Use a RNC to track? Better than nothing?

  • Thread starter Thread starter alexvdbroek
  • Start date Start date
alexvdbroek said:
No this is a good tangent as it means that tracking with a RNC is probably a good idea so you can get the dynamics right where you want them.
Click to expand...
But that allows *MORE* voltage in the preamp.

Unless you're going to be like me and set levels at -15dBFS peaks and *then* compress without using any make-up gain at all...

WHICH IS FINE - It's not like -18dBFS peaks is too low... But few people seem to want to understand that for some reason. People always want "hot" even when it flies in the face of logic.


In any case, I don't want something "getting the dynamics right where I want them" on the way in. I have no idea what sort of dynamics are going to properly flatter the mix until I'm actually mixing. Overcompress that element and there's no "undo" button.
 
alexvdbroek said:
I haven't read that article yet, but if I track hot in digital (not clipping), then the noise floor will be even lower relatively to the recorded sound. Which is a good thing...
Click to expand...
While technically true, it's really an irrelevant point, because the analog noise floor is going create a total analog signal dynamic rage going into the digital that's at best only half as large as the total head-to-noise range as you have in digital.

Once again, if you're recording in 24-bit, your digital noise floor is going to be way down at -138dBFS. Since your analog signal is going to be, at the very best, maybe 70dB "tall" from peak to the analog noise floor, you could technically record it into digital with the peaks at -60dBFS and still have 8dB of "floor room" in digital to spare.

The only thing that recording hot in digital does is push your signal closer to clipping. Which brings us to...
Chili said:
So, correct me if I'm wrong, but 24 bit doesn't allow you to be any louder or hotter than 16 bit. It's just that the noise floor is so much lower. When people talk about headroom in 24 bit, they think the ceiling is raised, but it's really not, just that the floor is lower. Correct?? You can't come into a converter with a hotter signal regardless of bit depth. Or do I have this wrong.
Click to expand...
You are absolutely correct. When talking fixed-point digital values, 0dBFS is 0dbFS, and is the exact same thing whether recording in 16-bit, 24-bit, 8-bit or 32 million bit.

G.
 
Chili said:
So, correct me if I'm wrong, but 24 bit doesn't allow you to be any louder or hotter than 16 bit. It's just that the noise floor is so much lower. When people talk about headroom in 24 bit, they think the ceiling is raised, but it's really not, just that the floor is lower. Correct?? You can't come into a converter with a hotter signal regardless of bit depth. Or do I have this wrong.


Oops, sorry for the tangent.
Click to expand...
With 24 bit, the floor is lower so you can track lower and therefore give youreslf more headroom.

Back when all converters were 24 bit, line level tended to be calibrated around -12dbfs. Now with 24 bit, line level tends to be around -18dbfs. This gives you 6db more headroom by design. Either way, line level is line level.
 
witzendoz said:
With recording levels, I do tend to record quite hot, maybe it's because I started in the analog world? But not super hot just healthy. The advantage I have with hotter levels is that even though I record in the digital world I prefer to mix in the analog world, analog desk, outboard, etc, and having a nice healthy signal from the digital recorder reduces analog induced noise (not excessive but there) in the mixing chain.
Alan
Click to expand...
Since you are familiar with the analog world, you know what line level is and normal analog gain staging. It's no different with digital. You run a line level signal into the converters and you get what you get. The only reason not to do that is if you get any clipping.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top