Reference sound pressure level flowchart

[flipflop]

The TV SPL looks off. 20,000+ cu ft... what kind of use case is that for TV... that is a movie use case. Also note that TV shows use very high dynamic range compression. I turn the volume down 10-20 dB compared to movies.

Preferred Listening Levels and Acceptance Windows for Dialog Reproduction in the Domestic Environment found that 60 dBA is "a typical listening level for television viewing in actual homes".
I doubt that the TV shows, which brickwall their audio content, care about using the correct reference SPLs. The louder, the better.

 

[Senior NEET Engineer]

Preferred Listening Levels and Acceptance Windows for Dialog Reproduction in the Domestic Environment found that 60 dBA is "a typical listening level for television viewing in actual homes".
I doubt that the TV shows, which brickwall their audio content, care about using the correct reference SPLs. The louder, the better.

The movies tree root should point to "size of your room" node instead and TV tree root should be removed for now. Loudness is pretty consistent for TV... there should be a standard somewhere.

 

[flipflop]

TV tree root should be removed for now. Loudness is pretty consistent for TV... there should be a standard somewhere.

Are you saying that the cited source for TV reference levels is not a/the standard?

 

[Senior NEET Engineer]

Are you saying that the cited source for TV reference levels is not a/the standard?

SMPTE RP 200 is for movies.

 

[dasdoing]

I think this list is inspired by control room levels?
-20dB is good for mixeng because there should be headroom left for the mastering.
end users should use something like -3 to -6

 

[RayDunzl]

Preferred Listening Levels and Acceptance Windows for Dialog Reproduction in the Domestic Environment found that 60 dBA is "a typical listening level for television viewing in actual homes".

I'll buy that:

I doubt that the TV shows, which brickwall their audio content, care about using the correct reference SPLs. The louder, the better.

My experience:

My TV (optical output) is less loud overall than my HDRadio (optical output) or CD Player (optical output) or PC output (USB to optical)..

The program content is not smashed to the limits as is the current tendency for consumer music. If I switch to other sources, I usually have to turn it down a bit.

This is a cable signal, and it does have a low frequency cutoff on this program. Other content has greater range.

TV:

 

[dasdoing]

I think this list is inspired by control room levels?
-20dB is good for mixeng because there should be headroom left for the mastering.
end users should use something like -3 to -6

again,
http://www.voesd.at/files/Multichannel_Music_Mixing.pdf is for PRODUCTION, not for playback of the mastered endproduct. imo the guide should be corrected. the masters don't have -20dB loudness

 

[flipflop]

again,
http://www.voesd.at/files/Multichannel_Music_Mixing.pdf is for PRODUCTION, not for playback of the mastered endproduct. imo the guide should be corrected. the masters don't have -20dB loudness

I wouldn't mind updating it, but you have to cite a credible source which shares the view that consumer playback SPLs should be different from the ones used in mixing and mastering rooms.

 

[dasdoing]

I wouldn't mind updating it, but you have to cite a credible source which shares the view that consumer playback SPLs should be different from the ones used in mixing and mastering rooms.

I wont say that I am right.
it's just how I understand it:
-20dB in production is there in order to leave headroom for mastering. In the mastering stage the loudness will be brought up with compression and limiting.
Do we have any sound engenieers here that could clear this up?

 

[Pluto]

Don't confuse headroom on recording media with listening level. I don't have the time to look at all the references but I believe the -20dB figure refers to the advised headroom for the very loudest material against the absolute peak capability of the recording media. The last thing you want on a live recording is to go over absolute maximum level, so a safety margin of 20dB is often advised. If that master recording is to find its way onto a loudness-war contestant, the very highest peaks on the original (say -18dB reference max.) may well end up at -0.2dB on the end product.

That's mastering for you.

 

[tomelex]

I believe this is why so many audiophiles listen at levels that are louder than reality - especially for small ensemble acoustic music. The louder level is like boosting the bass & treble. Which is ironic, since many of these same audiophiles eschew the use of tone controls, not realizing their volume knob is a kind of tone control.

yes, the so called hi-end in the seventies did away with tone controls, even though on all the better preamps of the time there was a bypass switch, the reason they did away with tone controls has a lot to do with their inability to design them in the small cottage industry shops so they just said they were bad and got in the way, when in reality there is one general volume control setting you need to be at to try to duplicate somewhat wha tthe recording engineer was aiming at for balance across the band,.....and we all do not always listen at high volumes for sure, and some speakers are bass heavy to start with so as you turn it up things get skewed and you need to turn to those "missing" tone controls to set things back to a listening experience that makes more sense for you as an individual.

 

[BDWoody]

and we all do not always listen at high volumes for sure, and some speakers are bass heavy to start with so as you turn it up things get skewed and you need to turn to those "missing" tone controls to set things back to a listening experience that makes more sense for you as an individual.

I have an old Nakamichi preamp with a contour knob...the suggestion is to set the main volume knob at the loudest listening you'll do, then adjust interim levels with the contour control...have to say, it works great. Wish more newer units had such a thing...

 

[MRC01]

yes, the so called hi-end in the seventies did away with tone controls ...

I remember that and am glad to see tone controls (or EQ more generally) making a comeback. Especially in this age of DSP effectively eliminating side effects when used judiciously. My current DAC/Preamp has tone controls, good old fashioned knobs you physically turn. They're implemented in DSP but I still enjoy the nostalgia every time I use them, or even look at them. They come in handy because the sad fact is that there will always be some great music with not-so-great sounding recordings.

Of course tone controls can't fix every flaw, far from it. But they do help with the most common recording flaws which are related to tonal balance.

 

[dasdoing]

Don't confuse headroom on recording media with listening level. I don't have the time to look at all the references but I believe the -20dB figure refers to the advised headroom for the very loudest material against the absolute peak capability of the recording media. The last thing you want on a live recording is to go over absolute maximum level, so a safety margin of 20dB is often advised. If that master recording is to find its way onto a loudness-war contestant, the very highest peaks on the original (say -18dB reference max.) may well end up at -0.2dB on the end product.

That's mastering for you.

when you master to up to -0.2dB, is your system calibrated with -20dB pink noise to 83dB?
in the other topic you said engineers master at a variety of listening levels; that would make calibrating home listening nonesene from the start as you never know at which levels stuff was mastered.

 

[Pluto]

when you master to up to -0.2dB, is your system calibrated with -20dB pink noise to 83dB?

No.

Not that I would ever run up to that level. Not even close.

in the other topic you said engineers master at a variety of listening levels; that would make calibrating home listening nonsense from the start

Yup!