TAXI.com

Hello,

I used some volume measuring tools on one of my tracks and got it down to what I read was an industry standard for broadcasting -23 LUFS. There were 3 different measurements like True Peak, Integrated Loudness and Loudness range

Anyways, after carefully measuring my mix so all lights were green on the volume front, I get the feedback from a taxi screener that this mix is to low and that it should be close to peaking at it's highest.

I'm confused as to how important this LUFS measuring thing is. Should I care about it at all, or should I do like the taxi screener said and just let it be close to peaking at it's highest? How much importance will the producers or poeple behind video games put in when they hear your track in regards to volume and RMS standards? If I put my songs in some library, should I be concerned that my songs meet the industry standards for RMS at all?

Cheers, Michael

Good question. It does matter a lot in getting your piece heard with the same seriousness as all other contenders.

Unfortunately, its also been asked a number of times on this forum, with sometimes lively debate following the original post. You might be able to search and find some other answers. Perhaps the Admin would consider a sticky to paste the answers at the top of this subsection of the forum.

As I understand it - the short version is this:

There is a standard for "broadcast" which incorporates dialogue, SFX, and music. That is the standard to which you refer - 23 LUFS. And yes, there is the peak loudness (the loudest instantaneous points of the broadcast), integrated loudness (time weighted average) and loudness range (somewhat analogous to crest factor or the difference between peak and average loudness).

But that is all for an integrated Program. Dialogue, Music, and SFX as its mixed to go on TV or movie screen.

I think its understandable that because of the non-continuous nature of dialogue and SFX that those might be made louder than music that is continuous wallpaper and there is also the issue of actually hearing the dialogue over the music.


Since music is only one part of this total , and can be either made softer or possibly made louder in Post, it doesn't really at all relate to the level of the music. With one exception - if its a concert DVD of some band like the Rolling Stones where 95% of the program is music, then the music itself will be level so that it fits in the LUFS specs as you posted above. Chances are though, that this concert DVD is going to be less "loud" than a CD of the same band off your bookshelf or from your iTunes library.

Therefore, the only measurement or impression that matters is how your track stacks up against other music that would be considered for the same use. If that music is peaking just below digital 0.0 dB and has an RMS average value of say -10 dB, then that is your reference. Make it like that and you won't get comments about it being too quiet.

One other thing to note: a lot of online streaming type sources for music like Spotify, YouTube etc do already employ a kind of volume matching so that music that is limited very loud to the ear appears at approximately the same volume as other music that might be less loud to the ear. You can hear the differences between tunes on YouTube and on iTunes (iTunes will be louder to the ear as long as Soundcheck isn't turned on in iTunes preferences).

Hope that perspective helps.

RMS, true peak, are different than loudness or "LUFS"

Loudness uses frequency in it's equation, see "Fletcher-Munson Curve"

For example, if you took an eq, and made a drastic cut at about 2-3khz, that should influence the loudness meter, and allow you to turn up the volume and still be within the "loudness standard". The meters only tell you what you have, not the optimization of how it should sound, if that makes any sense.

Let's say you have a vocal track that has an "over abundant" frequency at 2.5Khz. You will turn it down because you probably can't stand the piercing quality, however, you won't hear the non-peaking frequencies as well. The solution is to cut the vocal track at 2.5khz. Now you can turn up the volume, lose the piercing and hear the whole vocal.

The practical solution is to listen to a few cd's on your daw computer, then keep the same volume knob position while mixing your track. Instead of moving the volume knob, you adjust the tracks with track volume, eq, compression... within the daw to optimize the mix to the stationary volume knob.

Here's a good article on the subject;
http://transom.org/2015/the-audio-produ ... -loudness/

Personally I wouldn't be concerned with broadcaster's standards, unless you are a broadcaster,lol, because how the end user uses your compositions is beyond your control anyway as far as how loud or not. If they help you in mixing, by all means use them.

The best mix is going to be achieved by mixing to a reference. And imo, part of that reference is the volume mark where most of your reference cd's sound their best, along with the same reference components you listen to them on.

Len911 wrote:RMS, true peak, are different than loudness or "LUFS"

The best mix is going to be achieved by mixing to a reference.

That's what I was going to say.


[ For myself, I keep my main DAW volume to -3Dbs and my final mix plug-in at +6.3Dbs on almost all tracks when building and mixing, as that seems to work for me. I will turn down the volume on the monitors sometimes to check that I can hear all the elements at low volume and also to check that nothing is 'sticking out' of the mix. ]

PS - next time you are going to submit, throw the track up on P2P so we can have a listen for ya.

Thanks for all the replies. I guess finding some good reference music in the same genre and comparing is the way to go. Seems like different broadcasters/libraries have different standards from what I can tell.

Yeah, sorry if this has been brought up before. I tried to search for it on the forum, but didn't really find anything conclusive.

Always nice to get mix feedback in the P2P section, that has helped before.

This is the track btw: https://soundcloud.com/michael-keihl/ho ... in-despair I pumped it up in volume after a taxi screener commented it was not loud enough.

That's what I was going to say.

Great minds think alike!

Very nice track! Still has low volume issues.

I don't think broadcaster/library standards are the issue.

Without knowing for sure what is going on, we can only speculate, other than knowing it must be something in the "gain staging".

Don't forget to listen to your final mix in three or four different ways as well. In the car, on computer speakers, on an iPhone, etc. Might help to compare levels there as well.

Loudness and RMS are actually very related. LUFS not so much as its generally considering a time weighted average of volume.

To the original poster - use your ears. You have a really nice sounding track. It is still quiet in general. The opening section and the last 20 seconds are the loudest and without remixing the middle or adding a fair bit of compression and limiting it will continue to be "quiet".

Just a shot in the dark for a ref but listen to this:

https://itun.es/us/LrZnw?i=372716728

the second half gets louder and more epic.

Then listen to your track.

What do you hear? Can you speculate what the difference in "apparent volume to the ear" or "loudness" or "RMS value" is between your track and this particular ref? I am guessing its 5dB. You can see what the actual difference by importing your track and the ref from iTunes into your DAW and using a Loudness meter - In Logic the Multi Meter would do fine. If you use a different DAW you might have one included as well. Look at the RMS.

NOTE: This is the youtube version of the same Two Steps from Hell - "Heart of Courage" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRLdhFVzqt4 - as in my original post this will be significantly quieter than the iTunes version.

Michael - pasting in the listing text to which you submitted this would help nail down in what context the screener heard your track as well.

Sometimes its a production thing, sometimes its a "mastering" thing.