Members flyry Posted January 18, 2007 Members Share Posted January 18, 2007 Hello. I've heard that the standard is -0.3 dB. Is this correct? Is it a problem to have a CD at 0 dB? I'm using A4 studio to "master" a give-away live band recording. It "maximizes" to 0 dB, which sounds great, but when I do the second process to make the levels -0.3 dB it messes up the sound. I'd like to just do the one process to 0 db if it's not a problem. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members philbo Posted January 18, 2007 Members Share Posted January 18, 2007 It won't cause the universe to dissolve or anything.... If there are a certain number of consecutive samples that are at 0, some duplicator companies will reject it. Have you tried -0.1? or -0.5? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members where02190 Posted January 18, 2007 Members Share Posted January 18, 2007 Not to mention that it may sound like ass in some players with poor converters that can't handle the level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMS Author MikeRivers Posted January 18, 2007 CMS Author Share Posted January 18, 2007 Hello. I've heard that the standard is -0.3 dB. Is this correct? Is it a problem to have a CD at 0 dB? .There's really no standard for CD level other than "as loud as possible." The problme with getting too close to full scale (0 dBFS) is that most D/A converters get to sounding pretty funky over the top dB or so. If this is not a problem (for example, with the typical rock record which thrives on distortion) then you can go ahead and hit full scale all you want. If you're "mastering" a classical or Jazz CD or some other form of music where the listener is likely to notice that it sounds very clean, then I'd keep the level down to -1 dBFS. Those listeners don't mind turning up the volume control if they want to hear it louder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members the stranger Posted January 18, 2007 Members Share Posted January 18, 2007 Not to mention that it may sound like ass in some players with poor converters that can't handle the level. I learned over time that it doesn't sound good. I can pump out a CD that is 5 times as loud as anything you've ever heard. My buddy said [back when I first started cooking up beats] that I should sell some of my jams to guys who go to crankit competitions. _~ Now I never burn a CD that has anything going over -6. It just sounds better, imo. +1 for the volume knob! It's a crap shoot, in regard to converters. I've sold CD players and/or shelved them right after I got them because the converters sounded like crap and/or had audible clocking/jitter/digital noise issues. Better to stay on the safe side. And if you limit everything at -6, then twenty years from now when they remaster your classic, it won't sound like ass. _~ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted January 18, 2007 Members Share Posted January 18, 2007 Is this correct? Is it a problem to have a CD at 0 dB? Isn't this the contest that mastering engineers are having? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted January 18, 2007 Members Share Posted January 18, 2007 For rock/pop sort of stuff, I keep it under -0.4 dB. At that level, if a client wants their music absurdly loud, it's still quite possible anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members blue2blue Posted January 18, 2007 Members Share Posted January 18, 2007 It won't cause the universe to dissolve or anything.... If there are a certain number of consecutive samples that are at 0, some duplicator companies will reject it. Have you tried -0.1? or -0.5? This is closer to my understanding. I'm interested in reading more about this audio degradation in the top x (or .x) dB that some posters are referring to. That's a bit of of a new one on me. (I'm not suggesting, however, that the strategy of leaving yourself a little headroom is a bad one -- simply focused on this putative degradation at the very top of the converter's dynamic range in a signal with no actual "overs" [which I guess I'd define here as consecutive 0 dBfs words in the digital audio stream].) I'd love to read up on that. If anyone has a link to the facts... [Of course, I'm referring strictly to levels here -- NOT the hideous "competitive loudness" squashing that some folks do; that's a separate issue since the degradation there (all else being equal) comes from "overdoing" the compression/limiting. And no argument on that degradation. Some of it is simply awful. I heard a newer ZZ Top song ("Bang Bang") the other day that was pretty close to unlistenable, even once.] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Rudolf von Hagenwil Posted January 18, 2007 Members Share Posted January 18, 2007 I'm interested in reading more about this audio degradation in the top x (or .x) dB that some posters are referring to. Digital LevelIn digital production, level has traditionally been measured on a sample-by-sample basis. The highest possible level in a digital encoding is called 0 dBFS (or Full Scale Digital, FSD), and the only thing to be concerned about is not to hit that ceiling with too many samples in a row. However, a signal which needs more headroom to reproduce than a sine wave peaking at 0 dBFS can easily exist in the digital domain. We refer to such signals as "0 dBFS+", and haven Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members philbo Posted January 18, 2007 Members Share Posted January 18, 2007 Another issue is with the way analog electronics is designed. Typically, harmonic distortion starts rising exponentially around -10 dBFS, and reaches 3% THD in PRO gear at 0 dBFS (for a steady-state tone). (This is true if the equipment is not over-designed. Many people deliberately over-design their gear so the 3% THD level is reached at a much higher level) For consumer gear the number is typically 5 to 15% THD instead of 3%. For non-steady-state audio, such as a transient that ends up in the 0 dBFS+ mode, the harmonic distortion is going to be much worse, in general... That's why it ends up with the crapola sound quality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members blue2blue Posted January 18, 2007 Members Share Posted January 18, 2007 Whoa, Nelly. Are you talking about CONVERTERS there, Philbo? Because I'm 101% sure that there are NO pro converters with THD figures ANYWHERE close to that as they reach the levels required to drive their AD to 0 dBfs... I must be misunderstanding what you're getting at, somehow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.