Topic: Do you Band Pass Filter / Gate your Masters?

[mfisch]

So everyone seems to be in agreement on using compression for trade-friendly recordings? I've been applying at 100% on a per-track basis. This really does a great job on most recordings and songs.

As I've been whipping up 'demo' or distributable masters, I've been applying a mild 6-9dB gain w/ 3-band compression / limiter to ensure the intros, solos and chorus/etc are all audible on consumer hardware .... SlimSlowSlider's compressor isnt as nice as the hollywood or broadcaster digital compressors -- but its miles ahead of the one that came with cubase (just by being 3-band)... and its free.

Anyone have alternative method suggestions or a specific suite of tools they find particularly helpful? I'm using free tools / cubase se tools now, but If I find something I like I dont mind shelling out. .. of course much of this stuff is meant for producers who have complete isolation in their tracks already ...

[BayTaynt3d]

Oh shit, was that a troll? You're stepping in front of a train around here... 

[heath]

wanted to add that another great tool you can try (software permitting) is automation.  It's really helped me with gain issues, and is a nice alternative to plugins...  A slight fader ride during a particularly tough transition can do wonders.  Also works well for dropping rowdy crowds.  With smooth automation, the differences between those sudden peaks, and quieter setions can be completely seamless.

[Brian Skalinder]

So everyone seems to be in agreement on using compression for trade-friendly recordings?

Actually, it seems to me there's broad disagreement on using compression for trade-friendly recordings.

[mfisch]

So everyone seems to be in agreement on using compression for trade-friendly recordings?

Actually, it seems to me there's broad disagreement on using compression for trade-friendly recordings.

hmm, no, In fact not trolling, but maybe the bump on my head and late night are an excuse for a typo? I meant to say everyone is on the same page on using normalization ....

[Brian Skalinder]

Re normalizing:  you're better off setting your levels properly in the first place, so normalization is not necessary.  The only situations in which I can see levels not set properly is either a stealth job or a wholly unfamiliar recording scenario (for example, recording something far different than the normal AUD situation, like an organ recital with no sound check).

[RebelRebel]

Thanks Brian. 

Re normalizing:  you're better off setting your levels properly in the first place, so normalization is not necessary.  The only situations in which I can see levels not set properly is either a stealth job or a wholly unfamiliar recording scenario (for example, recording something far different than the normal AUD situation, like an organ recital with no sound check).

[ethan]

Leaving the stuff as is ... great for a "raw" master, but no good for distribution. A recording with no gain/eq/normalization/etc will not be "loud enough" on a normal CD player.

I disagree...get the levels right when recording and it'll be plenty loud. Besides half the resolution of 16 bit audio is *above* 6dBFS...if the nominal levels during recording aren't at or above that range you've blown the tape anyways. You can't get back what's not there.

-e

[bdasilva]

Mostly I record on my laptop... I record so that the levesl kiss 0 (without clipping)...  Its loud enough. I'll take out rumble and sometimes wind noise... But is not good soundwise to mess with too much and it'll drive you batty if to try too hard. Trims and fades.

[mfisch]

yep, its certainly driving me batty.

What about UV22?

[Brian Skalinder]

What about UV22?

What about it?  It's a dithering algorithm, and AFAIK, that's it.  I performed a dither comparison a while back if you're interested.

[mfisch]

What about UV22?

What about it?  It's a dithering algorithm, and AFAIK, that's it.  I performed a dither comparison a while back if you're interested.

Ya, its mainly the time it takes to run that bothers me. Thanks for the link.

ps. a "search" for uv22 comes up with mostly useless stuff not including your study .... and the more I think about the search rewrite its probably more complicated than I gave it credit initially ... worth a try though.