How are these people getting LOUD ass mixes?

High Flown

High Flown

Member
Thought I'd post my question on here since it seems this community has really knowledgeable people in it. I been doing mixes for quite some time now. When I'm in the mixing process getting my levels and eq and compression everything going, it actually sounds beautiful. It sounds flawless. Until I get to my mix buss and its time to turn it up with a limiter. When I do this my mix gets destroyed. Not only does it get destroyed, but when I compare it to other commercial releases, there songs are WAYYY louder, even when I've squashed the hell out of my track already. Am I missing something here? How are these people getting there mixes SO loud, but still clean sounding? I've been looking for this answer for years and I can't figure out how they are doing this.

I use compression on the mix bus and everything. I even tried using multiple compressors to take the load off of just using one. I tried that with using multiple limiters as well. Nothing works and I just can't seem to compete when it comes to getting my mixes loud and coherent.

Please someone, anyone
 
I would guess you may need to go back to the mix. In my experience, it can be helpful to adjust the mix so that it sounds good while running through effects on the master channel. Once it sounds good, take the effects off and see how the mix sounds.

After doing this a few times I began to notice things in the mix that I often overlooked since I thought my mixes were as good as they could be. Also, you might want to consider bringing in the tracks you use for comparison into your mix session.
 
Assuming that you mean 2-bus by mix bus. As Adrian-MarQ said, you probably want to go back to your individual tracks to check some details. Are you low pass filtering as needed? Much of a track's available energy can be taken up by low frequencies that are not needed - putting a LPF on guitars, bass guitars, and other instruments that generate low frequency (and not needed) harmonics below 50hz can often be of help. Take a look at the tracks with a spectrum analyzer (such as the excellent Voxengo Span) to see where this might be appropriate. Also, don't use compressors on every track, only where appropriate. If you squash every track, then you have nothing left to work with in the final mix and everything will sound dense, muddled, and lacking range.

The loudness wars are about over - don't feel compelled to hyper-compress everything just for the sake of average volume levels, dynamic range is coming back :) Having said that, getting a "loud" mix (given your individual tracks are in good shape) really comes down to your choice of compressor/limiter and how it's used. For free stuff, try Limiter No. 6, starting with the Master 2 preset and tweaking from there. Limiter No. 6 is perfectly capable of getting as "loud" as anything out there.

Also, if you post some of your tracks/stems/mixdowns, there are many here that could provide helpful advice.
 
High Flown said:
Thought I'd post my question on here since it seems this community has really knowledgeable people in it. I been doing mixes for quite some time now. When I'm in the mixing process getting my levels and eq and compression everything going, it actually sounds beautiful. It sounds flawless. Until I get to my mix buss and its time to turn it up with a limiter. When I do this my mix gets destroyed. Not only does it get destroyed, but when I compare it to other commercial releases, there songs are WAYYY louder, even when I've squashed the hell out of my track already. Am I missing something here? How are these people getting there mixes SO loud, but still clean sounding? I've been looking for this answer for years and I can't figure out how they are doing this.

I use compression on the mix bus and everything. I even tried using multiple compressors to take the load off of just using one. I tried that with using multiple limiters as well. Nothing works and I just can't seem to compete when it comes to getting my mixes loud and coherent.

Please someone, anyone
Click to expand...

Yes you are missing critical things.

The bad news is that this issue spans across many dimensions of engineering, the good news is that you can still fix the issue entirely by addressing the issues in all of those dimensions.

I'll break it down for you.

The DAW system is limited by the combined sample rate, latency, CPU, internal fx processing bit depth, oversampling rate. The software fx bus is limited by 64-bit precision on newer systems and 32-bit precision on older systems. On the true 64-bit systems/plugins the output is dithered down to 32-bit precision. By applying fxs in the hardware domain you raise the precision of these processes, hence you have higher levels of resonance in the signal left after fx processing.

Here are some calculations for you:

A) Pro Tools HDX running at 192 kHz with a hardware based limiter (infinite bit depth, infinite oversampling, infinite = 10000 as illustration) without CPU being the bottleneck

Input to output roundtrip latency: 67 samples -> 0.3 ms
->
1 / (0.3) * 1 * 10000 = 33000

B) Pro Tools HDX running at 192 kHz with an AAX 64 bit based software limiter at 8 times oversampling without CPU being the bottleneck

Input to output roundtrip latency: 67 samples -> 0.3 ms
->
1 / (0.3) * 1 * 48 * 8 = 1300

C) Presonus AudioBox 1818VSL running at 44.1 kHz with a 32 bit software limiter without oversampling, with the CPU putting a 10% bottleneck

Input to output roundtrip latency: 265 samples -> 6 ms
->
1 / 6 * 0.9 * 32 * 1 = 5


So we are up to this point talking a performance diff of 33000 (A) vs 5 (C).

Furthermore, the software summing process is limited by the 64-bit precision and the summed signal must then be dithered down to 32-bit precision and then finally dithered down to 16-bit precision. By summing in the hardware domain you raise the precision of this process, hence you have higher levels of resonance in the signal left after summing. Let's see what the impact is:

A) 33000

Instead of summing in the software domain, we decide to sum in the hardware domain. Summing precision: infinite. (infinite = 10000)
->
33000 * 10000 = 330000000

B) 1300
We decide to sum in the software domain. Summing precision: 64-bit, dithered down to 32-bit, dithered down to 16-bit.

1300 * 32 = 42000

C) 5
We decide to sum in the software domain. Summing precision: 64-bit, dithered down to 32-bit, dithered down to 16-bit.

5 * 32 = 160

At this point the performance diff between setup A and setup C is: 200 000 000 %

But this is not all. Then you have additional impacts as well, the "signal capacity of the limiter/audio interface and the input gain - threshold - output gain balance" quality factor, the factor for the headroom requirement for the target playback format, the precision of the engineering moves due to the monitoring performance and so on. That 200 000 000 % diff figure will eventually become so big that of course you will notice a huge difference in the "presence-clearity-beauty" factor between a commercial mix and a home recording mix.

Please note though that this basically just answers the presence question, there are of course much more dimensions at play here before the listeners go "I love this music", we are now discussing mostly vertical dimensions, but there are horizontal dimensions as well. A horizontal dimension is for instance the production quality - it spans across the vertical dimensions, although I usually approach it as if it was a vertical dimension, simply because the human mind with its current DNA setup is not designed for true multi-dimensional thinking.

The answer is not to think that hardware is all you need, or that presence is all you need. Hardware is only a part of it, so is presence, but those two are pretty critical when it comes to modern pop music. The emotion is in the overall charge density that the listener locks into.
 
Last edited:
This makes A LOT of sense. Using hardware just seems to add more depth whenever you apply it to something. Unfortunately I'm completely in the box, and there's now way I can afford all that equipment right now...There has to be another way because I know guys that mix in the box and there stuff is BANGING loud and I'm just so confused.

DarkRed said:
Yes you are missing critical things.

The bad news is that this issue spans across many dimensions of engineering, the good news is that you can still fix the issue entirely by addressing the issues in all of those dimensions.

I'll break it down for you.

The DAW system is limited by the combined sample rate, latency, CPU, internal fx processing bit depth, oversampling rate. The software fx bus is limited by 64-bit precision on newer systems and 32-bit precision on older systems. On the true 64-bit systems/plugins the output is dithered down to 32-bit precision. By applying fxs in the hardware domain you raise the precision of these processes, hence you have higher levels of resonance in the signal left after fx processing.

Here are some calculations for you:

A) Pro Tools HDX running at 192 kHz with a hardware based limiter (infinite bit depth, infinite oversampling, infinite = 10000 as illustration) without CPU being the bottleneck

Input to output roundtrip latency: 67 samples -> 0.3 ms
->
1 / (0.3) * 1 * 10000 = 33000

B) Pro Tools HDX running at 192 kHz with an AAX 64 bit based software limiter at 8 times oversampling without CPU being the bottleneck

Input to output roundtrip latency: 67 samples -> 0.3 ms
->
1 / (0.3) * 1 * 48 * 8 = 1300

C) Presonus AudioBox 1818VSL running at 44.1 kHz with a 32 bit software limiter without oversampling, with the CPU putting a 10% bottleneck

Input to output roundtrip latency: 265 samples -> 6 ms
->
1 / (1.4) * 0.9 * 32 * 1 = 5


So we are up to this point talking a performance diff of 33000 (A) vs 5 (C).

Furthermore, the software summing process is limited by the 64-bit precision and the summed signal must then be dithered down to 32-bit precision and then finally dithered down to 16-bit precision. By summing in the hardware domain you raise the precision of this process, hence you have higher levels of resonance in the signal left after summing. Let's see what the impact is:

A) 33000

Instead of summing in the software domain, we decide to sum in the hardware domain. Summing precision: infinite. (infinite = 10000)
->
33000 * 10000 = 330000000

B) 1300
We decide to sum in the software domain. Summing precision: 64-bit, dithered down to 32-bit, dithered down to 16-bit.

1300 * 32 = 42000

C) 5
We decide to sum in the software domain. Summing precision: 64-bit, dithered down to 32-bit, dithered down to 16-bit.

5 * 32 = 160

At this point the performance diff between setup A and setup C is: 200 000 000 %

But this is not all. Then you have additional impacts as well, the "signal capacity of the limiter/audio interface and the input gain - threshold - output gain balance" quality factor, the factor for the headroom requirement for the target playback format, the precision of the engineering moves due to the monitoring performance and so on. That 200 000 000 % diff figure will eventually become so big that of course you will notice a huge difference in the "presence-clearity-beauty" factor between a commercial mix and a home recording mix.

Please note though that this basically just answers the presence question, there are of course much more dimensions at play here before the listeners go "I love this music", we are now discussing mostly vertical dimensions, but there are horizontal dimensions as well. A horizontal dimension is for instance the production quality - it spans across the vertical dimensions, although I usually approach it as if it was a vertical dimension, simply because the human mind with its current DNA setup is not designed for true multi-dimensional thinking.

The answer is not to think that hardware is all you need, or that presence is all you need. Hardware is only a part of it, so is presence, but those two are pretty critical when it comes to modern pop music. The emotion is in the overall charge density that the listener locks into.
Click to expand...
 
Ok cool yeah that may help a bit. Here a somewhat recent beat of mine that I have mixed. https://soundcloud.com/highflown/im-sorry-smooth

Any feedback positive or negative will be greatly appreciated. It's really not as loud as it could be and it's hurting me in so many different areas I feel like.

As far as low pass filtering everything it's like a religion at this point. I literally low pass everything except for the low frequencies I want in the mix i.e. sub bass and kicks. I don't hardly every compress on the individual tracks because most of the samples I use are already compressed and processed to being with. I usually only compress synths like arps and stuff if I feel they get a little crazy.

I will def try out that limiter you suggested. I've been using very high quality limiters already but this is worth a shot as I've seen this used before and the results were pretty good even though its free. Thanks for the suggestions!

ponkapog said:
Assuming that you mean 2-bus by mix bus. As Adrian-MarQ said, you probably want to go back to your individual tracks to check some details. Are you low pass filtering as needed? Much of a track's available energy can be taken up by low frequencies that are not needed - putting a LPF on guitars, bass guitars, and other instruments that generate low frequency (and not needed) harmonics below 50hz can often be of help. Take a look at the tracks with a spectrum analyzer (such as the excellent Voxengo Span) to see where this might be appropriate. Also, don't use compressors on every track, only where appropriate. If you squash every track, then you have nothing left to work with in the final mix and everything will sound dense, muddled, and lacking range.

The loudness wars are about over - don't feel compelled to hyper-compress everything just for the sake of average volume levels, dynamic range is coming back :) Having said that, getting a "loud" mix (given your individual tracks are in good shape) really comes down to your choice of compressor/limiter and how it's used. For free stuff, try Limiter No. 6, starting with the Master 2 preset and tweaking from there. Limiter No. 6 is perfectly capable of getting as "loud" as anything out there.

Also, if you post some of your tracks/stems/mixdowns, there are many here that could provide helpful advice.
Click to expand...
 
Hardware or ITB doesn't make the difference for loudness. If the mix is OK, only the mastering skills make the difference.
 
High Flown said:
This makes A LOT of sense. Using hardware just seems to add more depth whenever you apply it to something. Unfortunately I'm completely in the box, and there's now way I can afford all that equipment right now...There has to be another way because I know guys that mix in the box and there stuff is BANGING loud and I'm just so confused.
Click to expand...

Loudness is not the same thing as presence. You can have a very loud mix that is very un-present. You have loudness, power and presence, usually when engineers feel they want more loudness, it is actually presence they want. There are tons of things here, I wish I could show you how I do it, because it is a process that involves many many things. I would show you how I work with the volume fader when I apply EQ, how I do the side chaining, how I monitor, how I build the dynamics of the mix, how I work with the master fader etc. It's much more advanced than you would guess, because I constantly act from a multi-dimensional perspective because I am aware of the mathematics behind it and that you simply don't do. But again, presence is established early, through the right arrangement, using the right hardware in the right way and so on. It's a very big topic. To really master this you have to understand how emotions work, what resonance is, what charge density is and so on. You are asking an important question, but you are avoiding the answer. One of the reasons that many mixes turn out un-present, is that each volume fader, EQ and limiter move is too dramatic. The reason for that is that you are mixing in a low voltage context with the master fader at unity gain. A mix that is not well balanced is an un-present sounding mix and it does not matter how much power you force into such a mix. You need to be aware of what you have in the mix. You need to know the loudness of the signal before and after the summed/gained/limited signal and you need to take into consideration what playback format this mix is going to be used for, because various playback formats require various amounts of headroom. And you need to have a monitoring solution that allows you to understand when the audible clipping is coming from the signal as oppose to from the speakers/headphones. Tons of headphones out there distort before the signal does.
 
Last edited:
Damn this was a very insightful answer. I appreciate that. Mixing is definitely a multi dimensional concept for sure. Idk, maybe I just need more practice...even though I been mixing for years lol I guess I'm just looking for a step by step process on how to get a mix that's present and most likely doesn't exist. ****..

DarkRed said:
Loudness is not the same thing as presence. You can have a very loud mix that is very un-present. You have loudness, power and presence, usually when engineers feel they want more loudness, it is actually presence they want. There are tons of things here, I wish I could show you how I do it, because it is a process that involves many many things. I would show you how I work with the volume fader when I apply EQ, how I do the side chaining, how I monitor, how I build the dynamics of the mix, how I work with the master fader etc. It's much more advanced than you would guess, because I constantly act from a multi-dimensional perspective because I am aware of the mathematics behind it and that you simply don't do. But again, presence is established early, through the right arrangement, using the right hardware in the right way and so on. It's a very big topic. To really master this you have to understand how emotions work, what resonance is, what charge density is and so on. You are asking an important question, but you are avoiding the answer. One of the reasons that many mixes turn out un-present, is that each volume fader, EQ and limiter move is too dramatic. The reason for that is that you are mixing in a low voltage context with the master fader at unity gain. A mix that is not well balanced is an un-present sounding mix and it does not matter how much power you force into such a mix. You need to be aware of what you have in the mix. You need to know the loudness of the signal before and after the summed/gained/limited signal and you need to take into consideration what playback format this mix is going to be used for, because various playback formats require various amounts of headroom. And you need to have a monitoring solution that allows you to understand when the audible clipping is coming from the signal as oppose to from the speakers/headphones. Tons of headphones out there distort before the signal does.
Click to expand...
 
A lot of what I've heard is from compression. Taking the dynamics out of a lot of the tracks so that there is headroom to turn the tracks up, but also I think you can only get some much done in the box as with hardware clipping can seem to have a more forgiving and musical sound to it rather than the digital sound of clipping.
 
compress individual channels just enough to beef them up and to tame their transients. and use transient shapers too for more accurate limiting.
and then limit the master without crushing it. And be sure to EQ individual tracks if needed so that the parts that need to be heard are clearer.
 
by your example (sc link) your song/beat is ENOUGH "loud" (its relative) //my opinion...just takke a listen to any of my beats (last ones) they are almos 2x quieter than your ... :D and, from when loudness really depends that much? nothing negative, im just curious (and yep i also have a problem with my loudness) but clearness > loudness isnt it? :D

ps from my perspective, your example is exelent, like i said, enough loud and has a good production, i would say: no wories hah :)
 
Your mix sounds dope man!
I would take the Limiter off your Master! Limiters can make your mix sound very flat cause it cuts off the dynamics in your tracks.
I only put a Limiter on individual instruments if they clip too much. Drums i clip on purpose though.
 
mark1234 said:
Your mix sounds dope man!
I would take the Limiter off your Master! Limiters can make your mix sound very flat cause it cuts off the dynamics in your tracks.
I only put a Limiter on individual instruments if they clip too much. Drums i clip on purpose though.
Click to expand...
Clipping is never acceptable. It's like Russian Roulette with 5 bullets in barrel.
Limiting individual tracks is a sure mean to get a flat, liveless too loud sound.
 
Last edited:
A lot of Hip-Hop and Dance has clipping drums though. Sometimes it can be done on purpose but you gotta know how to do it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top