Level Metering

tkingen

tkingen

Djembes Rock
I'm away from the studio so can't check this out right now. But, it just occured to me that maybe I've been recording all wrong.
When setting track recording levels I've always watched the metering in Sonar and adjusted gain on the outboard pres until the Sonar meters looked right. Most of the time the needle on the pre's VU meter barely moves.
It just occured to me that this may be the wrong approach...the pre's are probably not even doing their job. I would think that it would be better to turn the pres up until the VU meters are showing good levels, and then attenuating the track inputs within Sonar to set recording levels within Sonar.
Any thoughts on this?

Regards,
Terry
 
If you do that, you run the risk of clipping the converters in your soundcard. Turning the gain down after the signal is in the computer won't do any good. You might want to check if there is a -10/+4 switch, that might be why the preamps aren't working very hard.
 
Here's a novel idea... how about you ignore all the meters [except when the peak meters turn red... then pay lots of attention to them and make sure they're not red anymore].

Try recording everything at a level where all your faders go across in a straight line and you pretty much have a mix of the song. It ain't easy to do it that way, but it will save you a hell of a lot of grief come mix time.

Best of luck.
 
Fletcher said:
Try recording everything at a level where all your faders go across in a straight line and you pretty much have a mix of the song. It ain't easy to do it that way, but it will save you a hell of a lot of grief come mix time.
Click to expand...

Recording this way will not optimize your levels for digital recording, resulting in lost clarity and more distortion.

Always use up all the bits you can, especially if you're recording in 16 bit resolution.

24 bit recording is less of a concern, but still holds true.

Why only capture 16 of 24 bits to save you pushing down a fader later?
 
Sorry guys, I'm fairly new around here :( .

I'll gladly take back my comments.

My foot is now in my mouth.
 
Last edited:
JKestle said:
Sorry guys, I'm fairly new around here :( .

I'll gladly take back my comments.

My foot is now in my mouth.
Click to expand...

Johnathan,

While it's generally not healthy to accuse Fletcher of being wrong, and his advice/wisdom is not to be taken lightly, what you said echoes what many others believe on the subject. It would be great if he decides to speak more on this...but if not, I will surely research it more just because of his advice.
You probably don't have to grovel in apology, but if you truly believe in what you say...say it with facts to back it up in a nice way ;~)

Regards,
Terry
 
I shared the same thoughts... gain staging... keeping inputs as hot as possible without clipping or distortion... keeping the noise floor in the dust... but I knew better than comment...

Damn... I just did...
 
I have waivered into both schools of thought because in live mixing I *always* strive to keep faders at unity. There are many reasons for this including the obvious one that most people seem to miss -- when faders are at unity they are LEAST sensitive, which allows you to make subtle adjustments to the mix that are hard to accomplish with your faders in a less optimized position.

For example, on the K2 (my primary mixing console at the local club), moving a fader 2 millimeters from the unity position results in maybe a .2 db change in volume. If my fader is set to -30 decibels, BREATHING on it hard might result in a .2 decibel change in volume.. useless -- a 2 millimeter adjustment could be as much as 20 db.

So how can you optimize your bit capture depth *AND* mix at unity?

In Nuendo (and I imagine some other recording software) you can alt-click the software based gain knobs at the top of each channel to achieve a mix that sits well at unity even after recording to accomplish maximum bit depth.

A criticism I have about the way people hog the bits on digital is that you're not reducing your bit depth NEARLY as much as you think by not recording the hottest signal.

If you record at full amplitude, you get the full 24 bits. What you might not realize is that if you record at only 1 EIGHTH of maximum amplitude, you are still utilizing 21 BITS! You will never have to record this low to accomplish a unity mix, and by recording slightly lower levels you complete eliminate clipping that is so easy to hit in the digital domain. (one errant transient can destroy your whole recording).

My recent mixes rarely move the faders from the unity position at all.

After lots of pondering, I've come to the conclusion that your mix is more likely to suffer from being unmanageably complicated than it is likely to suffer from 21 or 22 bit effective sample depth on some channels.

Go for unity.
 
Yes, I've heard many people comment that when turning a fader down (in the digital world) you are in fact decreasing the bitrate. So, where does the concern come from when recording at a slightly lower "unoptimized" level?
I'm starting to think that all of this optimized bitrate stuff may fall into the realm of theory. Fletcher and Tallman are giving us a good argument to just trust our ears! ;)

Regards,
Terry
 
I guess the difference between the two approaches is EXPERIENCE.

1) "optimized" digital level > rounding errors by changing the level in the mix.

2) recording at unity "unoptimized" level > no rounding errors as levels are
already set.

Optimization is a bad word to be using in this discussion, that's why they're in quotation above.

Approach 1) is the safe & long road for newbies like me....

Approach 2) is the risky & short road for those like Fletcher who have the experience.


Getting from approach 1) to 2), while not easy, is a great goal to shoot for.
 
Ah Yes!!

A beautiful thing when learning and understanding are walking hand in hand :) :D :D :)

John

<anything is easy when you know how>
 
Sorry it took so long to get around here again... my bad.

JKestle's point is totally valid when recording 16 bit... but I didn't think anyone recorded 16 bit any more...

The resolution of 24 bit recording is so far superior to the resolution of 16 bit recording that you don't have to run everything up to the top anymore, but in the days of 16 bit recording, you wanted to push everything as close to the top as possible. I think this is one of the root causes of compression abuse... but I could be wrong about that.
 
I do always try to make my gain staging roughly right, but as long as it's ok by the soundcard I don't worry too much. The reason? As Fletcher correctly says - noise just isn't an issue any more!!! At 24/96 and with a half decent preamp, you room is likely to be louder than your desk/sound card.

In fact I ruined a delicate piano recording the other day by leaving the TV link to the control room on in the uni live room. Even with a very narrow notch filter I couldn't get rid of the high-pitched squeal of the TV without making the piano sound dull. With it filtered out, though, the recording was near-as-dammit-for-a-total-amateur-anyway silent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top