click to download and wait...
Psy Q or Optimaster or both...
Those are very good examples, Sandrop!
The first example shows us how a waveform must look like when you don´t compress the hell out of it. The second example looks almost like a square wave... When you look at the first example again, you have to imagine an aeroplane from above (whith it wings)... those are the ones that play loudest on radio. The first example looks like a real CD version of something, but when played on radio you will get the second version as a result. Usually there are differences between CD and radio versions, but the differences are mostly EQ-ing it "loud" whith additional limiting...
The question is, what usual loudness to peak ratio do you find in commercial overcompressed stuff and on good sounding albums. For something to sound really good and powerful, 10-12 db is more like it. On really overcompressed sounding stuff you'll get 5-6 db (second example). When level matched, however, the track with real dynamics makes the hypercompressed track sound small in comparison... Many mixes are pushed way too far, but you can still get a reasonably good sounding mix when you don´t overcompress your stuff and use "loud EQ- ing" and "limiting" instead. Again, let your ears decide...not a VU meter or "the other guys's" CD. I would be for -10(RMS)...that will give 10dB headroom for peaks...(But I like my RMS for the whole track in Rock/Pop to actually about -19) Of course it depends on the track and client!
Here I have a comment from mastering engineer "Bob Katz":
quote:
"It should be more widely known that hyper-compressed recordings do not play well on the radio. They sound softer and seriously distorted, pointing out that the loudness race has no winners, even in radio airplay. The best way to make a "radio-ready" recording is not to squash it, but rather produce it with the typical peak to average ratios that have worked for about a hundred years."
Regards,
Sunshine
The first example shows us how a waveform must look like when you don´t compress the hell out of it. The second example looks almost like a square wave... When you look at the first example again, you have to imagine an aeroplane from above (whith it wings)... those are the ones that play loudest on radio. The first example looks like a real CD version of something, but when played on radio you will get the second version as a result. Usually there are differences between CD and radio versions, but the differences are mostly EQ-ing it "loud" whith additional limiting...
The question is, what usual loudness to peak ratio do you find in commercial overcompressed stuff and on good sounding albums. For something to sound really good and powerful, 10-12 db is more like it. On really overcompressed sounding stuff you'll get 5-6 db (second example). When level matched, however, the track with real dynamics makes the hypercompressed track sound small in comparison... Many mixes are pushed way too far, but you can still get a reasonably good sounding mix when you don´t overcompress your stuff and use "loud EQ- ing" and "limiting" instead. Again, let your ears decide...not a VU meter or "the other guys's" CD. I would be for -10(RMS)...that will give 10dB headroom for peaks...(But I like my RMS for the whole track in Rock/Pop to actually about -19) Of course it depends on the track and client!
Here I have a comment from mastering engineer "Bob Katz":
quote:
"It should be more widely known that hyper-compressed recordings do not play well on the radio. They sound softer and seriously distorted, pointing out that the loudness race has no winners, even in radio airplay. The best way to make a "radio-ready" recording is not to squash it, but rather produce it with the typical peak to average ratios that have worked for about a hundred years."
Regards,
Sunshine
Last year one of my song has been played on the radio (great impression, as I was listening to this radio by pure chance Radio nova in Paris).
The tracks were recorded in 4 tracks , in 1994, so i used a faire amount of "remastering" (eq and L1) in order to boost everything.
Well, when I heard it, i was very disatisfied with the extremely LOW volume, and additional reverb that they added, and that messed everything on some parts of the track (i think my overcompressed track was compressed and reverberated at the radio so..., pretty strange result occured).
just my 2 cents, but it confirms the quote in the above post.
nb: the track is on
http://artists.mp3s.com/artists/254/spa ... ml#welcome
Title "Leaving Raindrops" (made in 1994 i think)
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: spacef on 2002-05-22 10:32 ]</font>
Radio nova in Paris).The tracks were recorded in 4 tracks , in 1994, so i used a faire amount of "remastering" (eq and L1) in order to boost everything.
Well, when I heard it, i was very disatisfied with the extremely LOW volume, and additional reverb that they added, and that messed everything on some parts of the track (i think my overcompressed track was compressed and reverberated at the radio so..., pretty strange result occured).
just my 2 cents, but it confirms the quote in the above post.
nb: the track is on
http://artists.mp3s.com/artists/254/spa ... ml#welcome
Title "Leaving Raindrops" (made in 1994 i think)
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: spacef on 2002-05-22 10:32 ]</font>
Another side effect of overcompressing, is when you play tyour track loud on a party for example.
If you didn't do it well , you will hear very deaf basses and no trebles (very muddy dull sound).
This is very likely to occur if you used the L1 too much for example (and i guess the same for optimatster, finalizer etc...)
I think that's called the Fletcher effect : when you boost volume, like in a rave party or the like, you will boost basses and trebles, but mediums do not respond the same. So if you multibanded-compressed in an approximate way, it is very likely that your basses are boosted, so at high volumes, you will only hear the basses.
(Sunshine, may be you can explain better if you have time ? i don't have full knowledge on this part of things)
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: spacef on 2002-05-22 10:06 ]</font>
If you didn't do it well , you will hear very deaf basses and no trebles (very muddy dull sound).
This is very likely to occur if you used the L1 too much for example (and i guess the same for optimatster, finalizer etc...)
I think that's called the Fletcher effect : when you boost volume, like in a rave party or the like, you will boost basses and trebles, but mediums do not respond the same. So if you multibanded-compressed in an approximate way, it is very likely that your basses are boosted, so at high volumes, you will only hear the basses.
(Sunshine, may be you can explain better if you have time ? i don't have full knowledge on this part of things)
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: spacef on 2002-05-22 10:06 ]</font>
-
ernest@303.nu
- Posts: 217
- Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2002 4:00 pm
- Contact:
What you are referring to has more to do whith the acoustics of the room... whith all the side effects, that include "standing waves", "masking" and "delay". Most of the problems whith certain rooms do of course come from standind waves which steal dynamic integrity by producing too much energie at specific regions (mostly bass). So there you already have an imbalance that can occur. But depending on the dimensions of the room and its reflectional enviroment that could as well lead to "dips" in the frequency spectrum by cancelling itself out... Then the tune sounds "phased out". It can also happen that amplitude-modulations can be heard at certain places of the room, caused by delays and a constantly changing tone of a source that has no fixed tones (like a fretless bass or violin). And when a room changes the freq-balance all the "carving" or "demasking", you did in hard work, might loose its effectiveness... as in "normal mixing" that gets very soon apperant in the midregion (again by sounding phased-out). "Masking" occurs when a lower frequency band that is very close to the "hidden" band gets louder (by an untuned room and it´s standing waves). The larger the bandwidth of those standing waves, the larger will also be the bandwidth of the region where masking occurs (Fletcher).
The Fletcher effect is mainly of comparing the difference between silent levels and loud levels. It is lot more diffucult to hear the bass frequencies at low levels. The listening level determines how you percieve the frequency balance. The great challenge is to judge, how much bass energy is the correct amount of energy for the mix.
Keep in mind that the consumer listenes to your finals at different levels. The easiest way way to judge the amount of bass (and highs) of a mix is to listen to it at different volumes. The maximum volume you should be listening to is at 86 db, the minimum is at conversation levels. Of course everything in between also will help...
Regards,
Sunshine
The Fletcher effect is mainly of comparing the difference between silent levels and loud levels. It is lot more diffucult to hear the bass frequencies at low levels. The listening level determines how you percieve the frequency balance. The great challenge is to judge, how much bass energy is the correct amount of energy for the mix.
Keep in mind that the consumer listenes to your finals at different levels. The easiest way way to judge the amount of bass (and highs) of a mix is to listen to it at different volumes. The maximum volume you should be listening to is at 86 db, the minimum is at conversation levels. Of course everything in between also will help...
Regards,
Sunshine
-
ernest@303.nu
- Posts: 217
- Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2002 4:00 pm
- Contact:
that is for the key that will be generated by cw after you install the device.in this case, i believe that since the device is already installed by the sfp software,all you have to do is use the key on your page.
btw,it is impossible to master properly w/o the proper room acoustics and monitor speakers.......
btw,it is impossible to master properly w/o the proper room acoustics and monitor speakers.......
Thanks Sunshine for the detailed info, i now remember of the things about room acoustic and "population".
For the little history, it happenned to a friend who played his trance tracks live during a party and it sounded very bad : over-present bass, undermixed kick, no highs (it's funny to play live a stereo mix, no ? all the technicity required to press play on a dat recorder then to pretend to play with buttons and stuff is often underestimated by the public.
Anyway, because he doesn't have any "real" mastered track, he decided to play live on 8 tracks, so he will be able to adjust a few instruments to the room acoustic. (like, bass, kick, snare, charleys (metals in general) ,plus different groups of tracks selected according to their frequency range or importance in the mix). I think that's a good idea for live purposes, especially for dancefloors (house, trance etc...).
Plus it's less boring for the stage performer....
pretty off topic though
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: spacef on 2002-05-22 16:58 ]</font>
For the little history, it happenned to a friend who played his trance tracks live during a party and it sounded very bad : over-present bass, undermixed kick, no highs (it's funny to play live a stereo mix, no ? all the technicity required to press play on a dat recorder then to pretend to play with buttons and stuff is often underestimated by the public
. Anyway, because he doesn't have any "real" mastered track, he decided to play live on 8 tracks, so he will be able to adjust a few instruments to the room acoustic. (like, bass, kick, snare, charleys (metals in general) ,plus different groups of tracks selected according to their frequency range or importance in the mix). I think that's a good idea for live purposes, especially for dancefloors (house, trance etc...).
Plus it's less boring for the stage performer....
pretty off topic though
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: spacef on 2002-05-22 16:58 ]</font>
<b>Still no luck with the download!</b><br>
And Creamware won't answer my e-mails... I guess they are all at some 10th anniversary party! The download page gives an "unknown error" message. All the activation keys are already there so one would think that the order was processed. And I got an email about it also. Has someone had the same problem?!
And Creamware won't answer my e-mails... I guess they are all at some 10th anniversary party!
The download page gives an "unknown error" message. All the activation keys are already there so one would think that the order was processed. And I got an email about it also. Has someone had the same problem?!-
ernest@303.nu
- Posts: 217
- Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2002 4:00 pm
- Contact:
I just re-downloaded the OptiMaster from Creamware's MyPage without any problem.... the .oxe-file is right here on my desktop now!
Are you on Mac or Win? Was the error-message on the webpage or from the browser? Have you already tried downloading the .oxe on another browser/computer or using a download manager?
I really feel sorry for you, having purchased this tool and not being able to use it
Maybe calling Creamware by phone will help?
Good luck!
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: ernest@303.nu on 2002-05-23 06:17 ]</font>
Are you on Mac or Win? Was the error-message on the webpage or from the browser? Have you already tried downloading the .oxe on another browser/computer or using a download manager?
I really feel sorry for you, having purchased this tool and not being able to use it
Maybe calling Creamware by phone will help?
Good luck!
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: ernest@303.nu on 2002-05-23 06:17 ]</font>
Hi! If someone sends me the Optimaster and Graph Eq's download packets will they work with my activation keys?! If so please send the packets to jani.ylikangas@omgi.com or send a download link. I use win98. Creamware doesn't seem to be doing anything to the problem despite my emails and I would like to start using <h1>MY</h1> software asap. I have tried different locations for the download and even ftp. <u>Please help!</u>
I understood that there could be download problems due to massive SFP downloads.
I don't say that's the reason but it's possible.
It was not clear to me how you are doing :
- go to my page
- the dev "must be generated" ; click the system of yours on the right ("for pc", "for mac" ....)
- a message appears with a link to download page
- back on the download page, click again on "For PC" (for example) and the dev will be downloaded.
- when you install, it should be already registered (thekey will be written in scope.rgy)
If you already do like this, I don't uynderstand (i just tried, the web doesn't seem to be buzy)
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: spacef on 2002-05-24 00:27 ]</font>
I don't say that's the reason but it's possible.
It was not clear to me how you are doing :
- go to my page
- the dev "must be generated" ; click the system of yours on the right ("for pc", "for mac" ....)
- a message appears with a link to download page
- back on the download page, click again on "For PC" (for example) and the dev will be downloaded.
- when you install, it should be already registered (thekey will be written in scope.rgy)
If you already do like this, I don't uynderstand (i just tried, the web doesn't seem to be buzy)
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: spacef on 2002-05-24 00:27 ]</font>
To Unitar: I had similar problems in the past downloading devices from the Creamware shop. No problems lately though. Hang in there.
One last word of caution: I also had problems with some *.oxe files crashing my PC (as in screwed up my registry). Be sure to Ghost your system before you install any oxe files. Just a word of caution.
One last word of caution: I also had problems with some *.oxe files crashing my PC (as in screwed up my registry). Be sure to Ghost your system before you install any oxe files. Just a word of caution.