Levels (Tracking & Mixing)

[iqi616]

I started an alternate thread about this and closed it... but I'd still like to know the very best way to achieve the "restoration of order", when I'm given a recording that was tracked too high...

Would a "mastering limiter" (Waves L1, L2, L3) with 0 threshold and lowered output offer any quality improvement to just puling down the faders?

If something is too hot I think pulling down the faders is probably better than adding further processing unless you want to use a compressor with a slowish attack to try to synthesize some microdynamics. That's just an opinion though.

Later... Saw your locked thread. I didn't like those replies much. As you probably knew already it's the average level that needs to come down. So, I think I'd just pull down the faders and mix at your normal mixing level.

 

[Massive Master]

The digital meters on the HD 24 aren't the model of accuracy.The segments go from -24 to -15 to -9. Gee, thanks alesis, right in the range where I need the most precision, it makes a 9db jump, then a 6db jump.

That's the thing - You *don't* need that precision there. If you're lighting up the -24 mark, and once in a while the -15 lights up, you're right in the pocket.

 

[Cult_Status02]

Interesting, all this. I've always prefered tracking pretty hot. Basically in green but sometimes hitting yellow, never red. I feel like a huge newb right now, but how does track lower help make it sound better, or does it just make it easier to mix later on?

 

[iqi616]

Interesting, all this. I've always prefered tracking pretty hot. Basically in green but sometimes hitting yellow, never red. I feel like a huge newb right now, but how does track lower help make it sound better, or does it just make it easier to mix later on?

Benefits...

tracking - less time worrying about overs and more time concentrating on the performer

mixing - faders don't end up way on down where their adjustments are coarser and if you mix to a similar target level you won't have situations where the mix is clipping and you are forced to go through the mix pulling all the faders down (and ruining it in the process)

Also some people maintain that it's working at a more optimal level for the analogue input circuitry. I've not verified that but I'm happy to go along with the sugguestion.

 

[Massive Master]

Actually, that (the analog circuitry) IS the reason. All the other wonderful things that go along with it (ease of mixing, clarity in sound, spaciousness and "air," effective EQ'ing and dynamics tweaking, etc., etc., etc and down the line) are things that are supposed to b there in the first place. That's how the gear is designed to run - ALWAYS has been. Digital was NEVER meant to change the working level of the input chain - It was implemented with those levels in mind.

And the effectiveness is so simple to verify -

Set up a good mic in the vicinity of a god speaker -

Play a 1k tone through the speaker -

Adjust the mic preamp to get a solid signal - Around 0dBVU, which should give you a digital level of around -18dBFS. Record a bit of that.

Then boost the preamp so you get a digital level of around -12 and record some of that. Then around -9, then around -6.

Open up a decent spectrum analyzer and analyze the -18 file... You'll see a gentle "swoop" up to 1k and back down.

Open up the -12 file and you'll very likely notice "devil horns" at 2k and 3k. On the -9, you'll probably clearly see spikes at 2, 3 and maybe 4k. You probably won't even want to see the -6 file...

And that's with a steady and "pure" tone - Just think of what it's like with a complex sound like a guitar or a human voice...

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

how does track lower help make it sound better, or does it just make it easier to mix later on?

It's all in the gain staging (geez, didn't we just go through all this over and over again in another still-current thread?).

The thing that I think is difficult for mst to wrap their heads around is that if you have your signal chain set up properly, with all the right levels for the best sound going through the analog side of it, the digital recording level will *work itself out* properly. When thought of that way, the recording level is an effect, not a cause.

Or, put put it in Reader's Digest form, if you have a more-or-less 0VU line-level signal going into your A/D converter, and you just let the converter do it's job, the digital recording levels that naturally come out the other end will sound just fine (unless you have a bad converter, of course.)

That those digital levels will happen to average somewhere in the mid-to-high negative teens FS is they way things are designed to be, so you just let it be. What's important is what happens on the analog end first; keep those levels where you need them and let the rest just fall in line. The digital levels, while not a standard, are typically designed to make sure there's plenty of headroom left for any transient peaks going into the converter.

(@ Mr T: Before you jump in with your "I like the sound of distorted converters" POV, that's not what's being asked here. The question was about tracking levels, not about special effects .)

G.

 

[Cult_Status02]

It's all in the gain staging (geez, didn't we just go through all this over and over again in another still-current thread?).

Thanks for the info, and sorry to bring it up in another discussion.