XPost: rec.audio.pro, comp.dsp   
   From: gah@ugcs.caltech.edu   
      
   In comp.dsp Mike Rivers  wrote:   
   (snip, I wrote)   
      
   (snip, and previous snip, on record levels)   
      
   >> Well, the idea is that they should sound about the same level,   
   >> such that one shouldn't want to run up and change the volume   
   >> control for each track.   
      
   > Oh, you mean mixing in the sense of "mix tape" rather than   
   > mixing a multitrack recording down to stereo. Well, of   
   > course the listener shouldn't have to run up and change the   
   > volume control, but, too, he shouldn't be subject to a flat   
   > program unless he isn't actually listening to it. Elevator   
   > music is good for that. Concerts, and even interesting radio   
   > programming don't work that way, however.   
      
   Yes.  The level I am considering is per track.  One that I have   
   done had some tracks a symphony orchestra and others a flute   
   quintet, three harps, or sometimes just vocals.   
      
   > If there's risk of hearing or speaker damage when switching   
   > between songs in a program, sure, that should be fixed, and   
   > normalizing to equal peak level can work. But unless each   
   > piece of the program has very little dynamic range (which   
   > isn't all that unusual in pop music today) you'll still have   
   > differences in perceived loudness.   
      
   Yes, so I usually don't want to go for just peaks.  It isn't   
   (usually) pop, but vocal music has much less dynamic range than   
   the symphony orchestra.   
      
   (snip)   
      
   > That's not the way you do it. You consider how annoyed you   
   > are when going from song to song. This is the money crop for   
   > mastering engineers.   
      
   There is no money in this, though.   
      
   -- glen   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)