EQ Analysis of Beatport Top 10
Вставка
- Опубліковано 4 лип 2024
- Why I’m using Ozone 5 (not Ozone 9) 00:50
What reference track do I use? 01:23
Initial comparison to reference flat 01:59
Why flat? (headphone frequency response curves) 03:43
Why flat? (averaging across the top 10) 06:02
Why 9 of the top 10 are too loud 08:23
What about peaks that spike above reference flat? 12:38
multiplier.audio - Audio samples for electronic music.
How I Make Money in the Music Industry: multipliermusic.com/products/...
If you have any questions or corrections, email me directly at multiplier@multiplier.audio
Multiplier music coaching/Skype lessons. Email multiplier@multipliermusic.com for info and pricing.
‘No Hidden Magic’ Mastering: multiplier.audio/mastering
multiplier.audio featured products:
HUMAN HIHATS - multiplier.audio/store/human-...
SOFT KICKS - multiplier.audio/store/soft-k...
FUTURE CLAPS - multiplier.audio/store/future...
MAGIC CRACKLES - multiplier.audio/store/magic-...
WHERE'S THAT SNARE - multiplier.audio/store/wheres...
the other 24 products in our store - multiplier.audio/store
Loopmasters sample packs I made:
Serum Trap Presets - www.loopmasters.com/genres/94...
Massive Trap Presets - www.loopmasters.com/product/d...
Space FX - www.loopmasters.com/genres/46...
Ghosts Evolving Massive Presets - www.loopmasters.com/genres/46...
1000 Weird Little One Shots - www.loopmasters.com/genres/46...
Sign up to the multiplier.audio email newsletter to receive free samples, tips, tricks, and tutorials - every Friday.
Either send an email to signup@multiplier.audio or use the form at the bottom of the homepage multiplier.audio
Multiplier on the web:
/ multipliermusic
/ multiplier
/ multiplier
www.beatport.com/artist/multip...
multipliermusic.com
And his label, Relentik Records:
/ relentik-records
www.beatport.com/label/relenti...
Multiplier's old podcast BLOUNCE:
itunes.apple.com/gb/podcast/bl...
/ blounce
Fantastic info as always
I am not sure if a flat curve is really desirable for some tracks. For example the Hot Since 82 - Make up one. That track is meant to have a powerful low end but it has little elements in the mid range (only a few percussions and stabs), so increasing mid range volume could harm the sub bass.
“Harm” is definitely the wrong word. Those top frequencies won’t interact with the sub bass however I will give you that tonally it will change the aesthetic of the mix down.
Was funny to find out we were both using a Rob Swire mix as our reference. And both still are. Hope your well mate.
You missed a HUGE point! That music is meant to be played extremely loud on a club PA system in mono. The mastering style for that purpose is different compared to headphones. Nobody goes to the club to experience piercing high mids or highs which is why they have been rolled off.
jon snow isn’t the mono PA system is a myth now tho
This is a very good point, apart from the mono thing (no club worth their salt has a mono system these days). Club music is designed to be played VERY loud. I have been analysing some of what are considered well mastered tracks in the genre I produce (Trance) and they all have roll-off starting at around 8-10k (sometimes lower). There is a very good reason for this... Fletcher-Munson curves. As music gets louder, the relative proportion of frequencies we hear changes. This means that the very top end becomes more pronounced the louder you go.
And yes, mastering for other platforms *should* be done differently. Whether those tracks have all been mastered differently for other platforms is irrelevant, the versions you looked at have all been mastered for clubs because you got them from Beatport.
As far as the loudness goes, most tracks I've analysed have had LUFS values of between -6 and -8 LUFS. It pays to be the same as the majority, otherwise your track will sound less intense in a club, or it will be clipping. Most DJs set their levels by how loud it sounds... if they are having to boost the overall level to get the same percieved loudness, there will probably be clipping as all tracks are usually limited to around 0db (give or take 0.3). This is another reason there *should* be a different master for streaming.
Also, white noise to level out / fill the spectrum is a horrible thing! (Just my opinion)
@@f1endish1 Close, but if you're mixing/mastering with the Fletcher-Munson curve in mind, you would in fact be reducing the mids around 2-4khz. That is the range that becomes the most pronounced as you get louder, before the very top end.
Fantastic. One of your best. And I never knew that about Ozone 5 which I have.
very analytical approach, i like it!
"objectively" too loud? "objectively" incorrect EQ curve? I would say that mixing is a subjective, creative process, like any artistic process.
The guidelines you describe are great for someone who wants to make "safe" mixes.
But many producers (Aphex Twin? Justice?) like to push the envelope, or stray from what is conventionally acceptable.
Also, I agree with the other commenters that these tracks are specifically created for club systems, so the EQ curves of different headphones, or the volume compensation that Spotify will apply, aren't particularly relevant.
Not eniterly no... Amplification of frequencies and perceived sound, is how the individual cyamtics pattersn interact with us on a cellular level.. this requires a specific foundational base on how music should sound to be able to have complete affect.. the subjective part is the creation and arrangement of the harmonics.
Great video man. I got turned off your videos a little while back cause they got quite rambly. But this was great. Thank you.
Interesting stuff! Are you comparing EQ curves of the entire songs or just the drops? Songs with longer intro/outros might make the EQ curve look "worse" if using the entire song to create the EQ curve
OCDProd had the same question myself
9:30 they create the same master for digital. Spotify and Apple will then automatically turn every track down to -14 LUFS via Replay Gain. This is because of the user experience aspect of streaming. If you listen to multiple tracks by various artists, you want them to all be similar in their overall loudness as otherwise tracks would sound disjointed due to how loudness can vary a lot. From really dynamic acoustic tracks or cinematic soundtracks to loud club tracks. Essentially this comes down to streaming services wanting consistency on their platform in order to create a really good user experience. So please DO NOT think you have to master a club track that naturally wants to go to -7 dBLUFS to -14 LUFS. But yeah the only thing you should consider is leaving -1 to -2 of headroom (dBFS). This is because when streaming services do their file conversion stuff your tracks get louder sometimes by more than a single dB. But yeah, the whole separate mix for Spotify is a myth.
Tonal balance from izotope is a great tool for this kind of eq reference :)
I really hope you tell the slope per octave setting you have on your spectrum
This is if you want all your music to sound the same :)
What does youtube/spotify compression do to the frequency curve and the loudness? Since you're comparing .wavs to streaming and videos? Love the video btw, as well as your others, very informative.
How would I go about finding the freq response for my KRK KNS-8400 Headphones, and my Monkey Banana 5's Speakers?
A plugin suggestion to solve your issue and maybe even make your referencing more accurate -> HOFA IQ Analyser (probably the greatest analyser I know of)
i need that techyes track you mentioned
Good one. Just for Clubs a harder master can be an advantage...
What about 1/f, I thought that was the reference to use?
Not sure about you but i always aim to get at least a 3db loudness penalty. I cant afford to have some platforms turn my track up and rely on their general purpose limiter, if they have a limiter, that is. .. Maybe
But don't you think that this loudness thing is a stylistic feature of those genres, so people will push loudness just to sound edm or whatever the genre is?
👍
So, your thoughts on Steely Dan’s Aja from the 70’s. Mix is amazing, but done by ear. I prefer listening with my ears not my eyes.
I really dont think anyone in a crowd in a club can tell the difference. the tracks in question arn't miles away from average frequency balance and loudness, kind of picky imo. great video though well explained but i disagree
Im not sure this works in every genres
Also a short error on the "too loud" section -> these are club tracks remember? not played on streaming services, not aimed for that. They are aimed to be played on a club system. - thats where your video started :)
I would suggest to maybe reconsider the statements from the side of a DJ, not from a producer.
Unfortunately man, even from a marketing perspective, I don't think that creating flat mixes that reproduce exactly the same no matter your headphones is worth it for your audience in 2021. They know they're listening on iphone speakers, and they don't give a ff unless it sounds noticeably bad. Making music that has a particular sonic profile is part of the artist stamp you place on a track as a producer. Shooting for the middle always dips you into the "this just sounds lifeless" category of music, including that reference from knife party. Nobody makes music in that genre like that anymore because you can make more dynamic mixes by choosing a curve that doesn't look like that "perfect" track.
I understand the point of this video though, especially for those who are still trying to find what's going wrong with their mixes. Finding the box is a crucial step before breaking out of the box. But for those reading these comments, you should know that if it sounds sick, it sounds sick. Sometimes what sounds awesome isn't what matches the expectation of what was "perfect" from a data analysis perspective.
I'm a mastering engineer
And the best track ever mastered till date according to me
Is
YOSI HORIKAWA - MAKI
just take a shot and listen to it
You will get idea what a great mix sounds like
Even experienced engineers fails to attain sound like him
Just listen to it you will learn alot
Nice try YOSI HORIKAWA
Wait is this self advertisement?
Lol guyszz seriously
Listen to my tracks
3 year old tracks
They are profressive
And then i joined music school
And there one sir told me
Listen to the mixes of yosi horikawa
And many mastering engineers in INDIA as well
Mastered on NEVE ssl console
If you are advanced enough you will be ae to notice considerable difference in your mix and his one
Just search who is he and look at his studio
1 million dollar studio he has
I am bedroom engineer
U can check yourself
Wow! Sorry but this video feels like the epitome of bad information on the internet. You mix with your ears, not your eyes. Using analysers can help identify problem frequencies but expecting every song to match a very specific curve like that is ridiculous. The tonal balance of a song depends on its instrumentation and arrangement. I can just see some young kid messing up a perfectly good mix with an EQ on the mix bus because his song didn’t match the EQ curve of his favorite song.
@@bassc I still agree with what I said but boy do I sound like an asshole.. 😂
This comment should honestly be higher. No offense multi, the video is interesting no matter the conclusions.
This isn’t really taking account of a producers creative style Eli Brown isn’t comparable to Moreno Pezzolato in terms of how they ‘sound’ (just two examples) .. what you describe as perfect to a reference takes account of frequency but not what is producing (instrument, voice etc) that frequency and or what the unique response of each person is to that .. statistically it’s useful but musically it isn’t.. I can’t tolerate Eli Brown’s brightness in his mixes but that’s due to the voices which I always find harsh (yet graphically aren’t) others may not hear or feel that..listening to Brown’s Desire for me personally is exhausting in the vocals but he is almost perfect to your reference, so whilst I agree all the mixes acknowledge a ‘standard’ which your research proves, how they create their sound within that is how we largely respond .. but yes there is a lot of bad audio that needs to nail the fundamentals you are describing first.
Dude music is not all about curve at all... Its about psychoacoustic too and some of your curves you call bad will sound 10 times better than your reference track just because the track has a different psychoacoustic due to producing techniques, especially at high level... Deeply disagree on this one, sorry.
It hurts me hearing your voice this way. Take some break from speaking! I haven't been here for two years and this is what I get? C'mon man you need some rest xD we'll be here