Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 11 to 20 of 20

Thread: When mixing a track why does the decibel reading shoot up when I cut?

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    95
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Rep Power
    198009
    Sign in to disable this ad
    Quote Originally Posted by rob aylestone View Post
    If you cannot manage levels on the zoom, and HAVE to have a mega loud record level (and frankly, this just sounds lazy, or an unwillingness to experiment, or discover manual record level - why not normalise you track DOWN in volume. Then you can cut and boost? You seem determined to make a problem out of nothing here really? Can you not say to the band - Play loud. set the level, then back it off, knowing the drummer will play louder anyway? Your problem just isn't a problem - and if it really is, then your attempts at eq will probably fail too!
    I don't worry about it too much if the recording sounds good, we record every practice anyway, and no one will ever hear these recordings other than me and my band members. So the elitism and assumptions aren't really helpful. There's clearly a lot of ignorance involved on my part, I'm just asking questions there guy. It takes me a while to figure out normalizing and master limiting as people aptly mentioned, which I'm going to need to figure out at some point, but for now its not a big deal, I just wanted to figure out what was going on with the recordings that already exist.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Trending
    Posts
    18,793
    Thanks
    305
    Thanked 877 Times in 766 Posts
    Rep Power
    21470743
    Quote Originally Posted by Help Help View Post
    So the elitism and assumptions aren't really helpful.
    I don't think there was any elitism in his post, more like hard reality...with a couple of critical assumptions, unless he was spot-on about them.

    Much if it stems from the growing practice with recording newcomers to always leave everything for a later fix.
    He's just saying that you should learn to sort out those things at the start...it will save you a lot of headaches later on when you begin to record more seriously, since you will have developed good habits instead of bad ones.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    essex
    Posts
    2,924
    Thanks
    14
    Thanked 424 Times in 388 Posts
    Rep Power
    4008612
    Yep, no intention to insult you - but recording sessions is a pretty common thing and I've already tried to help. You just need to get comfy wit the zoom and set the levels properly - a kind of 101 in recording - it's only for your benefit to record the sessions, so just stop the recorder getting anywhere near the top of it's range - then you can boost and cut to make it sound nicer. As for assumptions - I did make some because you didn't;t explain why you're recording so hot.

    So how about my idea to take what you already have and lower the level before you eq it? Did you even try it? Might be a rubbish idea, but as I said - experiment a bit. I'm ancient anyway. I try my hardest to help, and sometimes my responses might well not be what you wanted to hear. I'm sorry, but the reply came from what you posted - I just wondered why you had such a near 0dB record level. I guessed that you have your zoom in auto mode where it squeezes everything into mega loud. I had a quick try with a very loud cubase track, and only really savage eq makes a 0dB level distort on the guitar and keys I tried it on. Dropping the level by just 6dB on mine gave me plenty of choices in the eq dept.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    ArizonaMaybe
    Age
    69
    Posts
    9,556
    Thanks
    219
    Thanked 173 Times in 161 Posts
    Rep Power
    9581210
    I was fully aware of this in the case of HP filters -and the sharper the the more the result typically, but 'looked it up as I wasn't sure re bell filters.

    Post 17, and more importantly Paul Frindle on post 25..
    EQs increase the overall level when cutting out frequencies... WHY! - Gearslutz

    ..ya know who Paul Frindle is right? :>)
    Placebo stomps 96k ....... Recent projects
    Ray Catfish Copeland 'Got Love Jim Goodman 'Southern Steel

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    essex
    Posts
    2,924
    Thanks
    14
    Thanked 424 Times in 388 Posts
    Rep Power
    4008612
    Well, I'm ancient enough to have been at training sessions when digital firsts me along and couldn't afford the sony kit back when paul was doing his work on the Oxford. His published stuff from those days answers your question, but is of course dimmed down for the average user's understanding on forums. Have you tamed you record level yet to see if it solves your problem?

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    Terror Australis
    Age
    17
    Posts
    9,202
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 258 Times in 224 Posts
    Rep Power
    21474865
    Quote Originally Posted by Help Help View Post
    I don't worry about it too much if the recording sounds good, we record every practice anyway, and no one will ever hear these recordings other than me and my band members. So the elitism and assumptions aren't really helpful. There's clearly a lot of ignorance involved on my part, I'm just asking questions there guy. It takes me a while to figure out normalizing and master limiting as people aptly mentioned, which I'm going to need to figure out at some point, but for now its not a big deal, I just wanted to figure out what was going on with the recordings that already exist.
    On behalf of management, I'll apologise that perhaps some of our posters don't have the subtlety of verbal communication you'd prefer, but the answer to your problem is, as has been pointed out by several knowledgeable people above, to record with enough headroom - something you can do by turning one knob down a bit. Not difficult. It doesn't matter what you're recording. It doesn't matter if it's a noisy rehearsal in a garage or the next Abbey Road. It'll solve a lot of problems. Not just this one. Problems you haven't encountered yet. So DO worry about it. It's an easy fix.

    LMGTFY

    Now say "Thank you" to the people who've helped you - even if you didn't like the delivery - and just go and do it.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    95
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Rep Power
    198009
    Quote Originally Posted by Armistice View Post
    On behalf of management, I'll apologise that perhaps some of our posters don't have the subtlety of verbal communication you'd prefer, but the answer to your problem is, as has been pointed out by several knowledgeable people above, to record with enough headroom - something you can do by turning one knob down a bit. Not difficult. It doesn't matter what you're recording. It doesn't matter if it's a noisy rehearsal in a garage or the next Abbey Road. It'll solve a lot of problems. Not just this one. Problems you haven't encountered yet. So DO worry about it. It's an easy fix.

    LMGTFY

    Now say "Thank you" to the people who've helped you - even if you didn't like the delivery - and just go and do it.
    I say "thank you" profusely after basically every post I do where someone answers, but thanks for the passive-aggressive pretend-to-care but mostly just signalling-to-your-peers thing, I guess. You didn't even read my question nor are you interested in it. Not that anyone cares, but I know how levels and headroom work. Thanks for showing me how to type into a search engine though! I'm hardly competent, but I've recorded "seriously" before(a whole setup, micing everything, testing levels, mixing, doing everything myself) and gotten results I'm satisfied with. The Zoom mic was on a recording level of 25 out of 100. We just start playing immediately when we get there, start making up songs, I didn't have time to really check the levels closely. It wasn't meant to be a big deal, just to keep track of things, it just went well and sounded cool. My question was in regards to given the recording I have, which was recorded too hot but still sounds good, why do the levels raise after a slight EQ? I'm not and wasn't doing this, but let's say someone was recording too hot on purpose (I know that's blasphemy to recording snobs). Its usually a bad idea, but it can sound cool on some mics if you're going for something distorted sounding. Internet forums like this have this thing where they aren't really interested in what you are actually asking, rather how they can tell you how stupid you are, how they know so much more as if that makes them superior humans. I can ask a question about an amp I have and literally every single response will be how the amp isn't good enough, how could you buy such a bad amp, you need at least a $2000 amp to be able to be a "serious" musician or something, etc. It doesn't matter how innocuous my question or tone is when I ask it. The snobbery is a real thing. I've met a lot of people like this in real life, but I've never met ONE person like this who could write a decent song to save their life, or has anything original to say as an artist. Unless you count mimicking modern FM radio as that.

    Quote Originally Posted by rob aylestone View Post
    Well, I'm ancient enough to have been at training sessions when digital firsts me along and couldn't afford the sony kit back when paul was doing his work on the Oxford. His published stuff from those days answers your question, but is of course dimmed down for the average user's understanding on forums. Have you tamed you record level yet to see if it solves your problem?
    I wasn't going to respond to anything more on this thread, seemed like a waste of time for everyone involved, went and looked and saw that the same people are still "responding" to me. My question was in regards to files already recorded. If you're referring to turning the track down and then EQ-ing as you had mentioned, I had already done that before I even came on here. Was confused why the volume would change so much after such slight cuts in a single frequency, that appeared to make the track quieter. I'm often missing things that a simple question might solve, I was concerned there was something different about Cubase or something I should know for the future.

    I'm sorry for all of our time being wasted. Just forget this thread and move on. Thanks

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Below the Watford gap !
    Age
    56
    Posts
    7,668
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 25 Times in 21 Posts
    Rep Power
    21474857
    Help Help,
    While I sympathize with and agree with some of what you say, let me just add that often on this forum, a question that may not be directly answered is sometimes looking beyond the immediate exchange. So while few could tell you precisely why, after making an EQ cut, the level meter shot up, many could wonder why you'd be recording so hot in the first place. And bear in mind, a public forum is a bit like a living book and people at all stages of their recording/mixing life might be looking in. Therefore, sometimes the actual exchanges are what are of real value. I know I've often picked up loads of important food thought in reading threads, even though the immediate question or subject was of no relevance or interest to me. Often a question like yours is a jumping off point to address wider issues connected with the question. That, in my mind, makes it a good question and the discussion that followed, likewise.

  9. The Following User Says Thank You to grimtraveller For This Useful Post:


  10. #19
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    95
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Rep Power
    198009
    Yeah, I consider that too, that's part of it to me though. I've often been a third party reading an exchange that has nothing to do with me other than an interest in learning, and get frustrated for the same reason on behalf of someone else, cause I could have learned something too that was unnecessarily derailed. The actual question the OP is asking is not considered nearly to the degree as the entirely predictable pile-on assertions ad nauseum, that would at least appear to have more of an interest in group or self-affirmation with a certain way of thinking or assumed knowledge than they would any kind of earnest assistance. Nothing is learned or gained in these instances, certainly nothing new. I know that it sometimes comes from a frustration with questions that could be easily solved with a little trial and error or a google search, but for my specific question that wasn't enough for me to rule out what could've been going on. If the levels raised in proportion to how slight the cut was I would have assumed it was EQ changing things. With how much it raised I started to suspect there might be something else happening, it didn't make sense.

    This website doesn't suffer from such difficulties anywhere near what many others do, and I've gotten a lot of newbie help on here in the past with some very patient people. Its just an artifact of the internet, and each online forum acquires its own peculiar brand of groupthink, regardless of how many great and well-meaning people it may have.

    As for my original question, I think miroslav has probably deduced what's most likely going on. Thanks to all who tried to help, I appreciate it!
    Last edited by Help Help; 2 Weeks Ago at 20:25.

  11. #20
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    essex
    Posts
    2,924
    Thanks
    14
    Thanked 424 Times in 388 Posts
    Rep Power
    4008612
    No problem for us - and it was actually quite useful because I tried all sorts on Cubase here to see if I could replicate it and on my zooms, oddly I couldn't but I COULD on one of my video cameras (A JVC 750) on auto audio record level - it records on auto very loud, with, I think some limiting - and everything is always loud, and I could make this distort (from the waveform) by introducing some savage eq cuts that would musically sound weird. Where two filters overlay each other. Its easy on digital eq to pick a frequency and suck it out with narrow Q, but then bring in another frequency too close and produce a strange hump and bump curve. With the already loud JVC audio, it sounded pretty horrid.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Please check out my new rock track "Shoot You Down" from DECENTER
    By DogmaticVox in forum Marketing Your Music / Publicity
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-26-2012, 11:47
  2. Recording/Mixing/Master Reading Material
    By douglass.alex in forum Newbies
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-01-2012, 07:39
  3. Mic shoot out + Genesis 3 track:
    By Speeddemon in forum Guitars and Basses
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 01-28-2003, 14:13
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-26-2003, 16:33
  5. Stupid 14 decibel dip at 440 HZ.
    By CyanJaguar in forum Mixing Techniques
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-25-2001, 20:01

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •