Hey, for everyone talking about the benefits of mastering to "industry standards," here's an interesting experiment.
Use the Audacity Program to open up an MP3 of the song "Born to Run"* (if you have one) from the CD and study it. Look at the headroom and listen to the volume level. Look at how the waveform looks like--well, a wave. It rises and falls. It ebbs and flows.
Then do the same thing with "Radio Nowhere"* (for comparison, if you have one.) Look at at how the waveform in Radio Nowhere is a thick blue brick pushed all the way to the edge of maximizing, and then shaved off a few nanometers from spiking with the barest amount of limiting. Notice how the needle is constantly in the red. Notice how your ears bleed. Notice how if you go back to listening to Born to Run after listening to Radio Nowhere you will no longer be able to hear it because it sounds muted and you feel deaf. Those are not your headphones that have been muted. Those are your eardrums.
Ok, now think about this: Born to Run is universally recognized as one of the greatest Rock 'n Roll songs of all time. It took 6 months to produce and about another 6 months to master.
Was the mastering "bad"? Did they not know what they were doing? Did it not sound like a hit? Yet, by Spotify and SoundCloud standards it is nowhere near professional loudness norms.
Are you still sure you want a robot mastering tool mastering your stuff?
Really sure?
Really, really, really sure???
* If you don't have these songs try similar experiments with any songs released say 10 years ago, with any hit released today.
David Snyder Songwriter/Renaissance Man Studio + Fingers
Well I can only agree with the conclusion not being able to listen to either of those songs both absent from my limited CD collection.
I will add one thing technology has come a long way since some songs were released. I believe if any producer would go back and REMASTER any old song, they will end up quite different. But, your point will still be made, today the louder songs would be lowered a bit and the lower volume songs would be raised a bit. We all get Vanilla from the music industry today. No more 31 flavors.
Except here in the PG Forum where we can do anything we Da _ _ _ d well please.
A little more Cowbell!!
Last edited by dga; 05/30/1601:23 PM.
"When you help somebody else you are really helping yourself"
If you don't have these songs try similar experiments with any songs released say 10 years ago, with any hit released today.
Your point is valid but unless you have a DeLorean to go back and release your music before the start of The Loudness War, in order to have any chance of success at all in today's market you must master your stuff using similar techniques as "any hit released today"! On the other hand, if you (like I) have already concluded that you have a better chance of being hit by space debris than getting a hit with your music, then by all means buck the trend, be true to your school, produce the music you like fer sure!
Also wasn't Born to Run released before the days of CD's?? At least back then I had it on vinyl, don't recall if CD players were around then, if they were I didn't own one.
Point is there are many things mastering wise you can do to a track that is destined for digital release, either CD or WAV or MP3, that you couldn't do for a vinyl release, too loud or too much bass and the needle would jump right out of the groove.
I use Ozone (a very old version) to master here, and I'm always very careful to not add too much compression. I tend to go with the less is more approach, mostly because I'm no expert when it comes to this stuff!
Even though Born to run was pre-CD, they still had compressors and limiters. And if they had them , they could use them or abuse them.
The engineers doing much of the mastering and final production in the 70's simply chose to make the music sound good..... not so much loud.... but good. Nice dynamic range, which I recalled reading, was the holy grail in the day. Listeners had volume knobs to make it loud if they wanted.
Now days, everyone seems to want to have the loudest stuff.... because we do know that loud sounds better than "not loud". In a radio line up, if you want your song to stand out a bit... crank up the loudness levels with compression and use a limiter to really squash it into a brick.
The problem is, when everything is the same volume, your ears quickly become fatigued as David pointed out.
To the folks who use Ozone.... you have to be very careful with the compression. As you crank it up, yep, it sounds fatter and better...... but, dynamics are quickly going out the window.
Here's a few waves from my studio and from a few different projects.
This first one was seriously jacked on the compression. I intentionally cranked the levels to get this brick.
So much better..... still a consistent level but not slammed and not down in the valley.
I couldn't find the other wave photo I wanted to post... but the entire point is this.
It is totally possible to get a loud mix and NOT end up with a brick.
I always look at the wave I export in my wave editor and if I think it's got too many overs or flat tops, I will go back to the project and turn down the overall compression level. It needs to have dynamics. The can be lots of mountain peaks but there also needs to be as many valleys and middle ground.
You can find my music at: www.herbhartley.com Add 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.
One thing I never really see said about "today's music" in these "older is better" arguments is that they also do a lot more sonically to fill in gaps now.
I know, as an example, Nickelback uses a lot of different instruments in their songs that you wouldn't necessarily guess are there...they look for something musical that can cover a spectrum that the other instruments they use don't.
Also, it's not like the guitar is always on 11 AND the drums are on 11. It's more like the guitar is on 11 at some points, then the drums may be at 11 for a fill...but they are usually more like a 7, with the vocal being on 11.
So, yes the entire mix is louder, however there are still internal dynamics that occur.
Why people never talk about THIS part of it more I don't know. Many times I think the argument is misrepresented with statements others have heard over and over and present it as true knowledge.
Myself, I like both, and think they each have their places. You can EASILY find artists today who display dynamics in their music! I guess it's what you are looking for.
When someone says to me "Man, McDonalds...hamburgers just aren't what they used to be!" I ask them "Why are you eating at McDonalds?"
For dynamics, I don't prefer MP3, CD, tape, or vinyl. Give me a LIVE orchestra, and I will show you dynamics! Chills!
Great thread! Thanks for bringing it up. And Bruce Springsteen has GREAT production!
Chad (Hope that makes it easier)
TEMPO TANTRUM: What a lead singer has when they can't stay in time.
Thanks for your comments too!. I agree with the part about filling in spaces, but I suppose I was speaking of the "brick" Herb referred to which is what you will see if you open up a lot of stuff and look at it.
It is totally maxed out. A solid wall of blue. Whatever you put in there to be heard that is "extra" can't be heard because there are no gaps. A brick is a brick is a brick.
I guess that was my point, but I agree with your assessment of the live orchestra.
David Snyder Songwriter/Renaissance Man Studio + Fingers
Thanks for your comments too!. I agree with the part about filling in spaces, but I suppose I was speaking of the "brick" Herb referred to which is what you will see if you open up a lot of stuff and look at it.
It is totally maxed out. A solid wall of blue. Whatever you put in there to be heard that is "extra" can't be heard because there are no gaps. A brick is a brick is a brick.
Yup, I know what you mean. I just meant you can't turn something up that isn't there Louder silence isn't all that loud Sonically they fill every gap then brick it! They point isn't to hear it. That's not my opinion btw. I like things to breath a bit
Quote:
I guess that was my point, but I agree with your assessment of the live orchestra.
It is one of the wonders I wish for everyone to experience.
I have to say, I REALLY enjoyed many of Elton John's songs from Australia with the orchestra. "Tonight" was a completely different song! I love the dynamics of volume and pacing. Enjoy if you are so inclined
Thanks again for the topic!
Chad (Hope that makes it easier)
TEMPO TANTRUM: What a lead singer has when they can't stay in time.
I just downloaded this free product and used it, stand alone and VST. It is amazing!!! It gives you what Ozone does not, even though I love Ozone. What a miracle tool. Thanks you so much for recommending. I will use this all the time. Now you're talking!!!!!!! And it gives you a print out! Dang!!
Love it!!!!
David Snyder Songwriter/Renaissance Man Studio + Fingers
I just downloaded this free product and used it, stand alone and VST. It is amazing!!! It gives you what Ozone does not, even though I love Ozone. What a miracle tool. Thanks you so much for recommending. I will use this all the time. Now you're talking!!!!!!! And it gives you a print out! Dang!!
Love it!!!!
What I usually do is a rough mix, then run it through the TT, making note of the headroom on the L/R channels. Then I "master" the mix and re-check it. If I can maintain the headroom in the mastered mix I had in the rough, I'm a happy camper.
You will love this tool!! You can use it to study some of your favorite MP3s and you can tell at a glance while they sound so great...it shows you the dynamic contrast range as a number. Like 11 is good, 2 is bad. Thick as a brick is like 1.5
Follow the instructions in the manual exactly when loading the file with the DLL in Steinberg. You have to load the whole folder. It will show you. But if you don't do exactly what they say it won't work. Read that manual carefully.
Insert it into the mastering channel of RB or your other DAW and you will never look at your mix strip and effects chains the same way ever again.
It is awesome.
David Snyder Songwriter/Renaissance Man Studio + Fingers
Video: Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Mac®: VST3 Plugin Support
Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Mac® now includes support for VST3 plugins, alongside VST and AU. Use them with MIDI or audio tracks for even more creative possibilities in your music production.
Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Macs®: VST3 Plugin Support
Video: Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Mac®: Using VST3 Plugins
With the release of Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Mac, we’re rolling out a collection of brand-new videos on our YouTube channel. We’ll also keep this forum post updated so you can easily find all the latest videos in one convenient spot.
From overviews of new features and walkthroughs of the 202 new RealTracks, to highlights of XPro Styles PAK 8, Xtra Styles PAKs 18, the 2025 49-PAK, and in-depth tutorials — you’ll find everything you need to explore what’s new in Band-in-a-Box® 2025.
Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Mac is here, packed with major new features and an incredible collection of available new content! This includes 202 RealTracks (in Sets 449-467), plus 20 bonus Unreleased RealTracks in the 2025 49-PAK. There are new RealStyles, MIDI SuperTracks, Instrumental Studies, “Songs with Vocals” Artist Performance Sets, Playable RealTracks Set 4, two new sets of “RealDrums Stems,” XPro Styles PAK 8, Xtra Styles PAK 19, and more!
Special Offers
Upgrade to Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Mac with savings of up to 50% on most upgrade packages during our special—available until July 31, 2025! Visit our Band-in-a-Box® packages page for all the purchase options available.
2025 Free Bonus PAK & 49-PAK Add-ons
We've packed our Free Bonus PAK & 49-PAK with some incredible Add-ons! The Free Bonus PAK is automatically included with most Band-in-a-Box® for Mac 2025 packages, but for even more Add-ons (including 20 Unreleased RealTracks!) upgrade to the 2025 49-PAK for only $49. You can see the full lists of items in each package, and listen to demos here.
If you have any questions, feel free to connect with us directly—we’re here to help!
Cari amici
È stata aggerate la versione in Italiano del programma più amato dagli appassionati di musica, il nostro Band-in-a-Box.
Questo è il link alla nuova versione 2025.
Di seguito i link per scaricare il pacchetti di lingua italiana aggiornati per Band-in-a-Box e RealBand, anche per chi avesse già comprato la nuova versione in inglese.
Band-in-a-Box® 2025 pour Windows est disponible en Français.
Le téléchargement se fait à partir du site PG Music
Pour ceux qui auraient déjà acheté la version 2025 de Band-in-a-Box (et qui donc ont une version anglaise), il est possible de "franciser" cette version avec les patchs suivants:
Band-in-a-Box 2025 für Windows Deutsch ist verfügbar!
Die deutsche Version Band-in-a-Box® 2025 für Windows ist ab sofort verfügbar!
Alle die bereits die englische Version von Band-in-a-Box und RealBand 2024 installiert haben, finden hier die Installationsdateien für das Sprachenupdate:
Update Your Band-in-a-Box® 2025 to Build 1128 for Windows Today!
Already using Band-in-a-Box 2025 for Windows®? Download Build 1128 now from our Support Page to enjoy the latest enhancements and improvements from our team.
One of our representatives will be happy to help you over the phone. Our hours of operation are from
6:00AM to 6:00PM PST (GMT -8) Monday thru Friday, and 8:00AM to 4:00PM PST Saturday. We are closed Sunday. You can also send us your questions via email.
One of our representatives will be happy to help you on our Live Chat or by email. Our hours of operation are from
6:00AM to 6:00PM PST (GMT -8) Monday thru Friday; 8:00AM to 4:00PM PST (GMT -8) Saturday; Closed Sunday.
Louder silence isn't all that loud 
Dansk
Deutsch - Windows
Español
Français - Windows
Italiano - Windows
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Svenskt
русский
Japanese
Simplified Chinese
Traditional Chinese
Korean