Optimum listening volume while mixing/mastering

I know I read this on the forum before but for the life of me I can't find it through a search. But I remember reading that there is an ideal volume to set your monitors at while mixing - or maybe it was just mastering. I wasn't sure how to measure that volume either, but I seemed to recall that it was described as something like "the volume of a busy city street". (However, that is probably a little different in Missouri vs. New York!). Can anyone help me out with this??

Well let me answer this definitively.

Fletcher - Munson concluded....................

Sorry Skull I see you said Jeff now.

In which case I reckon somewhere below 11.

85db (c, slow) http://www.aes.org/technical/documentDownloads.cfm?docID=65 

I've been testing this and it's pretty good, especially if you work your levels to the K-System described in the document above. (essentially you callibrate your system so -20dbfs makes your monitors fire at 85db (c, slow) use pink noise to callibrate)

Headroom up the wazzoo (more space for dynamics) and turning your amp speakers up (and the input voltage to the amp down) generally makes them work better.  It makes you actually listen to / hear the effect of 2buss compression / limiting etc rather than just watching the inexorable rise of your signal towards clipping.

Child

Thanks. That link is pretty over my head but I'll try to absorb it.

How do you measure 85dB? I've got my interface (M-Audio Fast Track Ultra) connected to my monitors (Mackie MR8s) and control the volume using my interface - how do I know I've got it set at 85dB? Does that involve additional equipment to measure this? Can you try to describe in layman's terms, how loud is 85dB?
 
Thanks so much!

how do I know I've got it set at 85dB? Does that involve additional equipment to measure this? Can you try to describe in layman's terms, how loud is 85dB?

I went out and got a SPL meter at Radio Shack for like $30.  I think iphones have an app!

With the K system you can operate at three reference levels within your DAW and these are -12, -14 and -20. The concept is that you actually maintain the SPL level in your environment to be the same for all of these ref levels and that should be 85 db SPL.  (some like 83 db SPL) This is how I use it. You may also re calibrate your monitors and alter the level of the SPL you are monitoring at while you are at a given K ref level. eg  Add 6 db each step so you could now monitor at 91 db SPL and 97 db SPL and 103 db SPL etc.. And lower 79 db SPL, 73 db SPL and 67 db SPL. Calibrated monitor gain in your room is a big plus. (the SPL meter is fine though) But 85 db is a great level. It can sound quiet at first but if you start fresh with it, and don't go over for a while it starts to sound louder.

So if you are at K -20, transients can go up 20db  if you need  but most of the time you are around (-20) 85 db SPL.  At K -14 transients can only go up 14 db. So if you were working at K -20 and you had your room set to 85 db SPL and then decided to work at K -14 then the room is going to get 6 db louder but the room level is now recalibrated to be the same (85 db SPL) but the available transient range is less now you are at K -14.  And the average rms levels in the track are getting higher. Hence the reason why K -20 is such a nice ref level. It has the got the classiest sound. I work at K -14 a lot of the time as Dean does. I feel it is a good compromise between transients and how far you have to master up from there. (mastering brings the K levels up higher again)

And this is all C Weighting as well. Once you get up to 85 db SPL and bass is involved then C weighting settings should be used.

I love 85 db SPL in the room. It is a lovely volume and you can do it for a long time without fatigue. I also have a small Auratone type mono spekaer and I really like mixing on that. It is so good even at levels well under 85 db SPL such as 70 and even 65 db SPL. These are very quiet. You can hear a lot especially in a busy mix down at that volume and in mono as well. If any instrument is out of place in the mix, it seems to be emphasised at low volumes eg a snare that is too loud. I find it is the best way to set vocal levels to the music as well.

Loud listening is great for short bursts. You pick up all sorts of info like reverb status and how the kick and the bass line is moving the air (and you) around at serious SPL levels.

I would agree that if you are doing Dark Side of the Moon level material, then 85dB SPL is probably not a problem. Only occasionally are you going to have big swells in the volume and much of the time you'll actually be more in the mid-70s anyway. But, that's almost not ever going to happen these days for rock/pop music, where the RMS is going to be pretty dang close to the peak volume, hence my point about 85 being too much. It's really more for film mixing, which is a lot more like music of the DSotM type.

If you are mixing at 85dB reference, and there's no more than 3 or 4 dBFS dynamic range pretty much throughout the song in mixing, which wouldn't be at all unheard of these days, it's going to be pretty loud. I agree that you should back down on the compression, but that's just not going to happen these days for most folks. That's they way they want their music to sound, because that's what they've grown up listening to.

So anyway, if you do that kind of music, 85dB SPL might be a bit much. Or, OTOH, maybe you DO want to do that, and maybe that'll force you to reduce the compression, which is kind of what it's supposed to do anyway. But if you are mixing commercial music, and you want the mix to survive, you probably are going to be mixing it highly compressed, damn the torpedos or the ear drums.

I certainly don't do music that compressed, but I'm in an apartment, and it would really piss people off if I were running 85dB SPL so it's just not practical for me for that reason, particularly since I often only get to record 10PM to midnight. Otherwise I would crank it up a bit more. The kick drum is the killer. Since I tend to do music that has a solid kick/bass type of feel to it, that's a very annoying type of sound in an apartment situation. It travels through ceiling an walls and doors and such and really pisses off neighbors.

Thanks, Dean, and Jeff, for the additional insight.

As I mentioned, I'm new to the K-System but I'm a complete convert. And yes, I suspect that I will probably move to k-14 for most of what I do. But the point remains that (practicalities of neighbours, room size etc aside) 85db is (according to dolby) the 'ideal' volume.

I don't think Katz is saying that you shouldn't play at different volumes etc just that you should know where this reference point is and return to it regularly to test the validity of your mix decisions. (I have 2 pairs of speakers in the studio 'the speakers of love' (my PMC's) and 'the speakers of hate' (£10 thrift shop grot boxes) and I regularly flick between them at both low and high volumes to test out what stuff is doing.)

Child

I dunno about that. I love Jesus of Surburbia, say. But play that at 85dB SPL with nearfields and that's just brutally loud to me. It probably won't drop below 80dB the bulk of the song length. And that's music of some years ago, back when it was only stupidly compressed. And yeh, of course I'm adjusting the level of the commercial track down 14dB to adjust for that, otherwise I'd no longer have cones in my speakers :-)

you guys are gonna burn your ears out, when all you really need is some common sense!

I find 85db only comfortable for short periods. (Unlike when I was 30 years younger)

If I intend to indulge in a lengthy mixing session, I'll recalibrate to 79 which I can listen to for hours.

If you play a CD that has only 5 db of dynamic range on a K system that is calibrated for -20 db FS to give 85 db SPL then the track will be around 15 db louder than a normal K -20 level would be. If you have VU's calibrated to show K -20 at 0 db VU then the VU's will go off the scale and the track will be loud yes.

But if you have imported a track like this onto a Sonar track then you have to pull it down by 15 db for the CD to show 0 db VU again and you are back to K -20 and the level is 85 db SPL again back in the room.

So no matter what you play the level will always be 85 db SPL in the room. 85 db is 85 db and the level will always be the same. What varies is how much one has to pull the track fader down in order to get back to K -20. If its 15 db then you know the track is averaging K -5 which is loud on the CD.

What also varies are the transients.  A K -20 track will generate 85 db SPL in the room and so will a track that has only 5 db of dynamic range (except its fader is 15 db down) But what is wrong here is the track although still only at 85 db SPL will only have 5 db of transients so it won't sound as nice as the K -20 track does.

With digital, a system is necessary and the K system is it and the best one for the job. It guarantees uniformity of track and mix levels and one can work at one of three references. It focuses on the rms (or average ) level being constant on tracks (and busses) and lets the peaks vary. Without a system and people do this, they tend to keep the peaks constant (eg - 6db down from 0 db FS) but the rms (or average) levels are all over the place on tracks and busses. That is another way of looking at the K system. It is about two things, the rms (or average) levels on tracks (and busses) and also about calibrated monitor gain in the room. ie the room SPL always stays the same. (Unless you choose to monitor at another level of course like Dean)

The reason for the 3 K ref levels is that if you create a track at K -20 and you want to make it average K -5 (which wont sound great but loud) then you have to take a K -20 track up 15 db in mastering which is a lot. But a K -12 track only has to jump up 7 db in order to get it up to k -5 and that is a lot easier usually.

Another way to do it is also if you are wanting to achieve a K -5 level (and I hope we don't as that is very loud) then you can create a track at either K -14 or K -20 and mix it at that level and store it away. But also import that into a mastering session but you can then recalibrate the system to K -5 and it will all read (and sound) low even with that fader at unity and so you keep mastering it hard until the VU's start peaking 0 again and you know by then the track is at K -5. There is more than one way to use the K system so it can be confusing.

But I posted some info in the speaker stand thread about what I noticed about a Sting album and it was predominately around K -14, up to K -11 or so but not much. It is a nice change to see things being mastered not so loud. Lots of transients though.

Mike I totally agree with you. I think many people are used to the louder sound and the sound that lacks transients. Its a pity because the dynamic sound is such a nice sound. And the problem is there is no standard of any sort as to how loud a CD should be and what the transient range should be etc.. At least with the movies we have some sort of average ref level of 85 db and things seem to revolve around that. (go up mainly)

But at least you can use the K system during your production and get some consistency right up to the mastering stage and from there it is anywhere. If you walk into a mastering session with  K-14 track then you have to decide how much louder than that you are going to go. Unless you do something like Sting and pretty well leave it alone and just go up from there now and then etc..

And I don't think we can suddenly go back now and say hey we have standardised the average CD level now to -20 db. It is just not going to work. Its a bit too late, I do agree. But like I said it can be good during a production. At least you can end up with tracks and mixes that sound very similar and consistent in level etc. And that can't be a bad thing.

I have considered getting a SPL meter. The app in my phone is not as accurate as I'd want it to be. (just from a few tests it did not seem to be very accurate)

Currently, I simply set my MR5 monitors to the 50% detente point on the level knob, and let it roll. The level is comfortable. I normally will group the master output faders and pull them down to about half while tracking and preliminary mixing. Then on the final mix, I run the master back up keeping it and all others out of the red.... that level is pretty decent for the final mix. Since I use a sub, I don't usually run that level with others in the house, because the bass is audible throughout the house. 

bitflipper

I think the K-system is a misguided effort to institutionalize someones personal opinion about sound. The fact is, the K system is largely ignored in the actual professional recording world. Ask your friends in the biz. The k system is an internet phenomenon where by old ideas have been repackaged and presented to an audience that doesn't seem to have the experience to recognize it as plain old common sense.

This is the first time I've heard that particular opinion expressed. If true, Mr. Katz has pulled off a marketing scam of enormous proportions, with no apparent benefit to him personally. The K system has been adopted by most vendors of relevant software. Are they merely playing to the fad-of-the-day?

I have heard dissenting views about K-metering, from no less an authority than Bob Olhsson, for example, who disagrees with the very concept of monitoring at consistent levels. I don't get that. Consistent monitoring at just two reference levels (one quiet, one loud) has helped me immensely.  There are so many variables as it is, why not remove at least one of them when you can?

that's exactly what I do.  MOST of my mixing is at really low levels comparatively (I don't have an SPL meter, but I'd guess it's probably close to 70-75dB), but then I always check it at higher levels.  I also do this for critical listening to a mix if I'm being asked to listen to a mix to help someone.  that way I get a good feel for what the music really sounds like.