This is going to sound ridiculous...

[massimoz]

...But why to my Soundcloud waveforms look like a continuous brick even though I have quiet and loud sections!? Here's an example:

Soundcloud

Why can't it look like one where you can see the different sections:

Soundcloud


Thanks. And you're welcome to grind me if this is ridiculous!

[jetpack]

Are you using lots of compression...? Peek at my track in my sig, no compression at all.

[Hircine]

first it was skrillex bass, now it's skrillex waveform.

[massimoz]

first it was skrillex bass, now it's skrillex waveform.

Sorry! It's just that it came up in the Soundcloud 'hot' tracks and I just quickly picked one and it happened to be that.

Are you using lots of compression...? Peek at my track in my sig, no compression at all.

I don't think I'm using any compression at all. I haven't any limiters either. No mastering. I'm confused.

[jetpack]

Well, your track sounds good...drums could use a little beefing up, but usually, sub bass is the culprit for bricking a waveform. Have you eq'd out all of your higher freqs from your sub bass and vice versa for your highs?

[hysteriaa]

why does it even matter, as long as the musics good, who cares about the waveform..

[wormcode]

I don't know about your others, but that doesn't look like a brick. Also you have more frequency content going on from the sounds of it, like a sustaining pad/choir/strings sounds. The other is very choppy and cut-n-paste sounding.

I like your tune better anyway.

[Hircine]

just listened to the skrillex tune, it actually sounds good and minimal, not a raging fuckfest of mid range.

[Static D0gma]

...But why to my Soundcloud waveforms look like a continuous brick even though I have quiet and loud sections!?

Why did I laugh at that?

[Tracks To Wax]

...But why to my Soundcloud waveforms look like a continuous brick even though I have quiet and loud sections!? Here's an example:

Soundcloud

Why can't it look like one where you can see the different sections:

Soundcloud


Thanks. And you're welcome to grind me if this is ridiculous!

The continuous low-mid content in your track is causing this. The other tune has moments of no sub/low-mid's at all through out, but they have smashed it volume-wise, kick is clipping after the drop. Completely different types of music though.

[ChadDub]

Yeah you don't really have much mids in yours which is part of the reason.

[joshisrad]

Because at the loudest points in both tracks, yours is much more quiet.

Soundcloud's waveforms make your track look louder than it is. For tracks with a smaller overall dynamic range the size of the waveform will look closer to 0dB than you'd expect to see in an actual audio program like Audacity. It looks like your track is as loud as his on the waveform, but that isn't the reality of it at all. Also consider that your sub bass is playing throughout the whole thing, and constant sub bass pushes your RMS up.

Whereas, in the other guy's track, the sub bass doesn't play in the verse, but when the chorus comes in it slams all over the place. When the sub comes in the track gets way higher RMS than in the verse where there is no sub.

Is this making sense to you?

We only know loudness when we know quietness. The intro of his track shows us what quietness is. Then the drums come in and it gets a little louder. Then the sub comes in, and it gets crazy fucking loud.

[wub]

why does it even matter, as long as the musics good, who cares about the waveform..

This x 1000.


Folk need to stop getting hung up on what their tune looks like.

[outbound]

Waveform theory 101:

Bass/low-mids are where you're energy is and as such is represented as taking up more 'space' in your waveform.

Now in your track a lot of this energy is coming from the pads / bass which are fairly dynamically consistent across the track (This is what make it look flat). The drums which are what give the waveform transients are both very quiet and mainly top heavy meaning they won't show up a great deal in the waveform. In order to get them to 'look' more like the track you posted you would need more bass in the kick and snare.

It sounds trivial and it may sound funny to look into waveforms in detail but if you aren't very experienced and your monitoring system isn't quite cutting it then it is definitely a good starting point to question (especially when A/B'ing to tracks that you look up to)

@OP you may get stick for asking questions time to time but I'd much rather ask a question and be ridiculed than keep quiet and potentially miss out a vital piece of information.
Remember waveforms / spectral analysers will never be a substitute for using your ears however using them from time to time can possibly help you notice something you may have previously missed.

[nowaysj]

It can be very helpful to look at waveforms. Just expecting people with no training to sleuth out the intricacies of the physics of sound is rediculous. Anyone that thinks making side by side comparisons like this is useless, I can close to guarantee that you will learn something from this, if not a great deal. Ultimately u cannot mix like this, but u can learn a lot.

[Filthzilla]

first it was skrillex bass, now it's skrillex waveform.

[massimoz]

.

[massimoz]

..

[massimoz]

Well, your track sounds good...drums could use a little beefing up, but usually, sub bass is the culprit for bricking a waveform. Have you eq'd out all of your higher freqs from your sub bass and vice versa for your highs?

I eq'd all all of my lows...I'm not sure about my highs, I'll check that out. Thanks. And also for your comments on the drums.

why does it even matter, as long as the musics good, who cares about the waveform..

True. But I was wondering if it was an advanced problem like it subconsciously sounding stale or something. Something that my ears wouldn't pick up because I've heard the track so much.

I don't know about your others, but that doesn't look like a brick. Also you have more frequency content going on from the sounds of it, like a sustaining pad/choir/strings sounds. The other is very choppy and cut-n-paste sounding.

I like your tune better anyway.

I do have a pad, choir and strings running through it actually. Maybe they're too quiet. I thought that'd make the dynamics of the track even more consistent if they were louder. And I intended the cut-and-paste choppy sound. Maybe it sounds a bit too budget

just listened to the skrillex tune, it actually sounds good and minimal, not a raging fuckfest of mid range.

Yeah, it's not bad actually

The continuous low-mid content in your track is causing this. The other tune has moments of no sub/low-mid's at all through out, but they have smashed it volume-wise, kick is clipping after the drop. Completely different types of music though.

I see! Ok, I will remember this and make sure I have some varying moments of no low-mid content. I know it seems ridiculous to consider arranging a track based on waveform, but maybe it highlights not enough dynamic range in the low end which I'm sure would add to tension and interest. Thanks

Yeah you don't really have much mids in yours which is part of the reason.

I see. I thought I had too much mid as I thought my track sounds quite muddy?

Because at the loudest points in both tracks, yours is much more quiet.

Soundcloud's waveforms make your track look louder than it is. For tracks with a smaller overall dynamic range the size of the waveform will look closer to 0dB than you'd expect to see in an actual audio program like Audacity. It looks like your track is as loud as his on the waveform, but that isn't the reality of it at all. Also consider that your sub bass is playing throughout the whole thing, and constant sub bass pushes your RMS up.

Whereas, in the other guy's track, the sub bass doesn't play in the verse, but when the chorus comes in it slams all over the place. When the sub comes in the track gets way higher RMS than in the verse where there is no sub.

Is this making sense to you?

We only know loudness when we know quietness. The intro of his track shows us what quietness is. Then the drums come in and it gets a little louder. Then the sub comes in, and it gets crazy fucking loud.

Fantastic, this makes perfect sense to me! Thank you very much for your description and for everyone else's advice as well so far (I'm replying as I'm scrolling down). So grateful guys.

Folk need to stop getting hung up on what their tune looks like

I agree, but at the very least, I'm curious to know why this is the case.

Waveform theory 101:

Bass/low-mids are where you're energy is and as such is represented as taking up more 'space' in your waveform.

Now in your track a lot of this energy is coming from the pads / bass which are fairly dynamically consistent across the track (This is what make it look flat). The drums which are what give the waveform transients are both very quiet and mainly top heavy meaning they won't show up a great deal in the waveform. In order to get them to 'look' more like the track you posted you would need more bass in the kick and snare.

It sounds trivial and it may sound funny to look into waveforms in detail but if you aren't very experienced and your monitoring system isn't quite cutting it then it is definitely a good starting point to question (especially when A/B'ing to tracks that you look up to)

@OP you may get stick for asking questions time to time but I'd much rather ask a question and be ridiculed than keep quiet and potentially miss out a vital piece of information.
Remember waveforms / spectral analysers will never be a substitute for using your ears however using them from time to time can possibly help you notice something you may have previously missed.

Thank you, thank you! This all makes sense and I'm so happy that I've learnt something that for me is really important. It's highlighting that for me, in my tracks, I can make sections more exciting by varying the low end more. The tracks may not necessarily need this, but it's just good to know that this is what is causing my 'problem'. Yes, I was A/B'ing tracks and this helps me understand a bit why mine don't sound a punchy. I've layered about 3 bass drums and 3 snares and thought I added a lot of punch, but I guess not. I haven't used any transient designers or compression (maybe I'm not great at compression yet but I think it just kills the dynamic range and punch).

It can be very helpful to look at waveforms. Just expecting people with no training to sleuth out the intricacies of the physics of sound is rediculous. Anyone that thinks making side by side comparisons like this is useless, I can close to guarantee that you will learn something from this, if not a great deal. Ultimately u cannot mix like this, but u can learn a lot.

Yes, I agree.



Thank you guys, I've just woken up to all of these replies here in London and so pumped for the day realising that there are so many people who love to help each other out! Fantastic.

[massimoz]

Sorry guys, the bloody internet seemed to jam and now it's posted it thrice. I don't have a delete option when I click edit. Maybe I have to wait a bit. I've just put a full stop in the posts in them to shorten them instead.