illapino said:
DVYCE, thanks for the thorough response. You said however that I'm expecting something "unrealistic (like, for your songs to be as loud as finished commercially produced CD's)"
What's unrealistic about that? Shouldn't that be any musician's aim? To sound professional? Having quiet exported instrumentals to me sounds really unprofessional because first I play my exported work, and then open up something like "Jay-Z - Jigga What" or (especially) "Dr Dre - Still D.R.E." ... HUGE difference in volume. This is what bothers me so much. It's not up at the same level as commercial records and I think it really should be! And for me to not complain about my output volume simply because I have to leave headroom for the vocalist? I honestly don't think I should make that consideration. The instrumental should be bumping off the bat, should it not? The vocalist would always have headroom no matter the volume of the beat, I'm pretty sure of that. One thing they do know how to do is set their own acapella's volume properly.
Once again, it's another "trial and error" answer I'm getting on this forum, but I guess I have to accept that ... Always have to find my own way ...
Look, try to understand the process behind making records....
It is unrealistic for you to expect your mix to sound as loud as a commercially produced CD because at the stage in the process you are at, the mix is not supposed to be that loud.
If you listened to the final unmastered mix of any of these songs on a commercially produced CD, they would not sound that loud, either.
...and if you are making a beat which is intended for vocals to be added to it, it
definitely should not be going for that loudness at that point... not only that, but if you want your track really to sound good, the vocals have to be mixed in with the full song as one of the elements of your whole sequence.
Your exported track is just as "loud" as it was when it was in your sequencer before you exported it. You didn't have a problem with it then. You only had an issue with it when you
compared it to songs from CD's. Those songs from CD's are at a different stage than yours. Those are finished and mastered while yours is not.
If your track sounded "loud" to you in your sequencer, it will sound just as "loud" when someone imports your mix into their sequence to sing on it... yours was "loud" because you turned the volume up... they can turn their volume up, too.
So, going on the assumption that your song was written, arranged, produced, recorded, mixed and performed with the same level of professional quality as these songs you are comparing to from CD's-- when your song is completely finished and mixed (it should still not necessarily be "loud") you get is mastered and can go for "loudness".
illapino said:
Wow, well now I feel redundant ............
First off: I HAVE Sent Tracks To A Professional Engineer, And What He Did Wasn't What I Wanted! I Paid this guy (who, yes, does have a diploma in audio engineering)
A "diploma in engineering" means nothing. That does not make someone a good engineer. And is DEFINITELY does not make someone a good mixer. Just like knowing how to use ProTools doesn't make you a good songwriter.
illapino said:
to mix and master several instrumentals for me for, yes, money. He kind of added in his own ideas but I didn't like those ideas, so I'd find myself emailing him back to try again. Besides this artistic tendency of the engineer, he tended to not thoroughly bring out certain frequencies out as much as I wanted. He balanced things out great, but the bass lacked, the strings too thin, and the producer who sent him the material was TOO PICKY.
If these "certain frequencies" were not brought out in the mix, there is a very good chance that the problem is that you did not use good sounds that had those characteristics you wanted in the first place, or you recorded through not-so-good mics/pres, or those "frequencies" were not there in your sounds for him to accentuate, or your arrangement was not so good, or a combination of all those things...
...there is a good chance that the engineer did the bes possible job with what he had to work with. You can't magically turn a weak bass into a huge bass if the bass is weak at its core.
illapino said:
I can't believe I'm explaining this really, it's like arguing with people who Automatically assumed that I've never PAID for a course on Mixing, Recording, and Mastering, or with people who Automatically assumed that I've never PAID someone to mix and master for me, but it's just not going to work with me. I wasted my money on that project and each song of mine that he mixed and mastered, I had something to complain about, so I'm really not happy if it's someone other than ME who's been enlisted to polish my knives. Try another engineer instead? No thanks. I would pay someone all over again to have to also ask him to redo a new set of tracks until they sound "right"to me? No ....
Whether or not you "pay" for something has absolutely nothing to do with the quality of the results you will get.
illapino said:
And I would also like to argue some more about your opinions on how to get that "loud" sound, but I really don't want to. Like I expected, the answer is to pull 5 years of experience in mastering out of me even though I'm much more attuned to creating MUSIC
Well, if you don't want to put that time or effort into the skills required to do these things (so you can simply focus on "creating music") then you can't expect to be able to get the results.
(...and 5 years experience is
nothing... someone with 5 years experience in any part of the music making process would be considered a
beginner)
If you do not want to learn these skills, then send your tracks off to someone who
does have the skills and hope for the best.
illapino said:
... Sure sure, TAj Mahal, not overnight, floor before the roof, yeah yeah. But to say that major labels got the equipment to really give tracks that BIG sound is reigniting an old debate here that kinda went like: "Triton vs VST #1?" ... and another one like "Yamaha Motif ES vs VST #2?" ... Some people disregard the fact that some of the shyt they're hearing right now is completely made with computer software (software mastering effects too ! can you believe how far we've advanced?!). Can you tell the difference. No you can't.
The issue is not "hardware vs software" the issue is knowing how to use the tools you have, regardless of whether they are hardware or software.
If two people are using the exact same gear, one can come out with an amazing song that sounds amazing, and the other can come out with complete garbage.
Focus on the SKILLS.
And, by the way, when you record a Triton or any other piece of hardware, you are recording it through a preamp as well as an A/D converter... just because it is based on a computer chip does not mean it is always equal.
(and there are many other factors like this, too, when making music... but i am just pointing out this one.)
illapino said:
Oh, and I know I've failed to make any rebuttals in regards to other things like room space, and for that you are right so I don't need to address it though I should say that some things are kinda givens when it comes to my knowledge ... I do my homework on the whole post-production process, but I guess it's Time to return to the boards and trial and error some more. And to think. this was all over how to make a track louder just to the point that it doesn't distort ... too much to ask from Allah. Don't worry, i'm not mad at you guys. you've helped lots ..
Actually, you were not asking how to make your tracks louder... you were asking why your tracks were exporting quieter than they were in your sequencer. and why your tracks are quieter than commercial CD's, and how to make them export properly.
That was answered:
Your tracks are not exporting quieter than they are in your sequencer.
They are exporting properly.
A final mix of a track is not supposed to be "loud" at that stage of the process.
)
