2-track 22-2 levels

[Golden]

simple question... I just got a 22-2, and I'm going to send some mixes to it. Just wondering, do I want to be hitting far into the red? Is there a suggested level to hit? or does it matter?

 

[cjacek]

simple question... I just got a 22-2, and I'm going to send some mixes to it. Just wondering, do I want to be hitting far into the red? Is there a suggested level to hit? or does it matter?

Depends strongly on what tape you're using, if your recorder is aligned / calibrated properly and if you like the sound of pushing the meters into the red. I personally would stay below 0db for two reasons: (1) I don't like the sound of hitting the tape above 0db and (2) the frequency response is wider and sound more neutral / natural. You have to strike a balance between that and tape hiss, which may or may not be an issue for you, especially that the 22-2 is half track with very good S/N ratio.

 

[Beck]

Yeah, what Daniel said is generally good advice for mixing down and 0 VU is plenty safe for the 22-2.

The reference flux level on the 22-2 is on the low side at 200 nWb/m. Staying around 0 VU with peaks no higher than +3 VU will give you a very clean mix with Quantegy 407 or Maxell XL 35-90B.

If using 457 or BASF(EMTEC/RMGI) LPR35 you could probably get away with pegging the meters if you felt so inclined. I avoid doing that though even if I can because I actually like having a reading I can reference. Buried meters can’t tell you where you are.

Keep in mind that the meters on the 22-2 don't have peak LEDs so the transients will be above what the meters can tell you.

 

[Golden]

Thanks, guys!

 

[ofajen]

If using 457 or BASF(EMTEC/RMGI) LPR35 you could probably get away with pegging the meters if you felt so inclined. I avoid doing that though even if I can because I actually like having a reading I can reference. Buried meters can’t tell you where you are.

Keep in mind that the meters on the 22-2 don't have peak LEDs so the transients will be above what the meters can tell you.

This is a very useful point. One of several justifiable criticisms of the elderly and generally worthy VU meter spec is that you really only get useful information from -10 dB to +3 dB. I happen to also use VU meters to monitor the outputs of my digital soundcard, but I've chosen to set my digital reference level of -20 dBFS to register in the middle of the VU meters at -3 dB. That gives me up to 6 dB of peak above the reference level that can still be metered on the VU. Since the crest factor (ratio of peak to average level) of digital audio tends to be greater, it's a more pressing need to see those peaks, but I just may try calibrating the tape decks that way, too. Hmmm, I could just pretend that I was lowering my operating level to 250 nW/m (which is what -3 dB represents on my M-79), and then I wouldn't have to recalibrate anything.

Cheers,

Otto

 

[themaddog]

Your best bet is to record your mix to your 2 track but monitor from the playback head as you're recording. As you're doing that, fool around with your record level. Don't focus on the meters too much, and just go by ear for what sounds "best." If you go too far, you'll hear distortion, if it's too low, you'll hear hiss. Try and find a comfortable middle-ground by listening.

-MD

 

[Beck]

This is a very useful point. One of several justifiable criticisms of the elderly and generally worthy VU meter spec is that you really only get useful information from -10 dB to +3 dB. I happen to also use VU meters to monitor the outputs of my digital soundcard, but I've chosen to set my digital reference level of -20 dBFS to register in the middle of the VU meters at -3 dB. That gives me up to 6 dB of peak above the reference level that can still be metered on the VU. Since the crest factor (ratio of peak to average level) of digital audio tends to be greater, it's a more pressing need to see those peaks, but I just may try calibrating the tape decks that way, too. Hmmm, I could just pretend that I was lowering my operating level to 250 nW/m (which is what -3 dB represents on my M-79), and then I wouldn't have to recalibrate anything.

Cheers,

Otto

Yeah, it can be tricky using mechanical meters for digital, since as you know full scale is really full scale, with no wiggle room above 0. It sounds like you’ve got it nailed through trial and error though… -20dBfs referenced to -3 on the meters should give you plenty of grace depending on what type of music you’re recording. The only caution is that your low passages not be sampled at extreme low levels. This is one of those fiddly things about digital that I find so many don’t understand. There is distortion at both extremely high (above FS) and extremely low signal levels, albeit a different kind of distortion.

I have LED Bargraph type on my TASCAM TSR-8 and mechanical averaging meters with peak LEDs on my console. I like both for different reasons, but I’m still somewhat partial to the old mechanical VU. And if they have a peak or overload LED I find they can do about any job.

I first started recording (professionally that is) in television in 1978. In that field 0 VU is a pretty hard rule. As a result I have a bit of an obsession with sticking to it. Consequently it was a snap when I began using digital recording equipment in the early 90’s, since I was never one to push levels into the red anyway.

When recording analog I take a different approach and use different tape rather than recalibrate or change my meter reference… but that’s just one of my quirks. For example rather than push my levels using 456, I’ll just pop on a reel of 406 and keep my 0 VU reference. It just makes me feel better.


~Tim