Should not really matter what volumes and playback systems IMO. This is a key point as all of our players will be using whatever they prefer in that regard. Sounds should suit all systems and volumes best they can I suppose. I know this is hard thing to do, specially with EAX and all that nonsense
I also like the BMP sounds, well done. Explosions sounds and m249 not a great fan of compared to the older ones. I find them already more then decent and see absolutely no reason for a change (apart from some volume work)
Which is something I find to apply to most of our library atm as most of them are more then above good for the team. Rather have you focus on some of the lesser sounds that most people think could use some work. I personally think the L85 series right now doesn't really sound right? Could you look into that? And the G36 hasn't been liked by some R/L operators of them neither for the past few releases And of course biggest focus should lie on new sounds where there are none like you are doing for PR L! Great work on that.
In fact I also think the m249 sound isn't 100% right compared to the real thing?
while there is a massive drop in quality due to the device that is recording, I think its a good area to aim for.
4:40 is a good place to aim for, your current version just sounds like it has to high of a rof. I feel like the sounds should just be a cleaned up version of the sound at 4:40, more stereo might be all that it would need from that video.
It's about time the reload sounds become stereo and its great to have someone that can help improve, add and fix some bugs in the sounds
I love how crisp and clean the gun in the video sounds. I know in the past if memory serves that there were attempts to make reload stereo but they werent sucessful.
Lookjng forward to seeing more. Do you use Sony Soundforge for the sounds? I read its the best for BF2
Last edited by Arab on 2015-08-13 12:59, edited 3 times in total.
while there is a massive drop in quality due to the device that is recording, I think its a good area to aim for.
4:40 is a good place to aim for, your current version just sounds like it has to high of a rof. I feel like the sounds should just be a cleaned up version of the sound at 4:40, more stereo might be all that it would need from that video.
If I remember correctly that's pretty much how the M249 used to sound in 1.0. Always wondered why it was changed, I really liked it then.
First of all: since English is not my native language and I tend to be very direct and precise, I sometimes come off as cocky or condescending. This is not my intention. I love PR, play it actively again since 1.3 was released and want just the best for it. When the servers needed money I donated although I live off of approx. 220 Eur a month at the time. There is just no game like it out there.
I use the PR sound examples only as arguments, not to bash them.
Hey guys, thanks for your replies. I understand that audio is a close to the heart topic in PR and although I absolutely understand different opinions on taste, I would love to start a discussion with you guys about topics, that are not up to taste. Some of it will need some preparation though, I will need to produce some videos about audio and maybe I can convince you guys of a thing or two. I am too passionate about sound to not try to.
[quote=""'[R-DEV"]Mineral;2090807']Should not really matter what volumes and playback systems IMO. This is a key point as all of our players will be using whatever they prefer in that regard. Sounds should suit all systems and volumes best they can I suppose. I know this is hard thing to do, specially with EAX and all that nonsense
[/quote]
Thanks for your reply. I absolutely agree that a sound should sound decent on a wide range of playback systems. But I must say that someone with a cheap 2.0 system can not expect to experience the same audio sensation compared to someone with more expensive, high end speakers or headphones. This is why "everything sounds different for everybody" unless you have a good middle ground. More on that later. To prevent any misunderstandings, a short video.
There is a reason why everybody who is serious about audio production needs to use a playback system with a so called "linear "frequency response". These kind of speakers/headphones are "honest" and show the sound the way it really is because they do not favor any frequency range (bass, mid range, high).
Imagine mixing a sound on a speaker system that has a LOT of exaggerated bass and you feel that it's "just right" - everyone else will tell you to mix the material with more bass and you become confused, because for YOU "it sounds just right". This works the other way around as well. If someone has a "super elite awesome bass boost" they will tell the mixer "omg there is too much bass!" and that's not really the mixers fault. So it's important to find some kind of middleground and the first thing is - a proper, honest, linear playback system.
If someone with rather cheap/nonlinear systems gives me sound feedback I accept it but sometimes with a grain of salt because for some system you can compensate using some psychoacoustic tricks (example: read the big bottom quote of this article) and sometimes the playback systems are SO bad, that I can barely take that serious.
Back in the day I bought myself some gamer headset from steel-series which sounded VERY weird when I put them on. So I did some digging in the interwebs and found out about all this "frequency response stuff". The headset had NO low end and boosted high frequency output to emphasize footsteps in games. The headset went back to the store the next week.
Speaking of psychoacoustics, there is this thing called the Fletcher Munson curves (additional info at the end of the post) which basically says - the more you raise the volume of something you are listening to, the more bass and high end you will hear. So if you listen to something at a quiet volume you will miss out on all the sensation of good low and high end. This is especially difficult to work around because many people play on different volume levels. But the levels are not too different, according to my little survey here these players (myself included) play at around 25% +/- 10%. So the values are not too different, I can expect some consistency there.
But it's a tricky area that even the most advanced mastering engineers have to play with. It's an amazing effect, I have lots to learn about it and talked to the sound designer of Insurgency about this exact topic today.
I also like the BMP sounds, well done. Explosions sounds and m249 not a great fan of compared to the older ones. I find them already more then decent and see absolutely no reason for a change (apart from some volume work)
Thanks for the BMP comment, I also love it.
I hope you compared the M249 sounds that I provided because they are at equal loudness. Loudness is not volume. Why does loudness matter? Because the human ear prefers the sound of loud. So if you don't want to cheat and just compare sound QUALITY, you must listen to them at equal loudness. I might try to prepare a side by side comparison for explosions as well like I did with the M249. Anyway, if I gave you the same sound two times and and lowered the loudness of one by let's say 3dB you would prefer the louder sound over the quieter one. Louder=better, but up to a certain point. If stuff gets too loud/compressed, you lose punch. This is why I tend to mix lower than the average PR sound, because once you turn up the volume, you feel the punch.
As for the explosions. Let's think physics. The explosion of a hand grenade is a short, agressive release of a small amount of explosive material burning up to gasses. There is really not much explosive in the small thing and the burning happens very fast. So in order to be realistic the sound should have a short, agressive attack blast with proper bass and that's that. There is not much low end/rumble after that. Here is the wave form of a professionally recorded explosion. As you can see, the max volume is "burned" within the first 100 miliseconds of the sound. Here is the sound itself. It does sound rather boring and it needs a lot of processing to sound convincing within a video game, but the main characteristics do not change.
The current handgrenades sound very loud, have and have lots of low end after the initial bang, which I feel like does not leave much room for the bigger explosions in game which needs to be considered from a game design and especially sound design standpoint - different elements need to have "space". Here is the wave form, note how the loudness is at maximum levels even after half a second. I do not feel like this corresponds with real life.
Listen to this, this is the current PR hand grenade and artillery shell impact sounds. They both sound very similiar, but should they? Would you not agree that the artillery should have more power? Or rather the other way around, should the hand grenade not sound weaker?
Which is something I find to apply to most of our library atm as most of them are more then above good for the team. Rather have you focus on some of the lesser sounds that most people think could use some work. I personally think the L85 series right now doesn't really sound right? Could you look into that? And the G36 hasn't been liked by some R/L operators of them neither for the past few releases And of course biggest focus should lie on new sounds where there are none like you are doing for PR L! Great work on that.
In fact I also think the m249 sound isn't 100% right compared to the real thing?
@M249 not real: realism is not possible in games, because if I was to produce a sound that had real dynamic range, you would hurt your ears and headphones because you would have to turn the volume so high up. We can mimic emotions and body-feedback by using certain low frequencies, which tends to work out just fine. I adore the sound design of Battlefield 3 (nice G36 and explosion sounds btw) - lots of punch, dynamic range and low end in weapons.
I used to shoot the G36 in the army and I also talked to some KSK clan guys about the G36, they said it's "ok" and that it's impossible anyway to create a sound that:
1. is "real" (because a real life recording does not work without heavy processing and then it becomes unreal anyway, also most players play games with a dynamic range of about 30dB while the recording could have a dynamic range of let's say 130dB because guns are so damn loud, but dynamic range in audio is a whole different topic)
2. makes everyone happy
3. sounds clean - if I had to turn the sound up to the current average loudness levels, the sound would distort, but it could be a temporary solution
I honestly think that the G36 is one of the better sounds in game, because it has a bassier/punchier attack compared to some other guns ingame.
I will think it over though, also I think I will need to talk to someone with real life experience about the L85 to find out some characteristics.
[quote="Jacksonez__""]M249 sounds some kind of soft, too smooth. I don't know how to explain it.[/quote]
Try using this? I would really like details. Describing Sound - A Glossary
Also, I hope you listened to the MP3 in the archive because youtube compression kills the attacks of agressive sounds.
[quote=""'[R-DEV"]Rabbit;2090812']
while there is a massive drop in quality due to the device that is recording, I think its a good area to aim for.
4:40 is a good place to aim for, your current version just sounds like it has to high of a rof. I feel like the sounds should just be a cleaned up version of the sound at 4:40, more stereo might be all that it would need from that video.[/quote]
Thanks for your reply. Yes, youtube videos are not good quality sound reference (except the ones from the UK vehicle recording, hehe), real life experience matters most, professional recordings combined with research on used materials come after.
I got the rate of fire from the configs (900RPM) and used my DAW to insert a loop marker at 1 beat of 900 BMP (beats per minute. BMP=RPM) so if the ROF is too fast, the value in the the config is wrong too. Is the rate of fire the only thing that bothers you? has much louder early reflections in it's reverb compared to the initial kick/punch but that is because the camera's microphone can not pick up dynamic range like a professional one. But this goes into taste discussions now. Maybe you can help me identify what exactly you like & dislike?
[quote="Arab""]It's about time the reload sounds become stereo and its great to have someone that can help improve, add and fix some bugs in the sounds
I love how crisp and clean the gun in the video sounds. I know in the past if memory serves that there were attempts to make reload stereo but they werent sucessful.
Lookjng forward to seeing more. Do you use Sony Soundforge for the sounds? I read its the best for BF2[/quote]
Hey thank you man, really appreciate the support.
I only use soundforge to insert loop points for engines and weapons. I create all sounds within my DAW - REAPER (version 5.0 is out, yey!)
Phew, what a wall of text and only for the replies! Sorry guys. But audio must not be handled superficially, so I like to go into detail.
I briefly want to talk about dynamic range, which is important for punch & clarity in audio. I feel like a video with a demonstration works best.
Mats gave me a script that allows me to massively reduce all effects by a certain dB number and that is great because on my "quiet" PR I can finally hear ambient map sounds again such as wind, forest etc.
Here a quick showcase video of CURRENT PR 1.3.1 and what would happen to (for example) ambient noises. Turn up your volume. At the very end I shoot the rifle and it's very loud, prepare to turn down the volume very quickly.
Newly produced sounds with great dynamic range such as the wist pistol of the polish faction would greatly benefit from this and players would not really hear a difference, since they can just turn up their ingame effects to 100%.
Additional Fletcher Munson Info
Last edited by Megagoth1702 on 2015-08-14 12:23, edited 6 times in total.
I like the idea of lowering the sounds in pr, having to play at 5% volume in order to not go deaf seems a bit crazy. It'd be nice to hear those ambient sounds again.
I like the idea of lowering the sounds in pr, having to play at 5% volume in order to not go deaf seems a bit crazy. It'd be nice to hear those ambient sounds again.
Thanks.
[R-DEV]ddeo wrote:I've been waiting for this post to show my full support for lowering sounds idea. Good read, well explained.
Wysłane z mojego LG-P710 przy użyciu Tapatalka
Thank you.
[R-DEV]Rabbit wrote:I have real life experience with the M249.
So you know then that your memory of the "sound" is very subjective and affected by for example:
-combat stress
think of a mosh pit in a concert, we don't really notice all the nouances in the songs the bands are playing while we are "busy" pushing eachother around
-earplugs
they filter out a lot of frequencies, alter the sound and make you hear less but feel more with
-the body's "sense of touch (read limits of perception and the body's ability to "sense" sound of low frequencies)" the kick in the stomach from gun fire for example can only be reproduced in games with a low-end kick like this, I took a filter that only lets through the low frequencies of the "old" and "new" M249, notice an improvement in attack and kick in the new one, this is to simulate the bodys feel of touch and this is why sound without bass sounds thin and unreal
-surrounding gunfire
it distracts from the sound of our own weapon (which can be rather boring in 1p, G36 and P8 sound like a dry bang with a bit of a click that you feel in your hands & shoulder, boring as hell)
-environment
as you know guns sound incredibely different in different surroundings
So given all of this I have to combine sound elements the best I can to create solutions that work in all outdoor and all indoor scenarios.
In sound design we have to find a compromise between sound that works great in games and makes people happy at the same time. Sometimes (like in this case) it's not as easy. From a sound engeneering stand point the sound is great, I have several sound designers telling me so. Now while I respect your feedback and service I don't feel like it's helping me create a sound that you would like. I am not willing to take youtube video sound over into the game because it's low quality. It's a no go in sound design to just copy sounds straight from sources. I might MIX it into my sound a little bit but that's that.
So please, help me and respond to the rest of my question.
I got the rate of fire from the configs (900RPM) and used my DAW to insert a loop marker at 1 beat of 900 BMP (beats per minute. BMP=RPM) so if the ROF is too fast, the value in the the config is wrong too. Is the rate of fire the only thing that bothers you? I also notice that the sound in the video has much louder early reflections in it's reverb compared to the initial kick/punch but that is because the camera's microphone can not pick up dynamic range like a professional one. But this starts going into taste discussions now. Maybe you can help me identify what exactly you like & dislike?
I'll be out of town for the weekend, so any sound updates -> next week.
Last edited by Megagoth1702 on 2015-08-14 12:35, edited 1 time in total.
Megagoth1702 wrote:So you know then that your memory of the "sound" is very subjective and affected by for example:
-combat stress
think of a mosh pit in a concert, we don't really notice all the nouances in the songs the bands are playing while we are "busy" pushing eachother around
-earplugs
they filter out a lot of frequencies, alter the sound and make you hear less but feel more with
-the body's "sense of touch (read limits of perception and the body's ability to "sense" sound of low frequencies)" the kick in the stomach from gun fire for example can only be reproduced in games with a low-end kick like this, I took a filter that only lets through the low frequencies of the "old" and "new" M249, notice an improvement in attack and kick in the new one, this is to simulate the bodys feel of touch and this is why sound without bass sounds thin and unreal
-surrounding gunfire
it distracts from the sound of our own weapon (which can be rather boring in 1p, G36 and P8 sound like a dry bang with a bit of a click that you feel in your hands & shoulder, boring as hell)
-environment
as you know guns sound incredibely different in different surroundings
while i appreciate your work Megagoth i dont like your attitude.
I'm not looking for a super clear sound and how a weapon would sound in case of vakuum.
I'm looking for combat sounds - that includes that the soldiers are wearing earplugs, are stressed, have a body and all your other points.
if you try to filter them out your sound might be very clear and good in your eyes but is completly useless for a game like Project Reality.
[R-DEV]Amok@ndy wrote:while i appreciate your work Megagoth i dont like your attitude.
I'm not looking for a super clear sound and how a weapon would sound in case of vakuum.
I'm looking for combat sounds - that includes that the soldiers are wearing earplugs, are stressed, have a body and all your other points.
if you try to filter them out your sound might be very clear and good in your eyes but is completly useless for a game like Project Reality.
Thanks for the appreciation. But please, don't rip my post into two parts that ruin the context. The 2nd part of the post says "we need to find a compromise".
It's the internet and text based communication does not work well with emotions so let's ignore them to avoid misunderstandings. I don't intend to come off like I have an attitude but how else can I be direct and precise? I was replying and asking for a response to my previous question. I don't get offended by text on a screen even if I get feedback from a DEV that says "love the BMP1, hate the M249" without any additional constructive criticism. I could also critique attitude, but I don't because it does not matter. I rather dig deeper and ask for details. I want better sound for this game.
"Combat sound" is very subjective. During my army time we had a group practise with multiple rifles and MG3s. And to no surprise - while it was louder than any video game (even through earplugs) the sound WAS in fact very clean. You heard clean, punchy sounds. I am sure that Rabbit will confirm that. If you want my sound to be more exciting, turn up your volume so that the punch of the gun is pretty loud. Also compare these two files that I posted in my M249 post and tell me what EXACTLY you prefer in the old sound? I honestly believe this comes down to "being used to a specific kind of sound" - in this case YouTube distorted sound & current PR sounds, no matter if they are accurate or not. Little anecdote - when I show friends TV series in their original, english VO they tell me "oh no, I prefer the german voice, it sounds more natural and fitting". More natural than the natural voice of the actor? This is only possible because they are used to something and it takes a lot of force to change a habit.
Also - you have not heard the sound within a proper ingame "combat environment" so I feel like saying "how it would sound in a vakuum" is pretty rash. Do you feel the same way about weapons from recent battlefield titles and Insurgency? Taken on their own they don't sound too different, agressive punch, quieter tail, sounds best on high volume because the loud punch is short and is understood as "powerful" and not "too loud" by the brain.
Most people only know combat sounds from youtube videos but it can not be said enough: they are absolutely not reliable sources because of the way microphones work. If I was to create a "youtube like" sound stage I would have to totally ignore most basic rules of sound engeneering and do the opposite of "dont distort your sound unless especially necessary (explosions), have dynamic range to provide punch and attack, low end is important and means power, different volumes for different instruments/effects/weapons".
Many (probably most) players play on low volumes because the sounds are too loud. In order to get them as loud they were severely compressed up to the point of distortion/destruction. And what did it bring to the sound stage? Less punch in weapons overall, some "silent" vehicles and no ambient sounds. Is this really what you wanted? We could all wear earplugs and play at 100% but not only we would not hear mumble anymore - in the end it's a game and games are supposed to be fun and enjoyable, even when they are tactical and serious. I want to help with that but I want to follow the basic rules of my trade.
Last edited by Megagoth1702 on 2015-08-14 14:45, edited 2 times in total.
Yes, I have been using REAPER ever since version 2.0 came out, it was a tiny 2 megabyte baby back then but already more powerful than other DAWs. Version 5.0 is amazing.
My point was, out of all the ways I heard the 249 fire, I think its best to base the sound closer to the video rather than your current posted on. Considering Adriaan said it sounds quite a bit like the 1.0 sound for it, I would look into that as a starting point or at least a reference.
[R-DEV]Rabbit wrote:while there is a massive drop in quality due to the device that is recording, I think its a good area to aim for.
4:40 is a good place to aim for, your current version just sounds like it has to high of a rof. I feel like the sounds should just be a cleaned up version of the sound at 4:40, more stereo might be all that it would need from that video.
Just out of curiosity I took that youtube sound, cleaned it up a bit, added a tail and voilla.
lol. no comment
I think I'll leave the m249 be for now and rather look at polish guns.
EDIT: Final try of m249, should have more snappier attack than the previous test.
Alright, I am leaving for two days, on monday I will start working on the Beryl.
Last edited by Megagoth1702 on 2015-08-17 09:24, edited 3 times in total.
As long as it's all done smooth and doesn't delay any of our release plans or make things worse for some guns I'm all for batch editing volumes But if you can't stick to those things I just said I rather not see it happen for a while. But given I doubt it's as easy as batching them all in once I doubt it will go that fast which in our current plans really doesn't fit IMO.
Also, why you not using our M249? Not sure if it really matters but I suppose it's better to test sounds with ours? (just noticed the model is different).
[R-DEV]Mineral wrote:As long as it's all done smooth and doesn't delay any of our release plans or make things worse for some guns I'm all for batch editing volumes But if you can't stick to those things I just said I rather not see it happen for a while.
Hey, thanks for the reply.
Yeah I am thinking about that all the time.
Problem: The old sounds have absolutely no dynamic range and therefore sound louder than sounds with dynamic range.
So if I play my new sounds together with the old sounds at the same config volume value the old ones will sound louder and it's unbalanced again. So it will have to be like this:
-reduce all sounds by X
-reduce menu clicks & beeps volume manually (have done these both already)
-check all maps if ambient sounds are okay, if not -> remix (sareema has some left-channel heavy forest ambience, makes you wanna turn left all the time)
-reduce old guns by X so that they have the same loudness as the new samples at -6dBFS and nothing is too loud/quiet
Checking all maps would be super annoying but imho it's the only really big task here. Batch-edit volumes & map check -> quieter PR with lots of headroom for peaks and dynamic range, all the players have to do is raise their effects volume to 100% again and reduce voice-over volume as they see fit.
Also, why you not using our M249? Not sure if it really matters but I suppose it's better to test sounds with ours? (just noticed the model is different).
The BF2 editor loads much faster with Bf2 content so I use that for short tests. And it does not matter since rate of fire is 900 for BF2/PR SAWs. Try closing your eyes, this is about sound.
@Beryl:Cool, thanks. But you should hear the uncompressed/undistorted version.
And of course biggest focus should lie on new sounds where there are none like you are doing for PR 
L! Great work on that. 
no comment
