The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
A friendly reminder: Leave those DAW faders alone!
Old 5th December 2019 | Show parent
  #331
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by optofonik View Post
Everything that is changed ITB requires mathematical recalculation. There is no audio, no gain, no fader, no volume, compression, etc.; there are only ones and zeros being manipulated, numbers being rounded to "the nearest".
If I have 4 million dollars in the bank, and the bank is "rounding off" my interest to the nearest penny, should I be concerned??
Old 5th December 2019 | Show parent
  #332
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DAW PLUS View Post
This thread sounds like one big dogma.
I think it is more like an Old Wives' Tale than a dogma. It's almost pure superstition.

Quote:
I think most of us can decide for ourselves whether we prefer a tight gain staging workflow
Well beyond workflow preferences, the OP implied sonic benefits. Let's be clear about the source of controversy in this thread. People's understanding of digital audio is so compromised that they latch on to the most bizarre claims and ideas. And to make matters worse, they then have the audacity to pass them on as "facts" to the rest of the forum. As "commands" even.
Old 5th December 2019 | Show parent
  #333
Lives for gear
 
BrentA's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by dbjp View Post
The advice is silly, but one merit I do see in the method is for fine adjustment.
Faders lose accuracy the further away they are from 0 (gets higher dB increments the further away you are).
So getting overall balance without moving faders, with no track going crazy anywhere, would allow for easier hands on adjustments come final mix time. I think that makes sense, particularly if you’re given a session file from someone else that didn’t balance the recordings all that great.

Not sure if that was the OP’s point as he never went into any details but there you go.
If I’m adjusting a fader by .1 db increments at -40 and .1 dB increments at 0 how am I losing any accuracy when the fader gets further away from 0? The answer is: I’m not. You can be just as accurate at any fader position.
Old 5th December 2019 | Show parent
  #334
Lives for gear
 
GreenNeedle's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by joeq View Post
If I have 4 million dollars in the bank, and the bank is "rounding off" my interest to the nearest penny, should I be concerned??
You should be concerned, but that you don’t know how to handle money if you let 4mil sit in a bank account.
Old 5th December 2019 | Show parent
  #335
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrentA View Post
If I’m adjusting a fader by .1 db increments at -40 and .1 dB increments at 0 how am I losing any accuracy when the fader gets further away from 0? The answer is: I’m not. You can be just as accurate at any fader position.
I'll add a minor distinction pertinent, I think, to the issue here...

Some DAWs (many DAWs?) offer broader increments as level sinks farther below 0 bBFS. For instance, I was just checking my DAW's track level faders. (CW, formerly Sonar.) In single digit -dB values, the gradations are .1 dB each. But as the position goes down the throw range, the possible value gradations spread out a bit. Above 12 dB or so, the gradations move to .2 and slowly grow as one goes farther down.

Of course, that doesn't mean the accuracy of processing is decreased (beyond obvious SNR issues, of course) -- but the precision of control is 'reduced' (in absolute terms, though, of course, the whole reason we use a log-based throw is to create proportional control that works about as we would expect from our own more or less logarithmically proportioned heading).
Old 5th December 2019 | Show parent
  #336
Lives for gear
 
BrentA's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by theblue1 View Post
I'll add a minor distinction pertinent, I think, to the issue here...

Some DAWs (many DAWs?) offer broader increments as level sinks farther below 0 bBFS. For instance, I was just checking my DAW's track level faders. (CW, formerly Sonar.) In single digit -dB values, the gradations are .1 dB each. But as the position goes down the throw range, the possible value gradations spread out a bit. Above 12 dB or so, the gradations move to .2 and slowly grow as one goes farther down.

Of course, that doesn't mean the accuracy of processing is decreased (beyond obvious SNR issues, of course) -- but the precision of control is 'reduced' (in absolute terms, though, of course, the whole reason we use a log-based throw is to create proportional control that works about as we would expect from our own more or less logarithmically proportioned heading).
If the DAW doesn’t have a way to adjust in finer increments then it’s not a professional level DAW. Sorry.
Old 5th December 2019 | Show parent
  #337
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrentA View Post
If the DAW doesn’t have a way to adjust in finer increments then it’s not a professional level DAW. Sorry.
It's okay, buddy. I'm retired.

That noted, I'm sure you do know what a logarithm is and how its 'proportional' scaling works.


For those who need a brush-up: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logarithm
Old 5th December 2019 | Show parent
  #338
Lives for gear
 
BrentA's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by theblue1 View Post
It's okay, buddy. I'm retired.

That noted, I'm sure you do know what a logarithm is and how its 'proportional' scaling works.


For those who need a brush-up: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logarithm
My post wasn’t meant to be a dis to you or say you aren’t professional. I’m just saying I don’t know how somebody can mix songs day in day out without being able to make fine adjustments to levels. It would absolutely drive me crazy and I don’t really understand how somebody could work like that.

If Cakewalk indeed has no fine control of faders when they are lowered, which is such a major flaw that it seems hard to believe, then it seems like a truly terrible platform for mixing songs professionally. Maybe it’s good for other things.
Old 5th December 2019 | Show parent
  #339
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrentA View Post
My post wasn’t meant to be a dis to you or say you aren’t professional. I’m just saying I don’t know how somebody can mix songs day in day out without being able to make fine adjustments to levels. It would absolutely drive me crazy and I don’t really understand how somebody could work like that.

If Cakewalk indeed has no fine control of faders when they are lowered, which is such a major flaw that it seems hard to believe, then it seems like a truly terrible platform for mixing songs professionally. Maybe it’s good for other things.


No worries. And -- as it turns out -- I'd forgotten that CW/Sonar DOES actually have a fine adjustment fader mode if one holds down the shift key while adjusting via mouse.

But one of the reasons I temporarily forgot that feature is because I virtually never use it. I'm an old computer coder, and more than a bit OCD, but I came up in the analog era and my ears tend to act as the final arbiter in my work. Not numbers. By and large, if I have a track fader down, say, -15 dB, I pretty much never find myself having to make 0.1 dB adjustments in it.

Your mileage -- clearly -- varies from that.
Old 5th December 2019
  #340
Gear Guru
 

"Nobody" can hear a 0.1db adjustment. And nobody (without quotes) can hear it after the signal has been slammed through a ton of compression.

I'm not saying it's not valuable to have this option, just that some of the adjustments people say they're making are so small they're borderline useless. And I actually feel a lot of people who end up making that small adjustments are likely looking at the number to begin with, rather than just listening.
Old 5th December 2019 | Show parent
  #341
Quote:
Originally Posted by mattiasnyc View Post
"Nobody" can hear a 0.1db adjustment. And nobody (without quotes) can hear it after the signal has been slammed through a ton of compression.

I'm not saying it's not valuable to have this option, just that some of the adjustments people say they're making are so small they're borderline useless. And I actually feel a lot of people who end up making that small adjustments are likely looking at the number to begin with, rather than just listening.
Well... there is that, of course. That said, 'trained ears' can often make distinctions as small as 0.2 dB (in the right circumstances, of course!) I believe most folks (untrained ears, to use a phrase) are thought to be able to begin discerning volume changes in the 0.3 to 0.4 dB range.

I definitely have found myself making a change of a few tenths of a dB in a setting, a barely discernible nudge, if you will. But, as suggested, I almost never find myself twiddling that small a change in a track that's already double digits below 0 dBFS. Not saying it couldn't happen. I follow my ears.
Old 5th December 2019 | Show parent
  #342
Lives for gear
 
BrentA's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mattiasnyc View Post
"Nobody" can hear a 0.1db adjustment. And nobody (without quotes) can hear it after the signal has been slammed through a ton of compression.

I'm not saying it's not valuable to have this option, just that some of the adjustments people say they're making are so small they're borderline useless. And I actually feel a lot of people who end up making that small adjustments are likely looking at the number to begin with, rather than just listening.
In my experience the levels are actually more discernible after they have been slammed with compression. A dynamic signal is jumping around in level anyway. A compressed signal is static so making an adjustment is more obvious. On a smashed lead vocal changing it by .2 or .3 dB can make all the difference.
Old 6th December 2019
  #343
Gear Guru
 

Yeah, I don't disagree with that actually. I agree that 0.3dB can make 'all the difference' in some cases, but I was thinking that for the most part signals gets more compressed after what's done on their individual channels. So even post-fader a lot of compression is happening.

And to get back to the point: I really wonder if anyone is having problems with setting levels using a fader if only listening, just because a lack of this resolution. Using "trim" for automation aside, I really think a lot of people twiddle with stuff while looking at numbers and meters, and if it doesn't look the way people think it should they question things, rather than trust their ears.
Old 6th December 2019 | Show parent
  #344
Quote:
Originally Posted by mattiasnyc View Post
Yeah, I don't disagree with that actually. I agree that 0.3dB can make 'all the difference' in some cases, but I was thinking that for the most part signals gets more compressed after what's done on their individual channels. So even post-fader a lot of compression is happening.

And to get back to the point: I really wonder if anyone is having problems with setting levels using a fader if only listening, just because a lack of this resolution. Using "trim" for automation aside, I really think a lot of people twiddle with stuff while looking at numbers and meters, and if it doesn't look the way people think it should they question things, rather than trust their ears.
Certainly, as a general rule, highly compressing a mix element is going to make any changes to its seating/level in the mix easier to discern. Easy to see why.

But moving on, yeah, it's been a REAL LONG TIME since I heard a 'stair-stepped' fade on the digital side. Probably the crappy software that came with my first soundcard, which was 8 bits a channel but could be yoked to provide 16 bit mono. Eee haw! We're talking pre-WWW days. My drinkin' days. Long time ago. By crackie.
Old 6th December 2019 | Show parent
  #345
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mattiasnyc View Post
The above seems like meaningless semantics.
Of course it does...
📝 Reply

Similar Threads

Thread / Thread Starter Replies / Views Last Post
replies: 4594 views: 589013
Avatar for Arseny
Arseny 4 weeks ago
replies: 55 views: 20748
Avatar for IM WHO YOU THINK
IM WHO YOU THINK 13th October 2020
replies: 97 views: 28697
Avatar for mowmow
mowmow 15th September 2010
replies: 1296 views: 159594
Avatar for heraldo_jones
heraldo_jones 1st February 2016
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
🖨️ Show Printable Version
✉️ Email this Page
🔍 Search thread
🎙️ View mentioned gear
Forum Jump
Forum Jump