Setting up a Standardized Wide Range Dynamic Environment
A proposal of a workflow for the composer and mixer.
.
Moderator's Edit: For the sake of better readabilty, the critical discussion of this thread continues HERE:
200,225 users have contributed to 43,194 threads and 259,061 posts.
In the past 24 hours, we have 0 new thread(s), 2 new post(s) and 71 new user(s).
Setting up a Standardized Wide Range Dynamic Environment
A proposal of a workflow for the composer and mixer.
.
Moderator's Edit: For the sake of better readabilty, the critical discussion of this thread continues HERE:
@mathis said:
In my template I was more concerned about the relative ff levels. So trumpets double loudness than horns. horns double loudness than strings and woodwinds. But I didn't set these levels by numbers but by ear.
On the other hand, since all instruments can play more or less equally soft the midi programming doesn't translate automatically between the instruments. I think about applying input filters to the individual instruments so instrument programming can be moved around freely without adaptation.
Angelo, you don't mention relative levels. How did you set these up?
@hermitage59 said:
I think Angelo's intent (and considerable reflection and work in this) is to provide a 'baseline' to start from, and give those who wish to build a template somewhere to begin. (Yes Angelo? Was this the idea?)
@jbm said:
Yes, this is the big question for me, too. I'm mostly concerned with relative levels - basically, in the sense of making 4 Horns fff distinctly mask out 1 solo violin fff...
@dpcon said:
[b]Does this mean for example if I have and aux in my DAW that is bringing in audio from an outboard cpu that I set it to -6.0? Or do I set the output faders in the outboard cpu of host Plogue Bidule to -06? Would you explain this step more and where it applies?