Should I maximize it?

How loud do you make the quiet songs?

I've got two quiet songs... a lot of softly played piano, some cello and a voice.

Should I just crank it up to average -14dBFS RMS or do I take a chance and let it sit in it's own place and hope the peeps will turn the volume knob up?

:-S






The thing is, both songs have passages that do feature a full instrumentation: Trap kit, Bass, Guitar, 8 vocals, and the Piano and the Cello. So those sections are full of energy.

It's difficult to know how loud to make the quiet passages without diminishing the impact of the loud sections.

I wonder if I'll ever know for sure?





best regards,
mike

Practice and experience Mike there are no substitutes.  Keep going and you'll get there. You can do it.

It would help if perhaps you stopped riding the faders while tracking, you'd then hear the intended relationship between the louder and softer parts and be able to satisfy yourself with a more informed choice.

I love the enthusiasm that something like a new playroom can bring, it can make you think everything you touch from now on in is going to be a hit.  Don't let anyone try to dull that for you.  Hold on to your dreams.

HTH

Jonbouy

Beagle


Mike, I have a serious question.  How can I possibly know if you are ever asking a serious question? 

At this point I would never respond to any question regarding recording, mixing or anything DAW related simply because of your constant snarking posts.

Even in this one, if this is truly a real question and not an attempt to laugh at people who answer your question with an honest opinion but completely "clueless" in the world according to Mike, how do I know the difference?

That's why I either respond with a SNARK award, or simply don't respond to ANY of your posts simply because I am guessing that you're just posting to get a laugh at those who disagree with your opinions.

And I would prefer to have an honest open discussion with you than to read any post from you which is just an attempt at smug humor at my (and anyone else's) expense.

So how can we tell when you're honestly wanting to know others' opinions and when you're just making fun of everyone who responds?  Or should we just assume all of your posts are snarky?

Reece I'm sorry to have to point this out, but remember how Jessie Sammler had some of us duped as to what he really was?

It's a similar thing mate.

It's kind of like somebody waffling on about drama thinking there is a similarity between it and the making and producing of music.  There is of course some similarity there but it's not the same thing.

There is definitely some knowledge on an engineering level of how audio works here but none of it has ever been successfully applied to making music to any standard of broad appeal.

The man doesn't even know how tuning a guitar works correctly, he's confirmed here in the last week he hasn't got a clue how to record a singing performance, yet he castigates with remorseless ill intent others far more capable than he.

In short I'd say he's hood-winked many of us for a long time.  It all fell apart for me in the last few weeks.

I'm just glad I never sent any money.

I literally laughed out loud at these! 
 
back to responding to your post, tho, I really hate that if it's true.  I guess I haven't yet accepted that's what's really going on here.  I know in the past I have read really good well thought out posts from Mike regarding how equipment works and differences between types of equipment.  I really hate to place Mike in the same category as Jessie.  It just seems wrong to me.  But maybe I'm just wearing rose colored glasses and have yet to open my eyes.  everything, to me, up to this point has been reading Mike as being "smug" and feeling like he's "superior" to everyone else and that's why he posts his snarky comments just to laugh at everyone who responds because everyone answering is beneath him.
 
But if he really is a "Jessie" then that's all part of the charade and means he has been better at his craft than Jessie was because I could see through Jessie with the first couple of posts.  Mike - I still want to believe in. 
 
Mike, I truly hope this is not true.  I don't want to believe it.  but I'll be thinking on this...

I'm not sure that how good he is at engineering is directly relevant, really. It would still be kind of lame to be such a constantly condescending arse, even if he was the greatest, most successful engineer around.

What sounds correct to you Mr McCue?
Do you think there should be standards, Like the ones sugggested by others more knowledgable than us?
Your question suggests you do, and also that there are guidelines and no set rules per se.
I see some have answered, shared their knowledge and views freely. While others have questioned your motives. It has me wondering what are your motives?
If there is a teachable moment, then I would ask that every forum member use that opportunity to do so. I applaud any member that shares his knowledge freely. Having opposing views, even being outright wrong, one or many can gain knowledge through discussion. That's why we are here isn't it? That's why I'm here. 
*Why are you here?



* when I write "why are you here?"  I'm not trying to be "snarky" I'm truly asking. Is it to impart knowledge? To gain knowledge? Something else? All of the above? There are no wrong answers to this question.
I know why I'm here.

RLD

Jonbouy


Reece I'm sorry to have to point this out, but remember how Jessie Sammler had some of us duped as to what he really was?

It's a similar thing mate.

It's kind of like somebody waffling on about drama thinking there is a similarity between it and the making and producing of music.  There is of course some similarity there but it's not the same thing.

There is definitely some knowledge on an engineering level of how audio works here but none of it has ever been successfully applied to making music to any standard of broad appeal.

The man doesn't even know how tuning a guitar works correctly yet he pitches himself as a connoisseur of fine instruments, he's confirmed here in the last week he hasn't got a clue how to record a singing performance, yet he castigates with remorseless ill intent others far more capable than he inferring that in some way they are dim-witted.

In short I'd say he's hood-winked many of us for a long time.  It all fell apart for me in the last few weeks.

I'm just glad I never sent any money.

It's been really disappointing for me as I grew quite fond of what I thought he was until I found that he didn't have the size of personality to apologize to somebody where I'd judged him on my own principles to be completely out of line.

 
I'm surprised it took you guys so long to figure this out.

As most regulars will know Mike has had a problem with me for some time, as far as I can tell simply because I dared to challenge one of his 'facts' which I felt I did without getting personal. Or at least until my integrity was questioned then I gave as good as I got, apart from I stopped bothering after I got called a troll.

When I first started frequenting these boards I had the utmost respect for him and found many of his posts helpful. I don't know what happened but at some point the world according to mikemccue seemed to take him over and I put him on block for an awful long time. There's only one other user I've ever bothered doing that to before and it wasn't even 10Ten. I felt it was the best way to stop my 'grudge' against him making me respond.

I too have no idea when he's being genuine or trying to take the piss. I stopped caring frankly and barely bother reading his posts any more. I take no pleasure from others seeing what I saw a while ago. I feel sorry for him. Sincerely - Karl

As I am trying to type around the little Spring here I, too, am a little puzzled by a lot of what has been going on lately. 

All I can think of is something has bothered him for some time and it may not even be here that has him bothered...

LOL,

I was just going to say that hair-care product adverts always have a 'science' bit because they know that BS baffles brains.

Never mind the SM57 has been the snare drum mic of choice in pretty much every studio worldwide for the last 40 years we have to do this;

What we noticed and confirmed on a sprectragraph was that the old '57 seemed very controlled and had very little low end. It seemed to have a built in roll off and it was about 1" from the top head so the proximity effect seemed well balanced.

...for it have the stamp of McQ credibility so we can all rest assured that we wont suffer from flaky scalps.  Pity it doesn't have the right-angled form factor as standard though McQ concludes...

When I first started frequenting these boards I had the utmost respect for him and found many of his posts helpful.

I'm starting to wonder if I imagined that bit, I never bothered to check out any music if there was anything of note to appear ever.

It's so hard because I'm working from memory and I'm first to admit that I'm no audio expert now let alone then. I did know how to operate Sonar though - I'd been using it for 5 or 6 years before I joined the forum and self taught myself most of it so I've no worries posting about what I do know.

Whereas with 'audio in general' I was a clueless beginner then (and not that much further up the scale now) so when a post is written by what is by the nature of the beast a complete stranger who seems to have plenty of knowledge I'm impressed. That's what I remember but of course memory can play tricks, perhaps it was all cut & pasted from another site.

Stranger things have happened. Close up magic is one of my other hobbies/money making schemes and on a magic site I moderate on that was a prevalent happening. Someone trying to make out they were more knowledgeable than they were, for whatever reason, cutting and pasting or quoting from books/videos/other websites. In those type of niche areas though it's easier to spot.

Let's not forget there's nothing wrong with being a beginner though, everyone was there once but to some it's some sort of affront to their ego. Of course anyone who knows they're stuff can usually spot the 'Walter Mitty's' when they meet in 'the real world' but on a faceless forum it's much harder. If that is indeed the case, I really don't know - I don't wish him any harm but I really don't care much either. I have a tipping point for dealing with people, and I'm afraid that particular cart tipped a while ago.......

Jonbouy


Philip

I think Jeff has covered it quite well already.  Maintaining relative levels between loud and soft passages isn't difficult if they are planned for.

It's the very term 'Maximise' here that indicates the trolling factor provided by the OP.

You only have to look at the remaindered detritus on the front page of this particular forum to notice that any valid and considered discussion isn't coming from this particular OP just now.

I'd suggest a new thread if you wanted to discuss it with any earnestness.

That's just my opinion though, maximisation just doesn't seem to me the correct term for what you are alluding to.  Normalization may be a better one here, where the highest peak reaches a ceiling and everything else follows it's 'normal' relative level in relation to that loudest peak.

Mike just thinks we are going to smash everything to an equal RMS level because we are not as smart as him and he has insights into this that we don't. 

That's all I can conclude from the OP.

He'll have no way of knowing what those 'normal' differences in level are now though because he's already stated that he's been riding the faders while tracking so there won't be any normal differences between loud and soft left.  Which is really ironic given the title.

Very well ... due to popular consensus of trolling and/or excess loopiness ... by 2 or more of you dedicated musicians (for which I duly sympathize) ... I'll disregard this thread (and certain others) until the trolling issues wane signficantly.