This is -14 lufs streaming thing is a bit of a myth. I recently mastered a track for Spotify and iTunes at -14lufs for the first time ever as suggested by their new guidelines. Yet when you play the track in a Spotify or iTunes playlist it’s 5 dB quieter against commercials release. I remastered at -9lufs and what do you know it’s now sounding sweet and level matched with other releases. So clearly iTunes and Spotify don’t level match they way we think they do and also people are releasing some commercial music at -8lufs, so I’d stick to -9 -!: make sure your mix and mastering are good enough first.
God I love Graham's videos so much. He talks so much sense, always does a volume match when showing a plugin. He talks about the pros and cons and processing and I love he mentioned 'don't complicated mastering'. People buy a ton of plugins and feel the need to use them. And yes some plugins are amazing, but there is such a flat, digital and in cohesive sound when you over process things. I made that mistake in the past. You have to ask yourself, 'what does this sound need? Does it actually need anything'. If so, try and achieve it in as few a plugins as possible. Thank you Graham! I've been struggling with mastering but this video really helped!
A more dynamic mix would sound better on streaming, they are using -14 LUFS. I change my way of mixing completely, today I'm mixing targeting between -23 to -19 LUFS. And I will do my master between -16 to -12 LUFS.
LUFS are a real bullshit, if you view the LUFS levels on most commercial music on Spotify, you discover that all are over -10 dB LUFS! and your music, respected the -14 dB LUFS, sounds like an ant...
Ever since I saw this video and the Sonic Scoop video with Alan Silverman (The Future of Mastering Loudness in the Age of Music Streaming), where he also mentions using a VU meter set to -10 RMS, I have abandoned the modern LUFS meter madness. The VU meter is so much easier to use and so much more sonically accurate for me. I used to struggle with other meters, such as Ozone's and Fabfilter's Pro-L2 meter. But, using the VU literally shows us a visual representation of what our ears hear. VU is the way to go. The oldest tech wins in this case.
This is a great video! Do not overcomplicate mastering. I was wondering all the time: If the mix is already good, why should mastering be complicated? It makes no sense, because mixing is actually more difficult I think... Thank you Graham!
This info is super helpful! The more I listen and follow the more I'm understanding what these valuable tools do. I really appreciate you for sharing your knowledge with us!
That sounded pretty good. Pity about the snare sound after limiting - it stayed at a constant perceived loudness while everything else went much louder. If you use a transient vitalizer ahead (or behind) of limiting, you can stay out of this problem. But as you stated throughout your tutorial, one should definitely know where to stop: mastering ain't easy and to be honest - it ain't quick either.
Graham - your videos are amazing. Thank you so so much for this. I've always worried too much about final EQ when mastering, but if the mix is good, then there's no need for big EQing. Saturation and a very subtle multi-band compressor maybe the answer I'm looking for. Thanks again my friend.
Well...I'll say..... that this is a quick D.I.Y mastering technique for beginners. It does the trick...but as I was reading the comments I fell out laughing, because us Pro's were like...dude....One Knob Eq????.... Man...I'm going back to making this record. LOL.... Yall please let Graham live....LOL......He said...."Quick Mastering for Online".......Good job Graham!!!!!
Interesting, which one is better, This Linear phase multiband or the C4 multiband? Does it matter if plugin is old or new? Does the new always better than old? Thanks
Please, for the love of all that is wholesome, do not ever use a one knob plugin like the Greg Wells thing to set the eq and dynamics of a master. This is like enabling the loudness button on a hi-fi. Every mastering session requires unique dynamics and eq adjustments. If you think you can do that with just one generic knob, then you are the generic knob!
He's plugging the Greg Wells *MIXCENTRIC* plugin as well as the MB & L2 for Waves. It's so funny to see all of the so called *"Pros"* in the comments section trying to leave their *pro advice* on how bad it sounds, yet I don't see any of their stuff featured on the Waves channels or them doing demos for Waves. If you looked at his other videos on mastering he goes into separate uses of the EQ, compressor, etc, in the track mastering process and shows people how to use stock plugins as well.
@@mhunter4228 Dont forget that Waves just wants to sell their stuff to the "beginners" so they try to make it look as easy as possible. If you really want to achieve great masters you have to really get into that matter and learn to control these dynamics etc.
@jsg040 Exactly and I'd be curious to know if you were just releasing a preview track or work in progress, that this Mixcentric wouldn't work as a tool to just run thru the track just to throw online and be taken down once the final track is done and released. Especially if it's $29 or less on sale
@@mhunter4228 i put mixcentric on my beats almost every time. at least a little. The listener don t know that but they like the beat so who really give a damn.
basic leveling, and eq goes a long way in the mix for extra loudness. Kramer Tape by waves is awesome as well. It gives an individual track or whole master warmth and perceived loudnes giving extra head room..
Kshitij Kumar probalbly a touch of reverb and a mid frequency boost (1-3 db) would help but to be honest, it spunds good but I see understand what you are saying.
True I make music myself see my channel. I once thought loud music meant having better studio equipment, I was so focused on making my music loud all you do is squeeze the life out of the track best is focus on your mix even don't compress any music instruments just drums and the bass after master it with only dynamics eq and a limiter for best results.
Hey @therecordingrevolution, I would love to ask why is the vocal in the track is not that upfront? like I can hear the guitar better it's significantly loud and the vocal is there I can hear it but it's little too much in the background that I need to concentrate to hear it clearly.. Thanks, great video!
Ram Revivo the vocal is not that upfront because the song is a rock song. Usually Pop or Ballad genres have the vocals way upfront. In the end is up to you how you mix the song but usually rock is mixed like that
Exactly! I knew I wasn't the only one. X) If it's recorded in 24 bit 48K and then you decide down the road to make it 16 bit for CD, The overall quality is going to be greater than if it was just recorded in 16 bit to begin with.
MP3 may not play 24-bit audio but it is pointless to add dither (extra noise) to the signal. Personally I render MP3s straight from the mastering session which is essentially 32-bit floating point data.
The usage of the multi-band compression was misleading..I mean he lost energy already. And he had no point on using it. You can use it to control the very low end or the harshness. I like Graham but the multi-band thing is not always a go to specially for your master!
Everyone rightly mentioning that the future is going to be normalized. So loud mixes won't matter as they will be reduced automatically by spotify, UA-cam etc. BUT! On paper loudness should not be as important right? But I did a demo where I took a regular mix and uploaded it to UA-cam. YT also has a normalizing algorithm, you have to wait a few days to kick in. I also uploaded a mastered mix. My results REALLY surprised me. The low regular mix was ruined MORE than the mastered mix I uploaded separately. It blew my mind. The regular quieter mix lost the rich upper mids of the guitars etc. Made them nasally and annoying. The LOUD mastered mix sounded much better after vol matching. The high end had the usual artifacts that come with downsampling but they smeared to be less fizzy. We already know that we have to adjust mastering for streaming but I didn't know (at least for my style of music) that it's backwards. Which really pissed me off because that means the normalization method sucks. I was hoping it would be better for music...but a world where streaming prefers loud mastered mixes to regular mixes? Kill me. Thankfully my sample size is tiny so I'm hoping my experiment was a fluke based on those specific freqs.
Hi Graham, great video. I didn't quite get how the VU meter calibration at -10db tied in with the limiter. Thanks for all your videos, I have learned a lot! One of the coolest videos you did a while back was the Vocal Swarm effect (backward vocals) I love laying that in there for some texture. Thanks again!
Hey what about Intersample Peaks? When iTunes converts to MP3 some sections that are under or around 0db actually peak over and clip... Maybe look into that.
Noticed you do leave "wiggle room" but if you use AU Lab or Ozone 7 you can view what the MP3 or AAC conversion would be on the db meter. Usually need to leave it at around -1 to -1.5 db for the Intersample Peaks...
I'm selling music on my channel do you recommend put a limiter on the master when streaming them or leave the master channel dry so they can add vocals and master them afterwards because Mastering is promoting your music not sure what's best.
Mix it to sound the best you can. That's 90-95% of the final result. After mastering, streaming services will all handle it differently (more processing). Just like radio.
hi man! I always watch your videos, which are really helpful! I got a little question though. can I replace the last plug in you used for some plug in that comes in the waves pack? thanks for all you help, videos and time!!
In terms of loudness I heard that streaming services will turn down the volume to match but not up. I tested this with a couple of my songs that have a bit of a quiet mix and they were still quiet when uploaded to youtube
Great video and thanks for sharing! Please change the headline, the words "mastering for streaming services" just creates confusion. What about the new measurements LKFS/LUFS?....A great tip Graham to follow up is do a part 2 and put in some fresh info about the fresh standards on the leading services and how to get there. All the best/d
Hey i produced a rock song, the instrumental is mastered and is around -14 lufs. But when the vocals come in the chorus the lufs becomes around -11. I uploaded it to spotify like 3 times to try different techniques but the song is always played back a little bit toooooo quiet... why how
exactly. the c4 is much much better for what he wants/talks about. the linMB is great, but rather put it on the very end of the chain and have c4 in the beginning.
No Filler Words Productions Can you elaborate on that? From what I've read and used I go with minimal phase on individual tracks and linear phase on the master bus. (Eq as well as multiband comp) And why would you insert a linMB after a C4?
L2 limiting is completely unnecessary since Spotify, Music by Apple and others streaming services now use loudness algorithms to "normalize" loudness at -16 or -14 db LUFS (which is a slightly different level scale from peak or RMS or k). I see you are using it very gently, but why to lose even a couple of db (6 in your case even if loudness meters are a bit different from vu meters but they're related) of peak - rms ratio? I know is easy to fool your ears by louder signals, so... the trick is to master songs in different ways related to the media: vinyl, cd, streaming... today I'm using a -15 db LUFS paradigm, and most of all: after I've my bottom end right, I always use small speakers at low volume, since most people out there is listening streaming services trough them. New challenges are in our way... eg: controlling macro dynamic is more important than peak limiting. cause the signal to noise ratio today is even worse than in the '80s with cassettes. (noisy environments, poor audio on mobile devices, mono speakers in most phones... ecc...). By the way... nice song!!!!
Paolo Pasquariello thanks a lot for these informations ! Still very confusing for me.. Do you know if youtube normalize loudness on every videos or just on big channels like VEVOs.. If I use a "normal" limiter like Pro Q2, I just set a ceilling and set it to transparant mode, is it different from a "true peak limiter" ?? finally how do we measure LUFS ??
Don't worry. Loudness metering can be a little confusing. The algorithm is a bit complicated, but you can think of it as an average level of an entire program (song, commercial, tv show, movie). the calculation is done by specialized loudness meters. Today we're lucky to have some freeware out there, but I still remember when my studio payed something like 1000 euros on the T.C. Electronic Radar (one of those specialized meters)... :-(. my advice is to pick up a free one and read the manual.. EG: Melda Loudness Analyzer. The steps to follow are quite simple... reset the meter. play the entire song from start to end and read the result. if is louder than -14 LUFS (but I use -15 LUFS because is a midway between -14 and -16 used in different streaming services) you put your master down(or the ceiling of the limiter, or any gain stage you have as the LAST output stage) by the amount of db necessary to reach that level (EG: the loudness meter says -12 LUFS you put down 2 db; the loudness meter says -8 you put down -6 db; the loudness meter says -19 LUFS you put UP 5 db...you get the idea) FWIK youtube is adopting this standard and is starting normalizing contents backward but there's a lot of stuff not yet normalized. The Pro-Q is an Equalizer... maybe do you mean PRO-L? in that case... yes... PRO-L detects inter-samples peaks... so... it is a true peak limiter... but trust me on that ... -14 LUFS is so plenty of dynamics that you'll see your mixes reach peak reduction very very rarely... more on this topic here: www.masteringthemix.com/blogs/learn/76296773-mastering-audio-for-soundcloud-itunes-spotify-and-youtube
Thank you Sensei! Until now, I used to reproduce what I had seen on tutorials without really understanding anything ... Yes, I meant Pro L. I used to set the ceiling at -0.3 and push the gain until I get around -6 on the main bus meter (which shows rms I suppose). As you said, it is easy to fool your ears by stronger signals and also by blindly following the rules...
the 0VU calibration is referenced to digital full scale peak (dBFS). So a test tone at 0VU in this case = -10dBFS. Common calibration for mixing is 0VU = --21 to - 18dBFS. 0VU in analog =4dBu which would equal a voltage reference. It's all about having an ideal "sweet spot" level but with plenty of headroom in reserve for peaks.
Hmmm... Seems like the MB made this more trebly/sibilanty on cymbals. Nice show of Mix-Centric and the VU meter. It seems your VU levels target is still aimed at CDs. Katz would recommend K-12 at most for rock (i.e. VU meter at -12dB vs. 10dB. Better yet -14 for music. Or for current streaming standards, it seems that -16 to -18 db LUFS or EBU 128, is increasingly preferable, as these are becoming standardized.
I've only downloaded a hand full of different companies "free plugins" since I've been recording every day since 2013 but that said TDR plugins are by far AMAZING and transparent and that's a hell of an understatement.
Sadly, the normalization on Spotify is a bit of a joke. One song playing Average LAF: 80.0 dBA and other LAF: 88dBA. Make whatever you want out of that.
Instead of using that final compressor in the end, why don't you just NORMALIZE the clip and set the limit to whatever under the 0.0 dB limit?? Which would take the highest peaks and make it the NORMALIZED maximum with everything under the same dynamically?
when you say "Bounce down" are you recording the song onto an audio track first so that you have a final audio track with all the processing or do you just Bounce with the apps on?
apps. ? you mean plug-ins ? when you bounce=export=transfer you music project out of the daw as final stereo mix, you should not have ANY PLUG-INS=APPS. on the stereo master buss output. but all plug-ins=apps that are on individual tracks in the mix stay activated during bounce=export of the project. and you mix should not be peaking above -8 or -9 LUFS .
This has been done to death... Why don't you take this and tell us how to achieve loudness and balance in regards to specific LUFS and True Peak requirements for Spotify, UA-cam and so on. Smashing the mix into a one knob compressor is one thing, but getting crisp loud and dynamic mix while staying inside -14 LUFS is another... but that would actually take effort to talk about right...
Hello there World. I hope everyone is good and having a good time. I have a question. Please answer me if you can. If i want to send the stems for mixing or mastering to someone then should i bounce the stems with the Master Off or with the Master ON. The Master consists a Limiter. So how should i bounce them. With Master ON or OFF? Really thanks for your time whoever reads this and try to help me. Have a good day. Peace :)
Mmm there's something about the L2 that makes the low end fatter and this is compared to a lot of other limiters like the fabfilter, izotope which doesn't produce the same magic.
This is -14 lufs streaming thing is a bit of a myth.
I recently mastered a track for Spotify and iTunes at -14lufs for the first time ever as suggested by their new guidelines.
Yet when you play the track in a Spotify or iTunes playlist it’s 5 dB quieter against commercials release.
I remastered at -9lufs and what do you know it’s now sounding sweet and level matched with other releases. So clearly iTunes and Spotify don’t level match they way we think they do and also people are releasing some commercial music at -8lufs, so I’d stick to -9 -!: make sure your mix and mastering are good enough first.
Yes, thanks for this info.
can second that. I Always aim for -9 or even -8
integrated or True peak?
Screw all this crap about LUFS, there seems to be no right answer. Set it to -8 RMS and whatever LUFS it ends up at should be good enough.
Yep, had this exact issue. Mastered to the - 14 lufs and it was ridiculously quiet
God I love Graham's videos so much. He talks so much sense, always does a volume match when showing a plugin. He talks about the pros and cons and processing and I love he mentioned 'don't complicated mastering'. People buy a ton of plugins and feel the need to use them. And yes some plugins are amazing, but there is such a flat, digital and in cohesive sound when you over process things. I made that mistake in the past. You have to ask yourself, 'what does this sound need? Does it actually need anything'. If so, try and achieve it in as few a plugins as possible. Thank you Graham! I've been struggling with mastering but this video really helped!
You are the best bro. You have no idea how youve turned me into a better producer.
A more dynamic mix would sound better on streaming, they are using -14 LUFS. I change my way of mixing completely, today I'm mixing targeting between -23 to -19 LUFS. And I will do my master between -16 to -12 LUFS.
how do you guys learn this?
Soundcloud just ruins my song.
I use Garageband btw
@@marcomartinez89 Did you use soundcloud mastering?
upload the same song at -8 and -14 lufs to x streaming platform and guess which one will sound louder? HINT: THE ONE AT -8 LUFS
halfway through this video i realized this wasn't on his channel but the waves channel. wow good job man! hard work pays off
"Just a little bit more.." is really something
not one word about lufs? Or did I miss it? Would be pretty strange...
Why talk about usefull stuff like True Peak and LUFS, when you can beat that dead horse for more likes and views right.
Yeah! LUFS measurment is essential! Especially when it comes to online streaming.
tiscover 09:10
LUFS are a real bullshit, if you view the LUFS levels on most commercial music on Spotify, you discover that all are over -10 dB LUFS! and your music, respected the -14 dB LUFS, sounds like an ant...
Just crank it up....the streaming services will turn it down anyway.
Ever since I saw this video and the Sonic Scoop video with Alan Silverman (The Future of Mastering Loudness in the Age of Music Streaming), where he also mentions using a VU meter set to -10 RMS, I have abandoned the modern LUFS meter madness. The VU meter is so much easier to use and so much more sonically accurate for me. I used to struggle with other meters, such as Ozone's and Fabfilter's Pro-L2 meter. But, using the VU literally shows us a visual representation of what our ears hear. VU is the way to go. The oldest tech wins in this case.
This is a great video! Do not overcomplicate mastering. I was wondering all the time: If the mix is already good, why should mastering be complicated? It makes no sense, because mixing is actually more difficult I think... Thank you Graham!
Thanks for the info Graham. I've been following you for over a year now. There's never a dull moment watching your videos though I use Reason.
This info is super helpful! The more I listen and follow the more I'm understanding what these valuable tools do. I really appreciate you for sharing your knowledge with us!
Great video! That GW mixcentric and multiband compression combo really did wonders for my song. Thank you!
Loudness for me is -14dbfs at the RMS level. That allows the peaks to go up as high as they can. Always turns out great.
That sounded pretty good. Pity about the snare sound after limiting - it stayed at a constant perceived loudness while everything else went much louder. If you use a transient vitalizer ahead (or behind) of limiting, you can stay out of this problem. But as you stated throughout your tutorial, one should definitely know where to stop: mastering ain't easy and to be honest - it ain't quick either.
Graham - your videos are amazing. Thank you so so much for this. I've always worried too much about final EQ when mastering, but if the mix is good, then there's no need for big EQing. Saturation and a very subtle multi-band compressor maybe the answer I'm looking for. Thanks again my friend.
Well...I'll say..... that this is a quick D.I.Y mastering technique for beginners. It does the trick...but as I was reading the comments I fell out laughing, because us Pro's were like...dude....One Knob Eq????....
Man...I'm going back to making this record. LOL....
Yall please let Graham live....LOL......He said...."Quick Mastering for Online".......Good job Graham!!!!!
That MixCentric plugin is AMAZING! Wow!
Interesting, which one is better, This Linear phase multiband or the C4 multiband? Does it matter if plugin is old or new? Does the new always better than old? Thanks
Please, for the love of all that is wholesome, do not ever use a one knob plugin like the Greg Wells thing to set the eq and dynamics of a master. This is like enabling the loudness button on a hi-fi. Every mastering session requires unique dynamics and eq adjustments. If you think you can do that with just one generic knob, then you are the generic knob!
He's plugging the Greg Wells *MIXCENTRIC* plugin as well as the MB & L2 for Waves. It's so funny to see all of the so called *"Pros"* in the comments section trying to leave their *pro advice* on how bad it sounds, yet I don't see any of their stuff featured on the Waves channels or them doing demos for Waves. If you looked at his other videos on mastering he goes into separate uses of the EQ, compressor, etc, in the track mastering process and shows people how to use stock plugins as well.
@@mhunter4228 Dont forget that Waves just wants to sell their stuff to the "beginners" so they try to make it look as easy as possible. If you really want to achieve great masters you have to really get into that matter and learn to control these dynamics etc.
@jsg040 Exactly and I'd be curious to know if you were just releasing a preview track or work in progress, that this Mixcentric wouldn't work as a tool to just run thru the track just to throw online and be taken down once the final track is done and released. Especially if it's $29 or less on sale
Boys "mastering for streaming online"
@@mhunter4228 i put mixcentric on my beats almost every time. at least a little.
The listener don t know that but they like the beat so who really give a damn.
Very nice! I like the GW tone centric plugin as well. The LinMB is definitely a go to!
basic leveling, and eq goes a long way in the mix for extra loudness. Kramer Tape by waves is awesome as well. It gives an individual track or whole master warmth and perceived loudnes giving extra head room..
15:25 for straight forward tips
GO TO 6:40 AND SWITCH PLAYBACK SPEED TO DOUBLE TIME....STR8 FLAMES...SOUNDS LIKE MJ
Is it just me or those vocals seem way too dry?
Kshitij Kumar probalbly a touch of reverb and a mid frequency boost (1-3 db) would help but to be honest, it spunds good but I see understand what you are saying.
The genre is just like these nothing can be changed out
I hear much too much 5 k boost
Here in 2020 but this song sounds good!
The vox are just a tad too loud or upfront as well.
Wov, that sucked - so much loudness. We are past the loudness war, now the war will be macro dynamics, Graham has slept in class :)
True I make music myself see my channel. I once thought loud music meant having better studio equipment, I was so focused on making my music loud all you do is squeeze the life out of the track best is focus on your mix even don't compress any music instruments just drums and the bass after master it with only dynamics eq and a limiter for best results.
LUFSi is unaffected by macro dynamics
Oneroom in your opinion...that approach is not right for every type of music.
Soundcloud......
That mean loudness War still exist
that was so freaking awesome. so awesome, I've learned an extra Mastering tecnic that's always helpful. thanks again GRAM!!!!
Hey @therecordingrevolution, I would love to ask why is the vocal in the track is not that upfront?
like I can hear the guitar better it's significantly loud and the vocal is there I can hear it but it's little too much in the background that I need to concentrate to hear it clearly..
Thanks, great video!
Ram Revivo the vocal is not that upfront because the song is a rock song. Usually Pop or Ballad genres have the vocals way upfront. In the end is up to you how you mix the song but usually rock is mixed like that
I just make a 24bit master and make the mp3 from that. No need to go down to 16bit except for CD.
Exactly! I knew I wasn't the only one. X)
If it's recorded in 24 bit 48K and then you decide down the road to make it 16 bit for CD, The overall quality is going to be greater than if it was just recorded in 16 bit to begin with.
Actually, MP3 is incapable of playing 24-bit audio, so the bit-rate gets truncated. You should still dither down to 16-bit before encoding to MP3.
Mostly all streaming services want you to upload it as WAV threw your distribution service. iTunes, Spotify ect want WAV
Yes I make a 24bit WAV for Spotify etc. The mp3 is for other purposes and sites that only accept mp3.
MP3 may not play 24-bit audio but it is pointless to add dither (extra noise) to the signal. Personally I render MP3s straight from the mastering session which is essentially 32-bit floating point data.
The usage of the multi-band compression was misleading..I mean he lost energy already. And he had no point on using it. You can use it to control the very low end or the harshness. I like Graham but the multi-band thing is not always a go to specially for your master!
I’m agree . I’ve being mastering by chain and I’ve had to remove it because I realized that’s not always necessary
Everyone rightly mentioning that the future is going to be normalized. So loud mixes won't matter as they will be reduced automatically by spotify, UA-cam etc.
BUT!
On paper loudness should not be as important right? But I did a demo where I took a regular mix and uploaded it to UA-cam. YT also has a normalizing algorithm, you have to wait a few days to kick in. I also uploaded a mastered mix.
My results REALLY surprised me. The low regular mix was ruined MORE than the mastered mix I uploaded separately. It blew my mind. The regular quieter mix lost the rich upper mids of the guitars etc. Made them nasally and annoying.
The LOUD mastered mix sounded much better after vol matching. The high end had the usual artifacts that come with downsampling but they smeared to be less fizzy.
We already know that we have to adjust mastering for streaming but I didn't know (at least for my style of music) that it's backwards. Which really pissed me off because that means the normalization method sucks.
I was hoping it would be better for music...but a world where streaming prefers loud mastered mixes to regular mixes? Kill me.
Thankfully my sample size is tiny so I'm hoping my experiment was a fluke based on those specific freqs.
Incredible final product!! Thanks for sharing!
So when you bounce final mastered track you are getting a -10db average song on a Peak meter or VU meter? I need enlightment :) Thanks
Thanks for taking the time to do this video. i learned some things.
ELECTRONIC MUSIC 14 LUFS + ROCK MUSIC 10 LUFS = LOVE FOREVER ( THE SAME PERCEPETION OF LOUDNESS )
Hi Graham, great video. I didn't quite get how the VU meter calibration at -10db tied in with the limiter. Thanks for all your videos, I have learned a lot! One of the coolest videos you did a while back was the Vocal Swarm effect (backward vocals) I love laying that in there for some texture. Thanks again!
which preset do i use on the linear phase multiband for hip hop & pop songs????????????/
Hey what about Intersample Peaks? When iTunes converts to MP3 some sections that are under or around 0db actually peak over and clip... Maybe look into that.
Noticed you do leave "wiggle room" but if you use AU Lab or Ozone 7 you can view what the MP3 or AAC conversion would be on the db meter. Usually need to leave it at around -1 to -1.5 db for the Intersample Peaks...
Graham my man made it big time 👌🏼
God I need that song in my play list!
I watched his whole series on recording and mixing that track and then I downloaded it off of iTunes.
How this linear multiband differ from c4 c6 and ozone multiband. I know it is linear but what that means. Can you help
I don't listened to this type of music but that song sounds good! Where can i find it?
What about LUFS levels for streaming?
I'm selling music on my channel do you recommend put a limiter on the master when streaming them or leave the master channel dry so they can add vocals and master them afterwards because Mastering is promoting your music not sure what's best.
Mix it to sound the best you can. That's 90-95% of the final result.
After mastering, streaming services will all handle it differently (more processing). Just like radio.
What level should the mix peak at when it hits the first mastering plugin?
Always great info Graham, thanks much!
Do you put that vu meter before processing or after
hi man! I always watch your videos, which are really helpful! I got a little question though. can I replace the last plug in you used for some plug in that comes in the waves pack?
thanks for all you help, videos and time!!
In terms of loudness I heard that streaming services will turn down the volume to match but not up. I tested this with a couple of my songs that have a bit of a quiet mix and they were still quiet when uploaded to youtube
Jupiter Slang that is exactly how it works. There's no need to crank your loudness past -14 lufs if you are mixing for streaming.
Great video and thanks for sharing! Please change the headline, the words "mastering for streaming services" just creates confusion. What about the new measurements LKFS/LUFS?....A great tip Graham to follow up is do a part 2 and put in some fresh info about the fresh standards on the leading services and how to get there. All the best/d
Hey i produced a rock song, the instrumental is mastered and is around -14 lufs. But when the vocals come in the chorus the lufs becomes around -11. I uploaded it to spotify like 3 times to try different techniques but the song is always played back a little bit toooooo quiet... why how
Great video!! Thanks!!
you just drastically changed your whole mix by putting on mix centric. If I sent a mix out and got it back sounding that thin and bright I'd be pissed
p.s. you clearly don't understand the use of linear phase and when to use it. you could have don't that same move with a c4 or c6 mb
exactly. the c4 is much much better for what he wants/talks about. the linMB is great, but rather put it on the very end of the chain and have c4 in the beginning.
love that C6, not much can beat the multi-band compressor... smooth as you like...
No Filler Words Productions
Can you elaborate on that?
From what I've read and used I go with minimal phase on individual tracks and linear phase on the master bus. (Eq as well as multiband comp)
And why would you insert a linMB after a C4?
No Filler Words Productions why don’t you show him how it’s done in a video?
Awesome tutorial..thanks
As usual Graham's the man
Don't you hear the phase issue with that multi band comp?
Get a luf meter. And a good reference track try to match your master as best u can why over conplicate everything.
L2 limiting is completely unnecessary since Spotify, Music by Apple and others streaming services now use loudness algorithms to "normalize" loudness at -16 or -14 db LUFS (which is a slightly different level scale from peak or RMS or k). I see you are using it very gently, but why to lose even a couple of db (6 in your case even if loudness meters are a bit different from vu meters but they're related) of peak - rms ratio? I know is easy to fool your ears by louder signals, so... the trick is to master songs in different ways related to the media: vinyl, cd, streaming... today I'm using a -15 db LUFS paradigm, and most of all: after I've my bottom end right, I always use small speakers at low volume, since most people out there is listening streaming services trough them. New challenges are in our way... eg: controlling macro dynamic is more important than peak limiting. cause the signal to noise ratio today is even worse than in the '80s with cassettes. (noisy environments, poor audio on mobile devices, mono speakers in most phones... ecc...).
By the way... nice song!!!!
even better a true peak limiter (e.g. "A.O.M invisible limiter") since audio compressing tends to create overshoot during the encoding process
Samplitude (Pro Xx) includes a limiter with true peak metering. (But I realize this video is sponsored by Waves.)
Paolo Pasquariello thanks a lot for these informations ! Still very confusing for me.. Do you know if youtube normalize loudness on every videos or just on big channels like VEVOs..
If I use a "normal" limiter like Pro Q2, I just set a ceilling and set it to transparant mode, is it different from a "true peak limiter" ??
finally how do we measure LUFS ??
Don't worry. Loudness metering can be a little confusing. The algorithm is a bit complicated, but you can think of it as an average level of an entire program (song, commercial, tv show, movie). the calculation is done by specialized loudness meters. Today we're lucky to have some freeware out there, but I still remember when my studio payed something like 1000 euros on the T.C. Electronic Radar (one of those specialized meters)... :-(. my advice is to pick up a free one and read the manual.. EG: Melda Loudness Analyzer. The steps to follow are quite simple... reset the meter. play the entire song from start to end and read the result. if is louder than -14 LUFS (but I use -15 LUFS because is a midway between -14 and -16 used in different streaming services) you put your master down(or the ceiling of the limiter, or any gain stage you have as the LAST output stage) by the amount of db necessary to reach that level (EG: the loudness meter says -12 LUFS you put down 2 db; the loudness meter says -8 you put down -6 db; the loudness meter says -19 LUFS you put UP 5 db...you get the idea)
FWIK youtube is adopting this standard and is starting normalizing contents backward but there's a lot of stuff not yet normalized.
The Pro-Q is an Equalizer... maybe do you mean PRO-L? in that case... yes... PRO-L detects inter-samples peaks... so... it is a true peak limiter... but trust me on that ... -14 LUFS is so plenty of dynamics that you'll see your mixes reach peak reduction very very rarely...
more on this topic here:
www.masteringthemix.com/blogs/learn/76296773-mastering-audio-for-soundcloud-itunes-spotify-and-youtube
Thank you Sensei! Until now, I used to reproduce what I had seen on tutorials without really understanding anything ...
Yes, I meant Pro L. I used to set the ceiling at -0.3 and push the gain until I get around -6 on the main bus meter (which shows rms I suppose). As you said, it is easy to fool your ears by stronger signals and also by blindly following the rules...
nice! anyway, what is the unit of -10 (CAL) in the VU meter ? is it RMS, LUFS or others? tnx
the 0VU calibration is referenced to digital full scale peak (dBFS). So a test tone at 0VU in this case = -10dBFS.
Common calibration for mixing is 0VU = --21 to - 18dBFS.
0VU in analog =4dBu which would equal a voltage reference.
It's all about having an ideal "sweet spot" level but with plenty of headroom in reserve for peaks.
Hmmm... Seems like the MB made this more trebly/sibilanty on cymbals. Nice show of Mix-Centric and the VU meter.
It seems your VU levels target is still aimed at CDs. Katz would recommend K-12 at most for rock (i.e. VU meter at -12dB vs. 10dB. Better yet -14 for music. Or for current streaming standards, it seems that -16 to -18 db LUFS or EBU 128, is increasingly preferable, as these are becoming standardized.
LMB tends to do that. Thats why I quit using it. I got better results with TDR Nova
I have used Nova a bit. It is sweet. I need to learn to use it better.
Craig Allen TDR and vladg plugs are awesome
I've only downloaded a hand full of different companies "free plugins" since I've been recording every day since 2013 but that said TDR plugins are by far AMAZING and transparent and that's a hell of an understatement.
how do YT, Spotify and Soundcloud compare regarding sound quality/accuracy?
nice video very good
That mix has absolutely no vibe or character. Sounds extremely cold and flat.
Wish I could use Mixcentric in Multirack but 7684 samples of latency at 96k is more than what my rig runs roundtrip.
thank you for the vid.
I see Graham, I hit like.
Dat ring-light...
Manchester Music do he do hip hop
Dithering? IRSC-code?
Sadly, the normalization on Spotify is a bit of a joke. One song playing Average LAF: 80.0 dBA and other LAF: 88dBA. Make whatever you want out of that.
HEY GRAHAM DO YOU STILL USE SLATE FGX?
Visine bro:):) Love your videos . Very detailed and easy to "get". Thanks and keep on rockin>
Instead of using that final compressor in the end, why don't you just NORMALIZE the clip and set the limit to whatever under the 0.0 dB limit?? Which would take the highest peaks and make it the NORMALIZED maximum with everything under the same dynamically?
when you say "Bounce down" are you recording the song onto an audio track first so that you have a final audio track with all the processing or do you just Bounce with the apps on?
apps. ? you mean plug-ins ? when you bounce=export=transfer you music project out of the daw as final stereo mix, you should not have ANY PLUG-INS=APPS. on the stereo master buss output. but all plug-ins=apps that are on individual tracks in the mix stay activated during bounce=export of the project. and you mix should not be peaking above -8 or -9 LUFS .
Thanks. Yes I meant plugins not apps...Ooops :)
saez Tate Nope. You can have any number and any type of plug-ins on the master bus, if you're initially mixing with their use on master bus.
thanks much
Mastering has always been a mystery to me.
You have every plug-in most people don’t have
Thanx & Best Wishes from Germoney€€€€...
I love that FINAL MIX....2
Thanks for the video.
amazing video
Good Job !
Can anyone let me know how does he bypass all the plugins in the same channel strip together?
Thanks.
Could have done limiting and MB with an L316
This has been done to death... Why don't you take this and tell us how to achieve loudness and balance in regards to specific LUFS and True Peak requirements for Spotify, UA-cam and so on. Smashing the mix into a one knob compressor is one thing, but getting crisp loud and dynamic mix while staying inside -14 LUFS is another... but that would actually take effort to talk about right...
Greg Wells MixCentric great idea but No way mix is different on every song
My boy graham made it big
That mixcentric sounded thinner
Thank you so much dude 😉
Super like already before 5 sec
Hello there World. I hope everyone is good and having a good time. I have a question. Please answer me if you can. If i want to send the stems for mixing or mastering to someone then should i bounce the stems with the Master Off or with the Master ON. The Master consists a Limiter. So how should i bounce them. With Master ON or OFF?
Really thanks for your time whoever reads this and try to help me. Have a good day. Peace :)
You should put off all fx on masterbus. also, if you have specific fx on tracks better to print it as individual fx track.
Please put the subtitles, because I am from another language and I am sure that many who come here are also!
Thank you
is there a plug-in that will fix those stupid lyrics?
tnx bro blessings
that raw better than my final XD
real video starts at @00:55
pro tip: break it up into more than one limiter
Nice track
Thank you v much
song is fire
The slate FGX blows the L2 out of the water as far as limiters go. I get this is a waves video.... But L2 isn't that good compared to other limiters.
Yeah but the slate meter is out by about 2 db
Mmm there's something about the L2 that makes the low end fatter and this is compared to a lot of other limiters like the fabfilter, izotope which doesn't produce the same magic.