Is the best standard recording level outdated?

N

nononsense!

New member
I accept the theory that +4 dBu average is generally the best recording level.
But what happens above and below +4 dBu (0VU)?

Above +4 dBu
Above +4 dBu very light distortion begins and when the volume is getting higher the distortion
results in audible clipping at the clipping point mostly at +20 dBu. But the distortion begins
above +4 dBu. Is that correct?

Below +4 dBu
Below +4 dBu the noise starts becoming louder, but not the distortion! Is that correct?

If the above is true then +4 dBu is a compromise between distortion and noise and they made that
agreement 60 years ago when noisy equipment was the fashion.

But today's equipment hasn't got much noise anymore. Isn't the compromise of +4 dBu too loud for
these days?
 
nononsense! said:
Above +4 dBu very light distortion begins and when the volume is getting higher the distortion results in audible clipping at the clipping point mostly at +20 dBu. But the distortion begins
above +4 dBu. Is that correct?
Click to expand...
Not necessarily. Some stay rather clean up to the clip point, with the peaks fitting cleanly within the available headroom. Others saturate or soft clip at various levels. We'll want to be aware of what's what in either case.
Below +4 dBu the noise starts becoming louder, but not the distortion! Is that correct?
If the above is true then +4 dBu is a compromise between distortion and noise and they made that agreement 60 years ago when noisy equipment was the fashion.
But today's equipment hasn't got much noise anymore. Isn't the compromise of +4 dBu too loud for these days?
Click to expand...
The noise remains a constant (more or less) as our signal drops to meet it. The noise (and presumably some or the distortion that is always there) becomes a larger portion. (...Sort of winging it here ok? :)
But if noise and distortion levels get better (lower) or headroom goes up, the available window just gets wider. I don't know that would be a need to change where nominal is. They can juggle the gain and voltages to land where ever in any number of ways right?
Wayne
 
Remember, +4dbU is a nominal (and presumably optimal, if implimented correctly) operating level for professional ANALOG gear. If you use it as a reference for recording (i.e. try to keep the average signal level pretty close to it without going significantly over) it should keep your signal to noise ratio pretty close to the best the equipment can give you. Don't forget that the +4 refers to the nominal operating level of the gear, NOT +4 on the meters (where OdbVU should be your reference). If you're recording in the digital realm, the noise floor (on modern 24bit converters) is so far below signal as to be almost negligeble, and levels should be set relatively low (-12 to -18 db below digital 0) to preserve headroom for any subsequent processing, and avoid digital overs on peaks.

Scott
 
More so, recording a level riding around 0dBVU will *automatically* relate a digital signal around -18dBFS (could be a little higher or lower depending on how the converters are calibrated, of course).

It wasn't done that way by accident...
 
mixsit said:
Not necessarily. Some stay rather clean up to the clip point, with the peaks fitting cleanly within the available headroom. Others saturate or soft clip at various levels. We'll want to be aware of what's what in either case.
Wayne
Click to expand...

How can a human ever know if a mixer is clean up to the clip point, with only
one track you could never hear any difference. Only very large tests would
suffice. Like recording a whole lot of tracks on +4 dBu and then record the exact
same tracks on +15 dBu. Would you hear a difference?
 
If you can't hear the difference between a signal at a "normal" level and a signal being overdriven into a preamp, you should probably upgrade your monitors. True, it's easier to hear the effect after stacking tracks. But the effect is there with one.

That being said, certainly, some gear handles being overdriven much better than other gear. No doubt.

The problem with the "I record really hot" crowd is that they rarely if ever even *listen* to a signal going in at a normal level. They think that +20 *is* normal.

I'm sorry - that's wrong - They usually have no idea what +20 is, as they're only paying attention to the pretty lights on the digital meters, forsaking audio quality for signal strength, then complaining that their tracks "don't sound pro" later.
 
I am not talking about +20 dBu I am talking about +15 dBu clearly below the clipping point. Not that it is the best signal.

Someone said: Some mixers are clean all the way to the clipping point (+20dBu) some are not, so I asked how can you hear if it is clean towards the clipping point. Then I said: with one track you can't hear any difference but with 20 tracks you probably can.

I don't think it is possible to hear distortion with one track recorded on +15 dBu even when the mixer gives some distortion above +4 dBu, but with
20 tracks it could be possible. Has nothing to do
with the quality of monitors, the human ear is just not good enough.

As I evaluate my initial question....
It looks like the most mixers distort above +4 dBu and make relatively more noise below +4 dBu. The distortion can be heard with a lot of tracks. But the noise with today's equipment can not be heard, at least not when there is some instrument playing.

I would rather have more noise than distortion from
mixing equipment not made for distortion.
So my conclusion thus far is:
The standard recording level from 60 years ago is at least a bit outdated and can be lowered to about
-10 dBu or so.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top