Normalising is not essential if you are not changing format after recording. What you need a couple more TLA's (Three Letter Acronyms)?ĭAC is Digital to Analogue Converter - the bit that takes the bits and converts them to electrical waveforms.ĪDC is the Analogue to Digital Converter that you use to record with. Even knowing that a little bit of the high end is sacrificed to lose crackle is too much. For example, I am someone who will not buy remasters of 78s if surface noise is removed to the point of affecting the dynamic range of the music. To what degree is normalizing "unnaturally" affecting what the stylus and cartridge picked up? It is crucial to me to get the cleanest sound possible without adding things to the music, even if it "improves" the sound. If my levels are accurate on the capture (Peak: -6.4db, RMS -24.6db) and there isn't anything really "necessary" about normalizing, is there really a reason to start affecting the sound with normalization? I suppose the better phrased question is: what am I achieving by normalizing and does it perhaps just come down to a matter of opinion? Is it like flac vs a very high quality but imperceptibly lossy format?Ģ. What (embarrassed) is DAC? :oops: :oops: I know, I may have just spit on the Holy Grail.ġ. But while I really like the degree of detail and it has given me lots to read about online, I'm afraid you've surpassed my knowledge level. It's great having so much info to work with. I am very appreciative for all of your comments, guys. Some DAC's may handle it more gracefully than others - in my case with my setup it is clearly to be avoided.ĭlaloum wrote:precisely 48 samples through a 10minute track. There may be a different question wrapped up in this - which relates to how the output DAC then handles the conversion when there are clipped samples. (mind you this was only obvious on this one marimba/vibraphone track - other tracks did not obviously suffer from this problem although their levels and propensity to clip were similar)
I strongly (religiously!?) disagree with Werner on allowing clipping - as I find that even a small amount of clipping (there was one track that clipped on precisely 48 samples through a 10minute track) - results in a change in sound profile that introduces harshness. this provides enough margin to ensure the DAC is working in its optimal range without introducing any clipping. We are all clearly in violent agreement.īut nevertheless we can have a religious debate about how high to set the level when normalising.
Sound normalizer 6.4 pro#
For reference check the dynamic range and loudness of CDs from the early '90s which is about when CD mastering hit it's zenith, in my opinion, before Pro Tools and advanced digital processing came along and gave everyone too much freedom. You'd be surprised by how much you have to reduce the dynamic range to get a loudness equal to a modern CD release - perhaps 6dB or even more off the peaks. A pro mastering engineer can do the same job with regular compressors and limiters but they tend to have pretty arcane controls. I use Finis (from RND - no longer available) and it has just a gain control, a ceiling setting and a couple of noise-shaping choices. The best way to do this is with some kind of mastering plug-in with, hopefully, minimal controls. If you really want your rips to be at about the same perceived loudness as a CD then you're going to have to engage in a bit of judicious compression. If, however, you normalize the tracks individually then, yes, you will very likely change the loudness of the tracks relative to each other. The dynamic relationships are maintained. Normalizing will find the loudest peak & increase or decrease the overall gain to take that peak to a level of your choosing. Tinpanalley wrote:Doesn't normalizing (in making all loudness equal) in essence, affect the intended range of volume from track to track?Not necessarily and normalizing doesn't actually make "all loudness equal".
0 kommentar(er)
