DMP3 VU Meters?

[Massive Master]

Please forgive my ignorance but aren’t converters going to clip way before the mic pre anyway? I don’t understand why we need to know anything other than instantaneous peak levels in the DAW when there isn’t any danger of the mic pre clipping before the next device in the path?

Or is that just an incorrect assumption based on the behaviour of the gear that I use? My pres barely break a sweat getting even relatively soft sources into the DAW at a good level.

I thought I had a handle on this stuff, obviously not.

Just adding to dgatwood: True, the converters will (hopefully) *clip* before the preamp. But a CLIP is a FAILURE of the circuit -- It's not like it's "perfect, perfect, perfect, CLIP!"

It's "Perfect, a little distorted, spectrally questionable, dynamically compromised, noisy, grainy, heavily distorted, CLIP!"

As far as the accuracy of the meters, I can't say. But as far as recording without VU meters, I can -- I also record without VU meters commonly. But I know better. I know where my converters are calibrated, I know what the preamp is doing. A lot of "less seasoned" recordists do not. I've seen so many manuals - some from reputable companies - that say "record the signal as hot as possible without clipping" - when that's SUCH a bad idea that I can't even start.

But like anything else, let your own ears decide. Use a splitter and record the same signals simultaneously. One peaking as hot as possible (without clipping) and one peaking at around -14 or -12dBFS. Lay down a few tracks.

Put a rough mix together using the same levels - Whether you have to bring the faders down to -10 or lower to stop it from clipping on the "hot" mix or whatever.

Put a limiter on the "hot" mix and push it to (wherever it wants to be).

Put a limiter on the "normal" mix and do the same.

Which mix sounds "bigger" and more dynamic? Less noisy? Which mix has more clarity and "openness?" Which is less fatiguing over time?

Which mix can be pushed louder before it falls apart?

I have yet to find anyone - ANYONE - that says the "hot" tracked mix sounds better by any stretch. Even with very high quality gear that has much more usable headroom.

I also have yet to find a preamp that will complain about "not being pushed hard enough..."

 

[Kevin Deschwazi]

Dgatwood and MM, thanks for your responses.

I think you misunderstood me a little, I’m aware that it’s not necessarily good just because it’s not clipping and I’ve been tracking at very conservative levels in the DAW (peaking at around -12db) for a few years now. (In fact that was probably the single best bit of advice I’ve seen on recording in the few years I’ve been doing it).

I have to say I’m not really sure about adjusting the gain of the converters!? When I’m tracking, the only gain adjustments I’m making are with the mic preamp. I use an E-mu interface which has a software mixer and I never touch it, all levels there remain at unity. I just adjust the gain of the mic pre until I get a good level and away I go. Conservative levels into the DAW and happy mic pres.

Like I said I know my preamps aren’t breaking a sweat getting the required level into the comp so I don’t see the need for metering at that stage. I think (hope!) that maybe I’m just familiar with my gear and I know how it’s going to behave so I don’t think about it too much.

 

[ofajen]

Meters....one word: Dorrough.

Peak plus average on 2 very detailed LCD scales, set in a pair of plastic windows big enough to wash.

Cool to look at, and accurate to work with. Just right.

C.

No argument that Dorrough meters are good. Also, Mytec meters. They both are also expensive. I happened to have a couple of extra Modutec (M-79) VU meters laying around, so I just use those in tandem with peak meters on the digital side or the free Inspector meter plug-in.

Roger Nichols' free version of Inspector gives you a meter plug-in with peak and RMS levels. The unwary should search for my previous posts on this so they are not caught unawares by a few minor oddities about the meter labelling and RMS level reference, but once that is understood, they are perfectly usable meters.

Cheers,

Otto

 

[Shadow_7]

My DMP3 VU meters hardly move at all. IF at all, is this thing on? And my converter clips long before the DMP3. But I'm a loud brass player recording with a phantom powered LDC. Well the AT4033a is more of an MDC.

I suppose that if I put a ribbon microphone on the thing and started cranking the gain, the DMP3 might actually move past the bottom 5% to 15%. All I know right now is that if the gain knob goes past 9 O'clock with the +33 dB button OFF, then I'm clipping on my Delta 44. And even at the level I have to play pretty conservatively to stay safe.

I can have the DMP3 at it's lowest level and still get a decent level on the DAW. I just like running it a little hotter than stone cold. If only because the soundcard may behave differently when pushed that last 15% of it's abilities. My Delta 44 sounds pretty good pushed to 100% on it's levels. But my laptops soundcard sounds like caw if pushed past 85%.

The cool thing about the VU meters is that they have lights. So that I can tell if I left the thing on before I go to bed. As opposed to my Mobile Pre that just has some faint LED light. Next to another LED that is ALWAYS on. That unit I have left on after going to bed. And not noticed that it was on(phantom power) until after noon the following day.

 

[cusebassman]

The cool thing about the VU meters is that they have lights. So that I can tell if I left the thing on before I go to bed. As opposed to my Mobile Pre that just has some faint LED light. Next to another LED that is ALWAYS on. That unit I have left on after going to bed. And not noticed that it was on(phantom power) until after noon the following day.

Wait til they die

One of the lights on my unit went, so just one comes on. I think I'd be happier if they had both gone, simply because it "looks" broken at the moment. It bothers me a bit despite the fact that the unit is compeltely operational otherwise, and despite the fact that I don't even *use* the VU meters

Perhaps I should open it up and simply disable the second light... or buy a soldering gun and replace the bulb that went - but that is the more complex and expensive of the two solutions...

 

[Chris Long]

A guy selling 2 DMP3's on eBay recently mentioned that the lights had a habit of burning out...now I know that it's a real phenomenon. He said he had replaced his a number of times...

 

[cusebassman]

A guy selling 2 DMP3's on eBay recently mentioned that the lights had a habit of burning out...now I know that it's a real phenomenon. He said he had replaced his a number of times...

Yea, it seems like a futile and pointless endeavor... I'm apparently at least content enough to leave them be since I've never made pains to go about replacing the bulb. I haven't checked to see if they are soldered in or if you can remove them from a base, but from what I've read here, they are soldered in. Just seems like a lot of pain for a little thing I suppose.

 

[Igor Alexander]

Just adding to dgatwood: True, the converters will (hopefully) *clip* before the preamp. But a CLIP is a FAILURE of the circuit -- It's not like it's "perfect, perfect, perfect, CLIP!"

I'm afraid I'm not following you. In digital recording, that's exactly what happens.

It's "Perfect, a little distorted, spectrally questionable, dynamically compromised, noisy, grainy, heavily distorted, CLIP!"

That's what happens in analog recording.

As far as the accuracy of the meters, I can't say.

Well, that's kind of a crucial point. Meters that aren't accurate can do more harm than good, and at best, aren't very useful, except maybe as an indicator that, "yes, this thing is working."

But as far as recording without VU meters, I can -- I also record without VU meters commonly. But I know better. I know where my converters are calibrated, I know what the preamp is doing. A lot of "less seasoned" recordists do not. I've seen so many manuals - some from reputable companies - that say "record the signal as hot as possible without clipping" - when that's SUCH a bad idea that I can't even start.

Why is that a bad idea? In analog recording, which is as much of an art as a science, how hot you want to record is to a large extent a matter of taste. You want to keep the signal out of the mud and keep it from pinning the meters, but in between those extremes, there's a large range to maneuver in.

With digital, it's either clipping or it isn't clipping, it's as simple as that. Since digital distortion is highly noticeable and extremely unpleasant, it's certainly a good idea to leave a wide margin of safety, and digital systems have such a low noise floor that you can do this without any problems, but you still want a nice, strong signal to work with, especially if you're mixing through an analog desk.

I don't know where you get this idea that digital waveforms distort at some point before they clip. That's simply not true! If you're experiencing this, then there is something seriously wrong with the system you are using.

But like anything else, let your own ears decide. Use a splitter and record the same signals simultaneously. One peaking as hot as possible (without clipping) and one peaking at around -14 or -12dBFS. Lay down a few tracks.

Use a splitter to route the same signal... where? To another preamp? What makes you think that the difference you are hearing isn't related to your preamps rather than to some mysterious digital distortion?

Put a rough mix together using the same levels - Whether you have to bring the faders down to -10 or lower to stop it from clipping on the "hot" mix or whatever.

Put a limiter on the "hot" mix and push it to (wherever it wants to be).

Put a limiter on the "normal" mix and do the same.

What's the rationale behind using a limiter? If you're using a limiter on your mix, and deliberately pushing your mix to trigger it, how do you know that what you're hearing isn't the effects of the dynamics processing?

Which mix sounds "bigger" and more dynamic? Less noisy? Which mix has more clarity and "openness?" Which is less fatiguing over time?

Which mix can be pushed louder before it falls apart?

I have yet to find anyone - ANYONE - that says the "hot" tracked mix sounds better by any stretch. Even with very high quality gear that has much more usable headroom.

I'm still not following you. There is no such thing as tracking "hot" in digital recording. Either the waveform is clipping or it's not. Either the waveform is an accurate representation of what you fed in to your ADC or it's not, and if it's not, you need to figure out what in your signal path is causing the signal to distort. There's nothing more to it than that. Digital recording is not analog recording.

I also have yet to find a preamp that will complain about "not being pushed hard enough..."

In recording, as a general rule, you always want to use as little gain as possible (but not so little that you'll have to boost the signal later, increasing noise). That's a given.

 

[Massive Master]

You completely misunderstood my post. I was talking about analog signals.

Why is that a bad idea? In analog recording, which is as much of an art as a science, how hot you want to record is to a large extent a matter of taste. You want to keep the signal out of the mud and keep it from pinning the meters, but in between those extremes, there's a large range to maneuver in.

Again, that's my point.

With digital, it's either clipping or it isn't clipping, it's as simple as that. Since digital distortion is highly noticeable and extremely unpleasant, it's certainly a good idea to leave a wide margin of safety, and digital systems have such a low noise floor that you can do this without any problems, but you still want a nice, strong signal to work with, especially if you're mixing through an analog desk.

And again. You do a want strong signal - But you don't want to overdrive the signal (my other point). You can't ram a preamp into a converter 15dB hotter than it's designed to run and expect the same signal - Whether the converter is clipping or not. That was the point.

I don't know where you get this idea that digital waveforms distort at some point before they clip. That's simply not true! If you're experiencing this, then there is something seriously wrong with the system you are using.

And again (and again and again), I never even eluded to such a thing. The ANALOG (ANALOG) signal can distort - considerably - before it gets to the digital converter.

You might want to re-read that post. Even the parts you quoted.

Use a splitter to route the same signal... where? To another preamp? What makes you think that the difference you are hearing isn't related to your preamps rather than to some mysterious digital distortion?

Yes. To another preamp. Will you PLEASE get off this "mysterious digital distortion" that I NEVER [SELF-CENSORED]-ING MENTIONED?!? My ENTIRE POINT was to avoid ANALOG distortion AT THE PREAMP.

What's the rationale behind using a limiter? If you're using a limiter on your mix, and deliberately pushing your mix to trigger it, how do you know that what you're hearing isn't the effects of the dynamics processing?

Okay, evidently a simple A/B test is beyond your grasp. Don't spoil it for the kids, alright?

I'm still not following you. There is no such thing as tracking "hot" in digital recording. Either the waveform is clipping or it's not. Either the waveform is an accurate representation of what you fed in to your ADC or it's not, and if it's not, you need to figure out what in your signal path is causing the signal to distort. There's nothing more to it than that. Digital recording is not analog recording.

A minute ago, it looked like you understood the difference between ANALOG distortion and digital clipping. Now, it looks like you've lost it. I'm not, and was never referring to digital distortion. I'm talking about making a DIGITAL recording of ANALOG DISTORTION. There is absolutely such a thing as "tracking hot" in digital. IT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE THAT THERE IS NO CLIP. READ THE POST.

What part of this is confusing you? Do you really think I don't understand this?

In recording, as a general rule, you always want to use as little gain as possible (but not so little that you'll have to boost the signal later, increasing noise). That's a given.

And again...

 

[Igor Alexander]

You might want to re-read that post. Even the parts you quoted.

I've re-read the post. I read it several times before posting my reply the first time, just to make sure I wasn't missing something. It still sounds to me as though you're talking about about digital distortion in that post. It even sounds like you're talking about digital distortion in parts of this post, even though you say you're not. I guess I must be having trouble wrapping my head around your writing style or something.

You wrote all that just to say that if you overdrive a preamp, it's going to distort?

 

[Igor Alexander]

It's not all about clipping. The ideal setting is to have your converters set to unity gain (neither padding the signal down nor boosting it) and set the levels with the pre unless your preamp ends up clipping or gets noisy at that gain level, in which case it may be advantageous to reduce the gain on the pre and add a little gain on the converters.

Wow. This thread is confusing the hell out of me.

You have converters that allow you to set gain? That must be some pretty fancy gear that you're using there, because I've never seen or even heard of converters that could do that. I believe that on my sound card, I can use software to reduce the level of an incoming SPDIF signal, or to create a monitor mix of what's on the analog channels, but that has nothing to do with controlling levels at the converters.

Is it possible that when people around here say "converters," they really mean "soundcard," as in a soundcard with built-in preamps or gain stages?

 

[Massive Master]

You wrote all that just to say that if you overdrive a preamp, it's going to distort?

Yes. You'd be shocked at how many times (for years) I've been writing all that over and over because so many people "don't get it" for the first 5 pages.

(To DGATWOOD You have converters that allow you to set gain? That must be some pretty fancy gear that you're using there, because I've never seen or even heard of converters that could do that

I know this wasn't at me, but I can set calibration levels (via hardware) on ALL my converters. I wouldn't buy a set where it wasn't possible -- I need to match them all with the gain structure. If I have one set fixed at -20dBFS and the incoming set is set at -10dBFS, that makes a mess.

 

[danny.guitar]

I know this wasn't at me, but I can set calibration levels (via hardware) on ALL my converters. I wouldn't buy a set where it wasn't possible -- I need to match them all with the gain structure. If I have one set fixed at -20dBFS and the incoming set is set at -10dBFS, that makes a mess.

I wish the cheaper gear let you calibrate them like that.