|
Log in to post
|
Print Thread |
|
|
|
|
|
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
|
Joined: Apr 2016
Posts: 470
Journeyman
|
OP
Journeyman
Joined: Apr 2016
Posts: 470 |
Hi all,
I have a strange interesting question.Ive made a Disco song and have followed closely the style and production of "Dancing Queen" from ABBA.This included the final Mastered Wav which had a LUFS of 8.4 which and is what Dancing Queen had on CD.(I intend to do a youtube master of 13 Lufs also)
Two Things:
1:My Wav file Physically was smaller in width(about 8 to 10%) than the Dancing Queen wav even though the measurements were all the same.Why would that be?
2:As an experiment I did three Mastered wavs at different Maximizer values and the most compressed one was the same width as Dancing Queen at about 7.5 Lufs but sounded the best.Is this because the Genre Disco is more condusive to Compression? (because Disco is steady and more equal from start to finish)I heard the boys from ABBA saying they had to compress the hell out of Dancing Queen.
For instance I wouldnt be putting that much compression on any other songs Ive done.
I am not sure whether to go with the 8.4 level equal to Dancing Queen or go with the hotter slightly better sounding one is my delemma
Ps All the track levels and buss levels in the mixing were good and no clipping or red lights and enough headroom was left for mastering.Thanks for any ideas on that urs Hugh
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 22,165
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 22,165 |
You want opinions on which to use without us hearing them?
Only way I can think of to answer is to add more considerations.
Back when ABBA compressed this song there weren't any hard wall brick limiter digital compressors/limiters. So it was harder back then to get the numbers/results.
Nowadays, adjusting between the threshold (input and amount of compression) and limiter (top end) can make a lot of difference, turn one up and one down .. and then makeup gain can change all of the above results, so without data I'd say 'if it sounds good it is good', as long as you are in the safe limits.
Your question threw me; I immediately thought of wav 'file size' (not display) .. which should be pretty much the same for each.
Pushing a whole bunch of energy through the signal and then using the Limiter to get the Lufs level at the end may result in a mix with a smaller end signal display (being limited more).
I'd generally consider the larger wav display to have more dynamics and thus better if I had to look at them and decide, but like I said, use whichever one sounds better.
I do not work here, but the benefits are still awesome
Make your sound your own!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
|
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 8,334
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 8,334 |
The CD version of Dancing Queen I have is 14 (streaming quality) LUFS and a respectable 11.5 in Dynamic Range. It peaks at about -0.7 so it is not hot or over compressed by today's standards. It fact in has a pleasant sound. It is not a big monster fat .wav. but not skinny either, about what you would expect from that time period. 14 LUFS and 11.5 to 12 in DR are what you are aiming for today, no matter were you are peaking volume or amplification (headroom) wise. LUFS is not the same as volume, per se. It is something you have to google and study. https://www.audiodraft.com/blog/audio-levels-101-all-you-need-is-lufs/But basically, if you keep it below zero dB (start with headroom in your mix) and try and get 14 LUFS and 11-12 dynamic range you will sound good almost anywhere.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 5,680
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 5,680 |
From your description (your file with the same LUFS is smaller in width than the original) I think the issue is your audio file is too compressed. If the original audio is too compressed, the only way to reach a target LUFS of 14 (for example) is to reduce the amplitude of the entire track. Watch this video (link originally provided by Tony) that demonstrates this in action. Skip ahead to around 4:00 or so where he shows the two files and then later when he shows them with the same LUFS: https://youtu.be/n1Yfl6KGRk8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
|
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 2,732
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 2,732 |
Thanks Dave and David for your links. Interesting reads/videos.
 Steve BIAB/RB 2022, Pro Tools 2020, Korg N5, JBL LSR 4328 Powered Monitors, AKG/Shure Mics.
PC: Win11 PRO, 4 TB M2 SSD, 2 TB HD, 128 GB Memory
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
|
Joined: Apr 2016
Posts: 470
Journeyman
|
|
OP
Journeyman
Joined: Apr 2016
Posts: 470 |
Hi Rharv and David, Thanks for the answers.So I have now gone back and looked again and I notice a couple of things.I may not have been measuring the lufs correctly as I didnt take account of the input meter of Ozone when using their plugin "insight".So Im going to look at that again. Also David I realize that I must have a different version of Dancing Queen and I went to youtube and found this interesting comparision of the versions from Vinyl to a 2010 release.I have the 2010 release im guessing as its compressed to the last and similar to the wav in this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ThTc0K49oVoThanks for the info guys.I will hopefully have it ready for upload asap and you can let me know what you think h
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
|
Joined: Apr 2016
Posts: 470
Journeyman
|
|
OP
Journeyman
Joined: Apr 2016
Posts: 470 |
Hi Dave thanks great link and its interesting that he used EDM to demonstrate his point.The Dancing Queen wav display I have looks very similar to the over compressed wav he uses on the video at 4mins .I will now have a look at how compressed the mix is just in case I could get a better sounding version than the one I have
Hugh
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 22,165
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 22,165 |
Glad it helped. This is why I always put the final meter(s) very last in the chain, even after I see the levels in Ozone (for instance). I want to see how all the measurements interact in the end result. If you use a separate meter system afterwards you see more of the Ozone end result. Inside Ozone you see each effect .. but final meters shows what's happening at the very end, which can be different. I get the LUFS concept, but I still want to see how that end result is affecting certain other aspects. How close am I to zero, and how often? How much dynamics do I have on a relative scale? During a given time frame and overall? What's the Peak/Average ratio on the song? Funny, but here, the RMS readings seem to correlate closely to LUFS in most real life tests. At least here (and kinda confirmed here): http://productionadvice.co.uk/lufs-dbfs-rms/ One other thing to note, as mentioned in the video, LUFS is not really a mastering consideration, except to know how public standardized playback (TV,Streaming, etc) will alter the sound volume. A CD or DVD likely has no LUFS effect. So if you want something louder/softer, you can. Depends on what you are mastering for. Songs do not get 'averaged' on CD. I think of LUFS as a a broadcast spec more than a recording/mixing spec. If I am wrong please tell me.
Last edited by rharv; 08/22/18 03:12 PM.
I do not work here, but the benefits are still awesome
Make your sound your own!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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
Join the conversation on our forum.
Band-in-a-Box 2025 for Mac Videos
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.
Reference this forum post for One-Stop Shopping of our Band-in-a-Box® 2025 Mac Videos — we’ll be adding more videos as they’re released!
Band-in-a-Box 2025 for Mac is Here!
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!
Band-in-a-Box 2025 Italian Version is Here!
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 - Italiano
RealBand 2025 - Italiano
Band-in-a-Box 2025 French Version is Here!
Bonjour à tous,
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:
BIAB 2025 - francisation
RealBand 2025 - francisation
Voilà, enjoy!
Band-in-a-Box 2025 German Version is Here!
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.
Stay up to date—get the latest update now!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forums58
Topics84,299
Posts777,459
Members39,614
| |
Most Online25,754
Jan 24th, 2025
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dansk
Deutsch - Windows
Español
Français - Windows
Italiano - Windows
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Svenskt
русский
Japanese
Simplified Chinese
Traditional Chinese
Korean