Foo? mix done… PMing…
How can you expect to get a mix right if you’re compressing the master output? Compressing individual tracks is fine, but don’t touch that master channel! It was designed to be at 0.0 dB, while the loudest instrument peaks at about -8.5 dB. Unfortunately Renoise only halves the volume (reduces it by 6.02 dB), so you’ll have to reduce the input gain (pre-volume) of each channel by -2.499 dB if you want to have enough headroom. Some styles will even need more headroom, so start pulling those volumes down and mixing the way it was supposed to be done. You’ll start hearing a lot more and your mixes will improve tenfold. I think it’s really time I wrote a tutorial on setting your levels right in Renoise, because it’s absolutely terrible the kind of mixes people are pulling out of it. You can always slam the crap out of it when mastering, but a mix should peak no higher than -3.0 dB.
I can help a lot more just as soon as you upload a proper mixdown. You’ve probably already clipped things beyond repair in the mix, but getting that output down would be a good start.
I could get you the xrns, but nobody compressed the master here.
I don’t what a ‘proper mixdown’ sounds like, so I cant help you there.
Afterall, that’s the whole point of this topic. Duh 
sorry atlantis, but what you say makes absolutely no sense. a brickwall limiter on the master set to -.1db and adjusting the in-gain accordingly is the absolute standard and minimum of mastering. I like the new mixing btw, it’s definately not as harsh at the original one. still abit low on bass for my taste, but much, much better anyway.
You said so yourself:
Or did I misunderstand something? Reading it now, it seems you’re talking about compressing the individual tracks. But read my words: compression is NOT a way to hide peaks and turn the volume up without clipping. Compression reduces dynamic range by turning the volume down above a user-defined threshold. This allows you to turn the peak level back up to where it was before, bringing the average level up with it, but this is only secondary to actual dynamic range compression. Too many people think of compression in a backward sense, and it makes them drive the compressor by pushing the input into a clipping state, believing the compressor will prevent any peaks from going past 0.0 dB. This is only partly true, but it is the wrong mentality. You need to think downward. Turn everything down and make the parts fit well together instead of pushing everything up where it can’t go higher.
A proper mixdown shouldn’t clip for starters, so that you can accurately hear what’s going on in the individual parts.
As for sending me the XRNS, I’d probably be overwhelmed by all your volume wrongdoings. That’s why I said the mixer routing is probably beyond repair, but you can still turn the master post-gain down and work on balancing the post-gains of each mixer track, and EQing the instruments to sound better. If you want to send me the file though, it might help me to visualise what’s going on, but I don’t have any of the VSTi’s.
This isn’t the way to use a limiter. Don’t drive the input gain - lower the threshold instead and set the output ceiling to e.g. -0.2 dB (after you’ve found the threshold you want by keeping the output ceiling and threshold the same).
Is there a difference between pulling the treshold down and normalizing the wave afterwards and leaving the treshold at -.1 and pushing the input gain up?
im sure there was a calmer way of putting all that…tutorials are always gunna be good though if this kind of thing gets ur goat so to speak.
as far as my 2c goes, iv always had bad results when applying compression to the master track. my prefered technique is to put compression on each track (and even then only when i feel it needs it as i believe compression produces a certain sound which i dont always desire) and then just EQ the master and maybe a bit of barely audible reverb/etc just to help things to sit together a little. i admit that last bit is a bit of a cheat though 
peace.
have you read any nagel? what its like to be a bat and all that. interesting stuff. love the track.
(apologies for the multiple posts).
Atlantis, thanks for the tips! Indeed that was what I was using
compression for, it gets things loud and crispy, especially with ‘digital’
sounds. I’ll look more into compression. I did compress the various
channels instead of the master. At LEAST I knew I shouldn’t be doing
any compression on the master 
Captain Woo, I never read any Nagel. Nagel is Dutch for nail.
Thanks for the kind words tho !
I listened to both, I like the Foo? tweak more than the original.
It’s really cool, but gives off a king’s quest vibe. Have you considered working with an orchestra / choir? It’s ambitious but it would really give your musical exploration much more profound depth and notoriety. In the decades past, when i was a student in film/video school, I have had stuff scored for free by classical music students at universities and the sound quality is unmatched by “computer emulation”. You should look into it if you are serious about this direction, otherwise it comes off cool, but works as a sketch, or a shell, to something that could be much bigger. There’s just so much one guy on a laptop can do before you have to take it to the next level of musicality. Really, the first step in “mixing orchestral” is recording an orchestra…
In any case, really awesome as usual, but this could be so much more, evidently with great difficulty.
Nice one.
BotB has got a good thing here, I just let it shine.
For everyone’s info this was my rough workflow:
- Take down all the volumes and compressors.
- Balance the orchestra tone and compression, as well filtering the verb ‘wet’ to reduce mud.
- Re-EQ the bass, added mda-sub.
- Re-EQ the guitar, added mda-stereo.
- Re-EQ the drums and tweaked compression to reduce dynamics a little.
- Added most of the drums to a send and added tube warmth.
- Added light mda-sub to the drums.
- Spent a while balancing all elements in relation to each other - basically aimed to have everything perceptible no matter how busy the sound got. The ‘pre-mix’ never got much over -6dB.
- Built a mastering chain, firstly some reductive EQ off the subs and a light rolled-shelf from 14.2k up.
- Maximiser set to about +10dB boost, and the absolute peak volume set to -0.3db.
- Referenced boosting with FreeG, aimed four around -8-7dB RMS.
- Used SSL X-ISM to check there were not inter-sample peaks.
Yes, so I’ve been trying to say. Though it is more about mentality and the benefit of mixing downward instead of upward. If the threshold is at -0.1 dB, you’re going to have to push the gain about 5.5 dB into clipping, which can cause clipping in some effects. It’s just stupid and really bad practise.
By the way you’re mixing the bass far too low. Foo?'s was better, but the sound is far too low on bass frequencies. Unless that’s common to this style, but it sounds very weak on my monitors. Also the samples sound very cheap to me, but Foo? managed to spice them up a bit, but still it sounds fake. I’d love to have a go at helping you out but it might be too much work. Like I say, just upload a non-clipped, non-mastered mix and I can point out some things if you want.
Atlantis, are you using a sub? What model monitors are you using?
I forgot to mention the bass is ducked from the the kicks (using side chaining). And all the lows are filtered tight so it will sound huge on a big system without flabbing subs out and sounding muddy.
Dynaudio BM 5As, but it’s the same on my headphones, and I do know what I’m hearing when it comes to tonal balance, plus with the aid of a spectrum analyser you can’t go wrong. Like I say, maybe it’s the style that needs to be so mid-heavy and shy on bass, but I can’t say my ears appreciate it. Highpassing might have been part of the problem, since there isn’t much below ~50 Hz anyway, but there isn’t any real bass around ~96 Hz. Yours is much better, but still I’d go a bit more on bass and treble. And filtering out the subs can be a good thing, but in this case I think it’s needed to give the mix support.
I’d like to make one thing clear: I don’t care if it sounds plastic, fake,
like some kid ripped the sounds right off a cheap-ass midikeyboard.
All I’m aiming for is a clear sound, so the listener can make out the different
melodic layers, as well as the beats, bass and guitars seperately, without
things getting muddy.
Ofcourse edirol orchestra database sounds a bit dodgy, especially
without its own chorus/reverb effect and obviously recording a real
orchestra would be topnotchofthefukkingbill, but some guys at the
conservatorium told me my compositions are too mediocre for them
(haha, yes… honesty: like a stab in the head) and when I dropped the
concept of techno versus orchestral, the abomination was dripping from
their faces, so I guess I either have to find a more openminded
orchestra-dude, or find a better plugin, or find better ways to use
edirol…
But then again, I’m still experimenting with the concept. The idea behind
this track was to see if it would be possible to first write the melodies
and make the beats and bass lat0r. My conclusion is that this results
in a ‘clash’ rather than an appealing ‘whole’. The next experiment will
be to do both at the same time and see how I approach the composition,
compared to this track. I’m wondering what concessions I will make.
The final idea is to combine melodic content with the sound I love so
much (orchestra!) with the dancemusic I love so much (breaks!) and
bring the dancefloor a combination of emotional/energetic music, by
using melodies to support those feelings, instead of dirty synthfiltering.
But the bottomline: I need monitorspeakers to make this work. Else I’ll
keep coming back to you guys and beg for feedback and mixingfavours.
Not that I mind, but I need to learn this myself, plus I’m sure
you all have more important matters to attend to.
Anyway, it’s monday and I’m jabbering away to fill this gloomy morning.
Back to you, Captain Raskolnikov!
become f****ing rich so you can pay an orchestra to play what you want and throw enough money in their direction to shut them up.
I have met a few professional instrumentalists playing in big orchestras and some of them really cracked me up by either not having any taste at all (equals “I don’t care, I play whats on that sheet”) or being extremely negative about anything without having any creativity of their own. Those people are doomed if you take the sheet away. It’s like they suddenly have not the slightest idea of how to play that instrument.
Strange people.
On a sidenote, Edirol Orchestra is one of the worst Libraries I know. Although it got everything in it the sheer size of it is way too small to get anything proper out of it. If you can spend some serious money look for some of the soundfont/Kontakt based libraries, like the the one from Vitous, who did sample an entire orchestra.
I do have a suggestion when it comes to using orchestral sounds with breaks, and that’s mainly that extended string samples are not the greatest things to be using for fast melodies. What works best are “pizzicato”… that is, sounds that are played by plucking the instrument… or “staccato” sounds … which are played with similar gating to pizzicato but aren’t necessarily plucked.
Legato, however, is played quickly on the instrument, and there’s no gap in the sounds. Legato is the hardest to recreate with samples, and generally ends up sounding pretty crappy. My personal opinion (as this entire post is, I might point out) is that string samples that are long/looped to begin with should be used as pads, to create ambiance, and the short string stabs are what should be used mostly for quick passages.
there already are lots and lots and lots of staccato’s in the track
but staccato only has strength when there’s legato going on…
I live on contrast, y’know
I don’t like pizzicato, it quickly sounds like cartoonmusic…
looza: money is, alas, an issue… maybe in some future I can afford such a thing…
maybe I should email the kronos quartet, they’re into weird things 