Standard Hardness

Andrew Scheps

Section 2

🎸

Anthemic, weight-focused section

Slower, half-time section emphasising sonic weight via low palm-muted chugs, kick drum, and floor tom; more rhythmic space and low-frequency emphasis.

Half-time Palm mutes Low-end weight Anthemic

Study Stimulus (Section 2)

Loading waveform...

0:00 / 0:00

🔊 Acoustic Hardness

4.18 Moderate

Key Predictors

Spectral Complexity 23.21

Spectral Contrast (1.6–3.2 kHz) 16.41 dB

Dissonance 0.482

HPCP Entropy 2.14

Moderate spectral complexity provides textural density while maintaining some frequency separation. Hardness remains the primary predictor of heaviness.

💥 Temporal Punch

-26.60 dB Low

PM95 (Peak-to-Loudness) -26.60 dB

PLR (Dynamic Range) 11.96 dB Moderate

This mix has low PM95 and compressed PLR, indicating limited transient headroom. In our studies, hardness—not punch—was the primary predictor of heaviness in dense metal production.

Key Finding: While listeners perceive punch as salient, acoustic PM95 fails to track subjective punch in dense mixes. The production trade-off favors spectral saturation (hardness) over transient preservation (punch).

🎧 Perceptual Ratings

0.03 Perceptual Heaviness

Perceptual Heaviness 0.03

-1 (Low) 0 +1 (High)

Subjective Punch 0.01

Brightness -0.10

Roughness 0.04

Clarity -0.09

Key Insight: Perceived heaviness and subjective punch show strong correlation (listeners associate them), but acoustic PM95 fails to track subjective punch in dense mixes. This disconnect reveals that heaviness perception in metal is driven primarily by spectral-textural hardness rather than transient impact.

Producer Profile

Standard Hardness cluster; highest dynamic range (PLR 13.99) and most spacious mix with lower spectral saturation.

Aesthetic: Naturalistic, wide dynamic range, spacious