Preamp question

[maxpayne]

i was reading some specs on a preamp,it said it had limiter for studio....whats that?

[Freudian Slip]

A limiter is a device that says "you can be no louder than this" It lets you set a max for the signal level allowed to pass though the preamp (at least in certain stages). Now what makes it different than just a volume knob is that you can set a exact value to it not just move the full dynamic range (quiet to loud) up and down. In other words you can make the loud parts only so loud and keep the quiet parts right where they are. A volume knob would turn down the quiet parts with the loud parts. So it is sort of a stopper that you can adjust. This also allows you to turn up the quiet parts and still have the loud parts stop at a a set volume. This allows you to even out your track volume and make a weak part of of the track closer in volume to the loud part of the track. If you can limit the loudest parts of a track you can increase the over all track volume with out clipping or having parts that are too loud in a couple of places. Hope that made a little bit of since.

F S

[Massive Master]

It also fools people into thinking that recording hot signals is more "proper" than recording at normal levels and taking advantage of the amazing amount of headroom available.

[Farview]

Mostly, it's a crutch for people who track too loud.

It does come in handy when you are recording something that you don't know what it's going to do. (live show, nature sounds, etc...)

[Freudian Slip]

Massive Master & Fairview are right. I would personaly never use it when recording a track in studio. There is no need for it. You simpely set your signal so the loudest parts are just below clip and record it that way.

If I want to or need to compress the track or limit it, I do it later (when it can be un done). If you record the track with a limiter your your stuck with what you have unless you want to re record it.

you also bring up all the noise in the track to a higher level when you compress or limit. Ya the quiet parts get louder, but that includes any back ground noise or hiss that may be in the track.

F.S.

[Farview]

Originally Posted by Freudian Slip

You simpely set your signal so the loudest parts are just below clip and record it that way.

NO! You set the signal so it averages around -18 to -20dbfs (or 0dbVU on your mixer or preamp)

[Freudian Slip]

Originally Posted by Farview

NO! You set the signal so it averages around -18 to -20dbfs (or 0dbVU on your mixer or preamp)

Hmmm I have always turned it to clip and backed it off just a hair. That's how I was taught for live sound to get the hottest signal possible. It seems to work fine.

I think it works out just about the same, Averaging 0Dbvu

Could you explain to me your thought's on this?


thanks
F.S.

[Farview]

Originally Posted by Freudian Slip

Hmmm I have always turned it to clip and backed it off just a hair. That's how I was taught for live sound to get the hottest signal possible. It seems to work fine.

Live is a different animal. A little distortion won't be noticed my most of the crowd. The mix doesn't have to translate to another space (if it sounds fine in that room, that's all you have to worry about) And, once the show is over, it's over. No one will be able to recall it and listen back to it when they aren't drunk or trying to get laid.

[Massive Master]

Live or to tape it works out.

0dBVU is going to be around -18dBFS digitally - Depending on how your converters are calibrated. To get the signal up around -0dBFS, you're literally overdriving the preamp anywhere from around 16 to 22dB over it's standard operating level.

On top of that - Logic would dictate having the levels of the louder tracks recorded around there (-18dBFS ish) anyway. Otherwise, you're going to have to turn them all down around that much anyway before you can even start mixing.

So - One is left with the choice of overdriving the preamp, losing clarity and focus, increasing distortion and noise, smearing the image, making EQ'ing very difficult, etc. and then having to turn it down to a normal level -- OR -- recording a clean signal at the levels the gear is designed to run at and having the mix almost work itself.

[Freudian Slip]

Originally Posted by Massive Master

Live or to tape it works out.

0dBVU is going to be around -18dBFS digitally - Depending on how your converters are calibrated. To get the signal up around -0dBFS, you're literally overdriving the preamp anywhere from around 16 to 22dB over it's standard operating level.

On top of that - Logic would dictate having the levels of the louder tracks recorded around there (-18dBFS ish) anyway. Otherwise, you're going to have to turn them all down around that much anyway before you can even start mixing.

So - One is left with the choice of overdriving the preamp, losing clarity and focus, increasing distortion and noise, smearing the image, making EQ'ing very difficult, etc. and then having to turn it down to a normal level -- OR -- recording a clean signal at the levels the gear is designed to run at and having the mix almost work itself.

I see your point. If I where in the position to record the whole band at once and set up the sound in the control room I would have to do it the way you are talking about in order to get a decent mix. There for making it a lot less work later. Only having to tweek a couple things because it is already mixed for the most part.

I know that's how my guy does it when the band goes to the studio. I am un able to record more that 1 or 2 instruments at a time (excluding the drums) so I have always gone for the hot signal to try and have as much dynamic range as possible and keep my noise floor far below the recorded track. I haven't had any distortion or noise problems at all. I do have to turn down the tracks to mix them though.

I just wish I had the room to record the whole band at once. It would save so much work later. I have the hardware but my room is too small.

Thanks for the advice.

F.S.

[Farview]

You seem to be missing the point. It's not about mixing it with the trim controls.

You have to realize the the noise floor of a 24 bit signal is going to be down around -144db. The noise floor of your mixer or preamp will be around -90db (really nice, quiet preamps, not mackie or behringer) so hording bits doesn't do you any good.

In fact, turning the preamp up more will raise the noise floor of the preamp along with the signal you are trying to record. It doesn't get you anywhere.

The distortion that we are talking about isn't like guitar distortion or hard clipping. It is the result of running your signal hot enough to get you into the range where the preamps start becoming non-linear. This happen long before clipping occurs and you don't really hear it, but it adds up in a mix. It will cause the mix to lack clarity and focus.

When you run the preamps out of headroom you are running them about 12 to 20db hotter than they were designed to run. 12 to 20db hotter than they were tested and spec'd.

That whole thing about hitting tape hard back in the analog days was hitting the tape at +4 dbvu instead of 0dbvu. The equivalent on the digital scale would be -16 dbfs instead of -20dbfs.

[Freudian Slip]

Originally Posted by Farview

You seem to be missing the point. It's not about mixing it with the trim controls.

Your right I am setting my levels on my board at the trim controlls and i set it for the peaks to be below clipping but not far below. This generaly translates to much lower levels on the recorded track in the digital relm. At least that has been my expieriance. Even at settin my board up the way I do. I often end up with very low levels in crapwalk. I will I almost always have to normalize my files to get decent levels for the track.


I will tell you what I will print this thread and I will set up the way you suggest and see what the results are the next time I record. I will go off the digital scale in my card interface (beacause I trust it more than crapwalk) and I will see where it puts me on my board. I will also see if i have a lower noise floor and if it has a better sound. I will not normalize my track either.

I am hoping this will make mixing easier.

Any other advise or instruction post it here. I will be printing this thread soon.

F.S.

[Freudian Slip]

Looking at some recorded tracks I have done that have not been normalized I am looking at an average signal strength of about -16db according to cakewalk. This was with my board set at just below clip on a horn track and My card & cakewalk set with the sliders all the way up.

[Farview]

Are you setting the level 'just below clip' on the board or in the computer?

[Dogbreath]

I started tracking this way a couple of songs ago after reading what these guys said (thanks gentlemen ) and there IS a difference. It's pretty cool. My clarity and dynamics sound bigger, fuller. I'll keep my stuff down around -10 or -15 thru my 2 track mixdown and if I'm posting the clip for review, I'll beef it up at the end for volume but the one I'll be sending John for mastering will stay at the lower level. 24 bit is so cool.

[Massive Master]

This generaly translates to much lower levels on the recorded track in the digital realm.

I think there's some confusion here between "low" levels and "NORMAL" levels...

Getting "hot" levels is NOT normal -

But it's hard to nail down what "normal" is - In this case, you're purposfully using up all but the very top of your headroom - Headroom is "headroom" for a reason. It's there to handle micro-transients -- Not the weight of the entire signal. You're adding noise, losing clarity, messing with dynamics - All sorts of nastiness.

If you're thinking that tracking and mixing "hot" is the secret to getting a "hot" finsihed product, it's generally quite the opposite... Without question, and almost without exception, the projects that come out of here the hottest are the projects that came in with "normal" to obscene amounts of headroom at the track level (as I ask the engineers regularly) and of course, at the mixing level.

Farview is a good example - I've done several projects for him. Most mixes he sends in *PEAK* around -12, maybe -8dBFS tops. RMS levels maybe at -25 to -20 at the most. It's pretty easy to work with mixes like that.

That's not low - That's normal. That's how it's been done "downtown" for decades.

I often end up with very low levels in crapwalk. I will I almost always have to normalize my files to get decent levels for the track.

Waste of time. Turn the monitors up - Don't use up all your headroom.

I don't know if this is the case or not, but if you're comparing the volume of "commercially acceptable" finsihed products against your levels during the mixing stage, that's totally the wrong place to make the comparison.

[Freudian Slip]

I appreciate you taking the time to respond on this subject Massive Master. I think there is a lingo gap. I pretty much agree with everything you said. I tend to set up my gain structure or signal level looking at peak not rms. When I set the gain for say… drums I have the drummer play a little louder than he thinks he will and set the peak just below clip. When we actually track I end up with an rms around –18 to –12 or somewhere in that neighborhood. When I set up signal level on my vocals I do the same I take the loudest section on vocals and really belt it a little louder than I will do it in the song and I set it just below clip. Etc with the other instruments. So I am really setting it up so the transient spikes are just below clip. It’s just the way I look at it. If you want to talk in terms of RMS then we are in the same ballpark.

I have sort of given up on looking at the gain on cakewalk because it seems what it tells you and what you end up with are two different things. That’s nothing new it’s been said many times before.

I will examine my next recording project and try to make some changes in how I go about it. Leaving more headroom and not normalizing the tracks.
I do think I will have to make less adjustments in the long run if I leave the tracks at the lower level.

Worth a shot.

Thanks
F.S.