Recording levels

[smy1]

yes... you can always compress or limit as you record... but sometimes you may not want to commit to compression as you record and/or/because you are not sure exactly how dynamic you may want a part to be in the final mix or how you may want to the transients affected, or maybe you don't have the compressor/limiter you need for the task at the tracking facility.. .any number of reasons. i surely hope you guys aren't calling me to task on basic Recording 101 principles... good grief. lol.

Hm, no, that's not what I meant. I would only use the limiter for the odd transient that is MUCH louder than most of the rest of the material.

Wouldn't that mean that - except for the loudest transients - there is no compression going on?

 

[James Murphy]

jesus.... i was NOT arguing with you. try reading again.

"yes... you can always compress or limit as you record... but sometimes you may not want to commit to compression as you record and/or/because you are not sure exactly how dynamic you may want a part to be in the final mix or how you may want to the transients affected, or maybe you don't have the compressor/limiter you need for the task at the tracking facility.. .any number of reasons."

i dont' come here to argue techniques.. i come here to share what i've learned over 18 years as a recording artist and 12 years a recording engineer/producer....Take it for what it is.. advice... i'm not going to argue over it. i clearly... so very clearly... stated: IF you do not want or cannot due to lack of gear on hand, to compress or limit then with very dynamic sources record the peaks to just under zero..... so that the lower level parts of the signal will be as hi resolution as possible. Nothing more. my intention was to clarify what i had said before to rectify being misquoted here at the beginning of this thread...that is it. period. there is zero point in bringing up compressing or limiting in response to my post, because i said "IF YOU DON'T WANT TO" or "IF YOU CAN"T"...

no shit you can limit the peaks. that's Recording 101... may or may not sound transparent depending on your source material, your limiter, and you expertise... but that is not one tiny bit relevant to what i actually said.

yay! now let's kiss and make up

 

[everybody's x]

haha, man everybody argues with you

thanks for sharing, that's prolly not said enough

 

[::XeS::]

Hey James, I think you didn't understand my question... It was not my intention to misquote you...Since I read your old posts regardind the levels I've always follow you tecnique with good results. In my first post I've only sum up your old post (I remember you fight with Nitronius ) and my doubts was not regarding you and what you said. I found some people that record at very low level and I don't know if it's correct or not..
I've said neither that Bob Katz writes different things and it is better than you..
Mine was only doubts about different recording levels approach..nothing against you..indeed, that old thread was very important to me..

 

[greyskull]

haha james ive always agreed with you!
just never wrote it! sorry didnt mean to piss ya'll off
thats just my prefered way off working,

have a big fat sloppy limey kiss
x

 

[MR NINE]

James has the experience and the "know how"!
Nobody can argue with that!
I have a simple rule that is: when I'm not sure about something I shut up!
And in case of doubt, I'll ask to someone who I'm sure that this person really knows about the subject in question!
So take James advice about levels/recording and go practice, god damn it!!!

 

[::XeS::]

Mr.Nine, what the fuck, read what I wrote!
Anyway:
1- when I'm not sure about something I ASK (because I want to learn).
2- since I had a doubt, I asked someone here.
3- I had no doubts about James Murphy but I had some about all the other recording level approach I've found.
4- I've already wrote this: since I read James advice months ago, I've always worked that way (so, I've already taken james advice even if you hadn't told me before!)

So, your post is useless.

I was only searching the best recording approach, didn't want to argue about James know how

 

[MR NINE]

Mr.Nine, what the fuck, read what I wrote!
Anyway:
1- when I'm not sure about something I ASK (because I want to learn).
2- since I had a doubt, I asked someone here.
3- I had no doubts about James Murphy but I had some about all the other recording level approach I've found.
4- I've already wrote this: since I read James advice months ago, I've always worked that way (so, I've already taken james advice even if you hadn't told me before!)

So, your post is useless.

I was only searching the best recording approach, didn't want to argue about James know how

Jeeeeeeeesussssss Bloody Christ!!!
Man I wasn't even talking to you specifically!
my statement is purely in a mood of a joke or sort of! Not pointing the finger to anyone as far as I'm concerned!
Did you just woke in a bad mood or somethin'?!?!

 

[scorpio01169]

my question is what differences does 16bit or 24bit makes when it comes to noise getting on to the track...if your amp makes a bit of hiss, or you get a/c hum or anything outside of your converters, if you get record a guitar amp that gets hum at 24bits you get the same noise with just a bit more clarity. i mean i think the point to getting the loudest before clipping is to get more of the wanted source and less of anything else regardless of it being recorded at 16 bits or 24 bits

 

[James Murphy]

Simmah!

 

[broken81]

well im recording in protools and i know your not spossed to trust the clip light on a daw so ive been told as they can be slow i guess. Should i get some kind of plugin meter and should i be aiming to never light clip lights on protools?

just never really got into recording levels that much so im kinda curious how to go about this properly....

 

[AudioPhile777]

well im recording in protools and i know your not spossed to trust the clip light on a daw so ive been told as they can be slow i guess. Should i get some kind of plugin meter and should i be aiming to never light clip lights on protools?

just never really got into recording levels that much so im kinda curious how to go about this properly....

+1

I use PT and I just thought that hitting the red light was a bad thing and I backed off on the input a little... also, i cant figure out how to find where EXACTLY -3dB is in PT... the mix window and the edit window meters are too small and have no markers... even when you open up each individual track volume, there are no markers...

 

[MR NINE]

which PTools version do you have? If it's 6.1 upwards you can dowload for free the Bomb Factory free Pack from the site. In this pack you'll find some usefull plugins such as 1176, LA 2A, comps and some tools. among one of them there's a meter (VU).
Or you can find another free one here: http://www.pspaudioware.com/indexen.html

 

[AudioPhile777]

PT 7.1... its in my sig. lol.

uhm... ok... but I would need to throw one of those on just about every track when recording?

that seems a little... left field.

 

[MR NINE]

No. create a master main output (say 1/2) and insert it there.
Keep it open while you're setting up the levels. Be sure that u are monitoring only the track you're setting the levels to or if u like you can solo each track when setting input levels (in case of drums that you get a lot of spill).

 

[C_F_H_13]

Here's an excellent thread from over at PSW.

I agree with the thread in that it is no longer necessary to "use all the bits". I print to -10 to -12 over here.

http://recforums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/t/15038/0/

 

[2012]

The peaks do not have to be exactly at -3. Nor do they have to be exactly at 0.

The BF meter is useless, as are most of their plugins.

The DIGITAL noisefloor/headroom is different than the ANALOG sound source.

Don't kill yourself (and otherwise awesome takes) by trying to track as close to 0 as you possibly can. Just track at 24-bit with your peaks bouncing between -3 and -12 and you will be fine.

 

[James Murphy]

2012... so background noise has nothing to do with how hot you should print your levels? is that what you're saying.. you are wrong buddy. and CFW, so are you and the PSW thread. THERE IS STILKL NOISE IN "DIGIWORLD".. JUST NOT TAPE HISS FOR FUCKS SAKE. this issue has been debated by short-bus riders since the dawn of digital and over and over and over again... pros, as Andy has here in these very pages, will tell you to get as healthy a signal as you can, even in 24bit. you guys are running your heads in circles over this and it's starting to not be funny anymore.

i never fucking said to slam it to fucking zero...... i said.. and i repeate myself for the third time now... with very dynamic sources that you DO NOT WANT TO COMPRESS OR LIMIT... print you levels as high as you can.

it HELPS, it doen't HURT... your HEADROOM in the situation is NOT the space you have from the highest peak to "0".. your HEADROOM

 

[James Murphy]

2012... so background noise has nothing to do with how hot you should print your levels? is that what you're saying.. you are wrong buddy. and CFW, so are you and the PSW thread. THERE IS STILL NOISE IN "DIGIWORLD"... JUST NOT TAPE HISS. this issue has been debated by short-bus riders since the dawn of digital and yet over and over ... pros, as Andy has stated here in these very pages, will tell you to get as healthy a signal as you can, even in 24bit. you guys are running your heads in circles over this.

i never said to slam it to f'ing zero at all times...... i said.. and i repeate myself for the third time now... with very dynamic sources that you DO NOT WANT TO COMPRESS OR LIMIT... print your levels as high as you can. for the record, i typically record in 24bit at somewhere between -3 and -6 for most sources. i don't get overly geeky about it though.

As one of the PSW thread posters noted: "experiments (have) found that if you (record) the same mix at near peak levels, and then do a -15 dB trim across the whole mix, the result is much better sounding."

NOW LICK IT AND SHADDUP.

 

[2012]

2012... so background noise has nothing to do with how hot you should print your levels?

Who is misquoting who now? Chill out. Why the hell are you so pissed off anyway? This is what I was referring to:

if your amp makes a bit of hiss, or you get a/c hum or anything outside of your converters, if you get record a guitar amp that gets hum at 24bits you get the same noise with just a bit more clarity

Whatever noise you have at the source is going to be there regardless of whether you track at 16-bit, 24-bit, -12, or -3. Tracking hotter is not going to make the background noise vanish, in fact, turning up the gain on the preamp will increase the level of noise in the track.

My post wasn't even directed at you. Have a nice day.