to get a feeler for how hard you need to jam the album into the sausage machine as it were.

[eman kayker]

basicaly, i don't mind being loud, or if the result of that project would have been as loud as prince for instence, as long as it doesn't get flat/crunchy on the downbeats...
i found infos about that +6 on some other thread, and it says that the top infos cut out by zero's can be recreated as the missing part of the message by the DA converters
can't realy explain better but will find in on my work's desktop and post it next time

[Darius van H]

Originally Posted by eman kayker

i found infos about that +6 on some other thread, and it says that the top infos cut out by zero's can be recreated as the missing part of the message by the DA converters

If only this were true...........once that information is gone (once the wave is flat-toped), it's gone forever......i believe there are some de-clipping tools, though i've never messed with them myself.........D

[eman kayker]

here is the paper about the ¨ghost¨ informations...
they don't say it sounds good either!!!

http://www.cadenzarecording.com/pape...distortion.pdf