|
Log in to post
|
Print Thread |
|
|
|
|
|
RealBand
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 358
Journeyman
|
OP
Journeyman
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 358 |
Hi all
I'm sure this question has been asked before but I couldn't find anything regarding this particular problem.
When converting tracks to wave or MP3 is there a way to equalize the volume so they are all the same? I just finished a bunch of backing tracks & some where way too loud. I'm working with RB 13. ...Hank
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RealBand
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 22,606
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 22,606 |
Edit-Gain Change- Normalize preset.
Before everybody starts with the 'you shouldn't Normalize' comments; you can Normalize to -6 dB if you want .. just check the box for adjust gain and select a value.
Highlight a Track from beginning to end (Select All)
Then select the tracks you want to Normalize (you can do many at once if you want).
Afterwards use 'Save As' so you don't lose your original copy .. in case you don't like the results.
I do not work here, but the benefits are still awesome
Make your sound your own!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RealBand
|
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 216
Apprentice
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 216 |
I normalize everything to -3db. Makes it much easier to mix and apply effects.
I never heard you shouldn't normalize. Why shouldn't you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RealBand
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 358
Journeyman
|
|
OP
Journeyman
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 358 |
Thanks rharv
When you say check the box for adjust gain, do you mean that you go to " Audio Effects" and open "Gain Change"?...Hank
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RealBand
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 22,606
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 22,606 |
Yes, but this 'hard writes' the change, so use Save As if you have time invested in the mix.
I do not work here, but the benefits are still awesome
Make your sound your own!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RealBand
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 358
Journeyman
|
|
OP
Journeyman
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 358 |
This leads me to another question. Frank, You prefer -3db & Rharv you use -6 db. What are these decisions based on?....Hank
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RealBand
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 22,606
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 22,606 |
I don't prefer -6 .. I prefer a track recorded with the correct levels (relative to the mix).
The reference was simply that; a reference.
-6 or -3 or -12 .. it's all possible, and I needed an example.
I do not work here, but the benefits are still awesome
Make your sound your own!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RealBand
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 22,606
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 22,606 |
I normalize everything to -3db. Makes it much easier to mix and apply effects.
I never heard you shouldn't normalize. Why shouldn't you? Best case scenario has the tracks recorded in volumes that are 'relative' to the next. Normalizing (often) raises noise floor level for one ..
I do not work here, but the benefits are still awesome
Make your sound your own!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RealBand
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 38,502
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 38,502 |
3dB change = aprox 1.2 times Amplitude increase or decrease. 6dB = aprox 1.5 times 12dB = about 2.3 X It is important to understand the difference between the terms, "Amplitude" and "Volume" or "Loudness". Twice the Amplitude is not twice as loud. That is because of the way the human ear hears things, favoring midrange frequencies over the other two extremes of low and high. Fletcher-Munson curve. I'm going to post a link here that may seem daunting, try to wade through it anyway. And, since the deciBel thing is log10, good idea to memorize the following mantra: "It takes 10 times the Power to make a signal twice as loud." Remember that for the next time that other guy informs you that his 200W amplifier is twice as loud as your 100W amp and just look at him and say, "okay" - and proceed to drown him out anyway by hiking your mids a bit. http://www.sengpielaudio.com/calculator-levelchange.htm --Mac
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RealBand
|
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 216
Apprentice
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 216 |
Rutabago wrote: "This leads me to another question. Frank, You prefer -3db & Rharv you use -6 db. What are these decisions based on?....Hank"
My choice of -3db is fairly arbitrary. When I choose normalize Reaper would default to 0db. Adding a bunch of tracks together would result in me having to lower the 'Master' volume (not a big deal but I didn't care for it). At -3db that doesn't happen much (I usually only have around 6 tracks).
What I like, is my compressor and my reverb bus and my reverb sends are set in my templete. Because I always have about the same levels on my tracks (-3db) my sends and compressor and master limiter are already in the ballpark of where I want them. I just tweek from there. This just helps an old persons memory like mine.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RealBand
|
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 216
Apprentice
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 216 |
I normalize everything to -3db. Makes it much easier to mix and apply effects.
I never heard you shouldn't normalize. Why shouldn't you? Best case scenario has the tracks recorded in volumes that are 'relative' to the next. Normalizing (often) raises noise floor level for one .. In the digital world I heard it was pretty normal to record at around -6db to -12db and raise the volumes at mix down. I got this information from this guy who really seems to know what he talks about and has garnered a lot of respect from me and others: http://forum.cockos.com/showthread.php?t=29283I know we used to record at real high levels to keep the tape hiss to a minimum. Does that still make sense with digital recording where there isn't any tape hiss?
Last edited by Frankp; 11/10/13 06:49 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RealBand
|
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 123
Apprentice
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 123 |
the thing is that most plugins are optimized to produce best results with an input of around -17db & this is the volume you should be looking at hitting them. Proper gain staging will make all of your work sound better
Last edited by bupper; 11/11/13 05:45 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RealBand
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 8,021
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 8,021 |
There is only one way to get all of your tunes to sound the way you want. Listen over & over and tweak over & over.It's a lot of work to get a show balanced the way you want. No real easy tricks.JMO
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RealBand
|
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 10,867
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 10,867 |
Normalize.....
Why you should or shouldn't use it....? Use it to raise levels in a track with low levels. It's really handy to bring up a mic'd acoustic guitar track.
The down side is that when you normalize the track, the process of normalization brings everything up to a predetermined level. Say you choose -3db as the level. Normalize will look at the entire track, find the highest peak in the wave and bring THAT point to -3db. It amplifies everything else in that wave on a linear scale as well so that the music retains the exact same dynamic range but just louder with the highest peak not exceeding -3db. What that means is any noise in the track also gets that same boost. That's the downside and the why not.
-3db and -6db are not magical numbers someone picked out of the air. The common number is -6db as peaks and -12 as RMS levels on a mix for a wave that has NOT been mastered yet. This allows the mastering house engineer to work with sufficient headroom to add compression and limiting without exceeding the 0db level which in the digital world is clipping. Adhering to those levels also allows for the conversion to MP3 without the clipping as well.
Most of the -6 db thing is applicable if you are having the track mastered by a pro mastering house. If you do your own, the -3db level is a good rule of thumb to use on the final mix.
As for me, my rule of thumb is to keep the meters out of the red (clipping) and mix by that measure and what it sounds like. It's totally possible to have an acoustic guitar based tune quite loud (in relative db's in the wave) and still retain the dynamic range of the music when it's done right.
I do also tend to use normalize in a track only when the levels are low. BB will render some low level tracks at times and I'll bump them with normalize. I always use normalize in the mastering/polishing process after I have exported the finished mix.... it gets trimmed and normalized in my audio editor generally to that -3db level.
You can find my music at: www.herbhartley.comAdd nothing that adds nothing to the music. You can make excuses or you can make progress but not both. The magic you are looking for is in the work you are avoiding.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RealBand
|
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 216
Apprentice
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 216 |
The down side is that when you normalize the track, the process of normalization brings everything up to a predetermined level. Say you choose -3db as the level. Normalize will look at the entire track, find the highest peak in the wave and bring THAT point to -3db. It amplifies everything else in that wave on a linear scale as well so that the music retains the exact same dynamic range but just louder with the highest peak not exceeding -3db. What that means is any noise in the track also gets that same boost. That's the downside and the why not.
I understand it raises everything including the noise. But it raises everything, so doesn't the noise level stay relative. I always increase the volume on my mix as much as I can without clipping. Does it make any difference in the noise level of the final mix whether I, 1) raised the volume with the master fader or, 2) raised the volume by first normalizing individual tracks and then still adjusting the volume with the master fader? Or for that matter, I keep the volume low on the mix and the final listener just raises the volume on their stereo, any difference in that noise level? It's all digital, I don't understand how it would make a difference in the noise levels in any of those scenarios.
Last edited by Frankp; 11/11/13 07:43 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RealBand
|
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 216
Apprentice
|
|
Apprentice
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 216 |
the thing is that most plugins are optimized to produce best results with an input of around -17db & this is the volume you should be looking at hitting them. Proper gain staging will make all of your work sound better
I never heard that. That will change how I set all my levels. Do you go for -17db peaks or some sort of average?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RealBand
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 38,502
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 38,502 |
I know we used to record at real high levels to keep the tape hiss to a minimum. Does that still make sense with digital recording where there isn't any tape hiss?
In a word, no. The two methods are entirely different. With analog magnetic tape recording, Saturation of the magnetic media was desirable in most cases. But the modern PCM Digital recording is recording a digital number that corresponds to the amplitude of the signal measwured for each sample in time, according to the sample rate. In this method, we are not going to gain anything by increasing those numbers, and may even get into the bad territory of raising those numbers so high as to create distortion or clipping problems at the digital level. The advent of the 32-bit PCM digital recording "engine" has greatly alleviated the problem though, previously, when all we had for PC recording was the 16-bit engine, there was the problem of digital clipping that was caused due to forcing those numbers to the top of the available bits and thus they would suddenly wrap around to the bottom, creating a nasty sound that we called, "Digital Thwack" or just "Thwack". All that aside, there are still places around the web to be found where some explanations of digital recording tout setting the recording level for as high as possible before reaching the 0dBFS mark on the recording VU meter. I do not recommend that procedure. It can lead to ruining an otherwise good take because a section of the music performance could easily exceed 0dBFS mark due to the dynamic abilities of the performer. I try to set my levels for recording where the VU meters in the recording program are hovering below 0dB for the peaks, somewhere around the -6dBFS mark or so, sometimes lower than that if the instrument is drums, or a very dynamic singer. When setting levels for someone, there is also the human factor to consider. If you ask the performer to sing or play "as loud as they can" they will attempt to do so but typically will always hold back for some reason. Then, when actually performing and recording the track, the emotion of the thing may come out and they will easily exceed the amount of amplitude they generated during level-set testing. So I allow for that when setting the level. I'd much rather have to perform a Gain Change on a track, or even resort to Normalization of that particular track if it contains Strong Performance rather than risk losing the section where they got too loud to the ravages of digital overshoot or clipping, even with today's 32-bit engine, which is very hard to force into digital clipping but doing so can indeed make for some distortion at playback sometimes. --Mac
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RealBand
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 38,502
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 38,502 |
the thing is that most plugins are optimized to produce best results with an input of around -17db & this is the volume you should be looking at hitting them. Proper gain staging will make all of your work sound better
Can you cite a source for that claim? Doesn't sound right. Also, just throwing out a dB figure without a reference is meaningless information. dB must always be referenced to something. Sometimes it can stand alone like that if the reference is the *previous* audio level, but that is not the case here. I'm going to assume you mean, -17dBFS, the "FS" in this case standing for "Full Scale" reference on the typical digital recording program's VU meter. The math says: -17dBFS signal translates to a Loudness of approximately 0.307786 of the reference, which in this case is the 0dB mark on the VU. That's like one third of the VU travel. That is pretty doggone low and likely wouldn't drive the input of an audio plugin very well, surely they are designed to handle much more input than this. Don't go with a rule of thumb setting in the case of plugins anyway, for different tracks will have differing amounts of energy as compared to time on them. Most of the time, I use my ears. In particular cases where my ears detect anomaly, I might resort to use of good quality Real Time Analyzer software or plugin to see visually what the heck's going on and thus be able to make intelligent correction decisions. For example, if it is found that a detected audio anomaly is happening in a certain frequency band, the analyzer shows the band, inserting an instance of EQ before the effect and tweaking that band can alleviate the problem. --Mac
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RealBand
|
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 10,867
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 10,867 |
The down side is that when you normalize the track, the process of normalization brings everything up to a predetermined level. Say you choose -3db as the level. Normalize will look at the entire track, find the highest peak in the wave and bring THAT point to -3db. It amplifies everything else in that wave on a linear scale as well so that the music retains the exact same dynamic range but just louder with the highest peak not exceeding -3db. What that means is any noise in the track also gets that same boost. That's the downside and the why not.
I understand it raises everything including the noise. But it raises everything, so doesn't the noise level stay relative. I always increase the volume on my mix as much as I can without clipping. Does it make any difference in the noise level of the final mix whether I, 1) raised the volume with the master fader or, 2) raised the volume by first normalizing individual tracks and then still adjusting the volume with the master fader? Or for that matter, I keep the volume low on the mix and the final listener just raises the volume on their stereo, any difference in that noise level? It's all digital, I don't understand how it would make a difference in the noise levels in any of those scenarios. pretty much correct. If the track is a midi track and digital, there should be no noise in it to speak of. The silence in a midi track should be (for all practical purposes) total silence. we know that is not possible but it is so low you can't hear it and even amplifying it 100% or more still leaves it below the threshold of hearing. The problem comes in when you record an audio track such as a guitar amp with a certain amount of hum. That hum is boosted, as you said, relative to the track, or as I said, in a linear manner.... so as the track volume goes up so does the noise. So even though the audio track is digital, the hum is part of the material and regardless if it's digital, it gets boosted. Then, you also have the phenomenon of masking. This is where there is other sound sources (instruments in the other tracks) that, due to their presence, mask, quite effectively, the noise in the target track to the point it's not heard. So even if the noise is boosted and not edited out in the silent parts, the other sources keep it well hidden in the mix. Any time you turn it up, whether in the track, the sub-bus, the master output or after with normalization you will raise the noise level. The only time this would really matter is if that instrument track was solo at the time. Such as a guitar intro to a song... however, the amp hum/noise can also be an asset by giving that "live" and personal feel to the recording.... so it may not always be a bad thing to have noise in a track. If it is an issue, gating or envelope editing will work but you also risk the loss of the reverb tails making the part sound very unnatural as a result.
Last edited by Guitarhacker; 11/11/13 10:49 AM.
You can find my music at: www.herbhartley.comAdd nothing that adds nothing to the music. You can make excuses or you can make progress but not both. The magic you are looking for is in the work you are avoiding.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RealBand
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 358
Journeyman
|
|
OP
Journeyman
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 358 |
WOW. Where to begin this note. First, I'd like to thank all of you for your interest. It has turned into a great discussion. I have spent about 40 years in one aspect or another of the music business but, no time in the recording side. Therefore db's, mixing & mixers, effect settings etc. are avoided .At this point, I'd like to blushingly point that my misspelling of volume on my original heading was simply a typo. I can spell voloom! Back to db's. A lot of what I have read here leaves me scratching my head But! I have understood enough to move ahead & I intend to learn more! One last thing. Frank, you mentioned being an older person, well I'm up there too. 84 as of Oct. 24th, but still doing the odd gig, duo's trio's, all using backing tracks created in P G products. I am trying to do a better job using "Real Tracks". Thanks again...Hank
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ask sales and support questions about Band-in-a-Box using natural language.
ChatPG's knowledge base includes the full Band-in-a-Box User Manual and sales information from the website.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
XPro & Xtra Styles PAK Sets On Sale Now - Until May 15, 2026!
All of our XPro Styles PAKs and Xtra Styles PAKs are on sale until May 15th, 2026!
It's the perfect time to expand your Band-in-a-Box® style library with XPro and Xtra Styles PAKs. These additional styles for Band-in-a-Box® offer a wide range of genres designed to fit seamlessly into your projects. Each style is professionally arranged and mixed, helping enhance your songs while saving you time.
What are XPro Styles and Xtra Styles PAKs?
XPro Styles PAKs are styles that work with any version (Pro, MegaPAK, UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition) of Band-in-a-Box® 2025 (or higher). XPro Styles PAKS 1-10 includes 1,000 styles!
Xtra Styles PAKs are styles that work with the UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition of Band-in-a-Box® 2025 (or higher). Xtra Styles PAKs 1-21 includes 3,700 styles (and 35 MIDI styles)!
The XPro & Xtra Styles PAKs are not included in any Band-in-a-Box® package.
The XPro Styles PAKs 1-10 are available for only $29 ea (reg. $49 ea), or get them all in the XPro Styles PAK Bundle for only $149 (reg. $299)! Listen to demos and order now! For Mac or for Windows.
The Xtra Styles PAKs 1-21 are available for only $29 ea (reg. $49 ea), or get them all in the Xtra Styles PAK Bundle for only $199 (reg. $349)! Listen to demos and order now! For Mac or for Windows.
Note: XPro Styles PAKs require Band-in-a-Box® 2025 or higher and are compatible with ANY package, including the Pro, MegaPAK, UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, and Audiophile Edition.
The Xtra Styles require the UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition of Band-in-a-Box®. (Xtra Styles PAK 19 requires the 2025 or higher UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition. They will not work with the Pro or MegaPAK version as they require the RealTracks included in the UltraPAK, UltraPAK+, or Audiophile Edition.
Supercharge your Band-in-a-Box today with XPro Styles PAKs and Xtra Styles PAK Sets!
Band-in-a-Box 2026 for Mac Videos
With the release of Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Mac, we’re rolling out a collection of brand-new videos on our YouTube channel. We’ll keep this forum post updated so you can easily find all the latest videos in one convenient spot.
Whether you're exploring new features, checking out the latest RealTracks or Style PAKs, this is your go-to guide for Band-in-a-Box® 2026.
Check out this forum post for "One Stop Shopping" of our Band-in-a-Box® 2026 Mac Videos!
Band-in-a-Box 2026 for Mac is Here!
Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Mac is here and it is packed with major new features! There’s a new modern look, a GUI redesign to all areas of the program including toolbars, windows, workflow and more. There’s a Multi-view layout for organizing multiple windows. A standout addition is the powerful AI-Notes feature, which uses AI neural-net technology to transcribe polyphonic audio into MIDI—entire mixes or individual instruments—making it easy to study, view, and play parts from any song. And that’s just the beginning—there are over 100 new features in this exciting release.
Along with version 2026, we've released an incredible lineup of new content! There's 202 new RealTracks, brand-new RealStyles, MIDI SuperTracks, Instrumental Studies, “Songs with Vocals” Artist Performance Sets, Playable RealTracks Set 5, two new RealDrums Stems sets, XPro Styles PAK 10, Xtra Styles PAK 21, and much more!
Special Offers
Upgrade to Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Mac and save up to 50% on most upgrade packages during our special offer—available until May 15, 2026. Visit our Band-in-a-Box® packages page to explore all available upgrade options.
2026 Free Bonus PAK & 49-PAK Add-ons
Our Free Bonus PAK and 49-PAK are loaded with amazing add-ons! The Free Bonus PAK is included with most Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Mac packages, but you can unlock even more—including 20 unreleased RealTracks—by upgrading to the 2026 49-PAK for just $49.
Holiday Weekend Hours
As we hop into the Easter weekend, here are our holiday hours:
April 3 (Good Friday): 8:00 AM – 4:00 PM PDT
April 4 (Saturday): Closed
April 5 (Easter Sunday): Closed
April 6 (Easter Monday): Open regular hours
Wishing you an egg-cellent weekend!
— Team PG
Update to Build 10 of RealBand® 2026 for Windows®!
If you're already using RealBand 2026 for Windows, download build 10 to get all the latest additions and enhancements.
Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Mac® users: Build 904 now available!
If you're already using Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Mac®, make sure to grab the latest update! Build 904 is now available for download and includes the newest additions and enhancements from our team.
Band-in-a-Box® 2026 for Windows® users: Build 1237 is now available!
Already a Band-in-a-Box 2026 for Windows user? Stay up to date and download the build 1237 to get all the latest additions and enhancements.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forums57
Topics86,204
Posts801,931
Members40,068
| |
Most Online64,515
Apr 8th, 2026
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dansk
Deutsch - Windows
Español
Français - Windows
Italiano - Windows
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Svenskt
русский
Japanese
Simplified Chinese
Traditional Chinese
Korean