Become a Site Supporter and Never see Ads again!

Author Topic: To nomalize or not?  (Read 24920 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline momule

  • Trade Count: (4)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2178
  • Gender: Male
Re: To nomalize or not?
« Reply #45 on: November 14, 2005, 06:07:13 PM »
I find it funny that some folks were saying to compress the peaks then normalize. that seems crazy to me as I would simply normalize and apply dynamic compression to the peaks/over's all in one step. (see the above post for a pic)
Its funny for me as 90% of the stuff I read here goes against How I have been instructed.


If the compressor is set properly, the levels should be where they belong coming out of the compressor.  That may be the same thing as what you're saying.

basicly the same thing.

I was refering to the above post.
http://taperssection.com/index.php?topic=53916.msg704920#msg704920

when using SF's normalize funtion you have the option to nomalize and add dynamic compression to the peaks at the same time.

AKG 463's (uno ck62) > Mackie Onyx Satellite > Microtrack II

Offline mmmatt

  • taping > photography
  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4168
  • Gender: Male
  • ... A broken angel sings from a guitar
    • LightCraft Photography
Re: To nomalize or not?
« Reply #46 on: November 14, 2005, 06:13:17 PM »
This is a wonderful thread!!!  I kinda thought I was a rare person to actually attempt to master my recordings.  Seems I'm not alone.  I'm still learning... not a know it all, but I enjoy doing it.  I would love to hear others thoughts and some more specifics on this subject!!!
 
    I'm not going to dig up all the quotes but here are a few of my comments... it is my belief that rms normalizing doesn't compress the wav, it just finds the median of the recording instead of the peak the adjusts based on that... so with a really dynamic recording (ie LIVE), you are likely to clip it becuase the dynamic spread is so great.  Typical normalizing will find the peak and raise the whole file an equal amount just like a simple gain change except it makes the change acurately.  If you have random peaks suck as a pop evey time the singer touches the mic this can alter your normalizing.  You can just pic that milisecond in time and knock it down by reducing gain or compressing before you normalize.  Aslo if you are normalizing song by song, it is a good idea to cut all your tracks at the impacting first note of a song so that you don't hear a level bumb during a quiet point between songs or hear the room ambiance jump without a musical punch.

   When I am checking out gear or a room via the archive... if it doesn't already say specifically what steps were taken in mastering, I will drop an email to the taper to ask... I get them from time to time too.  For me, unless I say "only bitrate conversion and dither" then you can bet I did a lot more.

Compression... love it.  Just a touch and it makes a world of difference.  If I always listened with my stereo cranked I maybe wouldn't use it, but to have dynamics so low you have to strain to hear it, and then so loud the neighbors are pissed just makes no sense.  Not every recording but most.  VA_Taper passed on to me a technique of doing multiple small compression runs that I've been playing with instead of one larger squeeze.

As momule stated I also use eq... if you can learn to pick out room frequencies in your recording and knock them down a bit, you can do amazing things.  Throw in a good studio cs, crank your  home stereo and walk around your living room near corners etc... you will find resonacies in your living room (bass hum or painful highs).  Now make the room 10 times bigger and the source 10 times louder, and you have bigger problems... I sometimes knock down 4 or 5 different frequencies below 200hz!  A spectrum anylizer helps a lot, and a parametric eq that allows a real narrow mid band... just slide it up and down till that problem frequency goes away.  Ever hear a recording where the bass player seems to hit one particular note reall loud all the time?  that is a resonancy not the bass palyer or engineer. Also I don't care what your rig is... diferent distances from the source will make a differance on how your mics record.  Different frequencies move at different rates.

I'm not saying it is impossible to take home the gold and do nothing... just not every time in every situation.

Matt
I do think taping is the reality of the business..it is also an impetus for artists to create studio CDs that are ART, not just another recording...    Fareed Haque  2-4-2005




Canon 24-70 f2.8L, Canon 135 f2L, Canon 70-200 f4L, Canon 50 f1.8, > Canon 5D or Canon xt (digi) and Canon 1N (film)

Offline momule

  • Trade Count: (4)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2178
  • Gender: Male
Re: To nomalize or not?
« Reply #47 on: November 14, 2005, 06:19:01 PM »
  A spectrum anylizer helps a lot,
Matt


this and trial and error as you said matt can train your eyes to find what your ears are hearing...
+t matt for caring enough to take the time to make it sound as good as it can or as good as it sounded that night..


« Last Edit: November 14, 2005, 06:20:51 PM by Momule »
AKG 463's (uno ck62) > Mackie Onyx Satellite > Microtrack II

Offline momule

  • Trade Count: (4)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2178
  • Gender: Male
Re: To nomalize or not?
« Reply #48 on: November 14, 2005, 07:10:33 PM »
I'm not interested in turning my recordings into uber-polished, perfect-sounding, exquisitely EQ'd masterpieces.  But I agree that a bit of discretionary mastering can make a significant difference in the overall end result of the recording.

Me neither , just wanna try to make um as accurate/good as possible

On the other hand, many studio releases waaaay over-utilize those nifty little features, so the resulting "mastered" recording sounds like horseshit - no dynamic range, very 'closed' sounding, etc.

the last couple I have picked up have been pretty good IMO . I still cant get the Clapton Sessions for Robert Johnson out my player.   check it out (24bits of smokin ass clapton) if that's your flavor.. another one was Susan Tedeschi's new one its very mellow (as expected) but good IMO

I, for one, appreciate the discussion and your perspective, and would love to see more feedback from you about the 90% of stuff "we" do here that goes against what you've learned.  The more we all know, the better decisions we can make about what's right for each of us to do individually.  Without the information, well...it's just an uninformed decision, hardly a good way to go about it.

Most of it is mastering, such as mastering being destructive and why and how you should or should not use it.
I try to chime in anytime I have something I think I have something to add thats constructive. And with the recent heart prob's I have a little more time on my hands  ::) as Im not able to work full time again just yet. thank god for friends and family.
AKG 463's (uno ck62) > Mackie Onyx Satellite > Microtrack II

Offline Brian Skalinder

  • Complaint Dept.
  • Trade Count: (28)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 18868
  • Gender: Male
Re: To nomalize or not?
« Reply #49 on: November 14, 2005, 07:18:05 PM »
+t matt for caring enough to take the time to make it sound as good as it can or as good as it sounded that night..

"As good as can be" is part of the rub for me.  As good as can be for whose ears and brain, on what playback system, in what listening environment?  I just received a recording from a fellow taper who applied a bit of HPF to a recording.  And it sounds really, really good.  Only to my ears and brain, on my playback system, in my listening environment, it sounds far more bass-shy than I prefer.  (Which is one of the reasons I didn't apply a HPF in post to my recording.)

FWIW.  Just an example of one of my thoughts earlier, and one that someone else made - without <a> the right knowledge, <b> proper tools, <c> a great ear, and <d> the right monitoring equipment, I think it's difficult to do well.  And many tapers lack one or more of those critical elements (and that's not unique to tapers, I think many engineers lack one or more of those critical elements).  I'm not suggesting the taper above did a poor job - it sounds excellent, but it's geared more towards his preferences than my own.  Anyway, yet another thought on why I take a fairly hands-off approach to mastering.
Milab VM-44 Links > Fostex FR-2LE or
Naiant IPA (tinybox format) >
Roland R-05

Offline momule

  • Trade Count: (4)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2178
  • Gender: Male
Re: To nomalize or not?
« Reply #50 on: November 14, 2005, 08:31:07 PM »
+t matt for caring enough to take the time to make it sound as good as it can or as good as it sounded that night..

"As good as can be" is part of the rub for me.  As good as can be for whose ears and brain, on what playback system, in what listening environment?  I just received a recording from a fellow taper who applied a bit of HPF to a recording.  And it sounds really, really good.  Only to my ears and brain, on my playback system, in my listening environment, it sounds far more bass-shy than I prefer.  (Which is one of the reasons I didn't apply a HPF in post to my recording.)

FWIW.  Just an example of one of my thoughts earlier, and one that someone else made - without <a> the right knowledge, <b> proper tools, <c> a great ear, and <d> the right monitoring equipment, I think it's difficult to do well.  And many tapers lack one or more of those critical elements (and that's not unique to tapers, I think many engineers lack one or more of those critical elements).  I'm not suggesting the taper above did a poor job - it sounds excellent, but it's geared more towards his preferences than my own.  Anyway, yet another thought on why I take a fairly hands-off approach to mastering.

I think its toooo anal about it at that point, I listened to my shows on a 5 different playback's ranging from (Including my stores 2004 ford work truck to a $2500+home playback) before I seed , simply for this reason. And I think a paragraphic Eq used correctly will deliver a show that tight ass bass (but is not crunchy) accross the board on almost any playback. Highs and Mid highs vary slightly for my ears.
A friend And I both hear the shows before its seeded so we can hear it on sperate playback's and many times before seeding. I may hear 10 mixes before I find one I like. But again I think it shouldnt be a race to get them out...

Id be intrested to hear a clip of it. that you hear as "bass shy" , just to get a feel . And do you know what your friend did ???
HPF (what did he use and how much and at what freq?)


AKG 463's (uno ck62) > Mackie Onyx Satellite > Microtrack II

Offline mmmatt

  • taping > photography
  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4168
  • Gender: Male
  • ... A broken angel sings from a guitar
    • LightCraft Photography
Re: To nomalize or not?
« Reply #51 on: November 14, 2005, 10:08:52 PM »


I'm not interested in turning my recordings into uber-polished, perfect-sounding, exquisitely EQ'd masterpieces.  But I agree that a bit of discretionary mastering can make a significant difference in the overall end result of the recording.

I should make another clarification here... I do mostly matrix and multitrack/matrix recordings and I personally DO want them to sound better than the original.  I always try to get the feeling of being in a bubble with music all around you, or setting your chin on the stage and being more inside of the music than looking over it, if that makes sense. I do have a touch of purest in me though... I like the crowd, the room, the banter, and the natural ebb and flow of the show as the engineer or band responds to the crowd with more volume.  Clink of the glasses at the bar, sound of a mic stand falling on stage... whatever!  I want the whole experience there, just in a more paletable (to me) form.  I don't want to sanitize my recordings but I also don't want anyone to hear seperate sources... just one that is a combination of the two (or more) originals.  I agree most studio cds of recent days suck ass... I'm not going for that at all.  Live is live and it isn't supposed to be perfect on any level.
     When I do ambient I am a little different and a little more of a purest.  There are MANY more qualified ambient recordists here than I, and I'm always trying to do better at that... that is part of why I always try to coax Skandlier to come record with me...  ;D

Matt
I do think taping is the reality of the business..it is also an impetus for artists to create studio CDs that are ART, not just another recording...    Fareed Haque  2-4-2005




Canon 24-70 f2.8L, Canon 135 f2L, Canon 70-200 f4L, Canon 50 f1.8, > Canon 5D or Canon xt (digi) and Canon 1N (film)

Offline it-goes-to-eleven

  • Trade Count: (58)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 6696
Re: To nomalize or not?
« Reply #52 on: November 14, 2005, 10:21:02 PM »
Good thread..  This is a bit of a grey area.  If you're willing to EQ to improve the sound, why worry about warm pre-amps at all?   Want fat bass?  Fatten it.  Where do you stop?

Another concern.. Let's say I have 3 80's SRV masters. I EQ them using medicore 1990 tech and release them. Years later, the masters get lost in a fire.  What source do we want floating around?

I use a Slim Devices Squeezebox for playback.  One thing I'd like to see with that software is source specific EQ.  Basically, I'd like to be able to add bass to some shows and reduce the highs on others and have those settings remembered for that show.  Taken to the next level, you would be able to do real time parametric EQ at playback time on a show by show basis.  The master never gets tweaked, etc..

Offline mmmatt

  • taping > photography
  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4168
  • Gender: Male
  • ... A broken angel sings from a guitar
    • LightCraft Photography
Re: To nomalize or not?
« Reply #53 on: November 14, 2005, 11:15:52 PM »
Good thread..  This is a bit of a grey area.  If you're willing to EQ to improve the sound, why worry about warm pre-amps at all?   Want fat bass?  Fatten it.  Where do you stop?


For me, analog is king... bar none.  The flavoring done in the analog realm (with good gear) is better than anything I can do in post IMHO.  The hard part is knowing (hearing) what to do on site.  I Love the eq in my ONYX mixer for instance, but I'm gun shy as hell with it.  I've nailed it and I've choked with it... it's a crap shot at best.
      Chris (VA_Taper) and I had a good email discussion along these lines a few weeks ago and he made a good point in that regard.  The true blessing of quality gear is a low enough noise factor to afford yourself the ability to do extensive post work without adding audible noise to the final recording.  He didn't say it quite that way but that was the intent.  quality gear is more than a flavor.  I'm sick of quoting him... he should be here for this one!  Paging VA_Taper!

Matt
« Last Edit: November 14, 2005, 11:49:52 PM by mmmatt »
I do think taping is the reality of the business..it is also an impetus for artists to create studio CDs that are ART, not just another recording...    Fareed Haque  2-4-2005




Canon 24-70 f2.8L, Canon 135 f2L, Canon 70-200 f4L, Canon 50 f1.8, > Canon 5D or Canon xt (digi) and Canon 1N (film)

Offline eric.B

  • to the side qualified
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2796
Re: To nomalize or not?
« Reply #54 on: November 14, 2005, 11:31:15 PM »
good thread..

I personally archive, seed, and listen to untouched masters..  no editing done whatsoever  (unless the occasional resample)  ..  I generally like the way my tapes sound most of the time..

If I need to playback with some "eq", I just use the little treble/bass knobs on the playback unit, whatever that may be..

We have a system that increasingly taxes work and subsidizes nonwork.  ~Milton Friedman

Offline TenoRichards

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 169
  • Gender: Male
  • Resident Taper/Audiophile Wannabe
    • Tenor
Re: To nomalize or not?
« Reply #55 on: November 15, 2005, 02:59:57 AM »
Thanks to all of you for this thread. I have more than once been lambasted for asking Q's about adding compression to classical. The purists' mentality which seems to (rightfully?) prevail here always shuns my tendancy to master things. As I don't really release or seed any of my stuff (classical) I tinker with it, because, frankly, it is more the mastering that draws my attention rather than the taping. I like taping fine, but it's the simple manipulation of the source that interests me, thus I can spend hours working w/ my recordings of live opera. My tapes are really done to give to my fellow singers with whom I am performing, and hell, they'll like anything I give them, so I don't need to worry about the purists mentality.

I DO use Wavelab 5 montages more and more, as all mastering in them is non-destructive. I usually will keep the source untouched, but seriously, you guys that do rock and louder shows w/ less dynamic range would be very hard pressed to tape some classical and be happy with your tapes, ESPECIALLY give the less than ideal circumstances I have to tape in (stealthed and balance problems between orch and singers). HELL YES, I use  eq'ing, punchers, and L2!!! In doing so, I can (shudder) IMPROVE the live sound. There IS a reason why the majority of the POP artists are lipsynching so much of their shows....cuz it sounds BETTER on tape when they're not jiggling their tushes off in some shitty dance move. The same reasoning applies here too. WE have to stop being afraid to 'improve' our tapes.

Does anyone really bemoan the fact that the EXACT duplicate of Caruso's recordings might not be in circulation, or are they happy that they simply GOT him on 'tape?'
dpa 4060's>BBox>acm modded pmd671 or Edirol r-09
www.tenorrichards.com

Offline Jonathan_Hatgis

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 25
  • Gender: Male
  • Pristine quality audio for the masses
Re: To nomalize or not?
« Reply #56 on: November 15, 2005, 06:50:31 AM »
I'm sure I am just rehashing what has already been stated, but I do not have the time to read this whole thread right now. 

I vote absolutely not.  there is no need if your levels are adjuted properly.  Much of todays gear can run very hot.  Take advantage of that, because there will  be sound you are missing if your levels are too low...even if you doctor it up afterwards.
TLM170's > V3 > 722

I'll alway's give a patch

Offline Digital Quality

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1148
  • Gender: Male
Re: To nomalize or not?
« Reply #57 on: November 15, 2005, 05:00:35 PM »
Actually, there is noise introduced by the AD process and it is raised by normalizing after the fact.
You are here: http://www.atlasoftheuniverse.com/
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/astropix.html

rig:         mk41/21>kc5>cmc6>KindKables>v3>Axim x50v,WM6,live2496
playback: Marantz DV7600>Mackie 1202>Mackie HR824

Offline momule

  • Trade Count: (4)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2178
  • Gender: Male
Re: To nomalize or not?
« Reply #58 on: November 15, 2005, 05:23:36 PM »
Good thread..  This is a bit of a grey area.  If you're willing to EQ to improve the sound, why worry about warm pre-amps at all?   Want fat bass?  Fatten it.  Where do you stop?

Another concern.. Let's say I have 3 80's SRV masters. I EQ them using medicore 1990 tech and release them. Years later, the masters get lost in a fire.  What source do we want floating around?

I use a Slim Devices Squeezebox for playback.  One thing I'd like to see with that software is source specific EQ.  Basically, I'd like to be able to add bass to some shows and reduce the highs on others and have those settings remembered for that show.  Taken to the next level, you would be able to do real time parametric EQ at playback time on a show by show basis.  The master never gets tweaked, etc..


I dont seem to have a problem with the Stock Ua-5 being too thin sounding by anymeans. It picks up plenty off bass at most of the shows I record, Hence why I EQ it in post.

I would say that your nuts for not keeping copies of the master both on and off site. But I dont see where that fits into this thread really ..

I do this now. its called presets via wavelab , which is linked to my home playback.





« Last Edit: November 15, 2005, 05:48:44 PM by Momule »
AKG 463's (uno ck62) > Mackie Onyx Satellite > Microtrack II

zowie

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: To nomalize or not?
« Reply #59 on: November 15, 2005, 06:21:03 PM »
Actually, there is noise introduced by the AD process and it is raised by normalizing after the fact.

*sigh*

 

RSS | Mobile
Page created in 0.105 seconds with 43 queries.
© 2002-2024 Taperssection.com
Powered by SMF