Tracking volume shootout, theory being put to the test

John_C

John_C

formerly Skeksis268
Dec 30, 2008
3,455
1
36
Coventry, UK
www.myspace.com
I felt like I was talking an excessive amount of theory in the thread on tracking volumes, so i decided to do shootout using the first 16 seconds of Windowpane by Opeth

Chain was this:

DAW -> profire 2626 -> tannoy reveal 5a -> SE R-1 -> profire 2626 -> DAW

I adjusted the pre-amp gain so as to reach the desired dBFS values, microphone didn't move, volume coming through the speakers stayed constant.

the file names refer to the peak dBFS of the recording before i normalised them

At first i thought there was a large difference between the the loudest and quietest, but i think once you learn to ignore the increased noise there isn't much in it. Then again, i could just of tired my ears out.

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/910836/tracking volumes.rar
 
I had a listen but only through crappy headphones. You can definitely hear the noise floor rise up but other than that I can't much hear difference. I'll have another listen later with monitors.
 
AudioGeekZine said:
increased noise isn't reason enough?
Click to expand...

It is reason enough to make sure you track at reasonable levels, yes.

However, i was trying to demonstrate that although there's a fuck load of technical shit about sampling quality linked to tracking volume, it's barely audible in a single track, even when tracked at ridiculously low levels.
 
skeksis268 said:
It is reason enough to make sure you track at reasonable levels, yes.

However, i was trying to demonstrate that although there's a fuck load of technical shit about sampling quality linked to tracking volume, it's barely audible in a single track, even when tracked at ridiculously low levels.
Click to expand...

Aren't all the post that are going on at the moment implying that we should be tracking lower?
 
skeksis268 said:
It is reason enough to make sure you track at reasonable levels, yes.

However, i was trying to demonstrate that although there's a fuck load of technical shit about sampling quality linked to tracking volume, it's barely audible in a single track, even when tracked at ridiculously low levels.
Click to expand...

wait now. You're saying the ones recorded lower have a higher noise than the ones with the preamp cranked?

maybe I should listen to those clips.
 
abt said:
Aren't all the post that are going on at the moment implying that we should be tracking lower?
Click to expand...

yes, you probably should, roughly averaging at -18dBFS is good, in theory at least. In practice, you might not notice the difference, depending on your ears and your equipment.
 
skeksis268 said:
yes, you probably should, roughly averaging at -18dBFS is good, in theory at least. In practice, you might not notice the difference, depending on your ears and your equipment.
Click to expand...

I'm such a dumbass! I think I just got this!

In Pro Tools the fader has a meter on each side. The left is corresponds to what the fader is doing in dbU and the right is the actual recorded signal in dbFS. So if I have a recorded signal that peaks at -18dbFS and I leave the fader at 0dbU then the output is -18dbFS. If I push the fader up a little to say +3dbU then the output is -15dbFS.

If this is correct then I understand exactly why I need to be tracking a bit lower.

If someone could please confirm this for me (or tell me I'm wrong) I'd much
appreciate it.

Here's a look at the meter if anyone wants it:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/pop_spex/3043483140/
 
sickgod said:
but the basic idea remains to maintain a good Signal-to-noise ratio.. if i'm not wrong... Maybe a noob :Saint: question but... is the noise floor equipment specific??
Click to expand...

The noise floor is simply the amount of noise anything makes. So a pre amp for example will make a certain amount of noise on its own. The lower the signal level the closer to the noise floor you are. The relationship between the two is the signal to noise ratio (I think you already knew this).

What the OP is saying that in the past it was really important to get the best signal to noise ratio as possible, that is more signal and less noise, but now this way of thinking, although is still correct, it's actually detrimental to be recording so hot and not necessary because the noise floor is so far away.

Please slap me if I'm wrong Skeksis.
 
AerialThesis said:
The noise floor didn't rise... you normalized the tracks. You rose the noise floor. By rising the preamps you add noise too, but it is not considered part of the original noise floor.
Click to expand...

Correct. The signal to noise ratio gets worse as the signal level gets closer to the noise floor.
 
There have been a few discussions on there being an 'optimal' level for recording digitally, and this level not being 'as hot as possible without clipping' but substantially lower. I haven't listened to the clips but from quick experiments I've done in the past I haven't noticed much difference in tracking levels, apart from the noise floor.
 
The noise total noise volume doesn't not change until amplifiers are pushed beyond unity gain, which they will start to amplify noise. Since we really can't push preamp and other devices past a unity gain (signal conditioning) without pissing off the AD converters the total noise level with remain the same. The contributing factor to noise is how hot the signal is to the noise floor, the hotter the signal, the better the S:N.

Yes when you start to push an amplifier you will begin to get noise, but on the before stage of a digital medium, its downright impossible, the only noise there will be that side of the stage will remain constant.
 
Isn't that the operation of the preamp? Raising the level without raising the noise? If you record a mic without a preamp, you get a low level and if you wanna use it at a reasonable level in a mix, you have to push the volume....but it becomes noisy as hell.
So we use preamps for this reason. In my opinion if you stay with your levels around -6dB (+/- 2dB) you're always ok. Because I don't get the idea to use a preamp with a peak at -20dB like there's almost any preamp :D
 
I hear a lot of people talking about the 'sweet spot' of the preamp gain and for me, this thread is more about that. And I really don't thing there's any audible difference between tracking around -5 and -10dB in terms of sound.
 
abt said:
I'm such a dumbass! I think I just got this!

In Pro Tools the fader has a meter on each side. The left is corresponds to what the fader is doing in dbU and the right is the actual recorded signal in dbFS. So if I have a recorded signal that peaks at -18dbFS and I leave the fader at 0dbU then the output is -18dbFS. If I push the fader up a little to say +3dbU then the output is -15dbFS.

If this is correct then I understand exactly why I need to be tracking a bit lower.

If someone could please confirm this for me (or tell me I'm wrong) I'd much
appreciate it.

Here's a look at the meter if anyone wants it:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/pop_spex/3043483140/
Click to expand...

the left hand side corresponds to the fader control, in a measurement of decibles

meter read out is on the right

in other words, looking at the numbers next to the fader while watching the meter is gibberish, it doesn't mean anything. the numbers next to the fader are there as a label to read where in decibel addition / subtraction you are with the fader
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

V
tracking levels ?
Replies
48
Views
5K
Andy Sneap
Via Noctis
V
Top Bottom