a compressor that won't let my signals clip.

  • Thread starter Thread starter wes480
  • Start date Start date
wes480

wes480

New member
I have an RNC and I am liking the sound of it now...

however, it still lets peaks through and I just can't get it to stop them.

Should I just get a Composer Pro to play "peak gaurd" and not use the compressor function?

Or, is there something like, under 500 bucks...that someone could reccomend that would give me some nice compression in addition to the RNC, that would also do a great job of peak limiting?

I would probably be interested in a 2 channel unit...but, not neccessity.
 
I just got an RNC. I have not had any problems and like it very much. Are you setting your threshold enough? Do you see the LEDs light all the way up? Do you have "by pass" activated ? This light should be off.

Also are you giving it enough compression? greater than 6:1? i am suer you have tried all this..but making sure..
 
what about a comp with a discrete limiter built in? i have the drawmer mx30 and i love it - should be somewhere about or even under 360 euros ... it handles dynamics very well - i know, that´s what it should, but so promise many cheaper comps which aren´t quite up to it! and the limiter works brick-like! however the comp itself doesn´t add that much character if you need that - it´s more of a plain "perceived volume control", but there it excels ...

fretless

p.s.: haven´t tried the behringers yet ...
 
wes480 said:
Should I just get a Composer Pro to play "peak gaurd" and not use the compressor function?
Click to expand...

That's not a bad idea.

Actually, the composer, if used sparingly, is not bad at all in the compression department. If you just need some light comp, I would use the composer only . . . throwing the RNC in to the mix only when you need medium to heavier compression.
 
wes480 said:
however, it still lets peaks through and I just can't get it to stop them.
Click to expand...


Haven`t you tought about the obvious solution?
You are recording too hot!
Ease back on the gain a little and the problems will disappear....
Remember the point of recording isn`t all about keeping the average level round 0dBFS
Most pros have their reference level at -18 to -12dBFS, leaving 18 to 12 dB of headroom.


Amund
 
yeah...that is true....but most pros have really good mastering also :)
 
I'm with Neve on this one. Just turn down the gain. Mastering doesn't really have anything to do with your tracking levels. You can still mix them hot if you want.

On your RNC set the ratio to max with fast attack and slow release and a threshold around -1db for a brick wall limiter.
 
Yeah, what was the point of your last post, wes? Leaving enough headroom during tracking is just good engineering. It has absolutely nothing to do with whether/how well the final product is mastered. It has everything to do with how good the final product will sound, regardless of mastering. Aside from the headroom issue, the other effect of raising the gain and squishing the peaks while tracking is that you're raising the noise floor. Not good.

Scott
 
From the historical perspective, it's easy to see how it gets confusing. It wasn't long ago that, back when digital recording meant 16 bits, we were all encouraged to track as hot as possible in order to take advantage of as many bits as possible (and maximize dynamic range).

But now with so many systems recording at 24 bits, it's better to prioritze headroom and not worry so much about recording "hot".
 
littledog said:
But now with so many systems recording at 24 bits, it's better to prioritze headroom and not worry so much about recording "hot".
Click to expand...


LD, can you please explain this concept a little more? From my understanding, hotter=less noise. Why would someone track low than raise the volume alone with noises in the mix??

Thanks

AL
 
A1A2 said:



LD, can you please explain this concept a little more? From my understanding, hotter=less noise. Why would someone track low than raise the volume alone with noises in the mix??

Thanks

AL
Click to expand...

Though I'm not LD, I just read what he said and it suddenly made a lot of sense to me so I think I'll give it a shot. I'm not terribly experienced and don't even have a 24-bit machine yet, so if I'm way off base here I hope someone will correct and enlighten me:

If a 16-bit recorder is capable of, say, a noise floor of -90db, you want to track as hot as you can because if you tracked at, say, -10db, you would find yourself with an overall signal to noise ratio of 80db, which is certainly noticeable.

If a 24-bit recorder is capable of, say, a noise floor of -120db, you could track at -10db and still have an overall signal to noise ratio of 110db. While you are still 10db down from what the gear is capable of, 110db is still damn good for S/N ratio--in many cases even superior to the gear being used to create the signal--and the difference between that and 120 is not nearly so noticeable as that between 80 and 90.

The bigger benefit, though, is that you have 10db of slack to play in before the signal distorts, meaning you are far less likely to lose a great take because of erratic dynamics on the part of the musician. You also won't find yourself so often squashing things with compressors and limiters during tracking in an effort to keep peaks under control, or having to retake or edit to salvage a performance with such distortion in it.
 
Osbick Bird:

Thanks for your attempt to answer. It does make sense to me, but, with the lack of knowledge of the exact definition of "nise floor", I don't quite understand why in 24 bit you have a lower noise floor. Is it because with more dynamic range, noise floor is relatively lower?

Is -10db a common volume to track at for you guys? I do at -7db, and just like Osbick Bird says, clipping happens sometimes....

AL
 
A1A2 said:
Osbick Bird:

Thanks for your attempt to answer. It does make sense to me, but, with the lack of knowledge of the exact definition of "nise floor", I don't quite understand why in 24 bit you have a lower noise floor. Is it because with more dynamic range, noise floor is relatively lower?

Is -10db a common volume to track at for you guys? I do at -7db, and just like Osbick Bird says, clipping happens sometimes....

AL
Click to expand...

I'm willing to bet I had my terminology a little bit mixed ("noise floor" vs. "dynamic range" vs. "signal to noise ratio" are probably all subtly different concepts but I was sort of using them all to mean the same thing), but I did mean that with more dynamic range in 24-bit machines, the "noise floor" is lower relative to a signal recorded at 0dB.

I was only using -10db as an example. Because my current gear is only 16-bit, I try to get a little closer to zero when I can, especially with MIDI-driven stuff where I have better control over dynamics before I even press "REC"....for more erratic stuff I make a SWAG (scientific wild-assed guess) as to just how many takes I want to risk having to make and adjust the gain accordingly. Since I'm typically recording myself and my musicianship often leaves a bit to be desired, I usually bite the bullet and turn down the level to something like -9dB (my meters are in 3dB steps), or put my compressor/limiter on it if I don't mind squashing it.
 
Here's an easy way to look at it without getting technical:

At 16 bits, we were encouraged to track as hot as possible, so that when we got to the soft sections they didn't sound grainy due to lack of available resolution. The trade-off, though, was increased danger of clipping.

Since 24 bits has 256x the resolution of 16 bits, you can get MUCH softer without getting grainy. That's why you can leave more safety headroom and not worry about compromising your quality.
 
Replying to A1A2's question on "noise floor":
An eay way to remember is count 6 dB for every bit. So 16 bits will give you 16 x 6= -96dB dynamic range. At 24 bits it becomes 24 x -6 = -144dB. But this 144 dB is not a reality. Actually it comes down to below 105dB and some sound cards bring it down closer to 100 which is closer to the 16 bit cards.

So for example if you had the noise floor at -20dB(this number is specified by the manufacturer) then it's better off to be above this 20dB as much as possible. The closer your signal is to the noise floor, the poorer the clarity(resolution) of the sound. The further you are away from the noise floor( well above 96 or 100dB, the better is the clarity.

Note:::: For every 3dB you gain, you gain twice the volume. So even if the 24 bit cards are only 9dB better than the 16 bit cards, your volume(overall dynamic range) has increased 3 times.

The RNC compressor which I just got (from recommendations from this forum) is really great. It has greatly enhanced my bass tracks. My guitar tracks are more manageable and cleaner.
 
A1A2 said:
Osbick Bird:

Thanks for your attempt to answer. It does make sense to me, but, with the lack of knowledge of the exact definition of "nise floor", I don't quite understand why in 24 bit you have a lower noise floor. Is it because with more dynamic range, noise floor is relatively lower?
Click to expand...

That's pretty much it. If you have a SNR of 115db then theoretically your noise floor is -115db on a digital system. You are limited by all devices in the chain so that is why I say theoritecally. Your mic or preamp my only have a SNR of 80db so that would be your real world limitation. Once a signal drops below the noise floor then you can't hear it anymore so the effective 'dynamic range' is the difference between the noise floor and the hottest possible signal without distortion (0db in digital and higher in analog.)
 
littledog said:
Here's an easy way to look at it without getting technical:

At 16 bits, we were encouraged to track as hot as possible, so that when we got to the soft sections they didn't sound grainy due to lack of available resolution. The trade-off, though, was increased danger of clipping.

Since 24 bits has 256x the resolution of 16 bits, you can get MUCH softer without getting grainy. That's why you can leave more safety headroom and not worry about compromising your quality.
Click to expand...

It may not even be as bad as all that. Try recording something simple and clean at very low level (I used a miced acoustic guitar just hitting -60 on 16bit, about as low I could get on my meters at the time). It sounds very normal, but with a lots of noise in the background. The problem is that that noise is the most awful sounding buzzing and crap- you would not want it to be anywhere near audible- but the guitar sounded fine otherwise.
The same thing at 24 bit has that noise way into the background, mixed with nice steady mic and preamp noise.
Cheers
 
Got cha, guys! Thanks for all the help!! Let's get back to what this thread was supposed to talk about :)

Wes: you could try to chain your RNC to another commpressor like Joemeek, and use the really nice mode on RNC, then you got 3 comps before you hit your soundcard. That should tak care of it if you don't track too hot.

AL
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top