Resolution of sound decreases by pulling down faders .....is there any such concept ?

DevD

New member
Hi , I have seen some tutorials in which they claim that , you should always keep the faders in the mixer at around 0 db and if you have to increase or decrease the volume of a track do it by putting a gain plugin on the track.... is it true that if we drop a fader much below 0 db.....the resolution of sound decreases ?
if it does what is this whole concept and what does that mean ? what do they mean by resolution ,what are they saying and why ?
 
You lose fader resolution as you pull them down...their increments become greater, not as fine...
...but you don't lose audio/data resolution.

No...don't add a gain plugin to your channels...it's just doing the same math as your fader.

Focus more on you overall gain staging so you are not overloading your mix bus.

For any more details...Google is your friend.
 
That sounds like an obsolete suggestion left over from very early software. For one thing, most DAWs have a clip gain function so you don't need to insert a gain plugin to get the track's level sorted ahead of the other plugins. For another, resolution isn't level dependent - one bit equal 6dB regardless of the signal level. Digital audio works differently from digital imaging, which is why for audio you only need dithering at the bottom of the scale while in imaging you need it spread across the whole dynamic range.

Tell us where you got this info so we could flag the source as unreliable.
 
"Tell us where you got this info so we could flag the source as unreliable".

Hay. Get a job ! haha How many people do you tag everyday, anyway ?
 
If that were true, You couldn't mix a song without screwing up the audio.

A gain control does the exact same thing as the faders

The fader resolution changes as you get farther away from 0. Meaning: if you move the fader 1/8th inch down from 0db, you will be at -1db. If you move the fader an 1/8th inch down from -20db, you will be at -30db. So it is easier to make smaller adjustments with the fader when it is around 0db. But that doesn't affect the resolution of the audio.
 
That's not true. Faders are technically made 'parabolic'. They loose quality if you put them too low, but above a minor setting they alway's work great.
I should look up technical specifications, but i roughly guess that if you have you're fader above 1 or 1,5 (2 for sure) it works as good as is does on 8 or 9 (10 mostly never is to be advised). If only 0.5 or 1 then it gets losses indeed, but who puts it so low?

I myself mostly record between -3 and -10db, depending on what to record. As if you have several tracks they stack towards the end volume.
If you record on 0db the risk of clipping or other bad sounds is much too high.
I must say that my mixer has very extended settings so i can alway's calibrate a channel on what is plugged in. With at the end i can always place the fader within it's opportune parabolic working space.

Low can even be an advantage. If put lower and sang closer the mic catches the source better. If higher and song from to far a mic catches more background noises. No problem in a great build sound proof studio, but a serious problem for home recorders.
 
I have three jobs, including engineering in two studios.



Counting you?

Or course. You go judging Mr. Tutorial based on what - besides that hair up your ass. The poster doesn't even say "digital".

"the resolution of sound decreases" in post #1 is the same in analog
 
Or course. You go judging Mr. Tutorial based on what - besides that hair up your ass. The poster doesn't even say "digital".

"the resolution of sound decreases" in post #1 is the same in analog

As miroslav said, fader resolution is not audio resolution. It's a meaningful difference.
 
Well, in my book peak-to-peak values are important in both realms, but that doesn't mean everything needs that kind of resolution. I think it is likely the Tutorial didn't example different losses in resolution from in to out as a reference point
 
Well, in my book peak-to-peak values are important in both realms, but that doesn't mean everything needs that kind of resolution. I think it is likely the Tutorial didn't example different losses in resolution from in to out as a reference point

You have a way of stringing together science-y sounding terms into nonsense. Are you sure you aren't Deepak Chopra?
 
Resolution of digital audio goes down as the signal level goes down.

This has absolutely nothing to do with gain staging or where your faders are set or how loud something should be. Line level is a happy place for recording and mixing. Especially tracking. Track too hot and things will run out of headroom and get crunchy.

What happens in PCM audio formats with low bit depth (8 bit or 16 bit) is that as the audio approaches the low end of the scale, there is the potential for something called quantization error.

In basic theory: an analog signal that passes through a D/A converter has to be sampled and quantized. The sample rate of the target format, eg. 44.1 kHz means that there will be 44,100 snapshots of your signal taken per second. It mostly has to do with the upper limit of frequencies that can be captured. Quantization of the signal is digitized information about how much power the sample has. (volume) When the incoming signal cannot be represented with reasonable accuracy, it gets rounded. The rounding errors, usually called truncation, result in something called "digital noise".

"Digital noise" is a bit misleading. Noise in general usually refers to a sound other than your signal. White noise, pink noise, etc. Static. Hiss. "Digital noise" or "quantization noise" is actually distortion. It generates harmonics. A lot of harmonics. A veritable spew of nasty sounding harmonic distortion. If you want to hear what it sounds like up close and personal, there are several videos on youtube that demonstrate this. If you have a signal with real noise and the signal stops, you can still hear the noise. If you have a signal with quantization noise and it stops, you get nothing. The noise stops with the signal. Digital noise is correlated to the signal - it IS the signal.

A sound wave will oscilate between positive and negative values. In order to get from one side to the other, it has to cross something called zero. This is called the zero crossing.

Pheww...

So anyway, if you're in 16 bit audio or something, the distortion from quantization error only really happens at very low signal levels. 16 bit has a range of 96 decibels, so the minimum signal you can have is -96 dBfs. Things will only really start to distort at around -80 or so. So if you have a sample that lands close to the zero crossing of a waveform, it's a candidate for quantization error. This can happen hundreds of times per second, at any signal level, since all waveforms have to cross zero with rapid frequency.

Getting closer to the top doesn't help the problem at all, because it happens at the bottom.

The solution is dither. Dither is a device that controls the LSB of the audio. So the very first "bit" in 16 bit audio or whatever, is now being controlled by some kind of random probability generator instead of the signal itself. It creates a sound much like broadband noise or hiss at a really low level. The quantization errors are still there, but dither traps the harmonics generated within the noise it creates. Essentially it decorrelates (removes) the distortion from your signal. The result is your actual signal. At the correct level, which in theory doesn't exist. Our ears are not really drawn much to broadband noise at infantissimally small levels. They are drawn to harmonic distortion that sings the very same song.

As an example, if you were to record a 1 kHz sine wave at a level of -100 dBfs in 16 bit audio without dither, you would get nothing. Digital black. No signal. Range is only -96, so you're on the outside. Once the converters start dithering, you'd hear white noise at a very low level. And somewhere underneath that, a 1 kHz sine wave.

Dither should be applied any time the signal gets quantized. It's mostly automatic (unless you're running plugins with bad code or something), so the only time you should really have to pay attention to it is when you mix down and render a project. Some workstations will have it as an option when you render a mix. Others might require you to put a dither plugin on the master buss.
 
All that is well and good...but the reality is that most every converter and DAW app currently runs at 24 bits...and internally, most DAW apps are running at 32bits.

So lowering the faders in your DAW mixer will not degrade the audio in any way.
 
Only skimmed through the thread....

I'm pretty sure most DAWs use 32 bit floating point calculations which, I think, eliminates the loss of resolution of low signal levels. I always kind of thought that was the whole purpose of it.

To the OPs original question, I remember reading in the manual for my synth where they recommend leaving the volume knob all the way up because lower volume would have less resolution. In fact, I found the excerpt...

"Turn the QuadraSynth Plus’s master [VOLUME] control to maximum. The best signal-to-noise ratio is achieved when [VOLUME] is set to maximum. This is a digital volume control, and lower settings have lower resolution." They go on to suggest adjusting volume with a mixer.

BUT.... this is a really old keyboard, for sure newer models adjust an amp output.
 
"I'm pretty sure most DAWs use 32 bit floating point calculations" At the very least these day Mr C!

'Resolution' is a dirty word in many digital audio circles! As was said at the start, one bit is (approx) 6dB and so as bits get fewer, things get noisier but RESOLUTION is always the same.

Mind you, I always want an ANALOGUE level control on the final feed to monitors but that has nothing to do with 'resolution'.

Dave.
 
That sounds like an obsolete suggestion left over from very early software. For one thing, most DAWs have a clip gain function so you don't need to insert a gain plugin to get the track's level sorted ahead of the other plugins.

Interesting. My Daw has a gain control pre-fader. Why would that be outdated? It IS there so that you can set gain before you starty mixing. Neither an outdated method, nor an obsolete software (in fact, the maker's very latest).
 
Resolution can be thought of as the number of bits. Since each bit represents 6.02 dB, every time you attenuate by that much you're reducing the word length by 1 bit of resolution.

It can also be thought of as the difference between 16 bit and 24 bit audio. 16 bit can sound amazing. What it can't do is handle a lot of processing. It should be okay for a while before things fall apart but 24 is way less fragile.

I've only seen it suggested to leave the faders at zero and use a gain plugin once. As general methodology it sounds like a myth. In this case it was to run the Airwindows plugins "Console" and "Channel" on your DAW to bypass the 32 bit floating point mix engine (or whatever the system has) and run on the Airwindows 80 bit fixed point summing. It supposedly sounds more like outboard summing.

Whole different kettle of fish. The only reason to do it would be to get those specific plugins to work properly.

I haven't tried them yet so I use the faders.
 
Interesting. My Daw has a gain control pre-fader. Why would that be outdated? It IS there so that you can set gain before you starty mixing. Neither an outdated method, nor an obsolete software (in fact, the maker's very latest).

The OP got advice to put a gain plugin on the track. That's an obsolete idea because modern DAWs have the gain function that serves the same purpose.
 
Back
Top