Could those that care to help please share their digital experience with me regarding "normalizing" my tracks after I've imported them into my DAW? (or in any digital audio file situation?)

I've researched it online: "Due to volume differences between audio tracks, normalization allows you to set the volume consistent between tracks during the encoding or burning process."

OK. I sorta get that. Sounds like it's more for setting up CD's or other collections of finished audio files to be at the same playback levels than for use in tracking and mixing in a DAW. If that's the case I'm wondering why most DAW's offer a normalizing feature. (I know that just because it's there doesn't mean I have to use it!)

Most of my BIAB Real Tracks/Drums don't have a huge track footprint when I import them to my DAW, but they sound great and have plenty of volume/horsepower to get me into -12 vicinity and beyond. Some of the BIAB acoustic guitar Real Tracks are a bit puny signal wise, but there are ways to boost them using the gain/loudness plugins. And since each track in my DAW mixing process is volume adjusted individually, is there really any value in normalizing tracks in my DAW?

Sounds kinda like normalizing might be more useful when one is getting into the mastering phase than in DAW tracking and mixing.

To my ears it seems the normalizing I've done in my experimentation simply increases the level of digital tracks that are already loud/strong enough. (I've lost a lot of my hearing in the high ranges however - playing live R&R several nights a week for 25+ years will do that to you! So if there's something going on up high in the normalizing process, I might not be hearing it).

When and why would you advise the use of normalizing?

If I were to normalize a track in a song, should I normalize all of them - - to have each track "on the same page".

Thanks for your time!

Hi SILVERBACK.

Normalizing just brings the track up to the noise ceiling. If you're careful about your tracking, or you're using all RealTracks, you probably won't need it. On the other hand, if you've recorded something a bit quiet and don't want to bother with a plugin, it can be useful.

Another useful feature associated with normalizing is the gain change/post peak limit. This puts a brick-wall limiter at the noise ceiling and then allows you to push up the noise floor by the selected amount. Think of it like tape compression, but without the subtle distortion that tape added.

If you want to go for tape saturation, try patching in the PG Distortion plugin. Two simple controls, pre-gain and output, let you boost and color the signal. It's surprisingly good, either on single tracks, or patched into the main output bus.

Hope this helps.

ROG.

The Behringer UltraDyne 9024 did a remarkable job of "bringing everything up front" on a recording. Got your attention!

In my case, it was a "God-Send" for the production of six CD's I did. Probably about $400, way back when!

Not currently on the market, but of course there are others out their now...10 years later.

Normalizing....

The best way to describe it is that it amplifies the signal. The cool thing, unlike compression, is, that it looks at the entire track and finds the HIGHEST peak. It then takes that peak to 100% or 0db unless you set a level less than that.

NOTE: It is possible to normalize above 0db however, that is not advised. If that is the goal, in this case a compressor may be the better choice, however you will lose the dynamic range of the music......

I often choose 96% normalization. This takes the track's highest peak to the 96% level and leaves a 4% headroom. Head room is important if you are converting to MP3 since the conversion process needs that extra room to prevent "overs". overs = peaks exceeding 0db = digital clipping = not good

It does not exceed that peak, and it amplifies everything else in the track IN RELATION TO that peak....so your dynamics are still in tact. Compression amplifies but can easily eliminate the dynamics.

I normalize ONLY when it is necessary. BB, I believe has a "normalize tracks on export" function so normalizing later in a DAW should not be needed.

If you can play back the track, and it has sufficient levels to hold it's own in the mix with the fader no higher than 0db, there is NO need to normalize it.

Normalizing does not bring the tracks up to the noise ceiling. It does however, raise the noise floor.... the noise under the music (room noise, mic hiss, etc)..... up by the same amount so it may actually be audible after the normalization is done. That's why I said to normalize only if it's needed. Most BB/RB tracks are pretty quiet in the noise floor area.

I will sometimes normalize a track I record....like acoustic guitar or mandolin. BB & RB tracks are generally OK without normalizing. After I work on a track in my DAW and export it, I will generally normalize it and that will only add a few db gain to the track. But I use Normalize to do that as opposed to compression to keep the dynamics and keep everything relative and clean.

Normalization is amplification that keeps the relationship & dynamics the same while boosting the levels and not exceeding a set maximum percentage of 0db.

Thank you all Gentlemen... great responses!

The only thing you need to know about normalization is ... don't use it!

You want to use some kind of look ahead limiter. Most DAWs have them or there are free plugins. A normalizer is a sledgehammer when you need to use a chisel.

I thought it might be interesting to see what the PowerTracks Help file says -

Pre Normalize-- Pre-scan each file, to determine how much gain should be applied to raise the level of the track to -0.3 dB full scale. The 0.3 dB headroom is left at the top, because some oversampling DA converters do not perform very well at full-scale levels. They sometimes make distortion from arithmetic overflow.

Gain Change-- The amount of boost to be applied to a track. If Pre Normalize is enabled, the Gain Change amount is added to the normalize boost. Positive Gain can cause clipping unless Post Peak Limit is also enabled. There is never any risk of clipping with negative gain.

Post Peak Limit-- An instant-attack, program-dependent-release Peak Limiter. The Peak Limiter protects the final output from clipping, by automatically "turning down the gain" on loud peaks.

ROG.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A71ctWCnzkc&list=PLEE99C9932C0EB19B

A complex approach (solving the IQ challenges of most of we non-technical souls) was this Behriner DSP 9024 owner spec report...This unit does a lot, algorithmically speaking (cough-cough) and I some of these writings were both helpful and hurtful to those who try to reach beyond their own--or the capabilities of the "9024" itself.....
that's why it was ultimately pulled off the market, despite the overall appreciation we made with our purchases.
An interesting read, at least, if you'd like additional imput from this well-written treatise.

http://www.behringer.com/assets/DSP9024_P0033_M_EN.pdf

And "hears" the Ultradyne "Anseltaler - Alpen Polka Soundtest" !!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LzPaok-4Qc4[/b]
[i][/i]

Good info. I don't do it unless I have to but there are times when it's necessary - and then I'll go back and gain change it down -3. I got that advice from someone on here - sorry don't remember who now - but it does seem to hit the sweet spot that way when I have to do it on a track in a mix.

I haven't mastered and burned my own cd so I don't know if it's necessary in that context or not.

Another thing to remember about normalizing is that it only takes one single extraneous peak (for example, someone coughed in the mike) in your file already at the ceiling and the result will seem to be that nothing happened (no change in volume). If you normalize, it's a good idea to first look through your file and see if there are any extraneous peaks in the wave form and edit them down to a lower level, then do the normalize.

Almost any FX or tool can be misused, and many are.

I use the normalize when I need it and really do not look at it like its a "sledgehammer or a chisel" It's more of a linear amplifier as opposed to being a compressor. It keeps the dynamics in proper relation, which a compressor does not do.

You have to view the wave, certainly, and if there are any "abnormal" spikes, you have to tame them in some manner or normalize will use that spike as it's measuring stick and the result may be that it does nothing at all to the wave in it's processing.

That is something you should be looking at anyway, regardless.

Normalize is simply another tool for you to use. The important thing is, to learn to use it properly and in the right place and measure and it will give you amazing results.

I have been in the "normalize or not normalize" discussion on other DAW forums, and some people love it, some people hate it. I say learn what it does and you decide if you want to use it or not. I have never had one single person, even the guys with the super critical ears, when listening to my music, make the comment that..."you normalized that guitar track didn't you? " or "wow, that normalization sure ruined that mix"...... nope... no one can tell me, when they hear one of my songs, which tracks, if any, or all, have been normalized.

I agree with the above.

Personally, I've yet to find the actual need to normalize any track in many years.
As long as I have all tracks at -12 db (my personal minimum) or so I've never had a problem getting a good mix regardless of the amount of tracks.
It the original tracking doesn't have adequate levels due to my poor technique I'd do it again.

That's my take on it...carry on.

I have normalized every single file I have posted for mp3 listening purposes online for the past 8 years or more. I have also been doing my projects with 24 bit A/D for most of that time, and have managed my mix levels so that I'm a good 6 dB under full scale on the output VU meter.

I have never had an issue with it or any complaints.

I have had other issues with websites like SoundCloud doing their own dither process taking my normalized .mp3 file at 320kbps and when down grading to 128 kbps, introduce funny artifacts.

IMO, if your intent is to post the file as an .mp3, by itself, normalization is something that should become a habit - I guess I'm at the other end of the scale if you compare my comments with kemmrich's comment to never use it. Why should it become a habit? Most everything else professionally done that has been posted as an .mp3 has likely been normalized.

Now, I should say that my DAW does normalization before .mp3 conversion - it does it in one fell swoop as part of the render to .mp3 process.

There is really no need to apply normalization to individual tracks. That's just going to create mixdown additional work.

Those are my opinions on the matter for what they are worth.

Oh, let me say that guitarhacker's points above are spot on....

Normalizing an final MP3 file to make it louder is quite different than normalizing individual tracks in a mix. You could normalize every track and you probably still wouldn't have volume consistency between tracks. But if it works for some folks here, that is fine by me.

i use protools and one of my teachers always told me to normalize at 99.4%, so it doesn't clip.

As far as i know normalizing just increases the gain, so you match the volume of your other audio recordings.

I don't exceed 98% with normalizing, because sometimes while encoding to MP3 afterward it seems to clip if I start any higher. The clipping may be a function of my audio editor when it creates the MP3s, but that's what works for me.