| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Russian Recording
re-cappin' neve
Joined: 21 May 2003
Posts: 746
Location: Bloomington, IN
|
 Posted: Mon Apr 19, 2004 1:48 pm Post subject: Re: And the problem with normalizing is? |
  |
|
| Joel Hamilton wrote: | | To say that normalization during the mix eats headroom is like sying pushing all the faders up during mixing eats headroom. |
Well, not exactly. An analogue console doesn't have a hard limit such as 0dBFS. Sonsoles start to break up when you get close to their maximum output, but it's generally a gentle slope and the break up is much more sonically pleasing (and often times desireable) compared to digital clipping. And anyways, depending on what is coming into your faders, pushing them all the way up can and will eat up headroom...
maybe I just misunderstood what you were saying.
mike |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
joel hamilton
zen recordist
Joined: 19 May 2003
Posts: 8863
Location: NYC/Brooklyn
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kdarr
buyin' gear
Joined: 11 Dec 2003
Posts: 577
Location: Seattle, WA
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cgarges
zen recordist
Joined: 16 Jun 2003
Posts: 10623
Location: Charlotte, NC
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mtw
gettin' sounds
Joined: 17 Jun 2003
Posts: 131
Location: pdx, or
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 19, 2004 2:43 pm Post subject: Re: And the problem with normalizing is? |
|
|
| I've always understood the main problem with normalizing is that you always raise your noise floor when you do it. If you've got a relatively strong signal to start with you shouldn't have too many problems. It's when you start with a weak signal that you run into problems. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
@¶,*ƒƒƒ&™
on a wing and a prayer
Joined: 07 May 2003
Posts: 5804
Location: Just left on the FM dial
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 19, 2004 2:55 pm Post subject: Re: And the problem with normalizing is? |
|
|
| mtw wrote: | | I've always understood the main problem with normalizing is that you always raise your noise floor when you do it. If you've got a relatively strong signal to start with you shouldn't have too many problems. It's when you start with a weak signal that you run into problems. |
Right. And at that point dithering becomes much more important to maintain the integrity of the audio that is using minimum bit resolution.
_________________
http://www.kbco.com/new2/artists/i/328804?psid=456092 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
joeysimms
ears didn't survive the freeze
Joined: 05 Jun 2003
Posts: 3838
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 19, 2004 3:24 pm Post subject: Re: And the problem with normalizing is? |
|
|
Probably the best thing to do is experiment with normalizing and see if you like what it does to your stuff. I own the masterlink but I've only normalized once. Didn't notice too much of a difference. But the masterlink also has a simple gain feature so you can just turn it up. I'm thinking that both turning it up and normalizing would be fine for making mix cd's and the like, but that I wouldn't want to do any of that if someone else was going to master it.
_________________
beware bee wear |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
brew
pushin' record
Joined: 14 Aug 2003
Posts: 280
Location: Brooklyn
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 19, 2004 4:27 pm Post subject: Re: And the problem with normalizing is? |
|
|
| Quote: | I've always understood the main problem with normalizing is that you always raise your noise floor when you do it. If you've got a relatively strong signal to start with you shouldn't have too many problems. It's when you start with a weak signal that you run into problems.
Right. And at that point dithering becomes much more important to maintain the integrity of the audio that is using minimum bit resolution. |
This is not quite right. Normalization does not raise the noise floor, this is only a perceived effect. Normalization raises everything equally, therefore if you have a 60 dB signal-to-noise ratio before normalization, you will have a 60 dB S/N after. Since the entire signal has been raised, the noise will also be louder, so you may hear noise that you did not hear before. If you match your monitor level with pre and post normalized levels, the noise floor will be identical, with the following additional exception...
The main problem with normalization is that it increases quantization error/distortion. Any digital gain change does this. When working in a low wordlength (16 bit) this error will audibly degrade low-level signals. For this reason, dither must be applied, but now you have 16 bit dithered twice, one on top of the other, which adds noise and can "veil" the sound. It is recommended that multiple additions of 16 bit dither be avoided.
So to 'fix' the effect of normalization, you must perform cumulative dither, another degrading process. This is mostly a concern for low wordlength stuff, but why submit your sonics to all this garbage? Afterall, loudness is only perceived. Raise your monitor gain if you want your signal to sound louder, don't normalize for normalizing's sake. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dayvel
gettin' sounds
Joined: 12 May 2003
Posts: 107
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 19, 2004 5:15 pm Post subject: Re: And the problem with normalizing is? |
|
|
Since you're using Peak, try this-
Open a file that's not hitting maximum levels. Choose "Change gain" from the DSP menu. When you move the slider, you'll notice the gain setting moves between discrete values with some pretty odd looking dB levels. These are the values where the math works out most nicely (least rounding error). Now check the "clipguard" box. This will let you raise the gain to the highest possible level with "nice" math. When you normalize, how much rounding error you get is pretty much a crapshoot. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tsw
steve albini likes it
Joined: 11 Aug 2003
Posts: 385
Location: inner space
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 19, 2004 5:23 pm Post subject: Re: And the problem with normalizing is? |
|
|
| dayvel wrote: | Since you're using Peak, try this-
Open a file that's not hitting maximum levels. Choose "Change gain" from the DSP menu. When you move the slider, you'll notice the gain setting moves between discrete values with some pretty odd looking dB levels. These are the values where the math works out most nicely (least rounding error). Now check the "clipguard" box. This will let you raise the gain to the highest possible level with "nice" math. When you normalize, how much rounding error you get is pretty much a crapshoot. |
You kind of read my mind. My next question was, "What's the difference between normalizing and just using the "change gain" function?" So, you're saying there's no difference except that "change gain" has less potential to screw stuff up? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dayvel
gettin' sounds
Joined: 12 May 2003
Posts: 107
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 19, 2004 5:30 pm Post subject: Re: And the problem with normalizing is? |
|
|
| Yes. Using "change gain" may not make the file as hot as normalizing to 100% but it's going to be less likely to introduce rounding errors. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
marqueemoon
carpal tunnel
Joined: 08 May 2003
Posts: 1593
Location: Seattle, WA
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 19, 2004 5:31 pm Post subject: Re: And the problem with normalizing is? |
|
|
| dayvel wrote: | Since you're using Peak, try this-
Open a file that's not hitting maximum levels. Choose "Change gain" from the DSP menu. When you move the slider, you'll notice the gain setting moves between discrete values with some pretty odd looking dB levels. These are the values where the math works out most nicely (least rounding error). Now check the "clipguard" box. This will let you raise the gain to the highest possible level with "nice" math. When you normalize, how much rounding error you get is pretty much a crapshoot. |
I used to use the clipguard as a limiter all the time. All you have to do is put in a value higher than the number of dB it calculates until you hit zero. I am a bad person. 
_________________
I the prostitute, shall not hide...
But I was very much bothered with my work! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jajjguy
re-cappin' neve
Joined: 12 May 2003
Posts: 777
Location: near Boston, MA, USA
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 19, 2004 5:44 pm Post subject: Re: And the problem with normalizing is? |
|
|
nothing actually wrong with normalizing. but i prefer to add gain to tracks manually, so i can continually balance the levels between tracks. if i were to normalize all the tracks in a song to zero, i'd just have to pull each of them down a bit anyway to keep the mix out of the red (i'm "in the box"). so if i'm adjusting each level anyway, may as well just do that. what i usually do is insert a trim plug on every track that needs any level adjustment (which is most tracks) and tinker with them as i mix.
an advantage of this is that, in the end, only one gain adjustment has been made on each track. if i'd normalized and then lowered, that's two adjustments, which in DAW-land means two rounds of math errors. (not that i claim to be able to hear the difference...) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mr. Dipity
carpal tunnel
Joined: 16 Jun 2003
Posts: 1528
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 19, 2004 6:03 pm Post subject: Re: And the problem with normalizing is? |
|
|
| abrawner wrote: | I know normalizing is about as popular as Barry Manilow. I want to know why. Since I couldn’t afford a Masterlink, I got Bias Peak (not bad for $99!) for my G4 iBook. The normalizing function lets me get better levels without changing the proportions of the dynamics of the song. The quiet parts are still proportionally quiet.
How is that a bad thing? I’m not trying to start an argument here. I’m really asking, what is the complaint against this function.
andy |
There isn't any opposition. Are you confusing this with Limiting?
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.01/play_pr.html
The only downside to a signal chain that requires normalisation (and this isn't the fault of the normalising) is that it means that you haven't used all the bit-depth of the audio file to begin with. By recording too quietly, and then normalising you are:
- bringing up the noise floor by however much you normalise.
- using less bit depth than you otherwise could. This is more of a problem with a 16 bit recording, where you need all the space you can get. At 24 bits, you are unlikely to experience any difference, unless you are recording much, much quieter than you should. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Knights Who Say Neve
buyin' a studio
Joined: 15 Feb 2004
Posts: 983
Location: The Mome Raths Outgrabe
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 19, 2004 12:42 am Post subject: Re: And the problem with normalizing is? |
|
|
Actually normalizing is cool as a lo-fi effect...lower the gain so your peaks are at -40 db or something like that, normalize to 0, compress, and repeat to taste. Add time stretching or pitch shift slowing for additional fun.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
