recording level

ok, now I understand, english is my 2nd language. I have to be more clear in writing.


Do not normalize. crank the pre gain to hit limiter set at -3 to -6.

....rate a post bad just because launguage barrier without finding out what I mean is a bad reflection on you massive.

very unprofessional indeed....
 
snow lizard said:
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.
Click to expand...

Not really. Lots of programmes have facilities to do as you say (in Audition which I use it's called "Group Waveform Normalise"...and I don't ever use it) but, used properly, normalise is just another, useful, tool in your arsenal. It's just like moving a fader except you can specify an upper limit so even the briefest transient won't go into clipping. I tend to use normalise a bit like the gain trim pot on a hardware mixer--I can move individual tracks up and down so the starting point in the mix is where your controls (software fader, volume envelope, automation envelope or whatever) are most linear. Normalising does NOT permanently change your track in an irreversible way any more than moving the fader does.

I think people get stumped on this when they figure out line level is substantially quieter than Youtube or iTunes or what have you.
Click to expand...

Er, that doesn't actually make sense. Line level is a specific reference level in the analogue domain (well, actually two reference levels since unbalanced domestic gear is different from balanced professional stuff). It simply defines the voltage which is considered to be "zero level" (expressed in dBV or dBu). A such, Youtube and iTunes can be line level if you play them via gear set up to be at the right level. I suspect what you meant to ay is that people get stumped when they realise that, without all the loudness wars mastering tricks used in commercial recording, their stuff will sound quieter (and, to many ears, better) because the dynamic range isn't sucked out of the mix.
 
drtechno said:
ok, now I understand, english is my 2nd language. I have to be more clear in writing.

Do not normalize. crank the pre gain to hit limiter set at -3 to -6.
Click to expand...
That's not it at all -- We totally understand that YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND. Crank the pre gain to hit -3 to -6...?

*ASSUMING* you mean -3dBFS... You're talking about running a preamp at 3-400% of the voltage it was spec'd to run -- Into a limiter -- And we're ASSUMING you mean an ANALOG limiter (as I would hope you understand that you can't digitally limit a signal on the way in as the damage has already been done - However, it seems you're absolutely content with damaging the signal on the way in already by ramming it into a limiter at 300% of the spec'd voltage anyway... That said, I know an awful lot of people who think they can actually record "through" plugs and have them "protect" from clipping - which is - well, it just doesn't work like that).

You're being plenty clear. It's very clear that you don't get it.

And the ironic part is that as "worthless" as normalizing is, at least it does little to no harm to the audio. Roasting a signal before it hits a limiter on the way in on the other hand... And you're worried about raising the level of the noise floor? :facepalm:
 
Last edited:
jimmys69 said:
drtechno is having a time out to read some manuals....
Click to expand...

Massive Master said:
That's not it at all -- We totally understand that YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND. Crank the pre gain to hit -3 to -6...?

*ASSUMING* you mean -3dBFS... You're talking about running a preamp at 3-400% of the voltage it was spec'd to run -- Into a limiter -- And we're ASSUMING you mean an ANALOG limiter (as I would hope you understand that you can't digitally limit a signal on the way in as the damage has already been done - However, it seems you're absolutely content with damaging the signal on the way in already by ramming it into a limiter at 300% of the spec'd voltage anyway...).

You're being plenty clear. It's very clear that you don't get it.
Click to expand...

It's so nice to confirm (not that I need the confirmation, but an outsider looking in might) that it's not just me picking on someone. When someone gives horribly wrong/false/ridiculous bad information, it NEEDS to be pointed out. Thanx guys, it's nice to see people not always trying to be "nice" just for the sake of not making waves.
 
Seriously guys... have a look at the OP. Single post, not been back since, hastily made up name... you don't think it's mark1971a just launching a post so he can argue with you all perhaps?

(and you can't tell from IP addresses mods... so easy to get around...)
 
Not the same IP address. Not even close. Though he could be doing a proxy thing.

I got my fingers on it. He is already banned anyway.

I am not a fan of bad advice....
 
The audio tracks that you see are not only "normalized" but are also compressed and volume maximized...is some cases over compressed to get the loudest possible presence on radio. They look like a solid bar with no dynamic information or character. Try looking at older recorded music....50's 60' and 70's listen to the dynamics and look at the graphics and you'll see exactly what I mean.
 
thesoundtek said:
The audio tracks that you see are not only "normalized" but are also compressed and volume maximized...is some cases over compressed to get the loudest possible presence on radio. They look like a solid bar with no dynamic information or character. Try looking at older recorded music....50's 60' and 70's listen to the dynamics and look at the graphics and you'll see exactly what I mean.
Click to expand...

No, he's not referring to mastered mix files. He's referring to the separate unmixed tracks in a multitrack project.
 
Well that was quite an enjoyable little 45 minute read.:thumbs up:

One thing's for sure, there are some complete twats around.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top