The jungle definitely is massive. Nice job.

As a side note, I really encourage you to be more thoughtful about the way in which you engage with members of the community. I want to believe that you intend your criticisms constructively, but so far they seem to come across as rude and unhelpful. You're as welcome here as anyone else, but please don't make this an unfriendly place for the rest of us.

The jungle definitely is massive. Nice job. As a side note, I really encourage you to be more thoughtful about the way in which you engage with members of the community. I want to believe that you intend your criticisms constructively, but so far they seem to come across as rude and unhelpful. You're as welcome here as anyone else, but please don't make this an unfriendly place for the rest of us.

Sure, since everybody is a snowflake, this itself excludes the possibility of honest conversation. Duly noted.

[quote=dadboy]The jungle definitely is massive. Nice job. As a side note, I really encourage you to be more thoughtful about the way in which you engage with members of the community. I want to believe that you intend your criticisms constructively, but so far they seem to come across as rude and unhelpful. You're as welcome here as anyone else, but please don't make this an unfriendly place for the rest of us. [/quote] Sure, since everybody is a snowflake, this itself excludes the possibility of honest conversation. Duly noted.

Respectfully, I gave you some honest feedback, and you responded defensively. I encourage you to reflect a little more and question who is actually being sensitive here. Constructive feedback is often welcome. Insults and judgment are not. You can be honest without being unkind. Read the room.

[quote=Subtonic Jungle][quote=dadboy]The jungle definitely is massive. Nice job. As a side note, I really encourage you to be more thoughtful about the way in which you engage with members of the community. I want to believe that you intend your criticisms constructively, but so far they seem to come across as rude and unhelpful. You're as welcome here as anyone else, but please don't make this an unfriendly place for the rest of us. [/quote] Sure, since everybody is a snowflake, this itself excludes the possibility of honest conversation. Duly noted.[/quote] Respectfully, I gave you some honest feedback, and you responded defensively. I encourage you to reflect a little more and question who is actually being sensitive here. Constructive feedback is often welcome. Insults and judgment are not. You can be honest without being unkind. Read the room.

The Self Evident Truth Of An Intuitive Mind! Reference track is Square, yes?

Also made me think about this track: Scarface - Hand Of The Dead Body (Possible 187 Remix)

Dope track. Omninous and dark, as is should be. Bassline effortlessly flows throughtout and break has good momentum all the way (good choice on that one). Suprisingly no gunshot fx, that's fine .

All the Best! Peace!

The Self Evident Truth Of An Intuitive Mind! Reference track is Square, yes? Also made me think about this track: Scarface - Hand Of The Dead Body (Possible 187 Remix) Dope track. Omninous and dark, as is should be. Bassline effortlessly flows throughtout and break has good momentum all the way (good choice on that one). Suprisingly no gunshot fx, that's fine =). All the Best! Peace!

Track is pretty cool, but I feel it should be LOUDER!

(Ok sorry about that...) but as mentioned on the forum thread, please give us some Keys about what should be done so what we output can be of better quality. I am myself culprit of printing my tracks overly loud, I go as loud as I can and am "good" with that.

especially on a platform like this where maybe 20 persons will have a listen to it. I just crank that limiter. I am a DIY hobbyist that is having some fun recording some tracks, that's it. If people here find my tracks too raw, or too loud, it is super easy to skip to the next one, and it is fine to critic how loud I print and give a comprehensive explanation of usual targets. I know listening tracks like that can be fatiguing, or even probably aggressive and it is fine to mention it. It is just the how...

I really hope you stick around as your tracks are fun to listen to, please don't take the forum replies in a bad way (or my message here). There are some musicians here that actually are pros (or were at some point), but most of us don't really know what we are doing, which is fine as well.

Take care!

(Good point about that debate-conversation is that it made me come here and listen to your tracks that I missed so far...)

Track is pretty cool, but I feel it should be LOUDER! (Ok sorry about that...) but as mentioned on the forum thread, please give us some Keys about what should be done so what we output can be of better quality. I am myself culprit of printing my tracks overly loud, I go as loud as I can and am "good" with that. especially on a platform like this where maybe 20 persons will have a listen to it. I just crank that limiter. I am a DIY hobbyist that is having some fun recording some tracks, that's it. If people here find my tracks too raw, or too loud, it is super easy to skip to the next one, and it is fine to critic how loud I print and give a comprehensive explanation of usual targets. I know listening tracks like that can be fatiguing, or even probably aggressive and it is fine to mention it. It is just the how... I really hope you stick around as your tracks are fun to listen to, please don't take the forum replies in a bad way (or my message here). There are some musicians here that actually are pros (or were at some point), but most of us don't really know what we are doing, which is fine as well. Take care! (Good point about that debate-conversation is that it made me come here and listen to your tracks that I missed so far...)

Can U please point me where that was, as I don't recall.

On the loudness issue.. OK, my audio mixer is based on something called "iec 268 audio meter scale", and as far as i understand, it translates audio signal differently than digital audio peak meter, which is what i believe many of u guys use.. iec 286 is good at displaying the "flesh" of the sound so to speak, it doesn't twitch like mad on transients, so i think it's good for setting up the levels and stuff. And most important it lets u see when approaching clipping.
For the finalizing as i said, i take some classic track from the period - in my case that's '94-95 material which in my opinion was top production, and i set up final volume roughly referencing to that.
That's it. Everyone's welcome to volume up their stuff as they like, but i believe the so called "loudness war" is ridiculous thing at many levels and it hurts the quality of music material in the first place.
You don't have to be slave to this nonsense just because some rich jerks printed that on CD in 2007.

Thanx 4 listening! Honestly i don't have the titles for that album, i just have it as one piece. I took some excerpt with fully blasting drums and bass and set it as my reference point.

When you hear the sirens, the shooting is done.

[quote=dadboy] Respectfully, I gave you some honest feedback, and you responded defensively. [/quote] Can U please point me where that was, as I don't recall. [quote=djippy] as mentioned on the forum thread, please give us some Keys about what should be done so what we output can be of better quality. I am myself culprit of printing my tracks overly loud, I go as loud as I can and am "good" with that. [/quote] On the loudness issue.. OK, my audio mixer is based on something called "iec 268 audio meter scale", and as far as i understand, it translates audio signal differently than digital audio peak meter, which is what i believe many of u guys use.. iec 286 is good at displaying the "flesh" of the sound so to speak, it doesn't twitch like mad on transients, so i think it's good for setting up the levels and stuff. And most important it lets u see when approaching clipping. For the finalizing as i said, i take some classic track from the period - in my case that's '94-95 material which in my opinion was top production, and i set up final volume roughly referencing to that. That's it. Everyone's welcome to volume up their stuff as they like, but i believe the so called "loudness war" is ridiculous thing at many levels and it hurts the quality of music material in the first place. You don't have to be slave to this nonsense just because some rich jerks printed that on CD in 2007. [quote=Routine]The Self Evident Truth Of An Intuitive Mind! Reference track is Square, yes? [/quote] Thanx 4 listening! Honestly i don't have the titles for that album, i just have it as one piece. I took some excerpt with fully blasting drums and bass and set it as my reference point. [quote=Routine]Suprisingly no gunshot fx, that's fine[/quote] When you hear the sirens, the shooting is done.

I just want you to know, it's not my intent to pick on you or give you a hard time, I just want this to be a constructive, respectful, and friendly place for everyone. I appreciate the insight into your process/perspective, and I think that's a totally valid take. This kind of explanation is super helpful and I think would be valuable and appreciated by most here (including me). I definitely don't disagree on the loudness war front (at least in many cases). I feel like it's been particularly bad in film, where it's impossible to comprehend dialogue without subtitles in a lot of recent movies.

[quote=Subtonic Jungle]On the loudness issue.. OK, my audio mixer is based on something called "iec 268 audio meter scale", and as far as i understand, it translates audio signal differently than digital audio peak meter, which is what i believe many of u guys use.. iec 286 is good at displaying the "flesh" of the sound so to speak, it doesn't twitch like mad on transients, so i think it's good for setting up the levels and stuff. And most important it lets u see when approaching clipping. For the finalizing as i said, i take some classic track from the period - in my case that's '94-95 material which in my opinion was top production, and i set up final volume roughly referencing to that. That's it. Everyone's welcome to volume up their stuff as they like, but i believe the so called "loudness war" is ridiculous thing at many levels and it hurts the quality of music material in the first place. You don't have to be slave to this nonsense just because some rich jerks printed that on CD in 2007. [/quote] I just want you to know, it's not my intent to pick on you or give you a hard time, I just want this to be a constructive, respectful, and friendly place for everyone. I appreciate the insight into your process/perspective, and I think that's a totally valid take. This kind of explanation is super helpful and I think would be valuable and appreciated by most here (including me). I definitely don't disagree on the loudness war front (at least in many cases). I feel like it's been particularly bad in film, where it's impossible to comprehend dialogue without subtitles in a lot of recent movies.

[/quote]
On the loudness issue.. OK, my audio mixer is based on something called "iec 268 audio meter scale", and as far as i understand, it translates audio signal differently than digital audio peak meter, which is what i believe many of u guys use.. iec 286 is good at displaying the "flesh" of the sound so to speak, it doesn't twitch like mad on transients, so i think it's good for setting up the levels and stuff. And most important it lets u see when approaching clipping.
For the finalizing as i said, i take some classic track from the period - in my case that's '94-95 material which in my opinion was top production, and i set up final volume roughly referencing to that.
That's it. Everyone's welcome to volume up their stuff as they like, but i believe the so called "loudness war" is ridiculous thing at many levels and it hurts the quality of music material in the first place.
You don't have to be slave to this nonsense just because some rich jerks printed that on CD in 2007.
[/quote]

Digital clipping happens at the Peak, not the Average. Because a VU meter has a 300ms integration time, a snare transient can clip your converters and be long gone before the needle even moves. You're relying on an analog-style meter to monitor digital headroom, you aren't 'properly monitoring’. What you’re doing is essentially driving a car by looking at the average speed over the last mile instead of the speedometer in front of you.

As for the '94-95 jungle tracks, they were mastered for vinyl, which has a physical ceiling. Comparing a vinyl-ready reference to a digital-native master without gain matching is the fundamental error here. You’re hearing a 'loudness war,' but the rest of us are just hearing the difference between a physical groove and 32-bit floating point. It’s not about being a 'slave to nonsense'; it's about understanding how your tools work in the century you're actually living in.

Turn your monitor knob down, gain-match your references, and you’ll realize the 'quality' hasn't gone anywhere, the noise floor just got lower and the impact higher.

[/quote] On the loudness issue.. OK, my audio mixer is based on something called "iec 268 audio meter scale", and as far as i understand, it translates audio signal differently than digital audio peak meter, which is what i believe many of u guys use.. iec 286 is good at displaying the "flesh" of the sound so to speak, it doesn't twitch like mad on transients, so i think it's good for setting up the levels and stuff. And most important it lets u see when approaching clipping. For the finalizing as i said, i take some classic track from the period - in my case that's '94-95 material which in my opinion was top production, and i set up final volume roughly referencing to that. That's it. Everyone's welcome to volume up their stuff as they like, but i believe the so called "loudness war" is ridiculous thing at many levels and it hurts the quality of music material in the first place. You don't have to be slave to this nonsense just because some rich jerks printed that on CD in 2007. [/quote] Digital clipping happens at the Peak, not the Average. Because a VU meter has a 300ms integration time, a snare transient can clip your converters and be long gone before the needle even moves. You're relying on an analog-style meter to monitor digital headroom, you aren't 'properly monitoring’. What you’re doing is essentially driving a car by looking at the average speed over the last mile instead of the speedometer in front of you. As for the '94-95 jungle tracks, they were mastered for vinyl, which has a physical ceiling. Comparing a vinyl-ready reference to a digital-native master without gain matching is the fundamental error here. You’re hearing a 'loudness war,' but the rest of us are just hearing the difference between a physical groove and 32-bit floating point. It’s not about being a 'slave to nonsense'; it's about understanding how your tools work in the century you're actually living in. Turn your monitor knob down, gain-match your references, and you’ll realize the 'quality' hasn't gone anywhere, the noise floor just got lower and the impact higher.

Misguided advice, mastering for vinyl, and comments about snowflakes in response to reasonable feedback to your unsolicited and unhelpful advice? Woof my dude.

Misguided advice, mastering for vinyl, and comments about snowflakes in response to reasonable feedback to your unsolicited and unhelpful advice? Woof my dude.

Also for the conversation to be “honest” you would need to be both having the conversation in good faith and doing more than spouting 40 year old hogwash. Your commentary was as blatantly incorrect as it was worthless. Multiple members made good faith attempts to address both levels of that and it is a shame that this is how you choose to express yourself. We are a community, not a place to farm clout

Also for the conversation to be “honest” you would need to be both having the conversation in good faith and doing more than spouting 40 year old hogwash. Your commentary was as blatantly incorrect as it was worthless. Multiple members made good faith attempts to address both levels of that and it is a shame that this is how you choose to express yourself. We are a community, not a place to farm clout