The concept of headroom

[dalgo]

Oh lawds Im trying to get a good mixdown in Fl studio( laughs) and after my multiband is on my master channel with a limiter and gain turned ut my kick is hitting at about -7.

This is my question. Is this a good space to leave the kick for room for the subbase? And if not? Make me less stupid with your knowledge plz.

[futures_untold]

Read this thread in its entirety................... http://dubstepforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=74832

[dalgo]

So the idea is that mixing at lower volume levels is easier than just subtracting volume from channels?

[futures_untold]

It doesn't sound like you've read the whole thread, because your question has been fairly well discussed if my memory of that thread serves me correctly....

Anyway, try the following:

Delete the compressor/limiter/maximiser you have on your master output buss.

Set the master output fader to unity (100 or whatever the normal default gain is). Macc usefully explained that this can be used as a consistent refernce point between all your different projects.

Bring down the volume of every individual element by about 10dB.

Your sub bass and kick drum will use up a lot of headroom combined. Using a steep filter slope on a highpass filter, roll off all the unneeded low end frequencies from your kick drum. The appropriate frequency will probably sit somewhere between 75hz - 120hz.

With your sub bass, roll off the higher frequencies with a low pass filter using a gentler slope. Using an eq, create a 'dip' by attenuating (turning down the volume) the frequencies where your kick drum is sitting. This literally creates m for your kick drum to sit in the mix without clashing to much with the sub.

By now, your master volume meter will be peaking closer to unity (although I don't really understand the mathmatics lol... Macc??) To keep enough headroom for everything else in the mix, you may need to turn everythingdown again using the individual channel faders, not your master fader.

If you must, add gentle but firm compression on your sub and or kick drum see this thread for appropriate settings ---> http://dubstepforum.com/viewtopic.php?t ... ompression

That should do it!

Avoid having master compression/limiting as it will squash the dynamic range from your song and make it sound over compressed.....

[macc]

Why are you using a multiband? What makes you think you need one?

[__________]

Oh lawds Im trying to get a good mixdown in Fl studio( laughs) and after my multiband is on my master channel with a limiter and gain turned ut my kick is hitting at about -7.

This is my question. Is this a good space to leave the kick for room for the subbase? And if not? Make me less stupid with your knowledge plz.

i'm no fountain of knowledge but believe me its 100% possible to get a great mixdown in FL. don't be filling up the FX inserts in the mixer just because you can. over-processing your sounds will sound just as shit as under-processing your sounds. i was always way too fx-happy when i started using FL - this might be worth considering if you're sitting there stressing about headroom and wondering why its not sounding good

[futures_untold]

It doesn't help that the Maximus limiter is on the master buss by default...!

[Brisance]

You use some retarded template then.. Just use "empty" or your own customized ones..

[futures_untold]

You use some retarded template then.. Just use "empty" or your own customized ones..

I don't use FL tbh, but for people who start out, they may not realise that there is processing happening on the master buss. I reckon that is why so many Fruity tunes sound fairly well produced by default....

I use the RuskoVST to ensure everything sounds good anyway.... :p

[paradigm_x]

It doesn't help that the Maximus limiter is on the master buss by default...!

jeebus

[futures_untold]

No I got that wrong, the default only has the Fruity Limiter on the master, not Maximus... Still...

[Brisance]

Yeah, but the limiter on the master is on such settings, that it will brickwall everything over 0 coming into it.. It's just there to stop clipping(which shouldn't happen anyways)

[futures_untold]

Seen.. Like I said, I don't really use FL. :shrug:

It is certainly a powerful program!

I really like Sytrus and fruity PEQ2

[paradigm_x]

No I got that wrong, the default only has the Fruity Limiter on the master, not Maximus... Still...

any limiter on the master by default =

imho etc

[megaladon]

Don't people go a bit too crazy about not having stuff on the master out? There's pretty much always some inaudible peaks that you didn't actually want in there, I don't think it's instantly just going to destroy your dynamics to take some of these out- and obviously it's practical if you want to bump it up a bit to play to people. Clearly actually listening to the effect of the limiter/compresser is the key, I'm not sure many people do this and just try to claw out the maximum volume until their song looks like one big square wave.

[paradigm_x]

well thats the danger innit, if you dont even know explicitly that you put one on you can be forgiven for not kowing/checking, just glancing at the output and 'Voila ! ' it hasnt clipped, job done, just turn the bass up a bit there you go, squarestep.

hearing the effects of compression/limiting is quite a skill, especially when you dont A/B at the same relative level. louder = better innit . (NOOO!)

maybe death magnetic was mixed in fruity

[macc]

Don't people go a bit too crazy about not having stuff on the master out? There's pretty much always some inaudible peaks that you didn't actually want in there, I don't think it's instantly just going to destroy your dynamics to take some of these out- and obviously it's practical if you want to bump it up a bit to play to people. Clearly actually listening to the effect of the limiter/compresser is the key, I'm not sure many people do this and just try to claw out the maximum volume until their song looks like one big square wave.

While I agree with you to a point, the problem is that it becomes a crutch, and one that people lean on heavily.

Assuming we're aiming for maximum sound quality (I hope), those inaudible peaks you refer to are *much* better taken care of on an individual/per-channel basis. Removing them on the master means that things interact, often in undesirable ways, and almost always causing distortion that could have been avoided. Your bass can cause your drum peak to be flat, for example. Limiting causes intermodulation distortion which would be fairly apparent in the such cases. Much better to have things treated correctly, independently - unless doing so deliberately by choice for creative effect or fixing specific severe problems (think sidechaining).

Further, while it can be the case that it is inaudible to the mixer/artist, often these peaks are due to tonal imbalances. Say something is too bassy and it is pushed in the way we're discussing. Intermodulation distortion is now 'in' the signal, and that's that. That can (and often does!) become much more apparent with corrections to the tonal balance applied in mastering. In this case, a tilt eq to correct the overall response would make the IMD much more apparent.

Also, controlling the peaks correctly on a track by track basis means the 'master peaks' will be that much lower - so for the same amount of output limiting/clipping your result will be that much louder. This is related to/ the source of the inherent mix power I bang on about a lot.

To sort of sum all that up, you have to think 'downstream'. If it is absolutely the last step and you can't hear it then away you go - say bumping it up for playing out. But processing is always cumulative. Having bad stuff in your signal when there's going to be more done to it for the sake of convenience ('I can't be arsed to treat each thing so I'll just hammer the lot') is a bit of a dead end that can take years to get out of.

So it isn't just about killing dynamics, but also about maintaining quality. I personally only want stuff happening that I specifically made happen, which is why I'm not crazy about having a limiter by default. Besides which, up to a point clipping is much cleaner and transparent than limiting, depending on the signal. So laters to having a default limiter for me.

Just some waffley thoughts

[futures_untold]

In this case, a tilt eq to correct the overall response would make the much more apparent.

That was a bit cryptic, but luckily, google is my friend

[megaladon]

Assuming we're aiming for maximum sound quality (I hope), those inaudible peaks you refer to are *much* better taken care of on an individual/per-channel basis. Removing them on the master means that things interact, often in undesirable ways, and almost always causing distortion that could have been avoided. Your bass can cause your drum peak to be flat, for example. Limiting causes intermodulation distortion which would be fairly apparent in the such cases. Much better to have things treated correctly, independently - unless doing so deliberately by choice for creative effect or fixing specific severe problems (think sidechaining).

Further, while it can be the case that it is inaudible to the mixer/artist, often these peaks are due to tonal imbalances. Say something is too bassy and it is pushed in the way we're discussing. Intermodulation distortion is now 'in' the signal, and that's that. That can (and often does!) become much more apparent with corrections to the tonal balance applied in mastering. In this case, a tilt eq to correct the overall response would make the IMD much more apparent.

Also, controlling the peaks correctly on a track by track basis means the 'master peaks' will be that much lower - so for the same amount of output limiting/clipping your result will be that much louder. This is related to/ the source of the inherent mix power I bang on about a lot.

To sort of sum all that up, you have to think 'downstream'. If it is absolutely the last step and you can't hear it then away you go - say bumping it up for playing out. But processing is always cumulative. Having bad stuff in your signal when there's going to be more done to it for the sake of convenience ('I can't be arsed to treat each thing so I'll just hammer the lot') is a bit of a dead end that can take years to get out of.

So it isn't just about killing dynamics, but also about maintaining quality. I personally only want stuff happening that I specifically made happen, which is why I'm not crazy about having a limiter by default. Besides which, up to a point clipping is much cleaner and transparent than limiting, depending on the signal. So laters to having a default limiter for me.

Just some waffley thoughts

Appreciated waffley thoughts. I get what you're saying, I think when I just lop off about 4dB from the most clear peak and normalize it all it's to go and show my friends I have some ideas, rather than to release a track.

At the most basic level, is going into individual channels and purging the 'phantom clips' with a limiter any better then wacking one on the master? Obviously it avoids limiting instruments that didn't require it in the first place, but does a limiter/compressor's presence on the end of the chain make a difference to elements that aren't actually being cut?

I think I'm definitely progressing with all of this but I find it hard to be patient when I get to this stage. Can these clashes/clips mostly be fixed with EQing (I realise there's no actual rules to this) downstream, as you say? Or do you find a lot of actual transposition needs to be done where frequencies will just unavoidably clash if left together?

Yeah, beat that for rubbish wording why don't you.

[macc]

Appreciated waffley thoughts. I get what you're saying, I think when I just lop off about 4dB from the most clear peak and normalize it all it's to go and show my friends I have some ideas, rather than to release a track.

Oh of course I need to put an auto 'this post was written by a massive snob' sig on all my posts or something

At the most basic level, is going into individual channels and purging the 'phantom clips' with a limiter any better then wacking one on the master? Obviously it avoids limiting instruments that didn't require it in the first place

Answered your own question there

but does a limiter/compressor's presence on the end of the chain make a difference to elements that aren't actually being cut?

This is precisely the point; they're all being cut. They all contribute to that moment where the signal exceeds the threshold. It's like microwaving the whole roast dinner when it is on the plate cos you didn't make the gravy hot enough; the roast potatoes are ALWAYS going to suffer and go a bit soggy. And we can't have that!!

I think I'm definitely progressing with all of this but I find it hard to be patient when I get to this stage. Can these clashes/clips mostly be fixed with EQing (I realise there's no actual rules to this) downstream, as you say? Or do you find a lot of actual transposition needs to be done where frequencies will just unavoidably clash if left together?

Of course *some* fixing can be done downstream, be it eq/dynamics or (more likely) somewhere in between. But the logical extreme of that is simply not doing any mixing at all and then sorting it all out once it is all mixed together. And that's quite obviously a total wrong un.

To continue the food analogies it's a spectrum from:

- chucking a bit of stewing beef and some raw potatoes in the oven and letting it cook until everything is safe to eat

to

- chucking the stewing beef in the frying pan, and chopping the spuds up and bunging them in the oven, then serving it all up once everything is cooked to some degree

to

- getting prime tender scotch beef, covering it in freshly milled black pepper, leaving it to sit while the King Edward potatoes are peeled, chopped and par boiled while the goose fat heats up in the oven, throwing them into the hot fat then starting the steak cooking once they have been in for 35 minutes, and finally serving it all up together.


The length of the above paragraphs is not coincidental