R/E/P Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 [2]  All   Go Down

Author Topic: A hard-to-refute justification for 1 dB monitor steps!  (Read 3063 times)

masterhse

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1059
Re: A hard-to-refute justification for 1 dB monitor steps!
« Reply #15 on: October 21, 2004, 10:19:48 am »

bblackwood wrote on Thu, 21 October 2004 10:04

bobkatz wrote on Wed, 20 October 2004 16:51

Refute that, DC  Smile

Tom (masterhouse) made a good point above.

Also, iirc, Dave has always promoted the use of 1dB steps in the critical range. Could be wrong, but that's how I remember it.



Found this paper:

 http://www.sfxmachine.com/docs/LoudnessAndDynamicsMatching.p df

(assuming that they have permission to use)
Logged
Tom Volpicelli
The Mastering House Inc.
CD Mastering and Media Production Services

Phillip Graham

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 280
Re: A hard-to-refute justification for 1 dB monitor steps!
« Reply #16 on: October 21, 2004, 10:22:52 am »

Edit: No need for me to chime in on this.  If you don't have anything nice to say, keep yer' mouth shut  Rolling Eyes
Logged
Phillip Graham

bobkatz

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2926
Re: A hard-to-refute justification for 1 dB monitor steps!
« Reply #17 on: October 21, 2004, 12:02:26 pm »

masterhse wrote on Wed, 20 October 2004 18:07

Not to be facetious Bob, but what if one wants to modify a threshold by .5 dB (or any other non-integer)?

One can adjust the master fader in a DAW for adjustments like this without a dedicated monitoring control (and then reset to 0 to avoid any additional processing).



I already knew these (valid) objections would come up. But no one can deny the strong case this makes for a repeatable, stepped (1 dB or less) monitor controller.

A small point: What if changing the level within the DAW affects the sound? Don't you want to have an objective monitor section that is independent from the issue of the level within the DAW?

BK
Logged
There are two kinds of fools,
One says-this is old and therefore good.
The other says-this is new and therefore better."

No trees were killed in the sending of this message. However a large number of
electrons were terribly inconvenienced.

dcollins

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2815
Re: A hard-to-refute justification for 1 dB monitor steps!
« Reply #18 on: October 21, 2004, 05:04:31 pm »

masterhse wrote on Thu, 21 October 2004 07:19

   http://www.sfxmachine.com/docs/LoudnessAndDynamicsMatching.p df


That's a great paper.  There's also one from the guys at Waves from a couple years ago.  I'll dig up the publication number if you want.

DC

bobkatz

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2926
Re: A hard-to-refute justification for 1 dB monitor steps!
« Reply #19 on: October 21, 2004, 08:05:45 pm »

As a reminder to those who brought up the valid objection that you cannot equate threshold changes in a compressor, for example, with exact changes in monitor level---yes, absolutely true, and I did mention that as an asterisk in my first post on this subject.

Nevertheless, I don't think this negates the need for or the concept of knowing exactly how far you have moved your monitor control. If only to say, "wow" I think my ears are getting fatigued---this doesn't sound loud to me, but look, my monitor pot is set 3 dB over where I usually keep it, and look at the meters!

BK
Logged
There are two kinds of fools,
One says-this is old and therefore good.
The other says-this is new and therefore better."

No trees were killed in the sending of this message. However a large number of
electrons were terribly inconvenienced.

masterhse

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1059
Re: A hard-to-refute justification for 1 dB monitor steps!
« Reply #20 on: October 22, 2004, 05:48:48 pm »

dcollins wrote on Thu, 21 October 2004 17:04

masterhse wrote on Thu, 21 October 2004 07:19

    http://www.sfxmachine.com/docs/LoudnessAndDynamicsMatching.p df


That's a great paper.  There's also one from the guys at Waves from a couple years ago.  I'll dig up the publication number if you want.

DC


If it's not a major PIA, sure!
Logged
Tom Volpicelli
The Mastering House Inc.
CD Mastering and Media Production Services

bobkatz

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2926
Re: A hard-to-refute justification for 1 dB monitor steps!
« Reply #21 on: October 22, 2004, 05:57:04 pm »

masterhse wrote on Fri, 22 October 2004 17:48

dcollins wrote on Thu, 21 October 2004 17:04

masterhse wrote on Thu, 21 October 2004 07:19

     http://www.sfxmachine.com/docs/LoudnessAndDynamicsMatching.p df


That's a great paper.  There's also one from the guys at Waves from a couple years ago.  I'll dig up the publication number if you want.

DC


If it's not a major PIA, sure!



That is a good AES paper. One thing's for sure, it's a lot harder to level the songs of a very dynamic album than it is a very compressed album. And the more dynamic the song, the less the principles of the "averaging" idea in the PDF would apply, as if it starts soft yet averages loud, it still requires a lot of good ol' fashioned human intervention to make that song fit well after the previous loud one ends.

BK
Logged
There are two kinds of fools,
One says-this is old and therefore good.
The other says-this is new and therefore better."

No trees were killed in the sending of this message. However a large number of
electrons were terribly inconvenienced.

masterhse

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1059
Re: A hard-to-refute justification for 1 dB monitor steps!
« Reply #22 on: October 22, 2004, 06:02:55 pm »

bobkatz wrote on Thu, 21 October 2004 12:02



I already knew these (valid) objections would come up. But no one can deny the strong case this makes for a repeatable, stepped (1 dB or less) monitor controller.



I believe that there is an even stronger case for automatic gain makeup in limiters and compressors that's based on the human perception of "loudness". Hearing the real effect of smearing and squashing dynamics as you lower the threshold may make a few engineers think twice about how far to take it, though as the article points out, this may be best done outside of real time. I really feel that the average consumer doesn't want volume per se, what they want is the "fullness" that you get from volume. It's also one on the major reasons IMHO that you see so many graphic EQs with smiley faces.

Until automatic gain makeup based on loudness shows up more ubiquitously, a monitor controller is definitely the best way to go, either via analog or digitally.

Logged
Tom Volpicelli
The Mastering House Inc.
CD Mastering and Media Production Services
Pages: 1 [2]  All   Go Up