TAXI.com

In reference to supervisors or Taxi screeners viewing waveforms as well as the consideration for getting broadcast quality audio:

Some creators master their mix. It's seems like a lot of creators simply mixdown their mix which gives a more dynamic waveform appearance. Apparently the brick wall looking master waveform doesn't have the right optics for sync. The debate on mastering or not continues. I am considering simply doing a mixdown without mastering so the waveform looks more dynamic like what you see on the Taxi reference tracks uploaded to dropbox as well as the files from Taxi members on Taxi.com. I may be mixing apples & oranges here but to get to the point, what dbfs (or RMS) as it reads on your DAW master bus meter do you go for if you don't master your mixdowns and the brief or the client hasn't specified such details? Thanks.

I think the "mixing versus mastering" concept is outdated. Everything is in the box these days... you need to do whatever it takes so that your recording sounds finished, not like a demo.

I used to aim for -14 LUFS, then I had a library tell me he needs his stuff at -10LUFS. I get a lot of placements through him, so my response was "yes sir!" I think if you are between -14 and -10 you are good to go.

Here is a cool article that explains some of this stuff with really nice visuals:
https://www.masteringthemix.com/blogs/l ... nd-youtube

Paulie wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 14, 2023 4:57 pm

I think the "mixing versus mastering" concept is outdated. Everything is in the box these days... you need to do whatever it takes so that your recording sounds finished, not like a demo.

I used to aim for -14 LUFS, then I had a library tell me he needs his stuff at -10LUFS. I get a lot of placements through him, so my response was "yes sir!" I think if you are between -14 and -10 you are good to go.

Here is a cool article that explains some of this stuff with really nice visuals:
https://www.masteringthemix.com/blogs/l ... nd-youtube

Thanks for the reply Paulie as well as the article. I think I have the idea now. My interpretation of what you are saying i.e. paraphrasing: to do whatever it takes to get a finished product because it's all in the box translates to master the mix.
Additionally, get a good LUFS level which is easily achievable using a LUFS meter. I have a few of those lying around. LOL. Thanks again. I feel more confident going forward with the mix/master portion of my current project with these goals in mind and with the article as a guide.

Paulie wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 14, 2023 4:57 pm

Here is a cool article that explains some of this stuff with really nice visuals:
https://www.masteringthemix.com/blogs/l ... nd-youtube

Handy article, thanks Paulie

Paulie wrote: ↑

Fri Apr 14, 2023 4:57 pm

Here is a cool article that explains some of this stuff with really nice visuals:
https://www.masteringthemix.com/blogs/l ... nd-youtube

I read the article, explains quite a bit about the needs of the end user. Not as much about the measurement criteria as I'd like though.

I just got a return with a -14LUFS, -1dBTP suggestion from the screener. So - LUFS being relevant here - I have a related question:
When I'm watching the LUFS meter, I see (since the windowing function is a fairly short time frame. seconds? milliseconds?) the level rise and drop as the music phrases in and out. Maybe from -17LUFS to -12LUFS, with the peaks being rarer than the troughs. Am I looking to get -14LUFS peak, or "something visually around" -14LUFS on average?
I guess I'm asking how aggressive the streaming services (and digital content libraries) are about minor excursions above -14LUFS (or whatever their target value is).

Any comments welcome,
Alan

Telefunkin wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 21, 2023 12:52 pm

[snip]
...I hope that helps

Thank you, Graham. Understood!