Variations in LFE volume

[LTW]

I was wondering how more experienced Multichannel listeners here deal with variations in LFE volume between albums when listening?
I have found it is more evident in modern rock and metal music (which I listen too and create) with deeper kick and bass frequencies than it is in other genres that make much lighter use of the LFE channel.
Do you find it not much of an issue and take the variations as they were intended? Or are you adjusting your sub volume between albums?

Working on my own 5.1 mixes and studying Steven Wilson's work, I've even noticed quite large variations in gain through Porcupine Tree and his solo work. I'm assuming there isn't really a consensus among mixers how loud the LFE should be. Does Atmos require a more strict adherence?

 

[mrcond]

Do you find it not much of an issue and take the variations as they were intended? Or are you adjusting your sub volume between albums?

I am a “set it and forget it” type and almost never adjust anything other than overall volume when listening. So I guess you can say I take the variations as they were intended. While sometimes I wish the mixer would have used more bass in the mix, I find boosting the subs doesn’t serve the music well. I’ve been very content with this approach.

I use bass management so I honestly don’t know if the bass is coming from the main channels or the LFE channel or both, in any recording.

 

[Mr. Afternoon]

I personally believe that LFE doesn't have a place in musical multichannel mixes. Those who care about multichannel are smart enough to use bass management if needed, so personally I'd say to throw out the LFE altogether and deliver as 5.0. Just my two cents, FWIW.

 

[marpow]

I love LFE, but I do not listen at high SUB/LFE volume.
I have a small listening room 12' X 14' with 3 Subs, two of the three are LFE connected and the center channel sub is connected to speaker amp posts.
I believe through personal experience that the LFE/Subs takes out the nulls at listening position and fills the room with proper bass pressure.
I do not have the settings set so high that I get creaking or rattling of anything, it is a proper low end.
I was listening two days ago to Steven Wilsons most recent The Harmony Codex in Dolby Atmos, there where a couple tracks that had very low LFE to the point I could feel the LFE through my sitting chair, it actually is a fun experience.
Of course all of my rig has proper tuning, acoustic treatment on walls, etc which all combined improves my listening experience.
My listening is as 2.1, 5.1 and even my 4.0, are tuned to 4.1, albeit very subtle. My ATMOS, well of course all is engaged.

 

[LB-V]

I am a “set it and forget it” type and almost never adjust anything other than overall volume when listening. So I guess you can say I take the variations as they were intended. While sometimes I wish the mixer would have used more bass in the mix, I find boosting the subs doesn’t serve the music well. I’ve been very content with this approach.

I use bass management so I honestly don’t know if the bass is coming from the main channels or the LFE channel or both, in any recording.

I'm in this camp. It sounds good to me where I've got things for my listening, regardless. I never really notice when the bass seems high or low....it just sounds correct.

I understood "LFE" to be intended for movies and specific sounds like gunshots, helicopter blades, etc. It is not intended, from my understanding, to be used for musical listening. I don't use it, but I do enjoy all my subs.

 

[LTW]

I am a “set it and forget it” type and almost never adjust anything other than overall volume when listening. So I guess you can say I take the variations as they were intended. While sometimes I wish the mixer would have used more bass in the mix, I find boosting the subs doesn’t serve the music well. I’ve been very content with this approach.

I use bass management so I honestly don’t know if the bass is coming from the main channels or the LFE channel or both, in any recording.

I generally leave it set too. I do remember recently though that Devin Townsends recent 5.1 mixes and Soundgardens Badmotorfinger had very loud LFE channels that got me off my chair to turn the LFE down.

I personally believe that LFE doesn't have a place in musical multichannel mixes. Those who care about multichannel are smart enough to use bass management if needed, so personally I'd say to throw out the LFE altogether and deliver as 5.0. Just my two cents, FWIW.

I’ve seen others with this view too. I can understand how that could work for most genres. For my own music, which is pretty dense prog rock/metal, if I don’t use the LFE my mixes sound rather anemic. Having a thick punchy low end is crucial. Bass management works well for stereo but as soon as the room is filled with multiple channels, BM doesn’t cut it at the same amp settings.

I love LFE, but I do not listen at high SUB/LFE volume.
I have a small listening room 12' X 14' with 3 Subs, two of the three are LFE connected and the center channel sub is connected to speaker amp posts.
I believe through personal experience that the LFE/Subs takes out the nulls at listening position and fills the room with proper bass pressure.
I do not have the settings set so high that I get creaking or rattling of anything, it is a proper low end.
I was listening two days ago to Steven Wilsons most recent The Harmony Codex in Dolby Atmos, there where a couple tracks that had very low LFE to the point I could feel the LFE through my sitting chair, it actually is a fun experience.
Of course all of my rig has proper tuning, acoustic treatment on walls, etc which all combined improves my listening experience.
My listening is as 2.1, 5.1 and even my 4.0, are tuned to 4.1, albeit very subtle. My ATMOS, well of course all is engaged.

Oh man, SW controls the LFE so well on the Harmony Codex. I’m in awe. It’s very big in places but so well balanced. Don’t know how he does it.

 

[Mr. Afternoon]

Bass management works well for stereo but as soon as the room is filled with multiple channels, BM doesn’t cut it at the same amp settings.

That... doesn't sound quite right. On my setup bass management outputs the same amount of bass in stereo and 5.1. Although, I suppose every equipment manufacturer has it's quirks. For example, I know some Yamaha AVRs only bass manage the fronts and not the center and rears. I suppose you could get around that with software-based bass management but a lot of people still rely on hardware setups.

 

[LTW]

That... doesn't sound quite right. On my setup bass management outputs the same amount of bass in stereo and 5.1. Although, I suppose every equipment manufacturer has it's quirks. For example, I know some Yamaha AVRs only bass manage the fronts and not the center and rears. I suppose you could get around that with software-based bass management but a lot of people still rely on hardware setups.

I haven’t done a direct comparison between stereo and 5.1 with a song that outputs the same amount of sub frequencies in both mixes so you’re probably right that bass management should be working the same.
Perhaps what I mean is that with 5.1 or above there is more bandwidth to use LFE because it’s likely people have a sub. I can push the LFE channel for more low freq depth, whereas with stereo I’m rolling off below 40-50hz more. They are quite different approaches for the kind of music I’m making at least.

 

[kfbkfb]

https://delosmusic.com/recording/surround-spectacular-the-music-the-tests/

This test album might help in setting the subwoofer amplitude.


Kirk Bayne

 

[LTW]

Something kind of related that I came across: phase issues caused by low-pass filtering. My LFE mix was sounding very weak despite it's dB value and I discovered it was being shifted out of phase. Switching to a linear phase EQ mostly fixed it.

I dug further, checking Steven Wilson's 5.1 mixes for Closure/Continuation and The Harmony Codex and discovered that he doesn't low pass his LFE channel AT ALL. It's a full range signal. I can only assume it's to avoid and kick and bass guitar phase issues between the LFE and other channels. If he does it, I don't see any reason why I shouldn't follow his lead

 

[DuncanS]

Any filter adds group delay, the lower the bandwidth, the more the delay, and the higher the filter order (so the quicker the roll-off) the more the delay.

On top of any LFE filtering in authoring there will more than likely be delay added by the sub-woofer itself, as I would expect them to have a low pass filter as well. Linear phase or Bessel (maximally flat delay) filters will add delay, but the frequency roll-off isn't as great as you need a higher order filter to get the same level of attenuation.

I would follow Steven Wilson and not filter.

BTW I'm an Electronic Design Engineer who has designed a lot of analogue filters, also I don't have an LFE as I have floorstanders, so I don't get the same issues.

 

[LTW]

Any filter adds group delay, the lower the bandwidth, the more the delay, and the higher the filter order (so the quicker the roll-off) the more the delay.

On top of any LFE filtering in authoring there will more than likely be delay added by the sub-woofer itself, as I would expect them to have a low pass filter as well. Linear phase or Bessel (maximally flat delay) filters will add delay, but the frequency roll-off isn't as great as you need a higher order filter to get the same level of attenuation.

I would follow Steven Wilson and not filter.

BTW I'm an Electronic Design Engineer who has designed a lot of analogue filters, also I don't have an LFE as I have floorstanders, so I don't get the same issues.

Thanks for the info. It hasn't really been an issue for me before but the LFE makes it starkly clear.

 

[Mr. Afternoon]

Any filter adds group delay, the lower the bandwidth, the more the delay, and the higher the filter order (so the quicker the roll-off) the more the delay.

I've never run into any delay issues whatsoever because the DAWs I have used have auto-compensated. In fact, I'm kind of surprised any modern DAW doesn't auto-compensate, but from the horror stories I've heard I shouldn't be surprised.

 

[Stephen W Tayler]

It would seem to be that there are never any hard and fast rules for how to approach mixing music for multichannel formats.

I know I personally just like to discover what works for me, and hope that might be appreciated by others.

On the subject of LFE channel:

I had always used the LFE channel non-filtered, so full range - albeit just for hints of support for bass instruments and occasional effects.

However I was absolutely criticised for using full range for an effects section on a project I mixed a couple of years ago - it was meant to just emphasise the low frequencies for a soundscape introduction. But obviously somebody decided to listen to that channel on a full range speaker (not normal!) and drew attention to it, and as I say he criticised my choices very aggressively.

Some previous encoding algorithms for Dolby etc made sure the LFE was filtered, but after the introduction of DTS-HD encoding and LPCM lossless the transfers from the WAV files has been straight.

So ever since then I have been using filtering on the LFE channel for my mix outputs.

I checked the specification requirements for Dolby Atmos - and they do actually say that the LFE channel must be filtered, not full range.

As I say there are no specific requirements for multichannel music - and I have been forever breaking the rules in the world of sound anyway. Hey - I’m still here doing what I love!!

SWTx

 

[jimfisheye]

I was wondering how more experienced Multichannel listeners here deal with variations in LFE volume between albums when listening?
I have found it is more evident in modern rock and metal music (which I listen too and create) with deeper kick and bass frequencies than it is in other genres that make much lighter use of the LFE channel.
Do you find it not much of an issue and take the variations as they were intended? Or are you adjusting your sub volume between albums?

Working on my own 5.1 mixes and studying Steven Wilson's work, I've even noticed quite large variations in gain through Porcupine Tree and his solo work. I'm assuming there isn't really a consensus among mixers how loud the LFE should be. Does Atmos require a more strict adherence?

I haven't experienced any mixes that are just way out in left field with the Lfe channel.

I've seen/heard the mistakes talked about around here! The weird offset mistakes and all that. That scenario results in reduced bass. So, no reaching for the volume control with that.

I go from zero to 100 with alterations. I either listen out of the box strictly flat/calibrated by the book and take it as delivered or I bring it into my DAW app for my own remastering. So if I get some bootleg recording that's all piercing 2k screaming at you... that's going to remastering pretty quickly. (That is, if it isn't just shut off and deleted!) Most professional recordings don't make me jump for anything. Some of the shrill volume war CD editions do though!

Yeah, rogue CD masters make me leap for the volume control more than any Lfe faux pas!

Atmos encoding doesn't do anything different with the Lfe or introduce any different standards.

Yeah, so the weird Lfe offset mistakes!
Can anyone offer a clue on how some of these happened? What was the screwup? I'm just really curious to know if this was a software bug led blunder or if this is genuinely a number of different people all with an outboard fx path on their Lfe track and all screwing up their DAW system offsets with that. Just typing that out makes it feel absurd to suggest... but here we are!

 

[jimfisheye]

I know there are two camps for Lfe use.

Old school:
Your mains speakers only go so low...
You put a crossover eq on a sub to limit it to bass only.
Now you send mix elements to the sub that you want to have extended sub bass.
The crossover on the sub removes everything above the sub bass.
The mains speakers fade out where they do.
You mix to taste with that system.
Your Lfe channel in the file ends up with full range audio.

The end listener here also uses a sub with a crossover low pass eq and sets the volume to taste.

New school:
We're calibrated here!!!
Mains and sub are critically calibrated for the system. Mains are still full range and uncompromised themselves.
You mix any sub bass content to the Lfe specidfically. Nothing random. Nothing based on how your mains fade out in the sub range.

In theory, the end listener here can calibrate their system by the book and now any mix will be delivered as the mixer intended.

 

[Mr. Afternoon]

Can anyone offer a clue on how some of these happened? What was the screwup?

Pro Tools didn't auto-compensate some plugin delays for the longest time ever, from what I've read.

 

[omnipotent1]

I just pull up the LFE channel on my remote and adjust on the fly.
I tend to listen a lot of different genres in a session so say Kreator Enemy of God then Rosary Sonatas then maybe some Marvin Gaye maybe some Jeff Beck then maybe some Jehan Alai(pipe organ)
Also late night listening, to be kind I generally lower the LFE a bit for my family

 

[LTW]

Pro Tools didn't auto-compensate some plugin delays for the longest time ever, from what I've read.

Is automatic plugin delay compensation from latency the same as delay caused by strong filtering? I wonder if they are handled by the same process in a DAW. A DAW would know how much latency is caused by plug-in latency but I’m not sure it would know what the exact high pass filter settings are being used by a EQ plugin and compensate accordingly? The eq itself wouldn’t be able to do it because it can’t affect the rest of the DAW. anyway, that’s a tangent.

It would seem to be that there are never any hard and fast rules for how to approach mixing music for multichannel formats.

I know I personally just like to discover what works for me, and hope that might be appreciated by others.

On the subject of LFE channel:

I had always used the LFE channel non-filtered, so full range - albeit just for hints of support for bass instruments and occasional effects.

However I was absolutely criticised for using full range for an effects section on a project I mixed a couple of years ago - it was meant to just emphasise the low frequencies for a soundscape introduction. But obviously somebody decided to listen to that channel on a full range speaker (not normal!) and drew attention to it, and as I say he criticised my choices very aggressively.

Some previous encoding algorithms for Dolby etc made sure the LFE was filtered, but after the introduction of DTS-HD encoding and LPCM lossless the transfers from the WAV files has been straight.

So ever since then I have been using filtering on the LFE channel for my mix outputs.

I checked the specification requirements for Dolby Atmos - and they do actually say that the LFE channel must be filtered, not full range.

As I say there are no specific requirements for multichannel music - and I have been forever breaking the rules in the world of sound anyway. Hey - I’m still here doing what I love!!

SWTx

I saw those Dolby specs too. I haven’t mixed in Atmos myself yet. Wonder if SW also follows that LFE requirement? I assume he does separate 5.1 and Atmos mixes and not a 5.1 fold down of Atmos. They must also recommend filtering that doesn’t introduce phase issues!

 

[jimfisheye]

Pro Tools didn't auto-compensate some plugin delays for the longest time ever, from what I've read.

They were actually the first DAW to offer PDC (plugin delay compensation). I remember that well because it suddenly meant not having to do that math and nudge all the tracks all the time!! (Delay plugins took processing cycles... So you'd nudge tracks instead.)

Hmmm... You might have answered my question at the same time though!
I also remember one of the bugs at the end that made me ditch Protools HD and upgrade to Reaper! Depending on the PDC delay required for a specific plugin (especially if it was a Waves plugin with a larger latency) you might get a crash that resulted in random delays across the board. But you'd usually hear that and have a few choice words and all!