Hi everyone, I'm still a bit of a novice when it comes to mixing but I've been recently struggling with increasing loudness in my mixes before hitting the mastering stage. My question is two parts so any thoughts or input on either are appreciated.
1) What is the ideal peak/RMS ratio that you strive for in terms of headroom? I've seen anywhere between -3/-12 (peak db/RMS) to -6/-18. Is that the ideal range?
2) Do you have any techniques or suggestions on how to increase RMS without killing headroom? I've been experimenting and it seems I'm only able to do one or other. That is, I can get the right peak levels but my RMS levels are too low. Or I'm able to get RMS in the sweet spot but I'm pushing 0db on the mix bus.
I know each track warrants its own treatment and that there's no "one size fits all" remedy, but I'm curious if there are common techniques or strategies that I could be using to help increase loudness in a mix and still leave enough room when it comes time to mastering.
Thanks.
Hello,
I would also like to support there is likely no formula to apply in all mix situations---I would perhaps stress avoiding any rigid focus on number targets for your mix buss with peaks and rms.
Just some thoughts about avoiding that line of thinking:
-a quick thought: content is almost always different for the peaks and steadystate-rms of each mix. Example: -2dB peaks deriving from big bass notes alone will affect mixbus dynamic hardware/plugs wayyy different than -2dbpeaks coming from lurching vocal parts. Same for what is contributing to the steady rms in the mix---mid heavysynth pads strongly contibuting to rms vs deep cello quartets leading rms. So in short: thing freq balance and how it affects last ditch attempts to squeeze out loudness should that be your aim.
-another random thing: it has been my experience that being able to squeeze more stuff in the mix is generally what leads to the perception of loudness. Of course and like always this will only work if individual elements are balanced relative to themselves and with one another, this implying frequency distrubution (hz through khz) and dynamic state (upward and downward movement, attack/sustain). So this means fit all the puzzle pieces (the instruments) in the box together so they don't overlap, and capittalize on the natural strengths of each for the overall intention of the "box", aka the song...., forgive the terrible metaphor. Anyways, getting to Loudness, it has been my experience that stacking puzzle pieces on top of your existing puzzle tends to result in unholy (but objectively louder, rms especially) mixes. As suggested ,vigilance is needed because of frequency masking and comb filtering when phase/delay is not controlled (daws can actually help with fixing delay here when us8ng plugs). So again this is what squeezing more stuff in the mix is all about. Ppl love calling this stuff parallel comp, parallel eq, all those buzz words/phrases. If these techniques are applied with vigilence and thoughtfulness, this can effectively filli out frequency spectrum and balance attack/sustain by including additional frequencies (eq) not supplied and bringing up/down dynamic content(comp, exp) for a more perceivable steadystate performance for each track.
Sooooo, getting back to your thought about getting ready for mastering, perhaps attention to peak to rms is exactly what you should be focused on--You're probably deadon with that bc mastering treatments are often some bloody serious limiting or compression...obvious ex
eak content with rms far below the peaks give vicious pumping and loudness is not desirable at all, and the opposite squeezing dynamics till they're blue in the face is heartless and robs thy music and glory. I personally don't dig mastering dynamic content at all unless there is a absurd automation (like riding thresholds, att, rels, output, every 20 secs etc). I always support quality of song, and that seems to me found in the attention to individual instruments as they relate to themseleves, and one another,. it appears your thoughts are similar, apologies for any echo chambering. Just give it a go for a giggle or 2, if you add 5 dynamically steady parallel comp tracks for your vocal and give eq and fader balance attention to each as they fit with each other and in the whole mix I promise you can observe a louder rms on your voxbus (should that tickle ur fancy). Just some thoughts, for you !
Best,
-Madhat