DaleVO
Poor Farm Productions
Found a pretty handy resource that may answer a few questions that are commonly asked.
http://www.discmakers.com/pdf/home-studio-handbook.pdf
Dale
http://www.discmakers.com/pdf/home-studio-handbook.pdf
Dale
Home Studio Handbook
- Thread starter DaleVO
- Start date
dobro
Well-known member
Sorry, Dale, but that guide's a piece of poo. Just for fun, the first thing I checked was what they say about recording levels. It's under the heading on P. 8 called 'Get it Hot, Hot, Hot' and it says:
"Always try to get the hottest signal you can to tape. If you don’t, you’re missing out on some of the sound from the source. Get the level as hot as you can without going over the threshold."
This is pretty much the worst advice you can give somebody. The optimum level for tracking is somewhere in the vicinity of -18 dBFS, so if you're tracking 'as hot as you can without going over the threshold' you're tracking way too hot. Don't believe me? Ask around.
I'm not reading any more from it. If they could get it that wrong on something as basic as recording level, it means either they're idiots, or they wrote that guide twenty years ago before everybody started recording at 24-bit.
DaleVO
Poor Farm Productions
Dobro,
I appreciate your critique. I offered this as just a resource, and not the gospel. I read that "Hot,hot,hot" statement as well, thinking to myself: I do not agree with that statement in regards to my equipment and experiences with setting gain levels. To be an informed consumer of the tons of info available and determine the validity of content, I always ask: what do others have to say about that? You did just that.
I found the resource contained some information about acoustic treatment, types of gear, and definitions, that may be useful, since there are many related questions asked here, by those who are starting out. If nothing else, a great take-away from this is to read and do your research, and build your knowledge base.
Dale
I appreciate your critique. I offered this as just a resource, and not the gospel. I read that "Hot,hot,hot" statement as well, thinking to myself: I do not agree with that statement in regards to my equipment and experiences with setting gain levels. To be an informed consumer of the tons of info available and determine the validity of content, I always ask: what do others have to say about that? You did just that.
I found the resource contained some information about acoustic treatment, types of gear, and definitions, that may be useful, since there are many related questions asked here, by those who are starting out. If nothing else, a great take-away from this is to read and do your research, and build your knowledge base.
Dale
grimtraveller
If only for a moment.....
Hang on a moment. Firstly the guy says "Always try to get the hottest signal you can to tape. If you don’t, you’re missing out on some of the sound from the source. Get the level as hot as you can without going over the threshold."
That's not bad advice because firstly, that was standard when there was no digital recording. Many of the albums and singles we have loved in that mid 60s to late 90s period were recorded that way. And the advice giver stresses "to tape."
But the advice giver also stresses not "going over the threshold". If you record a track on a DAW with peaks at -1 dBFS, will it be clipping ? No.
Clipping is the problem. So theoretically, as long as you aren't clipping, what's the problem ?
There have been a few interesting debates on HR over the last 3 to 4 years on this very topic and even though -18 dBFS {and some say -12} is given as optimum, certain guys who have said that there is inherently no difference between something tracked with peaks of -18 and -9 and -1 have never been disproved, in terms of there being an actual problem to the sound of what's been recorded.
Like many things in recording, it's one opinion trying to dominate against another which for me is daft, given that that tend to be a number of different ways of achieving the same end.
dobro
Well-known member
The only reason to record hot is if you have so little headroom that by not recording hot, you bring up the noisefloor when you turn up the track in the mix to get the required level. That can happen when you record at 16-bit. But everybody records at 24-bit, which offers bags of range and there's no danger of noisefloor noise entering the picture. As for recording at -18 dBFS, that's the level that audio gear and many plugins are designed to operate best at, the level that they'll sound best at. The further above that level you're operating at, the greater the chances that gear's operating beyond its optimum range and the greater the chances that it'll affect the sound negatively. This is my understanding, off the top of my head, based on stuff I've been hearing and reading for years. If you want to debate it, I'll start digging around and finding quotes to support what I've said. Might be useful.
grimtraveller
If only for a moment.....
May well be. But to me it simply doesn't make sense to make the optimum level of a piece of equipment -18 but have a scale that runs to 0 with anything beyond that as problematic.
But all I'm saying is that there is opinion on both sides and lots of evidence of quotes can be found either way, I'm sure.
Personally, I'm of the opinion that in recording, there is more than one way to skin most cats.
dobro
Well-known member
It does make sense when you hear the informed arguments for it. I'll start looking now.
Yeah, opinion on both sides - one side's informed and the other isn't - that's my understanding of this issue. Like I said, I'll start digging up some quotes.
dobro
Well-known member
For the Grimster:
Okay, I haven't been able to find the article I'm remembering, but I came across this, which explains far better than I can the whys and hows of recording level, mixing level, and what happens when you allow either one to get too hot:
dBzee: Digital Recording Levels - a rule of thumb
"Apart from liking the sound of your converter clipping, there's NO technical or aesthetic advantage to recording any louder than about -18 or -20dBFS."
Okay, I haven't been able to find the article I'm remembering, but I came across this, which explains far better than I can the whys and hows of recording level, mixing level, and what happens when you allow either one to get too hot:
dBzee: Digital Recording Levels - a rule of thumb
"Apart from liking the sound of your converter clipping, there's NO technical or aesthetic advantage to recording any louder than about -18 or -20dBFS."
dobro
Well-known member
Here's another article along the same lines written by John Scrip aka Massive Mastering. He visits this site sometimes, so you can ask him about it in the Mixing or Mastering Forums:
Proper Audio Recording Levels | The Rants and Ravings of an Audio Mastering Engineer
"So - You have a microphone and a preamp going into a converter or sound card. Those converters are calibrated at LINE LEVEL. In most cases, over the last several years, most I've seen are calibrated to -18dBFS = line level (or 0dBVU). In other words, if you run a steady signal (a sustained note on a keyboard for instance) through a preamp and turn up the preamp gain until the VU meter reads 0dBVU, at the converter (and on the active track in whatever program you're using the record), it will read -18dBFS (or -18dBFS(RMS) -- full scale, but measured over time).
"THIS IS WHERE YOUR GEAR IS DESIGNED TO RUN. This is where it's spec'd at. You will have a decent amount of headroom, the lowest distortion, the best signal to noise ratio, etc., etc., etc. around this level or lower. Some gear - usually very high-quality stuff, has a good amount of usable headroom above this level. A lot of "budget friendly" gear does not. So all of this advice is *more* important if you're using "okay" gear at the input. EVEN YOUR DIGITAL CONVERTERS are ANALOG components up to the converter itself. They don't want to be "beat up" all the time either."
Proper Audio Recording Levels | The Rants and Ravings of an Audio Mastering Engineer
"So - You have a microphone and a preamp going into a converter or sound card. Those converters are calibrated at LINE LEVEL. In most cases, over the last several years, most I've seen are calibrated to -18dBFS = line level (or 0dBVU). In other words, if you run a steady signal (a sustained note on a keyboard for instance) through a preamp and turn up the preamp gain until the VU meter reads 0dBVU, at the converter (and on the active track in whatever program you're using the record), it will read -18dBFS (or -18dBFS(RMS) -- full scale, but measured over time).
"THIS IS WHERE YOUR GEAR IS DESIGNED TO RUN. This is where it's spec'd at. You will have a decent amount of headroom, the lowest distortion, the best signal to noise ratio, etc., etc., etc. around this level or lower. Some gear - usually very high-quality stuff, has a good amount of usable headroom above this level. A lot of "budget friendly" gear does not. So all of this advice is *more* important if you're using "okay" gear at the input. EVEN YOUR DIGITAL CONVERTERS are ANALOG components up to the converter itself. They don't want to be "beat up" all the time either."
dobro
Well-known member
Okay, I finally found that article I was looking for. SOS articles are great. This one's about gain staging, but notice what he says about how many (good) plugins operate when they're pushed too hard:
Gain Staging In Your DAW Software
"More commonly, problems arise when you introduce plug-in effects and processors, because some are just not designed to operate well when presented with very hot signal levels. I'm not referring exclusively to cheap plug-ins, either: there are some fantastic-sounding plug-ins by the likes of Waves, Slate and Sonnox that audibly suffer if you overload them.
Analogue-modelling plug-ins, in particular, seem susceptible to this sort of abuse: they often do a great job of mimicking the sonic behaviour of their hardware equivalent in its normal operating range, but start to fall down when you push them outside that range. My assumption (which I've yet to verify) is that this is because modelling the increasingly complex non-linearities of analogue gear as you feed hotter and hotter levels into it takes up so much DSP power. If the tool is used as intended, there's just no need to model that behaviour accurately, and users will often prefer a more resource-efficient plug-in in any case."
Gain Staging In Your DAW Software
"More commonly, problems arise when you introduce plug-in effects and processors, because some are just not designed to operate well when presented with very hot signal levels. I'm not referring exclusively to cheap plug-ins, either: there are some fantastic-sounding plug-ins by the likes of Waves, Slate and Sonnox that audibly suffer if you overload them.
Analogue-modelling plug-ins, in particular, seem susceptible to this sort of abuse: they often do a great job of mimicking the sonic behaviour of their hardware equivalent in its normal operating range, but start to fall down when you push them outside that range. My assumption (which I've yet to verify) is that this is because modelling the increasingly complex non-linearities of analogue gear as you feed hotter and hotter levels into it takes up so much DSP power. If the tool is used as intended, there's just no need to model that behaviour accurately, and users will often prefer a more resource-efficient plug-in in any case."
grimtraveller
If only for a moment.....
Here's one of a few interesting threads on the subject that have turned up here over the years.
I've noticed in the past with the DAW that I use that sometimes, the drums or congas would appear to clip on the meters {just odd peaks here and there} but when I listened to the actual sound, there was no discernible distortion and believe me, digital distortion {when the signal is constantly clipped} is a most awful sound that I wouldn't wish on anyone.
But that was then and now, I don't get near clipping even though the odd peak clipping didn't sound crass.
Aside from the fact that you can turn a hot but non clipping signal down on playback, I find that as long as nothing actually is clipping and the master mix level is sensible, it makes little difference what level something was tracked at. I don't disagree with shooting for -18 to -12 and having plenty of headroom, but I'm also mindful that headroom is headroom because it's the safe place or it wouldn't be headroom. A ceiling is not headroom.
I've noticed in the past with the DAW that I use that sometimes, the drums or congas would appear to clip on the meters {just odd peaks here and there} but when I listened to the actual sound, there was no discernible distortion and believe me, digital distortion {when the signal is constantly clipped} is a most awful sound that I wouldn't wish on anyone.
But that was then and now, I don't get near clipping even though the odd peak clipping didn't sound crass.
Aside from the fact that you can turn a hot but non clipping signal down on playback, I find that as long as nothing actually is clipping and the master mix level is sensible, it makes little difference what level something was tracked at. I don't disagree with shooting for -18 to -12 and having plenty of headroom, but I'm also mindful that headroom is headroom because it's the safe place or it wouldn't be headroom. A ceiling is not headroom.