thanks.. .it's terribly out-dated at this point.. hope to rectify that soon.Bob Savage said:By the way, nice website. I didn't get a chance to go through and really check it out, but it looks great.
What levels do you record at in digital?
- Thread starter Exocaster
- Start date
black sugar
The Burninator
Arriving to the party fashionably late...
James, thanks for the explanation(s) and the link to the SOS article. Long threads about bit depth, sample rates, and dither in particular can be um... challenging for the posters and readers. I've struggled through plenty of those threads (PSW, anyone?) and usually end up wanting to shoot myself in the face or go buy a Tascam 8-track. In no particular order.
I'm glad you got your gold star from Andy in the end. Haha.
James, thanks for the explanation(s) and the link to the SOS article. Long threads about bit depth, sample rates, and dither in particular can be um... challenging for the posters and readers. I've struggled through plenty of those threads (PSW, anyone?) and usually end up wanting to shoot myself in the face or go buy a Tascam 8-track. In no particular order.
I'm glad you got your gold star from Andy in the end. Haha.
So guys, with say distorted guitar that has about 3 db of dynamic range, once I get above the noise floor to a point that acceptable, why do I need lots of bits?
Why do I need to worry about dynamic range available if all Im using is 3db?
Isnt that way Andy is saying?
Colin
Why do I need to worry about dynamic range available if all Im using is 3db?
Isnt that way Andy is saying?
Colin
no it is not what he is saying Colin... you're hanging up on his words and not seeing his meaning... easy enough to do with none of us being sceintists here, but i sense you're aware of what he's saying perfectly well. he's talking about instantaneous peak level vs. average peak level when you don't actually WANT a broad dynamic range on the source in your mix... yes, you have a broad dynamic range if, for instance, the odd peak here or there hits just below 0 and the rest hits much lower... (as is possible with clean guitar, vox.. etc.) but if you want the whole performance the same level or close to it then just recording the broad dynamic range as is, when it's not how you are going to use it in your mix, will lead to compressing after the fact... most likely with a plug-in these days.. and this is NOT optimal gain structure. read the article i posted from SOS.. particulary the sidebar and the third main section for more on this. this is common knowledge, common practice, and common sense... (we have not been talking in any way shape or form about sources from which you WANT or need to capture the full dynamic range of the instrument. e.g., pretty much everything in a classical recording, or Jazz trio, etc.) furthermore i know you actually agree with us, though perhaps a bit more loosely than you should... so let's cut out the semantics, put this thread to bed, and move on to something constructive... cuz the home team done lit the bonfire on this one.vile_ator said:
So James, are you saying we should altogether try to eliminate dynamics in music?
Yeah, yeah... I just couldn't resist.
Yeah, yeah... I just couldn't resist.
Well, shoot; I didn't take into account the logarithmic nature of the decibel scale, and will admit my wrongness; dynamic range alone will not solely define bit usage. Good points then, James and Andy. It was an honor debating the both of you, despite my crushing and embarrassing defeat. I have been schooled in an utterly hardcore way, and am thankful for it.
Kazrog
Kazrog, Inc.
Bob Savage said:
LOL. Dynamics? What dynamics? ALL LOUD ALL THE TIME!!!
(I am kidding... of course...)
I AM JP22. Didnt you know? Really, Im laughing over here. James, I wasnt trying to confuse the issue. I think I didnt read the posts clearly enough. I fully agree that we need 24 bits. That we need to take advantage of added dynamic range. And that with classical guitar, Jazz, etc we can really put this to use. And I should not have said that I knew what Andy was trying to say. I was thinking back to a post of his from a year ago where he essentially said the same thing I said, get the levels good and dont trip. But yeah man, you have stated everything totally kosher I am with ya. Im just an argumentative arse and like to play devil's advocate and that kind of thing. Never mind me over here...
Colin
Colin
black sugar
The Burninator
Kazrog said:LOL. Dynamics? What dynamics? ALL LOUD ALL THE TIME!!!
(I am kidding... of course...)
Yeah, how can I get everything louder than everything else? What plugins do you guys use to do that?
James? Andy? Anyone?
This is a joke too right? I hope so. While Im at it let me tell you that when I record or mix something, one of the agreements is that I get to make it as loud as I think is best and no more.
I just got a mix from a guy for mastering. Well, not only was it so smashed that the peak level was slammed at 0(with tons of overs), but the average level was also 2 db below zero and actually touching zero at times!! The loudest thing Ive even gotten in ever!!
He wanted it mastered and so I asked him to release all plugs from the mix buss and re send. He said there were no plugs on the buss, that the mix was dry.
I told him there is nothing I can do for him.
Maybe I can put you in touch with him!
Colin
I just got a mix from a guy for mastering. Well, not only was it so smashed that the peak level was slammed at 0(with tons of overs), but the average level was also 2 db below zero and actually touching zero at times!! The loudest thing Ive even gotten in ever!!
He wanted it mastered and so I asked him to release all plugs from the mix buss and re send. He said there were no plugs on the buss, that the mix was dry.
I told him there is nothing I can do for him.
Maybe I can put you in touch with him!
Colin
what are you on about Colin?? look...just... ughh.. what bob said.vile_ator said:
ps. you previous post was much more like a final post.... i wish it still were.
6dB per bit, might as well use all the bits for the highest resolution possible. So I tend to set levels so they're around -8 to -6dBfs.
I have heard the other arguement the -18 one, as -18 is generally 0vu. I've heard arguements about how it's less strain on the mix bus on output but I don't really hear a difference.
I have heard the other arguement the -18 one, as -18 is generally 0vu. I've heard arguements about how it's less strain on the mix bus on output but I don't really hear a difference.
see my new thread for your answer, black sugar.black sugar said:
oh no. he's not joking... and i have the answer... on my new thread!vile_ator said:
vile_ator said:
for.... recipe swapping? no?.... maybe,..... a quick badminton match?... not that either? bah.. just link him to my new thread, he may find it helpful!vile_ator said:
sorceron
ken
nice bunnyJames Murphy said:see my new thread for your answer, black sugar.
oh no. he's not joking... and i have the answer... on my new thread!
for.... recipe swapping? no?.... maybe,..... a quick badminton match?... not that either? bah.. just link him to my new thread, he may find it helpful!
dill_the_devil
OneMetal.com Music Editor
Awesome thread. I'm a complete newbie to all this - only just started my Monday night Sound Recording Techniques course at college after dicking around with Audition for the last ten months - and even though I can't follow all the science and theory, this thread has still been really helpful.
Andy Sneap
Metal Guru
vile_ator said:
No it's not what I'm saying at all. To put it simply, the better the level, the more bits you are using, the lower the level, hey guess what, the less bits you are using. The file will still be at either 24 or 16 bit, but if recorded low, you are not taking advantage of this. Like I said, 24 bit is alot more forgiving than 16 bit, but its still good practice to get your peaks as loud as possible, without clipping. Dynamic range does not use a greater amount of bits, you are using less bits on the quieter parts, but if you have good levels, this should be nothing to worry about and perfectly acceptable.
Similar threads
