You need to start with 'something' at a strong level...all media does
this, movies, etc. Just the nature of things to make sure people set
the proper level.
Also the dynamic range of the mastered recording can't be 'too' broad,
it just gets annoying for people to have to ride their volume knob.
Generally I think if the recording is good, it will 'lead' people to
the proper level.
But definitely don't pump up a quiet track and slam it with tons of
compression.
Mastering is a skill that comes with experience.
Danny
--- In Dan Dugan <> wrote:
>
> >One thought I've had about mastering field recordings for distribution
> >is that unlike a music CD, you don't necessarily want to hit full
> >scale.
>
> Right. No point in normalizing a quiet background. Hopefully a nature
> sound CD should sound right at the volume setting used for music
> playback.
>
> >So I tend to assign different "cuts" (for lack of a better word)
> >different nominal level ranges, depending on the exact content of each
> >cut relative to the others I'm presenting. I generally think in 6 db
> >increments from full scale down to -24 dbfs as the nominal level range
> >for any given cut. Comments?
>
> Sounds good. I struggle with my desire to maintain natural dynamics
> in the piece; something I'd like to be able to brag about--Gordon
> Hempton's work, for example--but opposing that is the problem that if
> I start out with a quiet ambience, people are going to turn it up
> till they hear something, and then the louder parts will be annoying.
>
> I don't have a solution for the how-to-start problem.
>
> -Dan Dugan
>
|