Har-Bal Users Forum BBS

I have the following Plugs that I use to Master.

> HarBal
> Scrollworks Peak Slammer
> PSP VintageWarmer Multi-Compression

I perform the EQ first with the amazing HB.
Next I peakslam with Scrollworks to -3.3db to -4.4db just enough to take off the peaks but leave most of it alone, without normalizing.
Then compress with VintageWarmer which adds the Analog Sheen and brings up the overall volume.

The sound is to my liking...but there seems to be lots of room when I look at the WAV though the average volume is where I'd like.
Most Reference WAVs I look at are much tighter.

1.Should I apply the PSP VintageWarmer first and then the PeakSlammer with normalization? What is the proper order?
2. Also is OK to use Har-Bal after mastering to touchup or should you back up to the mix and start over?

Thanks Brian

Brian,

I'll let Earle follow up on this but my impression on touching up after limiting/compression is that it is generally not necessary. If your limiting is transparent (which generally translates to not too extreme) then it won't alter the spectrum much at all. If you use a great deal of compression and or limiting to raise the volume then you'll end up altering the spectral content significantly, though this is generally a sign of compression artifacts. In any case, if you do touch up post limiting you will need to apply -6dB gain in HarBal to ensure that no clipping occurs and then re-limit with a volume gain of 6dB to compensate.

Paavo.

brian770295 wrote:I have the following Plugs that I use to Master.

> HarBal
> Scrollworks Peak Slammer
> PSP VintageWarmer Multi-Compression

I perform the EQ first with the amazing HB.
Next I peakslam with Scrollworks to -3.3db to -4.4db just enough to take off the peaks but leave most of it alone, without normalizing.
Then compress with VintageWarmer which adds the Analog Sheen and brings up the overall volume.

The sound is to my liking...but there seems to be lots of room when I look at the WAV though the average volume is where I'd like.
Most Reference WAVs I look at are much tighter.

1.Should I apply the PSP VintageWarmer first and then the PeakSlammer with normalization? What is the proper order?
2. Also is OK to use Har-Bal after mastering to touchup or should you back up to the mix and start over?

Thanks Brian

Brian

You stated that it looks like you have plenty of room left after you master. What is the average RMS level upon the completion of your mastering. You want room because you need to preserve the dynamic content of your music.

Cheers

Earle

RMS per channel... -14.73 & -15.45.

brian770295 wrote:RMS per channel... -14.73 & -15.45.

Actually, Brian that is fine. Although depending on the genre you could probably safely add 2 or 3 more db's to it. You are definately on the right track.

Kudos to you

Earke

Been 'analyzing' American Idiot.

Average RMS levels are about -4.5.

This is a LOUD record!

zumbido wrote:Been 'analyzing' American Idiot.

Average RMS levels are about -4.5.

This is a LOUD record!

What!! are you kidding me. That wave file would have to look like a 2 X 4
It must be super compressed.

Earle

I'd say this record looks more like a 4 x 12.

And what's great, with Har-Bal and T-RackS, I (or anyone) can acheive this 'effect'.

And it never goes over '0' on playback!

Yuck

zumbido wrote:I'd say this record looks more like a 4 x 12.

And what's great, with Har-Bal and T-RackS, I (or anyone) can acheive this 'effect'.

And it never goes over '0' on playback!

There is a major problem making a song this loud. It would be robbed of its dynamic range.

-4.5 average rms is the actual destruction of a song.

Why would anyone want their track this loud?

Earle

har-bal wrote:

zumbido wrote:I'd say this record looks more like a 4 x 12.

And what's great, with Har-Bal and T-RackS, I (or anyone) can acheive this 'effect'.

And it never goes over '0' on playback!

There is a major problem making a song this loud. It would be robbed of its dynamic range.

-4.5 average rms is the actual destruction of a song.

Why would anyone want their track this loud?

Earle

Zumbido

Can you do me a favor and post a link to 10 seconds of the loudest part of this song? Either in mp3 or wav form.

I have to see this with my own eyes.

Earle

Okay, I'll put something up Friday.

The first song, "American Idiot", actually has a 'positive' Average of 0.49. I don't remember seeing a positive number before in Har-Bal. Is this unusual?

The dynamic range of Green Day is simply: 'LOUDEST'.

Here's a 10 second 'snippet'

zumbido wrote:Here's a 10 second 'snippet'

Ahh, I see what they did. The wave file looks like a black hole

They set their outceiling to -0.3 and it allowed them a little more space in their threshold. If they would have set their outceiling at -0.1 the ratio would of ended up being -10 or -11 because they would of needed to lose about 3dbs from the threshold..

This song isn't breathing at all. You definately don't want to get into this habit. I guess for this genre it is okay but I do not recommend it. KIND OF LIKE SOMEONE SPEAKING TO YOU IN CAPITAL LETTERS.

Cheers

Earle

Earle,

I agree with you comments. Although, I'll stick with the '4 x 12' label.

Try listening to an album's worth of this. It's exhausting.

Looking at it in Har-Bal, you can see the 'boost' in the 'powerchord guitar' region. That, with the incessant fully bashed ride cymbal, it approaches a blast of noise.