Levels too low?

[eeoo]

I got a return for this track today.

https://soundcloud.com/ethan-okamura/youd-better-run-v1

Here's the mini critique: (the recording box was checked)

Name Ethan Okamura Listing # Y130614RK Song Title You'd Better Run
Status: Forward Return

Reasons not Forwarded:
Vocal Performance
Instrumental Performance
Recording


Stylistically Off Target
Music
Lyrics
Other

For a broadcast quality pitch, I felt the levels were a bit too low for use.
Listener ID # 299

What I learn from this is that if the levels were higher it would have been a forward, right? Or am I missing something? Anyway, if you have a sec and could tell me if this not loud enough and therefore not broadcast quality i'd appreciate it. If this is the case then i don't think any of my songs are broadcast quality...

Thanks!

eo

[playagibson]

I master -10 to -9 RMS at peak.
Your mix didn't sound low to me.
Unless your a mastering guru with $$$$$ gear, It's not practical to go any hotter.

Rich.

[andygabrys]

agree with Rich.

whatever this screen heard on this track is not what we are hearing.

Its RMS is -9db at peaking - its certainly hot enough. Its possible that something happened in the upload to TAXI. I would ask for clarification and rescreen, cause this track is hot enough. If it were something else, like the lead vocal wasn't loud enough, then maybe I could understand, but it sounds fine to me that way really too.

[Kolstad]

I usually go for about -9 RMS too, so I'm curious how valid this screening is, and how widely this applies. It is judged as rock, and I understand this is supposed to be loud, but still, are the general expectation now -6 RMS for broadcast quality for film/tv, really. Anyway that would be important to know, if so..

[andygabrys]

I usually go for about -9 RMS too, so I'm curious how valid this screening is, and how widely this applies. It is judged as rock, and I understand this is supposed to be loud, but still, are the general expectation now -6 RMS for broadcast quality for film/tv, really. Anyway that would be important to know, if so..

-6 RMS is the loudest of loud masters at this point. most songs won't even tolerate this amount of limiting.

Most stuff for film is acceptable much lower. like -20 DB RMS or at most -14RMS. And if its peaking near 0 that should be enough.

[eeoo]

I sent a note to headscreener so I'll let you guys know what comes of it.

Thanks for taking the time guys!

eo

[AlpacaRoom]

Ethan, that's a great track ... and if anybody expects masters much hotter than that, we're all in a lot of trouble!

[Kolstad]

I usually go for about -9 RMS too, so I'm curious how valid this screening is, and how widely this applies. It is judged as rock, and I understand this is supposed to be loud, but still, are the general expectation now -6 RMS for broadcast quality for film/tv, really. Anyway that would be important to know, if so..

-6 RMS is the loudest of loud masters at this point. most songs won't even tolerate this amount of limiting.

Most stuff for film is acceptable much lower. like -20 DB RMS or at most -14RMS. And if its peaking near 0 that should be enough.

+1 Yes, that's what I thought I knew too

[allends]

I'm going to bet that the reviewer was reacting to the perceived volume of the track, not the actual RMS. The wave form sure looks hot enough. It will be good to know the answer on this one.

[Casey H]

You sure the screener didn't simply mean the VOCAL level was too low?

Casey