Tracking - Levels

[EvilE]

Originally Posted by Pfhuck

So, we've already established that 24bits of resolution is more than adequate....

Isn't keeping peak levels down (around -10ish) worth the peace of mind??

Who wants to stress about digital overs while tracking?

"Oh sorry dude, you got waaaay too emotional on that last take and my a/d clipped. Gotta do it over again. SORRY!"

But then again, maybe you want that sound??

I do sometimes.

Laters,
Pfhuck

amen to that! nothing is worse than catching a great performance only to have the levels clip at the pre or converter resulting in an unusable sound. this makes me feel very useless and i try to make it NOT happen as much as possible. After reading this thread i am def going to track lower levels on 24bit sessions. i have always understood the signal to noise thing but still i think i'm tracking a little too hot in general. werd up! good thread.

p.s. normalizing is totally lame!!! save it for the mastering engineer!

E

[mickrich]

Very interesting read.
I have always used the -6 as 0db method mentioned earlier.
If i were to record (into logic) peaking at -18dbfs, I think it would lead to problems with plugins. For example, if I wanted to limit a snare with sonnox limiter, I would have to push the input gain to +22 if I wanted about 4db of limiting then pull the output back by 18-20db to get back to about -18 peak. For eqs, delays, reverbs etc the level makes no difference but for dynamic processors there would be a lot of pushing the input gain to drive the effect then pulling back the output. Maybe i am missing the point.
I always use prefade metering to avoid clipping effects and make sure the master peaks at about 6 so, taking these points into account, would there be any advantage recording at -18dbfs.
Michael

[WinterSun]

I've only seen like 1 person talking about noise floor. I was always taught to track with high levels to keep the noise floor down. If you track too low and have to raise the level, the noise floor rises with it.

Does no one else find this to be an issue??

[synthoid]

There are two quite distinct issues here, getting muddled together.

The first is this: what's a good peak level to aim for at the A/D converter when tracking?

The second is this: should you aim at a particular peak level at all, or should you rather (as the OP suggested) capture each track at a volume that gives you a rough mix with faders at unity gain?

I don't want to comment on the first one, haha, because it's such a slugfest. I suggest you listen closely to your A/Ds, analog front end, etc., and make a decision based on the gear you have at hand. It's a complicated equation because many ADCs let you set or select the reference level (the analog level that corresponds to 0dbFS).

The second one, however, strikes me as questionable recording practice. You can indeed run into noise problems if you have to boost the level of a part that you tracked at too low a level. Someone said that pulling faders down hard in PT HD sounds bad!? Yikes. That's unbelievable to me.

Tracking is tracking, it has its own rules of good practice. Mixing is mixing, it happens later. Rough mixes and notes are the right way to communicate from tracking engineer to mix engineer IMO.

-synthoid

[Paul Frindle]

Originally Posted by mickrich

Very interesting read.
I have always used the -6 as 0db method mentioned earlier.
If i were to record (into logic) peaking at -18dbfs, I think it would lead to problems with plugins. For example, if I wanted to limit a snare with sonnox limiter, I would have to push the input gain to +22 if I wanted about 4db of limiting then pull the output back by 18-20db to get back to about -18 peak. For eqs, delays, reverbs etc the level makes no difference but for dynamic processors there would be a lot of pushing the input gain to drive the effect then pulling back the output. Maybe i am missing the point.
I always use prefade metering to avoid clipping effects and make sure the master peaks at about 6 so, taking these points into account, would there be any advantage recording at -18dbfs.
Michael

Yes this is a very good point and a limitation of the workstation environment (among many that we had tied down in consoles decades ago).

The point is that all signal ultimately has a relationship to the real world level - which is in the end what we will hear. Tracking at lower levels to give yourself back the headroom that the W/S designers overlooked is fine - except that plugs that need to know 'real values', in the absence of a real operating level variable, are necessarily still calibrated to 0dBFS - the level of the meter 'red lights'.

This means that stuff like the OX Limiter that requires significant gain to get certain stylised sounds may not have enough gain to make up for your headroom level loss - so you may lose the ability to achieve certain highly compressed sounds all in one go etc..

In consoles like the Sony OXF-R3, we therefore had a 'headroom global value' that was set on boot up options, which compensated for the gains in all signal paths - and passed 'real operating level' values to all internal processing, so that they 'knew' the intended output target level and behaved appropriately, whatever headroom was set up. This is of course how things should be done - and this is but one of many subtleties that have been sadly lost in the changeover to workstations.

It is stuff like this that happens under the hood (and never reported in brute specifications) that truly separated professional apps from consumer stuff. Basically it's that 'it just always works' experience you get from stuff truly designed for professional use. It's purpose was to relieve you of the nitty gritty and frustration of bad behaviours and time consuming measures spent avoiding them - and let you get on with producing art :-)

The idea used to be that you left the technical detail to those that had the experience, you got on with the job - and was not required to spend ages batting around trying to unearth hidden issues, in a desperate attempt to acquire the experience and knowledge that had been left out of your system :-(

And of course - all that kind of stuff was what largely made professional kit so much more expensive....

[peeder]

You should listen back carefully post-converter to assess proper gain staging for your particular chain. You should not fall to "meteritis" where you are a slave to some moronic rule of thumb foisted on you by some disembodied phantom pecking at a keyboard thousands of miles away (and btw I'm not pointing at anyone in particular). Do not sacrifice the huge investment you've made in a quality signal path trying to hit someone else's ideal meter reading.

Use analog attenuators only when the desired sound dictates doing so. Clipping a converter may sound good on some signals. So might noise. Free yourself from the tyranny.

Once ITB, gain and trim can be applied at any stage with virtually no consequence (at least in floating point systems). Many plugins have saturation models just like analog processors do, and each plugin will have its own levels and behaviors. Most such plugins have an input trim knob, and if not, there is a trim/gain plugin. Do not sacrifice this behavior of plugins either; some idiot may overdrive a plugin obliviously, and run to their computer and peck in, "ALL PLUGINS SOUND AWFUL WHEN OVERDRIVEN." Have a laugh.

[TheArchitect]

Originally Posted by WinterSun

I've only seen like 1 person talking about noise floor. I was always taught to track with high levels to keep the noise floor down. If you track too low and have to raise the level, the noise floor rises with it.

Does no one else find this to be an issue??

Not really. Your dealing with 144db of dynamic range. Even at lower levels you still have more range than 16bit. It should only be an issue if you do something really dumb.

[audibell]

Originally Posted by allencollins

huh?

Anyone who worries about tracking levels in digital is clueless. As long as it's not clipping I DOESN'T MATTER.

Clueless!! preposterous!!! I, sir, fret and agonise over every last blip of my k-20 meters. And I NEVER clip, so how can I be clueless???
stuff and nonsense, mutter, mutter...