Recording and Mixing levels in PT...

[Todd Lerner]

Hi,

I've read the posts on the related topic covering this subject, and I am stiill confused. I am not an engineer. Two questions:

1.) At what level should one record into PT?

Should one track as hot as possible into PT without clipping, or should one track less hot and how can one measure the incoming level? I use a Presonus M80 preamp into a PT Mix+ with an 888/24. I usually track through a compressor to knock off a few db's where nec. This gets my level fairly high into PT without ever clipping. I have never calibrated any equipment; and I use no mixing board -- once in PT I stay there.

2.) At what level should one mix in PT?

Should one lower all levels within PT's mixer to limit mix buss summing? (I use no outboard gear.) Does one then crank up the level on a PT stereo master channel? Can one then use L1 Maximizer on that channel to simulate a bit of what the song will sound like after being sent to a masterer?

Thank You,
-Todd Lerner

[NATEMYST]

Hi Todd, I'm still confused and I'm an engineer-Here's a few things I've heard and experienced: Record into you're 888/24 @ 0dB out of the pre's which is supposed to equal -14dBfs on the 888/24 meters. Now this is contrary to what I was taught at recording school and which there is an argument to record higher to fill up available bits(up in the yellow on your 888/24). From what I hear the analog circuitry in the 888/24 does not do well with higher levels. also when mixing in pt the master fader doesn't seem to take alot of level either. Maybe post this on mac os and see if some of the pt jedi can help-I do this all the time. -Nate.

[Todd Lerner]

Hi Nate,

Thanks for the good info! I really appreciate your input; it helps clear things up for me.

All the best,
-Todd

[Nika]

Nate,

Close. If you record so that your nominal level is at 0dBVU you'll probably be the safest. Depending on how the converters are calibrated this will be between -12dBFS and -20dBFS.

The reason not to record hotter than that is two fold:

1. Contrary to common myths, hotter does not actually give you a better signal beyond a certain point. It's not a matter of it being "just not noticeable, but there theoretically would be a better signal". It's a matter of just "sorry, after this many bits there is absolutely no theoretical or real improvement at all from recording hotter."

2. Your analog equipment is not designed to necessarily run that hot. Most preamps, compressors, etc. are designed to operate in a certain range. If you run them too hot or too cold they can loose some of their sound quality. Run them at the level they're comfortable running at, which is at 0dBVU as recommended above.

This is really simplifying a huge amount of theory and there are slight but reasonable exceptions to these rules. I'm trying to break it down as eloquently and simply as is possible.

Nika.

[Todd Lerner]

Hi Nika,

You broke it down break it down eloquently and simply -- and now I understand the issue much better. Thank you very much!

-Todd Lerner

[Chris Townsend]

Originally posted by Nika:
Nate,
1. Contrary to common myths, hotter does not actually give you a better signal beyond a certain point. It's not a matter of it being "just not noticeable, but there theoretically would be a better signal". It's a matter of just "sorry, after this many bits there is absolutely no theoretical or real improvement at all from recording hotter."

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Nika, I'm not sure why you still believe this after I made a number of posts disproving it. All other things being equal, more bits will always result in a better signal to noise ratio. Nonetheless, it is often be the case that adding more bits will only result in a negligible improvement (e.g. a thousandth of dB). In a practical sense what you're saying can be true, but there is no hard limit to the number of bits necessary to perfectly encode a signal.

That being said, I think 24-bit converters (at least good ones) are quite capable recording audio with incredible accuracy (even with lots of headroom). Going beyond 24-bits would theoretically be an improvement, but the improvement in SNR would be infinitesimally small.

[Nika]

Chris,

Am I not entitled to disagree with you?

Regardless of what you have said, the human ear has been shown through scientific studies to be able to hear up to 20dB below the noisefloor. I'm willing to leave some slop that perhaps the studies were inaccurate and we can hear further below the noisefloor than that.

What I have said above is that more than a certain number of bits are unnecessary and not theoretically or audibly beneficial because the ear has limits and there isn't a benefit to exceeding those limits. Do you have reason that exceeding those limits is somehow beneficial?

Notice that I didn't say HOW MANY bits was enough (as has been discussed before). I only mentioned that there isn't a benefit to using more than x number of bits based on the material. You disagree with this? Why?

Nika.

[QuikDraw]

I'm just curious...

How many of these signals with a thousanth of a decibel SNR degredation would have to be summed before the difference would become audible to even the most golden of golden ears?

[img]images/icons/confused.gif[/img]

Mike

[Mike Tholen]

how about two? [img]images/icons/tongue.gif[/img] [img]images/icons/wink.gif[/img]

[QuikDraw]

So Mike,

You're the guy that believes in absolutely observing 0dBVU. No questions. No exceptions. Period!

Now, since digital clipping is not desireable ever, that implies that you have 0dBVU calibrated far enough below 0dBFS that you will NEVER clip when observing 0dBVU. I would think that that often puts your signal a bit lower than a person that is trying to track as hot as possible relative to 0dBFS without clipping.

So it seems implied that you would tend to record slightly lower than the "hot as possible" camp. And now you state that you (or someone with the ultimate golden ears) can hear the degredation of SNR caused by tracking lower than "hot as possible" if you sum just two tracks?

Does this make sense? Are you saying that even though you can hear the difference that it's worth it because you are observing proper gain staging?

[img]images/icons/confused.gif[/img]

Mike