# Levels with K-system



## PepAX7

This is always a good topic since it involves the "Loudness" wars that have been going on since radio waves were transmitted.

I've read Bob Katz's "Mastering Audio" and I respect what he has to say. The K-system is what I've been using (K-20) and my RME has "Totalmix" which interprets the K system well.

When I mixdown to CD, and I take the disc for a ride in my car, it seems that I'm cranking the volume control up more than commercial cd's. Now I'm not going crazy with these rough masters... just some sweetening on the loudness curves and sometimes minor 1.4:1 compression.

I know the beauty of the K system is to do just that (avoiding clipping etc.), but how do you get the level up without sounding like FM radio??

Pep:doh:


----------



## chonc

Maybe K-20 has too much dynamic range for the loudness you try to achieve. Why not use K-14


----------



## DrGeoff

I'd agree, K-20 is good for large dynamic recordings of concert bands and orchestras. I tend towards K-14 for most jazz and rock recordings. If it's totally in-your-face then it gets squished at K-12.
That's where I use the calibration of my trusty VU meter as well for the session.


----------



## PepAX7

Yea, thanks Carlos... I definitely need to study this and try to find a nice compromise between the two extremes.

Pep


----------



## DOMC

I would also look at the k-14 scale - but that being said its not always about the loudness - I find eq has a big part to play in apparent loudness. I would start looking at your levels from a frequency point of view.


----------



## PepAX7

Yes, good point! Like I said, I didn't play with them much as far as EQ. I'm going to try switching to K-14 for mastering to see if that makes a big difference. I've always left my metering on K-20 when I record, so I need to get into the "Mastering" mode and switch my metering when setting final levels.

Thanks for the comments and and other members are welcome to post.

Pep


----------



## spacedout

I always record and mix at K-20, and then reduce my monitor level to K-14 or K-12 for mastering. I use an SM Pro M-Patch 2 monitor controller, and have post-it arrow notes stuck to around the volume knob at each of the K-levels for quick switching.


----------



## ngarjuna

The key to the K-systems is reference. What's your reference in SPL for 0?


----------



## bassman17

With the K-system, the 0 must be referenced to one of the three standards, such as 0dB K14. Which means a signal (pink noise) registering at -14dBFS RMS on a meter that tops out at 0. That's what the FS stands for, Full Scale or all numbers in the digital word are at maximum (all "1"s). So -14 dBFS = 0 dB K-14. Does that make sense? They are all relative. They just determine how much headroom you are giving yourself in the digital dynamic range.

Next, you turn your speakers up to a point where that signal registers a specified dBSPL reading such as 85dBSPL C weighted (deicbels of sound pressure level with C weighting curve applied). Now, mixing at a comfortable volume should yeild a master conforming to the K-14 standard.

But, what if we calibrate our K-14 to 79 dBSPL? You will tend to bring vocals up more in front and make things brighter in the mix. This is more appropriate for home listening. We use this volume for TV mixing for example.

In music mixing and mastering, it is a good idea to have your monitor system calibrated to one of these standards but also allow yourself the ability to turn it up and down from there. The nice thing is to always know what position of the volume knob in your studio conforms to the standard.

I have three markings on my volume control:

K-12
K-14
K-20

That way, I can go to any one of the reference points depending on the material. Mixing a movie, K-20. Music mixing, K-14. Mastering K-12. Modern loud masters are even louder than that and require you to turn your speakers down even further, maybe like a K-8 or so. Now I know Bob Katz would retch in his chair if he heard me recommending a K-8 ref level, but for really loud masters that many clients want, that's the way to go.

I consulted with Bob years ago when the K-system was just coming out and we could only find the one set of meters (Elemental Audio) that could give us accurate RMS readings for K-system referencing. So many meters out there are just plain random and not calibrated to any standard. Watch out! :sneeky:

-Ashley


----------



## PepAX7

Yea, I did the same procedure for K-20...88db pink C-weight... control room monitor knob at center detent 12 o'clock. 

Guess I need to do that for the other K levels. Great info, bassman!

Also, I went through my entire signal chain with trusty Tektronik scope and Fluke meter. Sine wave in at several freqs... drove each module (mixboard, EQ, crossover, until evidence of clipping on output. Record Vrms.. convert to dbu and dbv. Determines max in w/sine. This helped me to find "weakest link" and adjust gains of each module for max S/N and allowing for K headroom.

Your right about Bob katz and K-8!:yikes:

Keep it coming everyone.

Pep


----------



## DrGeoff

You only need to use the pink noise source and SPL reading (should be 85dB SPL) for the K-20 calibration. From here you just need to insert an attenuator to get the other settings. A 6dB attenuation of your monitor signal will be K-14, which effectively means you will need to create a mix 6dB 'louder' to get the same SPL.


----------



## PepAX7

OK.. I'll see if I can make that happen w/85db.

Thanks!:T


----------



## ggidluck

I use K-20 for audio going to DVD, but K-14 for CD's. 

One very useful tool I that use is the Sonoris meter available from sonoris dot nl. Your DAW software must support VST plugins to use this. It adheres to the K-system and has a built in bandwidth limited pink noise generator so that you can calibrate your playback level anytime for left/right/both channels. It also has a detector for intersample overs.


----------



## chonc

bassman17 said:


> I consulted with Bob years ago when the K-system was just coming out and we could only find the one set of meters (Elemental Audio) that could give us accurate RMS readings for K-system referencing. So many meters out there are just plain random and not calibrated to any standard. Watch out! :sneeky:
> 
> -Ashley


Great info! thanks!

Do you have a list of meters you would recommend?


----------



## DOMC

gswan said:


> You only need to use the pink noise source and SPL reading (should be 85dB SPL) for the K-20 calibration. From here you just need to insert an attenuator to get the other settings. A 6dB attenuation of your monitor signal will be K-14, which effectively means you will need to create a mix 6dB 'louder' to get the same SPL.


I find the 85db a bit loud for me


----------



## ngarjuna

I don't recall if it was in the book or on the digido materials but somewhere Bob Katz explains that for small rooms 83-85dB could be too loud.


----------



## PepAX7

I was doing 88db and was comfortable:huh:

But then, I've been playin' electric guitar forever.

There ya' go though.. everyone's ears and perceptions are different. I like to listen loud 88-92db on average.. even chamber music and classical. 

I believe the 85db standard was set by the SMPTE guys for an average user home listening environ. Correct me if I'm wrong. I can live with that.

I've been to classical concerts, acoustic unplugged things and the average loudness was about 88-95db and I was comfortable. Some crescendos were more but I love dynamics so...

Good stuff!


----------



## ngarjuna

83-85dB originates in the film industry; I'd have to look up the exact origin, Katz covers it in the Mastering book with some detail. But I believe it is the SPL calibration that is used pretty much as a standard for theatrical mixes not home theaters (although it could be used in home theaters now too, I have no idea). I'm taking Bob's word for this, it's not my niche.

Someone here may know better but I was under the impression that 83dB is the point at which prolonged exposure starts to cause permanent damage at certain audible frequencies (I have seen other studies which say 85 and others which say 90). But I can understand how years of guitar amps could require higher settings. Personally, if there's a debate between 83-90, I'm going to be conservative in an attempt to maintain every tiny bit of hearing potential I have left.

But that said professional engineers seem to have widely varying preferences in terms of the levels they mix at. 85-90, while out of the question for me and my preferences, might not be out of the question for a lot of others, especially in nice rooms with a decent size.

It's not true to the K-system spec, but I had to modify my calibration somewhat because:
-my room treatment is not sufficient (yet)
-my room is pretty small
-I am one of those engineers who prefers mixing at lower levels

So what I did was:
-calibrate my monitor controller (and mark) for 1dB increments from say 88 down to 65
-figure out which notch on the controller was the preferred setting using finished, mastered productions (not my own, stuff that's on my 'all time best production' list)
-compensate 3dB for the headroom I like to leave (so that what I hear is 3dB louder than the preferred setting for finished masters)

It's not a true K-system calibration but the point is similar: using the reference point of my preferred calibration setting every time as 0 and scaling the dynamics to only peak above that comfortable zero point (not to live there).


----------



## PepAX7

That's a great reply! We, as "Sound" people, need to be aware of everything that would affect the mix or the master. Ear fatigue is a major factor. I can't go much more than 45min-1 hour without taking a break.

And bottom line, I don't mix at that 88-92 level that much. It's too nerve wracking to me, especially when setting the DAW up and watching levels, etc. Out of that hour, I'll bet I'm averaging about 80-83db.

When I listen to what I've captured, that's when I'll dim the lights or close my eyes and just listen in that 85-92db range.

As far as damaging the ear... those ratings are over time... it's a time weighted average. Take a 10-15 minute break with quiet. My ears reset pretty quick.

And yea... we all face the time thing in age. I used to hear the horizontal flyback freq on my Aunts TV. I start to drop off at about 10KHz now. Good metering is important to me! I still hear and enjoy all music very much.:T


----------



## ggidluck

I like to listen and work at under 80 decibels most of the time. When making critical eq decisions I listen at a louder level where peaks reach about 85db, but I try not to listen at a loud level for very long at a time.

Ngarjuna mentioned lower levels for home listening. For home theatre, the listening level was recommended by Dolby to be 6db lower (ie. 79 db) because of the smaller room. Bob Katz explains this in his document "An Integrated Approach to Metering, Monitoring, and Levelling Practices".

edit: here is the link http://www.aes.org/technical/documentDownloads.cfm?docID=65


----------



## ggidluck

From http://www.nidcd.nih.gov/health/hearing/ruler.asp

110 Decibels: Regular exposure of more than 1 minute risks permanent hearing loss.
100 Decibels: No more than 15 minutes of unprotected exposure recommended.
85 Decibels: Prolonged exposure to any noise at or above 85 decibels can cause gradual hearing loss.


----------



## fractile

As mentioned at the beginning of this thread, the K-System is something Bob Katz came up with in response to the never-ending loudness wars, particularly in digital audio, with its infinite headroom and zero noise :rofl: Having run out of bits, they now intentionally drive things way into distortion to give the effect of loudness.

To add an additional point, the K-system is a means of retrieving a reference frame for apparent loudness, given the chaos these days. There are handles in digital audio to have dynamic control of loudness at broadcast and home points. Yet I think the production people need to get a handle on this at the beginning of the chain. Otherwise we would lose some responsible ability to have honest control over the dynamic sound levels.:scratchchin:


----------



## bassman17

chonc said:


> Great info! thanks!
> 
> Do you have a list of meters you would recommend?


The elemental stuff was bought out by Roger Nichols some time ago. The basic meter is free and the pro package can be found at:

http://www.rndigital.com/inspectorXL.html

The basic free one:

http://www.kaosaudio.com/roger-nichols-digital-inspector-free/


-ashley


----------



## PepAX7

Thank you for that, Bassman. I will download and check it out.

Pep


----------



## cdavis6406

Hi guys,

First and foremost, youll never ever get a "Mastering" quality sound without being a Mastering Engineer with a Mastering Facility +\- Years of exp. in sound mastering. Postproduction, Film, Audio whatever.

You can through a verrrrrrrrry select signal path with software/hardware inserts and painfully structured gain staging, acheive something close to the percieved loudness of something out of a Mastering House. However the end result will be degraded in quality compared to the Mastered tracks.

IF you could shoot me a synopsis of your rig, listening enviroment, DAW, and so on. I'm sure I can help you eek a few db out of the mix, along with some of the percieved loudness you want.

That being said, just throwing another compressor on it will give you loudness, but in turn squash the dynamics and have the reverse effect on the perceived loudness, even though your mix isnt clipping, or the RMS is rideing -.3 or so below unity.


----------



## ngarjuna

cdavis6406 said:


> Hi guys,
> 
> First and foremost, youll never ever get a "Mastering" quality sound without being a Mastering Engineer with a Mastering Facility +\- Years of exp. in sound mastering. Postproduction, Film, Audio whatever.
> 
> You can through a verrrrrrrrry select signal path with software/hardware inserts and painfully structured gain staging, acheive something close to the percieved loudness of something out of a Mastering House. However the end result will be degraded in quality compared to the Mastered tracks.
> 
> IF you could shoot me a synopsis of your rig, listening enviroment, DAW, and so on. I'm sure I can help you eek a few db out of the mix, along with some of the percieved loudness you want.
> 
> That being said, just throwing another compressor on it will give you loudness, but in turn squash the dynamics and have the reverse effect on the perceived loudness, even though your mix isnt clipping, or the RMS is rideing -.3 or so below unity.


I'm not sure what this specifically has to do with the K-system, but yeah a trained mastering engineer is going to produce better sounding masters than a non-mastering engineer with a limiter. Just like a trained (and well equipped) mixing engineer will create better mixes than a layman and a well-practiced (and well equipped) guitarist will play better guitar tracks than someone who isn't.

There's nothing mystical about mastering, it takes specialized equipment and practice just like everything else.


----------



## cdavis6406

ngarjuna said:


> I'm not sure what this specifically has to do with the K-system, but yeah a trained mastering engineer is going to produce better sounding masters than a non-mastering engineer with a limiter. Just like a trained (and well equipped) mixing engineer will create better mixes than a layman and a well-practiced (and well equipped) guitarist will play better guitar tracks than someone who isn't.
> 
> There's nothing mystical about mastering, it takes specialized equipment and practice just like everything else.


What it has to do with the K- System is this. Now where does the style of metering K- or other wise has to do with the loudness of your Mix. Its about RMS and peak, what ever peak your using. THat equates to dynamics/RMS for the whole track. And if your talking about occasionally going over 0bd at unity, its clipping by the way.

So yea the K has nothing to do at all with your "Mastering" not sounding the way you want. You already said what it is.

"-my room treatment is not sufficient (yet)
-my room is pretty small
-I am one of those engineers who prefers mixing at lower levels"

If this is the case then you can meter with a mercury thermometer and its wont make a difference. If your room is small, then youre doing right mixing at lower levels, it reduces some of the effects of the room. 

And also now alot of folks are "Mastering" their own music. Thats what they call it. But its not. There is a miss conception that you have to have it Mastered, or wow the mix sounds pretty good, but it needs mastering. Look here if the mix dont stand up on its own, Mastering wont do a damnd thing to improve it. The goal is to get your mixes great. If thats what your doing.


----------



## ngarjuna

cdavis6406 said:


> What it has to do with the K- System is this. Now where does the style of metering K- or other wise has to do with the loudness of your Mix. Its about RMS and peak, what ever peak your using. THat equates to dynamics/RMS for the whole track. And if your talking about occasionally going over 0bd at unity, its clipping by the way.
> 
> So yea the K has nothing to do at all with your "Mastering" not sounding the way you want. You already said what it is.
> 
> "-my room treatment is not sufficient (yet)
> -my room is pretty small
> -I am one of those engineers who prefers mixing at lower levels"
> 
> If this is the case then you can meter with a mercury thermometer and its wont make a difference. If your room is small, then youre doing right mixing at lower levels, it reduces some of the effects of the room.
> 
> And also now alot of folks are "Mastering" their own music. Thats what they call it. But its not. There is a miss conception that you have to have it Mastered, or wow the mix sounds pretty good, but it needs mastering. Look here if the mix dont stand up on its own, Mastering wont do a damnd thing to improve it. The goal is to get your mixes great. If thats what your doing.


Ah I don't master anything. I realize this is the Mastering forum, but I utilize the K-system for mixing. Frankly neither my listening chain nor most of my tools are designed for mastering, it's not really what I do.

I always thought mastering your own mixes is kind of a conflict of interest anyway: if the mix is perfect, what would you do to make it better? but if it's not perfect, why did you 'finish' the mix and start mastering it? So no, I'm not speaking on behalf of self-mastering or mastering on mixing equipment if that's what you're thinking.


----------



## PepAX7

Cdavis,

Please keep in mind, this is a forum to advance the "art" by sharing techniques and methodology with others, no matter what "mastering" level we're on. We are very much interested in your opinions and equipment/environ you "master" in. 

My original problem situation was pretty much this.... I needed to burn a CD of the recording session of a band, about 20 tracks 96k/24 for the leader of the band. Just the raw mix with no fancy level settings or sweetening. I use K-20 system to record. No problem, done in a few minutes.

Next day, the band leader was commenting on how much he had to crank his volume control, in his car, to get a good feel of the mix. He said it just didn't punch like his re-mastered Jeff Beck "Blow by Blow" CD. 

So in wanting to serve him well, I contemplated......

Have a go at it!

Pep


----------



## fractile

In the April EQ Magazine is the article, Mastering Master Class by Craig Anderton. He mentions "micro-mastering" in an example of a song with a dozen peaks between -2 and 0dB, reduces those peaks by 2dB, then normalizes the whole thing 2dB higher. He could then maximize by 4dB instead of 6dB.


----------



## ngarjuna

PepAX7 said:


> Cdavis,
> 
> Please keep in mind, this is a forum to advance the "art" by sharing techniques and methodology with others, no matter what "mastering" level we're on. We are very much interested in your opinions and equipment/environ you "master" in.
> 
> My original problem situation was pretty much this.... I needed to burn a CD of the recording session of a band, about 20 tracks 96k/24 for the leader of the band. Just the raw mix with no fancy level settings or sweetening. I use K-20 system to record. No problem, done in a few minutes.
> 
> Next day, the band leader was commenting on how much he had to crank his volume control, in his car, to get a good feel of the mix. He said it just didn't punch like his re-mastered Jeff Beck "Blow by Blow" CD.
> 
> So in wanting to serve him well, I contemplated......
> 
> Have a go at it!
> 
> Pep


I am not familiar with the Beck remaster in question but I would wonder if it's any good (in terms of being overly squashed or not). If the band leader is comparing an unmastered mixdown to a very loud and/or curshed master that's not really a great comparison. There are many albums that kick you in the chest when they start up but it's not often such a great sound is the tradeoff (hence the K-system!).

When my clients start bugging me for mastered level material I try to find them a good mastering engineer. As CDavis said a limiter on the 2-buss is not mastering.

I think now I understand what CDavis is getting at in this thread (and I agree): it's not the K-system that makes a non-mastering engineer produce tracks that don't really cut it as masters, it's a lack of mastering experience (and possibly equipment). Take a look at Bob Katz's honor roll albums. Of the ones I'm familiar with I don't think any of them are "too soft" or uncompetitive commercially; unless you consider commercially competitive to be exclusively in the range of Death Magnetic in which case the K-system is probably not for you (since you mix at K-20 I'm guessing this is not your opinion).


----------



## cdavis6406

PepAX7 said:


> Cdavis,
> 
> Please keep in mind, this is a forum to advance the "art" by sharing techniques and methodology with others, no matter what "mastering" level we're on. We are very much interested in your opinions and equipment/environ you "master" in.
> 
> Pep


Hey fellas how it going,

Hey PepAx and others, if anyone here thinks I'm ever being anything but cordial dont. Im about sharing knowledge with other guys that like doing this kind of thing. Its pretty damnd fun. And I understand what the poster was saying I know been there. Thats what I was conveying on the org post. 
#25
http://www.proaudioshack.com/forums/mastering/27960-levels-k-system-3.html#post257499

So as far as equip. and environ, I think I need do update my info, Im just lazy after I get home.

As far as "Pro Audio" scene goes I dont name drop and soforth, on the forums its tacky,(however on a couple forums, Ive made a few really good friends, as well as, business contacts there. And as for my environs, im located dead between Muscle Shoals, Al., and Nashville Tennesee, and have been in the southeastern scene (part-time, ha, ha) since the early 90's, and have been a practicing muscian since '87. So as you can imagine ive had a few things fall in my lap from time to time. Some times things just happen ya know.

The other half the time I manage a family owned horse farm the breeds Jumpers. So thats why im lazy this week, "Spring".

The equipment I use varies between home and work(not the farm,). Lets just say Im either using it at one or the other, or another at a hosts facility, or in the past. Man I use to go through gear like shoes, eventually It was just a hastle to learn new gear all the time. Guess I always thought I needed it. But after years of GAS, now I know what gets the job done best for me, sometimes its expensive, but you be real surprised some of the gear I, and some of the friends in the industry really use. Alot of the time its a go to.

So ngarjuna, if ya want my honest opinion refer to the post 
#25
http://www.proaudioshack.com/forums/mastering/27960-levels-k-system-3.html#post257499
I can probably help you get closer to the sweet spot. If it works then lets us know. If you try what ever I suggest and find a tweak or twist of your own, that is cool or makes it better, in the process, then especially lets us know.

Thats why I even post, sharing knowledge, 2 sets of ears are better than one they say, here we have 100's of sets of ears!

May want to have a sticky at the begging to post equip/DAW atleast when presenting questions.:devil:

Play on Gentlemen:T


----------



## DOMC

cdavis6406 said:


> Hey fellas how it going,
> 
> Hey PepAx and others, if anyone here thinks I'm ever being anything but cordial dont. Im about sharing knowledge with other guys that like doing this kind of thing. Its pretty damnd fun.


It sure is and we appreciate everyone here chipping in their opinions


----------



## DOMC

speaking of K-Levels. I use a few different things to monitor my levels. First one being a pre set level for my speakers - I know when they are a certain level (just by feel) then I am close to my calibrated system...the whole pink noise thing and comparison with current market trends. the other thing I use is digicheck from RME (only for RME systems). But lately I have been hearing some things that push K systems into the red a lot..some sound bad and tiring...some sound open and lush and nice. go figure - its all subjective.


----------



## PepAX7

Ok, CDavis... just wanted to be sure where you were coming from.. and yes, it is a lot of fun to bounce ideas off one another.

In this case I was using Sonar. And again, this was just a dump of tracks to CD for evaluation... not a mix to master. I like the C. Anderton thing, which I will try, but I dislike normalizing entire mixes.. but it may be the way to go in this case.

Yes, I too use RME and TotalMix. It's a great piece of code and have checked it out with scope and voltmeter and other plugins... I trust it! 

I read Bob Katz's book and really applied it in the control room. I even went so far as to measure the clip voltage of all components in the signal chain, insuring 20dB headroom throughout. It has really helped my mixes and has shown me the problem child in my signal chain, which I replaced.

So... what'd ya think. Should I soft knee compress the thing 8:1 and call it a day?:coocoo:
And again... I'm not mastering... I'm... pseudo mastering.:bigsmile:

Pep


----------



## cdavis6406

Nah dont worry about none of it.
First let me say this with great affection, because I have a good many friends the I refer to as "Meter Readers" and they me as Fet for brains. Usually Ill end a job after the eqing, comping and crying by turning off the computer monitors and using the board. I know my system and if its peaking I usually hear it. If not Ill see it clipped when I turn them back on, find it quickly fix that and the mix sounds good to me. I use to get really hung up on what the meters, and freq scopes were saying. I got ODC after a while. I will say dont worry about the K- or what ever. Mix in the default output format of the DAW. Theyre calibrate in the architecture of the internal bussin structrure to clip at unity. You know when that happens it goes strait to CD, Master whatever clipped. You can kind of patch it but its still just patching it. Calibrate your room, monitoring chain, set it then forget about it. Listen.

Leave atleast -.3 below unity on a hot mix to avoid clipping it.
When trying to get a punchier and or hotter mix, the K- or anything else changes your arbitrary perception of headroom. Its still gonna clip at the same unity. Mr Katz, as is mentioned alot here I noticed, mixes to and around a different crowd, style, genre, than most everybody. But if RCA sends him an album and wants it loud. Guess what, its loud, despite his personal preference. Its his business..

I would start on the track or stem level if thats possibility, HF some lows and rethink carving some EQ of parts around each other. Usually mixes have alot of freqs that are there that you will never hear anyway and clouds the mix. And adds RMS, reducing overall audible output, and percieved loundess.

Try to even out the dynamix on th drum mix, unless it jazz, or the like. Check the low Freqs they are the worst. So forth. Create a more efficent mix, oh and dont loose the scope of the product in the process. thats what we all shoot for.

As far as normalizing and so forth. It will work. not very effeciently because if you take a track with an average of say -8 db below unity. You want it to peak at say -6db then you normalize it +2db. You could have done that by pushing the fader up 2 db. Same thing.

Noramlized individual separated hits on a snare track to within +/- 1db of a target db say -12db at unity.
Then all the hits will be between -11 and -13 db. Then you are really tackling wrestling more headroom out of the mix. This was just an arbitraty example , you get the point.

Then on the 2 buss if your mix is riding around -8 to -3 db its okay, its probably loud, then you can start eeking out the volume and RMS with compression, limiting, eq, saturate, etc.

Most of my mixes have AC1 or similar flavor, with what i call more of an analog reaction to the audio, slow attach, med recover, gain to taste.
then a compressor, flavor depends on the source, maybe a couple, before or after eqs, some compressors work really nice but rob you u of the highs, post eq em. Little shorter attacks or longer release, but sometimes its the opposite depending on the source material.

Maybe some M/S compression if the center dense.

Like waves Maxx Volume for a quick and dirty end limiter. But many work.

Usually though I prefer, to get the mix good with out any master buss plugs, except to keep my end result in focus. Turn em off then bounce, render stems.

Take stems and then sort of stem master em, plugs or analog. I use Seqouia, its summing sound great. Dosent matter why, THD, 32fp, what ever it sounds musical. Analog.

Stem mixing lets you manipulate the mix and wrench on it a little more than normal, and its a little more forgiving in the stereo field. But works with any Daw im sure. I just like it.

When you start compressin on the 2, you hear your problem areas first they react poorly to it first.

Say the drum buss getss mushy at a certain amount of 2 buss compression first. I know to lower the volume of the drums stem(with adjusting the compression output or fader on that stem), but have to bring the mids highs up and also create a bit more attack. That will usually fix it. Give you a .5 to -1 db or 2, depends. When applied this to every track you can see where this will lead. Then something else will give, deal with that one, and so on. Untill Im happy with the overall mix, sound, volume, dynamics..........

.......and the customer.
Lets face it the customer is always right, even when he's wrong! Especially when he,s wrong.!
I will stipulate for me this is directley proportionate to the size of the check. 

Play on Gentlmen:devil:



Then


----------



## ngarjuna

Interestingly, one of the key points of the K-system is specifically to free the user from meter reading. The whole calibration is setup so that it will start to sound "too loud" (and/or make you reach for compression) when you're exceeding the headroom it is supposed to allow for. The connection to metering is that you need to get a feel for the K-system if you're new to it, so the meters help you judge/understand where you're at in this paradigm but K-mixing is not supposed to be a metering-intensive style.

There is no question that the K-system is not for everyone; there are plenty of musicians and mixing engineers who want it hotter and flatter than a K-system masterer is going to want to push it. At that point, for most of us, we have to give the customer what he or she wants. It's not worth trying to talk someone into something they don't want; they may be satisfied in the short term but it's something that will always bother them about that piece, and they'll remember that the next time they're looking for an engineer.

That said there are still plenty of musicians and engineers who are not so crazy about hot and flat and are looking for a more dynamic (at the expense of LOUWD!) master. Those are the kinds of people who seek out Bob Katz. I seriously doubt Metallica will be submitting their albums for him to master. But I doubt Bob Katz, whose name is legendary in the pro audio community, is forced to take any client he doesn't want to. There are plenty of engineers who won't get involved in the loudness wars and I'd say Bob Katz is probably on the top of that pile. To say that it isn't commercially viable is silly, there are numerous commercially viable (as in sell copies) albums which present more dynamics than the 'average' 2000s era CD. Check out the new Beatles remasters, they sold 2.25 million copies in the first 2 weeks they were available. Sure, it's the Beatles, you could probably press them onto cow patties and people would buy it, but that just proves the point: you don't need to crush to be commercially viable.


----------



## cdavis6406

Indeed your correct. Hendrix' early stuff sounded like do-do, Technically, but those notes were sweet.
Youd also be surprised about how many paying customers, in the rock genre, for instance are half deaf, anyway.

Man I finished a album for a band of regional flavor, me and the Vocalist were listening to it and shooting the bull , this guy says, "Hey you mind if I use the Headphones". I said what!!!!, your listening to a 750w roughly of nearfield monitoring, and had the levels to were I was a little uncomfortable listening,(short term anyway). 

He couldnt hear it well!!!! Man when I realized this and it was kind of sad, and explained why their last album in my opinion sounded like dog terds, and they paid for that.$$$$$? They didnt hear well enough to tell that the mix was and they got ripped off, the only thing it was, was loud. I wonder how they even play. AND STILL NO HEARING PROTECTION. Can you believe it.

Him and the guitarist cant hear it that well, the guitarist is tone deaf over the 3K mark. I had to tell him look man, your deaf and better stick with someone thats you know is going to do you right, because you dont know what it really sounds like. And try to make it as unoffenessive as possible.

Sticky situation. But you get it, and the Metallica stuff mannnnnn. Squish. And Ive enjoyed them from time to time. But a majority of their clientel are loud listeners, or kid muscians. They(band) and fans are mostly bashers, and problably a little tone deaf. "Mann you know its got to be loud". Bunk I say.

Most home or hobbiest will never get it too loud without killing the whole track anyway. Never heard ANR demos, or mixed a session tracked some where else that made me say thats too Loud. Ive gotten a couple and wouldnt mix it cause the tracking guys thought they would take it on them selves to "spice it up a bit". I listen to it and tell them if you want me to mix it bring me the orig tracks/takes.

And I know all about Mr. Katz, and the K system. Hes an Icon in his own right. The K system does what he set out for it to do very well. On the same note, he hears the sweet spot long before he looks at a meter anyway, and checks them visually as a system of double redundancy. If you learn that sweet spot, it wont matter what the metering system is. Or if your mixing at a guest facility, you wont have to worry about getting the levels right because their using a different system. 

The headroom and output meter system will range wildly from PTLS HD to SAW to Sequoia ot between Logic and Nuendo. So i allways suggest in addition to using a K system, learn that same sweet spot on the DAW's default metering system.

On the horse farm I know how to use the combine, bushog, bobcat and the weed eater. Hamer, saw, chainsaw, and a backhoe. What ever gets the job done.

Ive got to higher some more help their I think. Getting to old to play cowboy.

Its like the meter system in a Bell ranger heli is way better than a cessna 182. But its still lift and drag. And when flying youd better know both, depending on what your flying. But no matter what the gauges say when the aircraft is out of lift you fall. Same thing when the mix is out of lift it aint getting no better. But if im flying the Helo, to the Cessna gauges im at 12k ft, I still have another 6 or 8 k to go but never know it. Ive created that artificial ceiling. Which is okay too, untill I broad side a mountain.


Like crossing a railroad track Stop, Look, Then Listen.

:devil:


----------



## PepAX7

CDavis,

Hey, thanks man for that detailed post, much appreciated. I agree with it all... especially the part about using the two best analyzers one has... YOUR EARS!! Now granted, you've got to give in to the hi-freq roll off as we age, but with our equipment, we can come close to determining that. Your right, some guys are really deaf and its sad. I been to a few concerts here in the Philadelphia area and most of the time, I sit and wonder if the FOH guy has any ears at all! The highs are rippin' my ears out and the lows are makin' it hard to breathe. I started to question whether I was losing hearing. Then I took my daughters to a Carrie Underwood concert a few years back, at the fair grounds here in Delaware, and the sound was fantastic! Same thing with the Indiana Jones show at Disney. Fantastic sound in surround no less. Brought my confidence back.

I mean, this mix sounds great in my control room on the calibrated K-20 system. It could be what my DAW does to it when down converting to 44/16. Maybe I need to do some of your tricks before I burn it. I was lookin' for something quick and dirty and I'm gonna see if there are some options in Sonar to mess with that are quick.

Thanks everyone for your comments... they are well received... and what this "shack" is all about.:T

Off to burn the midnight lamp...

Pep


----------



## ngarjuna

Pep:

If you're using K-20, then it makes perfect sense why it's sounding a lot less loud than a lot of commercial CDs which, in the end, would probably be somewhere around a K-8 (or worse). In other words: you're aiming average unity at -20dBFS and they probably have it crushed so that average unity is at about -8dBFS. That's a fairly sizable difference.

The question you have to ask yourself is: what's the CD for? If it's just for personal listening and what not, then sure, crank it to whatever volume you want it. But if it's for reference listening, like to check your mix, I'm thinking you want to leave it alone and just turn up the volume knob. There's no way you're going to make up for more than 10dB average without altering your mix. If this is a final master (you're actually doing the mastering) and you are happy with the mix and just need level adjustment, that's when you break out the compression. But a K-20 premaster really shouldn't be level-competitive with a K-12+ finished master, that totally makes sense.


----------



## cdavis6406

Heres a comment from Mr Katz, form one of my other forums.

"If it's a true K-System meter and connected digitally you can watch it instead of the Nuendo meters. As a ROUGH guide, you're using the averaging meter of the K-System like a VU meter, so on loud passages it could hit 0 dB, and on fortissimo passages it could high as high as +4. When it's hitting above 0 dB, glance at the peak section and see if it's overloading. If it is, then either back down, and consider using more compression if it helps the SOUND you're going for, OR mix to a K-20 and let the mastering engineer take care of the loudness.

BK"

I didnt know if I could post a link to another forum here so check it on gearlutz.

But even he saying it can be used as a ROUGH guide and it does depend on the sound your going for.

ngarjuna is right. in his last post also. If you want it louder then the K-20 will give you good volume at your system, but wont be as loud as compared to a commercially mastered mix.

That being said if its not going to be mastered and the tracks need to be louder for a customer or friend etc., Then at times you have to abandon the K system for that particular moment and just go for loud. As painful as that is. That K-20 will leave a ton of headroom for the mastering engineer to work with. Thats why its so good to mix to. A mastering engineer can work wonders on a mix that is far from hot. But if you send on thats hot and close clipping then theres not much to be done to it.

If its being mastered by a master then


Bob Katz,
"For highest sound quality, use K-20 while mixing and save K-14 for the calibrated mastering suite. ...Using K-20 during mix encourages a clean-sounding mix that's advantageous to the mastering engineer. At that point, the producer and mastering engineer should discuss whether the program should be converted to K-14, or remainat K-20"

If its not then let your ears decide.


----------



## Hitmaker

Hi guys , 

Some comments on the K system ... Firstly ... contrary to some of the thinking here ... it's not about headroom ... it's about crest factor ... that is .. difference between average RMS ... and absolute peak . In mastering .. that peak is likely to be ~ -0.3 dB ... but the average RMS will vary ... dependent on the compression/limiting used ... And that's why an RMS meter is used ....
I would say K-20 would be a fairly quiet mix ... Many of the final mixes I get to work .. come in at ~ -17 dB ...
The 83 - 85 dB reference is to create a standard of listening level ... as -83 dB has been in the film industry for years ... It may be loud to some ... but .. remember ... that's the level at 0 dBFS ... ( digital ) .. you'll only get that hot on the peaks .... and that's deliberate ... to discourage excessive listening levels ... Another important point .... at SPLs of ~ 85 dB ... your ear is giving you the most 'flat' .. as in accurate .. rendition of what's in the air .... Check out Fletcher-Munson curves for a visual on that ...

Cheers , 

Evan .


----------



## PepAX7

Nice post, Hitmaker! I like the crest factor thinking also.

I'm using RME and they have metering for K-14, which I think I'll use to make rough mixes for evaluation purposes.

Thanks for your expertise!

P.S. Nice referral to the Fletcher Munson curves.:T

Pep


----------



## Hitmaker

Hi Pep , 

Taa for the kind words ... I thought it helpful to clarify some of the 'wooly' thoughts ... though the confusion with headroom ... is somewhat understandable .. in that Bob Katz is a keen advocate of being conservative in that ... as well as average volume ... Note ... he's measuring the average RMS .. in that this is the electrical measurement that most closely equates to perceived volume ...
Regards how loud you'll hear it at various K system values ... at K-20 .. your average volume , presuming your listening volume IS calibrated to 0 dBFS = 85 dB SPL .. would be ~ 65 dB SPL ( 85 - 20 ) ... which isn't uncomfortable at all ... K-14 would be 71 dB SPL ... etc .
Many of the posts are referring to mixing levels ( interesting for a mastering thread ...:laugh: ) ... so what we're talking is how much compression you're using ... Acoustic/orchestral music is unlikely to use much .. hence the larger dynamics ( crest factor ) .. and pop/rock is likely to have compression on drums/bass .. vox ... ( at least :gulp: ) ... so a higher K value is appropriate ...
I guess the bottom line is 1) ... calibrate your 0 dBFS to ~ 85 dB SPL ... and stick to it ( or at least know exactly what amp setting achieves it ... It is a factor of your monitoring chain ) ... and 2) keep an eye on your crest factor ... My thoughts are that slavishly sticking to a certain K value for a certain genre is overly pedantic ( mixing is an artistic interpretation ) ... but be aware of how dynamic your mix is ... compared to material of similar genre ... ( bearing in mind that what you hear commercially will be more compressed than the final mix it is crafted from ) ... In the current clime , with historically huge reductions in crest factor being requested at mastering , I suggest keep your mix as dynamic as taste permits ... and leave room for the ME to use his superior compression/limiting .. 

Cheers , 

Evan .


----------



## Hitmaker

Me again !!!!

Here's a link to some fairly technical thoughts on this subject ...

http://www.moultonlabs.com/more/about_playback_and_mixing_levels_levels_management_ii/P0/

Enjoy ...

Evan .


----------



## PepAX7

Thanks again, Hitmaker!

Looks like an interesting article and website.

Stay in touch.

Pep


----------

