Recording volume Ok. Playback volume too loud.

[Farview]

The good news is that the tracks all come practically normalized. All instruments are in the front so all you need to do is some IQ and LR positioning.

Your idea of a good mix is to have all the transients at the same level? That makes no sense.

I listened to all three songs. They all sound fine until something gets loud enough to hit the limiter. It distorts in a way that isn't appropriate for the genre.

And just in case you want to hear something dynamic recorded live at appropriate levels:

 

[MilkoNetherland]

Your idea of a good mix is to have all the transients at the same level? That makes no sense.

I listened to all three songs. They all sound fine until something gets loud enough to hit the limiter. It distorts in a way that isn't appropriate for the genre.

And just in case you want to hear something dynamic recorded live at appropriate levels:

Sure you need to set volumes on each track. But if you have low level instruments and you want them to come foreward in the mix it would mean that you need to set all other track volumes very low. Normalized tracks to begin with actually works very nice. And normalizing soft tracks give a terrible digital "rattle" to the sound. This way its already normalize in full information.. Just works more easy to mix. At least that is wat i see when i see my friend work on his mixes and also what he believes in.

By the way. I like the music you posted. But sound quality wise its very "safe". It sounds very produced but does not have the air i like so much. Sure your sound "colour" suits the kind of music. And probably if that music would have allot of air it would not sound commercial. How did you record these tracks? And is there a uncompressed format to make a better comparison?

 

[MilkoNetherland]

Hey man,
With modern technology there are no real arguments for tracking hot, but there are plenty of solid arguments against.
If you get away with it or don't find any problems then cool, but you're playing with fire and it is an outdated approach. There's no reason for it these days unless you're using old-school analog gear.


Incidentally, you can heavily compress or even limit on the way in without tracking hot.
The two are not the same thing.

I see all the talk of hotter/louder/etc but the few posts where you get descriptive sound like you're actually describing recording with compression.
That, as you described, can bring forward background noises and/or ambience (whether done on the way in or ITB) and there's certainly an argument for that as a technique.

Tracking hot for tracking hot's sake...not so much.

Ok I get that. But limiting is not exactly the same as compressing. Ím not hoping to find tape compressions this way. A good limiter does not fuck up the acoustic information on the moment it limits. it will only then lower the total volume for a certain time. A compressor constantly seeks to amplify lower level parts in the signal to amplify and then collapses when a peak comes in. That is a far more drastic change to the natural shape of the sine than a short dip in gain of the total signal for a short period of time. A limiter does not amplify. I know I can not get tape compression using limiters and digital technique.. But what I do get is all possible information to the max stuffed in to my recorder. . What do you think about the first 2 hot tracks i posted earlier?

 

[Farview]

If you set all the levels to average -18dbfs, there will be no "low level" audio to have to turn up.

Those recordins were done at my old studio. Everything but the vocals were played live, but the guitars were in a different room than the drums and percussion. The keys were obviously direct. The vocals weren't overdubbed.

It was just mics, preamps and an interface into Nuendo.

The commercial sound was kind of the point. It was meant to sell.

 

[Steenamaroo]

A compressor doesn't necessarily amplify anything unless you tell it to.
It does exactly the same thing as a limiter, but you have control of more parameters with a compressor.

Anyway, neither is related to tracking hot.
You can compress or limit and modest signal for whatever effect and still leave plenty of room above it.

From my previous post,
I see all the talk of hotter/louder/etc but the few posts where you get descriptive sound like you're actually describing recording with compression.
That, as you described, can bring forward background noises and/or ambience (whether done on the way in or ITB) and there's certainly an argument for that as a technique.

Tracking hot for tracking hot's sake...not so much.

Using a limiter, assuming variable threshold, doesn't equal tracking hot.
It sounds like you're choosing to do both and not differentiating between them?

 

[MilkoNetherland]

A compressor doesn't necessarily amplify anything unless you tell it to.
It does exactly the same thing as a limiter, but you have control of more parameters with a compressor.

Anyway, neither is related to tracking hot.
You can compress or limit and modest signal for whatever effect and still leave plenty of room above it.

From my previous post,
I see all the talk of hotter/louder/etc but the few posts where you get descriptive sound like you're actually describing recording with compression.
That, as you described, can bring forward background noises and/or ambience (whether done on the way in or ITB) and there's certainly an argument for that as a technique.

Tracking hot for tracking hot's sake...not so much.

Using a limiter, assuming variable threshold, doesn't equal tracking hot.
It sounds like you're choosing to do both and not differentiating between them?

The way its done on my preview recordings its simply set the input gain to the limiters to limit on the loudest passages of each instrument. With snare drums its a bit dangerous so on the snare i know we did it a bit less hot into the limiter. but even vocals and sax and guitars were continuously blinking. limit treshold was set just under the 0db on the recorder which means that it was never in the red but just below.

 

[Steenamaroo]

The way its done on my preview recordings its simply set the input gain to the limiters to limit on the loudest passages of each instrument. With snare drums its a bit dangerous so on the snare i know we did it a bit less hot into the limiter. but even vocals and sax and guitars were continuously blinking. limit treshold was set just under the 0db on the recorder which means that it was never in the red but just below.

One of us is missing the point, I think.
Unless your limiters have a fixed threshold, there's no reason to have it anywhere near zero.
The only benefit is a hot signal and that's not a benefit these days.
That's all I'm saying.

I'm not saying it's wrong. I'm not saying it won't work.
I'm saying, unless I've missed some salient piece of information, it's pointless.

 

[MilkoNetherland]

One of us is missing the point, I think.
Unless your limiters have a fixed threshold, there's no reason to have it anywhere near zero.
The only benefit is a hot signal and that's not a benefit these days.
That's all I'm saying.

I'm not saying it's wrong. I'm not saying it won't work.
I'm saying, unless I've missed some salient piece of information, it's pointless.

If you use a limiter in recordings.. would you still set it to limit at -18db in your recorder?? That would be very stupid... If you limit then for sure limit just before you reach maximum dynamic range of your recorder to save as much info as possible.. What I call: use the entire 24 bit... normalizing soft tracks give a nasty digital sound.. loud tracks don' t need normalizing.. Its still logic to me. People talk about super audio CDs sound better due to higher frequency response and higher bit dept causing more volume steps per sample.. If we don' t have the higher frequency response let us at least enjoy the maximum bit dept so the maximum amount of volume steps per sample.. limiting and recording -18 would not benefit anything. the limiters are 8 channels in one module. The only thing you can adjust is the level where the limiting kicks in.. It has a double function. Short loud bursts limit and give a very fast release time and long heavy limitings have a 1 sec release time.. I think we use it in the quick release band and only sometimes have the limiter in the heavy 1 sec release. Thing is you cant really see. its the same led blinking..

 

[Greg_L]

Save as much info? That's idiotic. You're not losing info by recording at regular normal levels. All the info is there and it's better because you're not permanently ruining it on the way in.

 

[Steenamaroo]

If you use a limiter in recordings.. would you still set it to limit at -18db in your recorder??

I set the threshold where ever I want it, relative to the audio peaks.
That'll never be anywhere near 0 because my individual-track audio peaks won't be any where near zero.

That's why I asked about fixed thresholds earlier. If the threshold is fixed you've no choice but to raise the signal to meet/exceed it,
but if you have the choice there's no need or reason to do that.

normalizing soft tracks give a nasty digital sound

Normalising doesn't give any sound, to the best of my knowledge.
If there's some technical argument that it does (and no doubt someone will present it) you're in gold cables territory.

Just to clarify, I'm not suggesting that there's damage being done by tracking hot.
I doubt that's the case if you stay on the right side of zero. My sole point is why would you want to play that close to the line when there's no disadvantage to backing off a little bit.
This is especially true where no limiters are involved.
One overshoot and your take is trash.

 

[Farview]

Recording at -18dbfs doesn't mean putting the peaks at -18, it means putting the average level at -18, and leaving the peaks wherever they end up. That's what headroom is... it is the room above the nominal level that is there for the transients to be without hitting the ceiling.

By the way, as long as you it above -6 dbfs at some point in the recording, you are using all the bits.

 

[MilkoNetherland]

I set the threshold where ever I want it, relative to the audio peaks.
That'll never be anywhere near 0 because my individual-track audio peaks won't be any where near zero.

That's why I asked about fixed thresholds earlier. If the threshold is fixed you've no choice but to raise the signal to meet/exceed it,
but if you have the choice there's no need or reason to do that.



Normalising doesn't give any sound, to the best of my knowledge.
If there's some technical argument that it does (and no doubt someone will present it) you're in gold cables territory.

Just to clarify, I'm not suggesting that there's damage being done by tracking hot.
I doubt that's the case if you stay on the right side of zero. My sole point is why would you want to play that close to the line when there's no disadvantage to backing off a little bit.
This is especially true where no limiters are involved.
One overshoot and your take is trash.

Haha.. Yes. One overshoot and its a block.. but there can not be any overshoots with my limiters. As far as I know dynamic range and the resolution in volume steps per sample is determained by the bit dept. True or not?? If this is true it means that recording hot automatically means you use the optimum amount of the available information.. Now all we need to do is get rid of the idea that a limiter destroys the signal. All it does is lowering the level when treshold is reached and still keeping the shape of the sine as orriginal as possible.. The louder the peak the more the limiter needs to lower the volume.. that is why limiting might and will affect the acoustic signal only in terms of volume compared to the non limited parts of the sine..
I read someone saying at -6db i already use all the bits. Can he explain that to me? That sounds interesting..

 

[Steenamaroo]

I think you're trolling.

 

[Farview]

Haha.. Yes. One overshoot and its a block.. but there can not be any overshoots with my limiters. As far as I know dynamic range and the resolution in volume steps per sample is determained by the bit dept. True or not??

There are no volume steps. That myth was brought about by the illustration attached to an extremely dumbed down explanation of how digital sampling works. See this post for the real explanation https://homerecording.com/bbs/gener...tal-sampling-stair-stepping-explained-359811/

If this is true it means that recording hot automatically means you use the optimum amount of the available information..

It's not true.

Now all we need to do is get rid of the idea that a limiter destroys the signal. All it does is lowering the level when treshold is reached and still keeping the shape of the sine as orriginal as possible.. The louder the peak the more the limiter needs to lower the volume.. that is why limiting might and will affect the acoustic signal only in terms of volume compared to the non limited parts of the sine..

A limiter will reshape the transient above the threshold...Always. That is why the idea won't die, because it is a fact.

I read someone saying at -6db i already use all the bits. Can he explain that to me? That sounds interesting..

Each bit represents about 6db of level. (144 db of dynamic range = 24 bits, 96db of dynamic range = 16 bits) So, anything over -6dbfs will light up the highest bit. Hitting -1dbfs will only light that bit up more times in a row. Anything above -6dbfs doesn't use more bits, there will just be more successive samples with that bit turned on.

 

[mixsit]

Haha.. Yes. One overshoot and its a block.. but there can not be any overshoots with my limiters. . True or not?? If this is true it means that recording hot automatically means you use the optimum amount of the available information.. Now all we need to do is get rid of the idea that a limiter destroys the signal. All it does is lowering the level when treshold is reached and still keeping the shape of the sine as orriginal as possible.. The louder the peak the more the limiter needs to lower the volume.. that is why limiting might and will affect the acoustic signal only in terms of volume compared to the non limited parts of the sine..
I read someone saying at -6db i already use all the bits. Can he explain that to me? That sounds interesting..

A quick summation / review.. IMO

-As far as I know dynamic range and the resolution in volume steps per sample is determained by the bit dept

Yes, buy expanding the range of accurate capture/reproduction in the lower end of the signal. Not at the top end, not the stuff in between.

-Now all we need to do is get rid of the idea that a limiter destroys the signal.

Right. Fine. A little bit of clipping doesn’t have to be very audible, or ‘destructive’. You sacrifice a bit of waveform distortion tossed in to get your increased allowable level.
At extremely small reductions- you can have little amounts of the distortion, for little jump in level.
They are (more or less depending) changes... Sonic hits’, or preferred sound effects... Your choice.

I read someone saying at -6db i already use all the bits. Can he explain that to me? That sounds interesting.

I doubt that’s exactly accurate -don’t know actually. It would seem the top one bit could still be toggling on off?
The point is who cares? What’s important is the concept all the signal within the usable dynamic range of conversion -defined by ‘high enough’ above the conversion error stuff’- ('highly technical jargon) ...is accurately captured/reproduced.

You like the sound of it. Maybe at these amounts of limiting / opperating 'constantly / 'typically at the top range of all/most of your analog chain, fine too.
Me, no thank you.
I'll push it in the mix -how and when I want.
I don't want my tracks 'normalized' (going into a mix
I'll almost never need to put in gain trim but for a few tracks here or there (almost always to correct up not down.)
You can put them on almost all your tracks- to get back into The Zone!, then mix'.

 

[Greg_L]

I think you're trolling.

At this point, he is.

 

[MilkoNetherland]

A quick summation / review.. IMO


Yes, buy expanding the range of accurate capture/reproduction in the lower end of the signal. Not at the top end, not the stuff in between.

Right. Fine. A little bit of clipping doesn’t have to be very audible, or ‘destructive’. You sacrifice a bit of waveform distortion tossed in to get your increased allowable level.
At extremely small reductions- you can have little amounts of the distortion, for little jump in level.
They are (more or less depending) changes... Sonic hits’, or preferred sound effects... Your choice.

Limiters do not cause clipping.... so take that out of the old idea of limiting...

 

[Steenamaroo]

Really? Picking out the one part you feel you can argue back on, and it's semantics?

You've got 5 posts to prove you're not a troll, my friend.

These people are providing good information. My advice would be to soak it up.

 

[Farview]

Limiters do not cause clipping.... so take that out of the old idea of limiting...

Limiters cause distortion, not clipping. They distort the transient.

 

[CSP]

Have read the entire thread but have forgotten exactly how the starter said that he was inserting the limiters. Having done PROFESSIONAL recordings for more than 45 years from within my own professional studio (3 of them) and having owned my own record company where over time we have won numerous awards, can I add the following.

1. If not done this way, and if you must use limiters, they should be connected via the input channels "Insert" section and no other way.

2. I have just read up on the desk and if you put a tone through an input channel with nothing in the Insert hole and then raise the level to 0 Vu on the channel's meter (having adjusted the Trim pot correctly) and then connect this signal via the channel's "Direct Out" (use a balanced 1/4" plug) and connect this to the Hd24's input (by the way, I use three of these in sync for every recording), the level received by the HD24 should/will be exactly where it should be.

3. Now connect the LINE output from the HD24 (again via a balanced 1/4" jack) to the LINE input on the desk and raise the channel's fader to its indicated "0" position and now adjust the channel's "Trim" pot so that the channel's Vu meter reaches 0Vu, you will now see that nothing is overloaded and the sound level leaving the desk should be heard as loud as the sound heard via the return into the desk.

4. Over the years that I have been recording, I have VERY seldom had to use a limiter --- a bit of compression on a vocalist sometimes yes and a bit on kick drum can be effective, but that is about all. It's all about gain structure !!!!!!!

5. The electronics in today's modern equipment is so good that noise floor is very seldom a problem, but digital overload is and this is why companies such as Alesis make their digital equivalent of the analogue 0Vu to be set at about -18. Remember the old analogue VU meter went from -infinity up to 0 then (depending upon the quality of the equipment) up to +9 or higher. If digital equipment is run so that the operator presumes that digital 0 is the same as the analogue 0, then when a signal higher than analogue 0 is produced on the digital piece of equipment this signal will be somewhat over the digital distortion threshold.

I trust that all of the above is understandable, but if not it simply means.

Throw away the limiters, set the console so the signals are around 0Vu (on your analogue console), connect the HD24 from the console's Direct Outs (using balanced leads) and return from the HD24 into the Console's Line Inputs (using balanced leads) and ALL signals should be at the correct levels, with the correct dynamic range.

Remember that when mixing, if you individually set each return channel to be at 0Vu on the Master Fader's meters and then mute the channel, as you progressively unmute each channel you will have to lower the Master Fader by about 3db, so set the Master Fader at the console's marked 0 point and mix from there by adjusting the individual channels to get the best mix.

Hope this helps a bit in solving your problem/situation.

David