Actually, that's exactly what you were saying without actually saying it. That's what a sceptic does, they habitually doubt. If you doubt what someone has said, you are saying you do not believe them. If you do not believe they are being truthful.......^^^^^^^^^^This, in spades.
I hope I wasn't controversial ! This is meant to be a peaceful monday afternoon.Careful Grim.....
Let's see where this goes. Should be fun.
Good point.Yeah, bit what you said could lead to someone asking you "why are you attacking me?". It's been known to happen.
^^^^^^^^^^This, in spades.
Personally, I've found this to be a fantastic thread. Sure, sometimes, the science has gone over my head, but it's all been helpful. There's a big difference in saying "I track at low levels" and "Tracking at high levels will guarantee your sound will be lousy". One does not inevitably follow the other. As with many things, I find that there are paradoxes afoot in making and recording music.
On my DAW, I've noticed time and again that if one records the sound continuously into the clip zone, it sounds utterly awful. It's worse than nails down a blackboard. But if on the odd occasion, the sound peaks for a split second into the clip zone, you can't hear any of that digital clipping sound. In fact, you can't tell anything untoward has happened.
@Offcentre;
You've asked a couple of times why, if you record at high or low levels and find acceptable results either way, keep hammering home the point that you don't have to record at low levels because they are not intrinsically better. I thought the answer to that would be obvious. If the accepted wisdom is that it does make a difference to 'go low' because higher levels are worse, then if you know that's not true, you perpetuate something knowing it's not true. Some people can live with that. Some can't. When a child cuts or grazes themselves, they automatically believe a plaster makes it better. It doesn't. I've always made the point of telling them that. Go wash it with water and let it get air so a scab can form. It'll do more for you than any plaster unless you're involved in some activity that risks pouring dirt into the cut/graze. But for decades the stock response to a cut or graze is to put a plaster on it. No one tells the child that it actually keeps the cut moist and hinders drying and scabbing. Usually, the child stops squawking. And the falsehood is perpetuated.
As for threads going off in unforeseen directions, you, I and no one else has any control over that - and that's a good thing. I've learned more from this intense debate than if someone had directly 'answered' your original question by pointing you to a painless link. Besides which, although you asked for no arguing {which no one can guarantee}, you asked for advice because you felt your gain staging through plug ins was wrong. That alone was opening the lid on a Pandora's box, which I would argue was a pretty healthy one.
But, if it makes no difference either way, you could advocate staying safe, but it begs the question why, if it makes no difference. So it becomes a circular argument. Whereas if there's no implied "better" or "worse" by taking one side or the other {because it often comes across that one way is better than the other}, then people are free to state why they go one way or the other or that they go one way or the other without the nuclear fallout that so often accompanies these kind of discussions.
I don't think that was the crux of the earlier debate.
I believe some were saying that your audio quality changes even with *increased* digital levels (-18 VS -8)...and not just when they are hitting/passing the "0" clip point.
That view comes from the belief that to get from -18 to -8....your analog front end has to work real hard and THAT is where the audio quality is suffering.....NOT in the digital realm....but that may not always be the case. Your analog front end might just fine, and still pushing the digital levels up pretty high.
I think I and other folks covered the whole analog front end perspective, and as I said, I would never set my analog signal level just by going for "safe" digital levels.
I would set them by the front end, analog levels...and the sound I want from that front end.
Yes, often if you keep your pres in their "middlin" operating range, chances are good that the digital meters will fall in the -18 to -14 range, and that's fine.
The real point I am making is that you seem to be just focused on "safe digital levels"...which is the analytical view....
...and I'm saying let your preamps fall where they sound right, even if the digital level ends up being on the hot side....
...which is the artistic view, and what you want to go for...right?
Dude, I hate to break this to you, but I have no idea who you are (before this thread) and what you're talking about. You obviously hold grudges a lot more than most people because you were a total stranger to me. That does explain why you went ballistic when all I did was tell you to calm down on Ethan. You came into any response to a post of mine with a chip on your shoulder that I wasn't aware of.
I agree. I'm over it because I was never really under it to begin with.I think there was some snipping earlier...from a few sides.
I mean, I saw all the posts that gecko zzed had to delete, yours, his, etc...but why don't we all just move on from that.
Let's not re-stir a new debate about who was arguing with who.
But when I see my name mentioned in a post, I simply respond to that. No big woop.
I think most agree that trying to always track up next to 0dBFS is not the best SOP.
My only concern is that if you just always shoot for low, safe levels...sure, things will be fine in the digital world, and often will be fine in the analog front end...
...but you may end up always tracking just for the low, safe levels, and using your eyes to set the front end levels....know what I mean?
There are many times when you might want to really hit the analog front end hard, which will kick out a hot level to the digital side.
I still think much of this gets confused/compounded by all these pre/DI/converter combination boxes, where the only thing one has to go by is the digital meter...not to mention, some actually allow you to raise the gain of the *digital input*...which is certainly an easy way to end up near 0dBFS.
My converters don't have the option to change the signal gain...only to chose from -10 or +4...so level adjustment is always happening at the analog front end.