Steenamaroo
...
LOL. Trust me; They're aware.
recording level
- Thread starter B1n4ry
- Start date
LOL. Trust me; They're aware.
No. You provided incorrect information in regards to normalizing. You provided bad information based off of your extremely limited and less than rudimentary knowledge of how digital audio works. That's the problem. You've been corrected by no less than 5 or 6 people. Lol. Yet you still keep up the charade. The pics and nonsense stuff you "shared" is completely irrelevant and meaningless for the purposes of what this thread is about. Why you went there is beyond me. Totally pointless. And all the rest of this is you just being a troll.
Alert them to what? You totally trolling and derailing a thread with nonsense? Sure, go ahead.
How was it incorrect? I have not 1 correction on the human hearing fact. I would love any response to the contrary, that can be backed by textbook.
It was relevant, it illustrated how normalizing works.
This is not the digital only forum.
This is recording techniques
I know a lot more than some others just based on responses.
I do not understand the take overthread thing. It seems there is no etiquette here anyway. If that is wrong, I apologize .
This is like texting, you discus the heading and see where it takes you , no?
I have left positive feedback for all who helped, yes that includes greg. Thanks.
Please do not start making up things about me the moment I leave. I you have further information for me related, please reach me through PM or email.
This is like texting, you discus the heading and see where it takes you , no?
I have left positive feedback for all who helped, yes that includes greg. Thanks.
Please do not start making up things about me the moment I leave. I you have further information for me related, please reach me through PM or email.
I, and others, have pointed out that your 200 ms observations are not relevant to what this thread was actually about. You spun it into your own direction, a direction that is irrelevant, and you keep defending your incompetence even though many others have pointed out that you are on the wrong track. It's not just me being a dick. Others have pointed it out too. So, there's that....you are just trolling.
Chili
Site Moderator
Okay, back open. Adult swim is over. Play nice, kids.
Steenamaroo
...
Farview
Well-known member
They are just links to mp3 files. It will open what ever player your computer is associated with mp3's on the web. The problem is on your end. You have it associated with quicktime, but haven't installed the plugin.
You could just right click and download the files.
I would suggest starting at the top of the page and working your way down. Project storm was a mix project, I didn't record it, I was sent the tracks to mix.
limit the signal going in when you record it. Granted, the normalize will get the volume, but at the cost of raising the noise floor.
R
RAMI
Guest
It doesn't raise the noise floor any more than simply turning up the volume would raise the noise floor. All you're doing when you normalize is turning up the volume of everything, signal and noise.
Having said that, I'm not sticking up for normalizing in this case. I'm just saying it has nothing to do with raising the noise floor.....and you certainly don't want to use a limiter just to make your wave form bigger. Now we're screwing up sound to make it "look" bigger.
Massive Master
www.massivemastering.com
Oh geez I can't even START to get into how much is absolutely "non-accurate" in this statement... And even if it was, what a horrible, terrible idea it would be.
Oh Massive, please elaborate or start another thread for our edification (really!). Limit then normalize sounds like a bad idea. I am looking through some literature for an article that discusses normalization, I think it was written by Gannon Kashiwa. If you get time please pen your thoughts. Mine: don't normalize, stage properly. Be well All.
Farview
Well-known member
If you feel the need to limit on the way in, you are simply recording too hot. Turn it down and everything will be fine.
There is no reason to normalize individual tracks in a session. It's simply pointless. The peak level that normalization uses does not have a standard relationship with volume. Some instruments have high peaks and low volume, some have very low peaks. For example: If you normalize a kick drum track and a violin track to the same peak level, the violin will be WAY louder than the kick, even though they have the same peak level. That is one reason why normalizing individual tracks is pointless.
Since there is a zoom control to make the picture of the waveform bigger, actually changing the audio in order to make it easier to see is just silly. Let me say that again: processing AUDIO to make it EASIER TO SEE is silly.
There is no reason to normalize individual tracks in a session. It's simply pointless. The peak level that normalization uses does not have a standard relationship with volume. Some instruments have high peaks and low volume, some have very low peaks. For example: If you normalize a kick drum track and a violin track to the same peak level, the violin will be WAY louder than the kick, even though they have the same peak level. That is one reason why normalizing individual tracks is pointless.
Since there is a zoom control to make the picture of the waveform bigger, actually changing the audio in order to make it easier to see is just silly. Let me say that again: processing AUDIO to make it EASIER TO SEE is silly.
bouldersoundguy
Well-known member
Why would you ever need to limit something during tracking unless you had a hardware limiter that sounded so spectacular it couldn't be done better after the fact in the context of the mix with a plugin? You certainly don't need it to prevent overs since there's plenty of dynamic range available, especially with 24 bit conversion but even with 16 bits. There's no upside and the downside is that you can't un-limit it very well once it's done.
no limit then normalize, but actually bring to a peak somewhere -3 to -6 and using the mic pre to slightly slamit into the limiter at that setpoint.
I never use normalize ever.
The reason behind this is that I recording the same amount of noise in the line stages no matter that level the mic pre is at.
it boosts that noise when it is normalize.
I never use normalize ever.
The reason behind this is that I recording the same amount of noise in the line stages no matter that level the mic pre is at.
it boosts that noise when it is normalize.
Massive Master
www.massivemastering.com
O... M... F'in... G...
Isn't there a "facepalm" icon here somewhere?
Found it --
But you just said to - Uh...
WHAT?!? WHAT?!? You know how a mic preamp works, right?
Well, okay, yes. It boosts that noise when it is normalize.
snow lizard
Dedicated Slacker
Bit depth is sort of irrelevant. Quantization error will cause a miniscule bit of harmonic distortion at around -60 dBfs in 16 bit, that gets more apparent as the level drops. You can counter it with dither. If you can even hear the problem. (-60 is pretty low signal level) Or use 24 bit and it ain't necessary. Overcooking the input distorts the business end, not the basement.
As far as "normalize" goes, I think it might have been invented for something like being able to make a mixed playlist and have all the songs at around the same level. I never use it because I have more confidence in my ears.
I think people get stumped on this when they figure out line level is substantially quieter than Youtube or iTunes or what have you.