Anyone have experience mixing while adhering to specs monitored by the Dolby LM 100?

[Jazzpunk]

A friend of mine picked up a new mixing gig in which he was told all of his mixes must adhere to specs set up within the Dolby LM100. I was at his studio today checking it out (it's an interesting little box actually) and it seems pretty straightforward.

The guidelines on the dialogue levels (as set by the network) are pretty strict. He was told by another mixer that you cannot use compression to tame the dialogue tracks as the LM100 will not give accurate level readings. Does anyone know if this is true? Seems odd that a box specifically designed to monitor dialogue levels would be thrown out of whack by utilizing compression.

I may be dealing with the LM100 eventually myself so any insights into peacefully co-existing with it would be appreciated.

[Eric L]

Originally Posted by Jazzpunk

He was told by another mixer that you cannot use compression to tame the dialogue tracks as the LM100 will not give accurate level readings. Does anyone know if this is true?

Absolutely untrue. It does change the way you go about mixing, however.

[Garret]

I use the LM100 everyday to pass Discovery specs. Of course you can use compression there is no problem with that. But if you heavily limit and don't have a healthy rms to peak ratio (about 10 to 12 dBs) then you will have problems. Mix in short term mode and monitor louder if you think it feels low. On a very basic level you will probably be mixing everything to a slightly lower level than you have been previously; I know thats what happened in my experience.
Garret

[Jazzpunk]

Originally Posted by Eric L

Absolutely untrue. It does change the way you go about mixing, however.

In what ways did it change your workflow?

[Jazzpunk]

Originally Posted by Garret

I use the LM100 everyday to pass Discovery specs. Of course you can use compression there is no problem with that. But if you heavily limit and don't have a healthy rms to peak ratio (about 10 to 12 dBs) then you will have problems. Mix in short term mode and monitor louder if you think it feels low. On a very basic level you will probably be mixing everything to a slightly lower level than you have been previously; I know thats what happened in my experience.
Garret

Small world Garret, it is for the local Discovery network here as well! Do you have the alarm hooked up so you can address peaks and dips in dialogue as they occur (seems like this could drive one crazy!) or do you do a complete pass and then run your mix through the LM100 afterwards?

What have you found most important when dealing with the LM100 to make sure your mixes are not kicked back from QC?

[minister]

i don't mix for Discovery or have an LM100... but i have been keeping up on all the developments and issues.

so i will echo what garret just said.

what makes sense to me is to turn up your monitors by 2dB and watch your VU meters and keep that dialogue around -5 VU. i was on a conference call with Dolby and some mixers discussing the LM100 and it Dialog intelligence technology and one engineer was explaining that one of his mixers was having issues with a poorly recorded production dialog driven reality show.... i suspect that heavy amounts of L2 are going to create higher readings with the algorithm then would show up on a PPM, or Peak or VU. (i personally feel L2 is a vice that ought to be dispensed with...there are better limiters out there.). anyway, if you monitor at 81 SPL instead of 79 you will have a better chance of keeping your diag sitting around -28 to -26.

[Henchman]

You can ceratianly use compression. ut as in pretty much all Post-Mixing you do not use compression and limiting the way you do in music.
It's great for tamign peaks here and there. but you don't want it slaming all the time.

[Eric L]

Originally Posted by Jazzpunk

In what ways did it change your workflow?

In my particular case, I am mixing for the NBC/Universal spec of dialnorm at -23 with peaks limited to +12dBVU or -8dBFS. This is quite a bit higher than Discovery, with a much smaller dynamic range.

To answer your question, first we re-calibrated our "tv room" to 78dB reference (as opposed to 83dB where it had been). I then had to pay closer attention to the L1 that I use as one of my dialogue chain plugs. DX noise reduction has become more important as the average dx level has been increased, yet the dynamic range has been decreased, in affect compressing the dx. My shows have a lot of creature design and explosions in them, so that has been extremely challenging to balance with the dx. I try to have a subtle drop in average level just before a large event, in order to maximize my already limited headroom.

All in all, it has made these mixes a bit too flat and boring for my tastes, but it is what the network has ordered.

Luckily, a lot of these shows go on to have a DVD release, so we mix the for the full range 5.1 first, then try to make the LT/RT fit broadcast specs. So at least one of the mixes out there sounds good. The +12 LT/RT is done in a day with the 5.1 stems, folded down and re-mixed for the LM100 spec. It is not a fun day.

I have personally found that my mixing style does not work well with the short term measurement mode of the LM100. When I do an infinite measurement during the review of the reel, my DX still ends up missing the mark low by about 1-2 dB. It is quite annoying actually. Luckily the spec allows for a +/- 1dB variance. I have sent a few mixes to QC at -24dB.

[Jazzpunk]

Originally Posted by Eric L

It is quite annoying actually.

Yeah, that was my initial impression as well. I'm just trying to put a happy face on it in case I am dealing with it soon myself!

Thanks for the detailed and informative response...much appreciated.

[soundboy]

Another pitfall of the Discovery spec is RMS levels. You can meet the leq requirement and the peak level limits, and still fail the rms level limits. If you have a show that is wall to wall FX, you really have to pick and choose what you are going to bring up, or your average levels will get too hot. I just did a Discovery show, with lots of explosions and it was hard to reign in those average levels. When mixing the DX in short term mode, an interesting thing I have noticed is that when I mix in the other elements and check the mix in long term mode, my leq reading is about 2db hotter than the short term. It may be because I premix the DX with the FX and MX very low, and adding them back pushes up the reading. But I thought "dial Intelligence" would handle that.

[Jazzpunk]

Originally Posted by soundboy

Another pitfall of the Discovery spec is RMS levels. You can meet the leq requirement and the peak level limits, and still fail the rms level limits. If you have a show that is wall to wall FX, you really have to pick and choose what you are going to bring up, or your average levels will get too hot. I just did a Discovery show, with lots of explosions and it was hard to reign in those average levels. When mixing the DX in short term mode, an interesting thing I have noticed is that when I mix in the other elements and check the mix in long term mode, my leq reading is about 2db hotter than the short term. It may be because I premix the DX with the FX and MX very low, and adding them back pushes up the reading. But I thought "dial Intelligence" would handle that.

Very interesting Charles. Thanks for the insights.

[philper]

What's changed in my workflow is that I now have to start by getting the dialog to satisfy the LM100, before I get into the fx and music. It takes more time, and you would be well advised to playdown just your dialog edit thru the LM100 by itself to see if your longterm dialnorm will pass before you get into working on the rest of the track. Getting verite docs to work is tough--and I agree that the higher the required dialnorm (given the same peak levels) the flatter the mix gets--more like radio--w/ not much dynamic range. Everything we do is thru the LM100 now--since sooner or later everything we do MIGHT end up being broadcast and most networks have adopted he dialnorm/LM100 standard.

Philip Perkins CAS

[Jazzpunk]

Originally Posted by philper

What's changed in my workflow is that I now have to start by getting the dialog to satisfy the LM100, before I get into the fx and music. It takes more time, and you would be well advised to playdown just your dialog edit thru the LM100 by itself to see if your longterm dialnorm will pass before you get into working on the rest of the track. Getting verite docs to work is tough--and I agree that the higher the required dialnorm (given the same peak levels) the flatter the mix gets--more like radio--w/ not much dynamic range. Everything we do is thru the LM100 now--since sooner or later everything we do MIGHT end up being broadcast and most networks have adopted he dialnorm/LM100 standard.

Philip Perkins CAS

Thanks Philip.

Man, this box is starting to sound like a real drag.

[philper]

Originally Posted by Jazzpunk

Thanks Philip.

Man, this box is starting to sound like a real drag.

Roger that.

Philip Perkins

[Henchman]

Originally Posted by Jazzpunk

Thanks Philip.

Man, this box is starting to sound like a real drag.

That's what happens when a corporation like discovery thinks they can battle the problem ofs hitty mixes being done in cheap studio's and avid suites, by inexperienced people, becasue the prouction company doesn't want to spend money on audio.
They think that some magic box, and mixig by numbers will make a difference.
All ti does is lower the quality the the lowest common denominator.

And the commercials still rip your head off.

[Garret]

Originally Posted by Jazzpunk

Small world Garret, it is for the local Discovery network here as well! Do you have the alarm hooked up so you can address peaks and dips in dialogue as they occur (seems like this could drive one crazy!) or do you do a complete pass and then run your mix through the LM100 afterwards?

What have you found most important when dealing with the LM100 to make sure your mixes are not kicked back from QC?

The best and simplest way is to mix in short term mode. If you can keep the dialogue around 27 here then you are pretty much guaranteed to pass in long term. Its important not to go above a 23 if possible at your loudest dialogue (a scream or whatever). Mix to a VU meter and keep the dialogue from -7 to -3. Your absolute max for the mix has now been reduced to 0VU (it was +3 previously). I also run a C4 multiband on the Dial Bus which compresses some mids and I find that this lets me mix the dialogue a little louder as it kind of tricks the LM100. The dialogue intelligence is obviously more sensitive at these frequencys so reducing them slightly gives you a chance to mix it a tad louder.
I recommend getting the Discovery handbook as it has a lot of good info in it.
Hope this helps some
Garret

[Jazzpunk]

Great info Garrett.

Thanks!

[hociman]

Originally Posted by Henchman

That's what happens when a corporation like discovery thinks they can battle the problem ofs hitty mixes being done in cheap studio's and avid suites, by inexperienced people, becasue the prouction company doesn't want to spend money on audio.
They think that some magic box, and mixig by numbers will make a difference.
All ti does is lower the quality the the lowest common denominator.

And the commercials still rip your head off.

The problem is that Discovery is not using dialnorm the way it was intended. Dialnorm was intended to be measured by an LM100, and the reading from the LM100 is meant to be passed along as metadata. Discovery is not using metadata. They have said "We did some research on cable head-ends, and have found that we can reduce listener complaints about volume if all of our audio rests around -27dB for dialnorm." Well, that's nice. What happens when one of those cable head-ends changes their processing? Are you going to re-invent your spec? Well, you will have to because your spec is predicated on an arbitrary value that has no merit when the processing changes! If they were just passing the dialnorm around, we wouldn't have that problem, and we could just mix and measure the value.

I guess NBC isn't passing metadata around either? Why do they have a dialnorm target if they do pass metadata along?

[jhg]

It's currently not possible to stuff metadata in the VANC, and without encoding everything in E to simply be able to incorporate the metadata and truly use dynamic dialnorm a lot of places are trying to use a static number and mix to that.

No, I'm not a big fan of mixing to a number, not ears.

Regards,

jhg

[Eric L]

Originally Posted by hociman

I guess NBC isn't passing metadata around either? Why do they have a dialnorm target if they do pass metadata along?

No they are not. They are also not using Dolby E. Discreet 8 channel broadcast masters. It was explained to me (by someone who know better from NBC/Universal) that this is their "plant level" and always will be for standard NTSC LT/RT broadcasts. HDTV 5.1 broadcasts have a different spec, but I do not know what it is as I have yet to mix an HD show.

[josh broome]

I was a little freaked out by the strictness of the dial norm at first, but it's actually much easier than I expected to mix to. The easiest and fastest way to get a good mix that passes spec is to first mix narration and dialogue while watching the meters, then bring in your music and fx around that, then the only thing you have to focus on is making it sound good, because you're already to spec.

[nathand]

Originally Posted by Henchman

And the commercials still rip your head off.

I learned the other day that when it comes to commercials at least one major network allows for a variance much greater than +/- 1dB.