Current US Commercial Loudness Game (CALM/ATSC?)

[jeremiahmoore]

Hi -

Any commercial mixers care to weigh in? Are you worrying about CALM/ATSC/LKFS numbers, or just going for loud?

I just got a spot in which was mixed in stereo, and as received metered at -17dB LKFS. Way over the spec. To bring it down to -22 I lowered it 4.5dB (!)

The job was to produce a surround upmix of the spot. I did this, and ran it at the 4.5dB lower level, hitting -22 (the top of the -24 +/-2 LKFS "spec")

I'm delivering a 5.1 version, plus stereo version (with the lowered levels, producers request "so it matches")

Either
- this is going to be great
- this is going to sound quiet on air

thoughts?

-jeremiah

[Chief Technician]

Originally Posted by jeremiahmoore

The job was to produce a surround upmix of the spot. I did this, and ran it at the 4.5dB lower level, hitting -22 (the top of the -24 +/-2 LKFS "spec")

This is what the audio departments of the networks would call playing the corner. You are thinking The spec says +/-2, so I'll just be at the +2 all the time. Some networks have their infrastructure configured to observe that you are playing the corner and scale the content down another -2dB.

One of the things that needs to be taken into account, and CALM doesn't do this, is how programs will be mixed. CALM is for commercials, not for programming. Some networks have publicly stated Well, you know, CALM doesn't regulate the loudness of our programming, but we are going to do the right thing and deliver our programming at -24dB LKFS.

Basically, if networks don't do the right thing, then people will still be reaching for their volume controls at the start and end of commercial breaks.

[jeremiahmoore]

Thanks Chief Technician-

Yes, definitely choosing to play the corner here. The piece had already been mixed and I suppose aired (no idea where, my client inherited tapes to do a cutdown and 5.1 upmix of) and I was turning it DOWN to meet the spec, and 4.5dB down is a lot. It's a Nike spot, so I suspect it was mixed at a high profile shop.

Which made me wonder: What are people doing who mix a lot of spots? Is the defacto norm "disregard the spec?" or is it "let the network's media server batch it to meet spec"? or is it "Meet the spec"?

I did post on Friday night, which might account for the very few responses so far, but I also suspect the real answer to be "all of the above, whatever you can get away with." (as usual, it's the wild west in the USA. What I wonder is: is the Sherif cracking down?)

-j

[froyo]

Hello. I'll jump in with what's been my experience so far. I've done a few spots in the last 2 or 3 months and I have to say, I'm liking it. It flows better. Part of it for myself also is the fact that with LKFS it takes me back to mixing to an average (VU, kind of) as opposed to limited peaks. It just flows better. However, I agree with the Chief, the devil will be in the details. Everybody involved has to play the same game and play fair, otherwise the sandbox will be filled with the same crying toddlers.

P.S. I also had to remix a spot from early in the year and I also found I had to turn stuff down about 6 dB or so, mostly the VO and music.

[jeremiahmoore]

Well, this piece is done and delivered. If it bounces back I will certainly post my experience here.

I'd hate to be the "after it went to that guy, it played low on air" guy, by delivering back a product 4.5dB lower than what I received. (which, yes, could end up getting normalized or levelled by the network, or not as happenstance will dictate)

But at least I can say "I played to the [corner of the] rules"

Frankly I agree with the CALM concept and implementation, and MUCH prefer mixing-to-spec level wise rather than stressing about how a given network's distribution chain is going to mangle (or not) my mix depending on what level I mix to. And mixing to a peak level spec is meaningless to harmful in terms of flooding the market with low crest factor, low dynamic audio, the sonic equivalent of overprocessed junk food.

My question is more to: are people playing by the CALM spec? Are mixers accepting the "best practice" as dictated, or continuing with the loudness wars? And if the latter, what are the effects?

(Now I suspect we enter the realm of philosophy: idealism vs. pragmatism, but please share any real experience if you have it to share!)

-j

[admix]

We've been mixing to the spec (-24) for some months now, with no major repercussions. The mixes are more well rounded, sound great on network broadcasts, and have somehow even fared well in the wild west that is cable. Initial worries that they'd get lost on stations not yet adhering to -24 turned out to be for the most part, unfounded.

The only network as yet that will simply reject non-spec mixes, is FOX. other major networks will simply scale your mixes down to meet the standard. Once FOX started doing that though, we complied, as our clients were loathe to spend money on shipping a FOX specific mix, and another mix for everyone else.

In the end, this has turned thankfully, into a non-issue... and frankly, a fairly significant improvement in quality.

[jeremiahmoore]

Great News Admix - I'm glad to hear the real experience of -24LKFS is working well.

Perhaps next time I will play the center instead of the corner, and we can all get back to doing good mixes!

-jeremiah

[BobbyDazzler]

So are the networks still running broadcast limiters/compressors now that everything is being QC'ed to within an inch of its life?

[Chief Technician]

Originally Posted by BobbyDazzler

So are the networks still running broadcast limiters/compressors now that everything is being QC'ed to within an inch of its life?

I don't work for Comcast (NBC Universal), but last I knew they had some signal paths with limiters/compressors. That will probably change to an all-scaling (no limiters/compressors) signal chain within a year, when the FCC will begin enforcing the CALM act and levying penalties.