Avid Pro Audio Community

Avid Pro Audio Community

How to Join & Post  •  Community Terms of Use  •  Help Us Help You

Knowledge Base Search  •  Community Search  •  Learn & Support


Avid Home Page

Go Back   Avid Pro Audio Community > Legacy Products > 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Mac)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #11  
Old 01-23-2003, 09:03 PM
Duardo Duardo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 978
Default Re: Getting the best sound quality in PT

Quote:
you always want to record the hottest signal possible without clipping because it reduces your perception of where the noise floor is...so basically, a good hot signal gives you a better signal to noise ratio.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">This is rarely the case these days. That's the great thing about 24-bit recording...you don't have to run the signal as hot as possible, so you don't need to worry about getting as close to digital 0 as possible without clipping. You'd have to be recording a very dynamic signal in a very quiet room with some very good equipment for this to be the case.

Even the "worst" 24-bit converters have at least a 95 dB S/N ratio these days. How many of us are recording a signal with such a wide dynamic range? I doubt many, if any, of us are. The noise floor is almost a non-issue. The ambient noise in the room you're recording in, or the self-noise of your analog gear, is much more likely to be an issue. Say you're recording something with a dynamic range of, say 40 dB...you could be peaking at -30 dB and your quietest signal would be at -70 dB and you'd still have plenty of room to spare on either end. You would not lose any quality and your signal would be recorded with the exact same level of accuracy as if you were peaking at -3dB, or -.03 (although in that case you'd most likely be using a limiter and your signal would actually be less accurate).

Not that I'd recommend recording at -30 dB...there are plenty of other reasons to have hotter signals, such as consistent levels from one track to the next, being able to have your faders where you've got the best resolution, and the fact that most analog dear does perform better when it's running as close to unity as possible and you want a level that's consistent with that.

Quote:
Here lately things have started sounding a lot better, and Im still tracking with a hot signal, just before clipping. I am just paying close attention to the gain staging from there on out, and its really working.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">That's something you really have to do (pay close attention to gain staging all the way through)...I'm pretty sure that most (not all!) of the complaints people have about the mix bus are because they don't know how to make the best of a digital system, and try to go by all of the analog rules. It's really easy to overlook gain staging issues when mixing digitally, unlike analog where you typically have all kinds of level indicators at just about every stage.

Quote:
Don't go too low, or you're not taking advantage of the resolution.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">You'd have to go really, really low to not take advantage of the resolution (assuming you're talking about bit depth).

Hot levels are a different issue when it comes to the mastering stage...although most stuff is heavily overcompressed these days, in general you do want your stuff to peak right under 0 dBFS and most likely you'll want to shove a bunch more than necessary up there to be competetive. But there's really no reason to push it when you're tracking and mixing, and you're likely doing more harm than good since that kind of thing can't be undone.

-Duardo
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 01-24-2003, 07:38 AM
H-man H-man is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Jersey City, NJ
Posts: 481
Default Re: Getting the best sound quality in PT

Carl- as soon as you get your new mini-me, I guarantee you will hear a huge improvement in the sound quality. I'm listening to a rough demo I just did of a band in one room tracked through my RNP preamps and new RME converter. I'm so happy with the sound quality I have a new outlook in recording in the digital world. Keep your levels lower in PT, and DO NOT overload your mix bus. Why don't you tell us exactly how you are mastering your stuff, than we can give you better feedback on this two bus issue. Good luck.
__________________
Don't be a puppet on strings!
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 01-24-2003, 11:00 AM
The Mighty Burner The Mighty Burner is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: NYC
Posts: 447
Default Re: Getting the best sound quality in PT

Quote:
Originally posted by Duardo:
Even the "worst" 24-bit converters have at least a 95 dB S/N ratio these days. How many of us are recording a signal with such a wide dynamic range? I doubt many, if any, of us are. The noise floor is almost a non-issue. The ambient noise in the room you're recording in, or the self-noise of your analog gear, is much more likely to be an issue. Say you're recording something with a dynamic range of, say 40 dB...you could be peaking at -30 dB and your quietest signal would be at -70 dB and you'd still have plenty of room to spare on either end. You would not lose any quality and your signal would be recorded with the exact same level of accuracy as if you were peaking at -3dB, or -.03 (although in that case you'd most likely be using a limiter and your signal would actually be less accurate).
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Obviously, I'm talking about input source noise, not the signal-to-noise ratio inherent in A/D conversion. Your instrument, your microphone, your pre-amp, your room, ground hum, etc...these are the things that conspire to create your "working" noise floor when tracking. Anything in the signal path can and probably will add some noise, so if you want to get the best signal-to-noise ratio during tracking, you should run your signal as hot as possible without signal peak/digital clipping, IMO. It doesn't seem to me that the "overloading the PT mix bus" issue (which I am still learning about) is quite as relevant to the tracking process.
__________________
The Burner
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 01-24-2003, 11:32 AM
Pete Weaver Pete Weaver is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Boise, ID
Posts: 116
Default Re: Getting the best sound quality in PT

I would definitely suggest that you avoid any red
lights on the master fader ever! It's always bad!

Other than that, run the volume as hot as you like, trust your ears, and no red lights!

I have found a killer way to use the Waves L1 or
L2 without distorting your mix.

1. Put L1 or L2 on the master fader with the desired dithering dialed in.
2. Put the Threshold at 0.0 and leave it there!
(Dont slide it down or it distorts your mix)
3. Put the out ceiling at -0.3
4. Crank the master fader up until the attenuator on the L1 is kicking in on the peaks but not mor than 3db of limiting.
5. This gives you nice hot clean volumes and uses the L1 in a gentle way that doesn't distort your mix.

For an example of this technique and the clean hot volume level I've achieved using this method,
you can check any of my mixes:

www.halftheworld.cc/music.html

Good luck!
__________________
Pete Weaver - Half The World
www.halftheworld.cc - Will appeal to fans of Fuel, Evanessence, Staind, Sevendust.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 01-24-2003, 01:08 PM
H-man H-man is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Jersey City, NJ
Posts: 481
Default Re: Getting the best sound quality in PT

Carl, I went with the RME because I needed more than 8 channels of A/D, and the fact it has D/A 8 channels is an added bonus. I'm clocking to my RME for now, but in the future I might possibly pick up a Lucid Genx wordclock and use that as my master clock as the RME has BNC connectors and can be slaved to another clock if needed. I dont know though, the clock in the RME sounds pretty darn good to me. I can honestly say after hearing it with my own two ears the clock in the RME even made my pre recorded tracks in PT sound better. Everything just kind of tightened up and had better clarity. Now, as for tracking throught the RME into PT, sonic bliss my friend, at least compared to how tracks sound going through the analog digi inputs. You have to be smart and do your research, which it looks like you have. I was sick of lifeless sounds in PT, and decided that I would only concentrate on my signal chain. In my opinion, you need first to get better mics, preamps, than once that is in place, get the converter. I'm working with bands and I needed 8 channels for live tracking situations. There was no way I was going to buy a two channel converter and run two tracks through it and the rest through PT's analog inputs. Then I would be pulling my hair out trying to decide which tracks to put through the converter. RME is 8 channel so problem solved. Wheter you go, Apogee, Lucid, or RME your gonna be stoked on the sound. You really should check out the RNP, two channels of pro preamp for a price that is unheard of. I have two of them now, and they are simply amazing. Couple that w/ an RNC compressor, and you have a fantastic chain. If your only going to be recording a couple of channels at a time than go mini-me, if not go RME. Either way your moving in the right direction. [img]images/icons/wink.gif[/img]
__________________
Don't be a puppet on strings!
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 01-24-2003, 01:59 PM
Duardo Duardo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 978
Default Re: Getting the best sound quality in PT

Quote:
Obviously, I'm talking about input source noise, not the signal-to-noise ratio inherent in A/D conversion. Your instrument, your microphone, your pre-amp, your room, ground hum, etc...these are the things that conspire to create your "working" noise floor when tracking. Anything in the signal path can and probably will add some noise, so if you want to get the best signal-to-noise ratio during tracking, you should run your signal as hot as possible without signal peak/digital clipping, IMO.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">You should always run your analog gear where it sounds best, true, and that's where you should make the most of your levels. If your analog gear's output registers at -15 dBFS on your A/D converter, there's no need to pump it up just to get closer to 0. You won't be gaining any resolution by doing so, and you won't be losing any by keeping your signal a little lower.

Quote:
It doesn't seem to me that the "overloading the PT mix bus" issue (which I am still learning about) is quite as relevant to the tracking process.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">No, it's more of a mixing issue, although if you track with all your levels peaking at -.5 dBFS it'll be much easier to inadvertently overload the mix bus.

Quote:
I have found a killer way to use the Waves L1 or
L2 without distorting your mix.
1. Put L1 or L2 on the master fader with the desired dithering dialed in.
2. Put the Threshold at 0.0 and leave it there!
(Dont slide it down or it distorts your mix)
3. Put the out ceiling at -0.3
4. Crank the master fader up until the attenuator on the L1 is kicking in on the peaks but not mor than 3db of limiting.
5. This gives you nice hot clean volumes and uses the L1 in a gentle way that doesn't distort your mix.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">If you're not going to have your CD mastered this may be a good idea, but if you are what are you gaining by pushing it like this?

Quote:
TO FURTHER CONFUSE ME, IF I AM RECORDING A CD IN THE MASTERLINK, WHY DO I NEED BETTER D/A THAN WHAT I CAN MONITOR FROM THE MASTERLINK D/A UNLESS I SHOULD BE RECORDING INTO THE MASTERLINK ANALOG FROM A D/A???
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Having the best D/A available will always give you the most accurate picture of what you're recording/mixing/mastering.


Quote:
24/44.1 MIX IN PT, SPDIF OUT TO MINI-DAC, ANALOG OUT INTO MINI-ME, SPDIF OUT AT 16/44.1 INTO MASTERLINK, BURN REDBOOK CD.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">This is the better scenario, although I'd recommend you try it both ways and go with what you think sounds best.

Quote:
I can honestly say after hearing it with my own two ears the clock in the RME even made my pre recorded tracks in PT sound better. Everything just kind of tightened up and had better clarity.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">That's to be expected, but it hasn't actually changed those prerecorded tracks. It's the same thing as if you do the entire mix in Pro Tools and then listen back to the CD on an expensive audiophile player. If hasn't actually changed the original tracks at all.

-Duardo
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 01-25-2003, 12:02 AM
bassmac bassmac is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,754
Default Re: Getting the best sound quality in PT

I don’t get that Pete.

Raising the master just increases the signal you’re sending to the L1. The L1 won't register any attenuation until you actually do pull down the threshold.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 01-25-2003, 12:12 AM
michaux's Avatar
michaux michaux is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 151
Default Re: Getting the best sound quality in PT

Thanks everone for grreat responses. I think I can see the light at the end of the tunnel.

H-Man, please see my comments amidst your quote:

Quote:
Originally posted by H-man:
Carl- as soon as you get your new mini-me, I guarantee you will hear a huge improvement in the sound quality. I'm listening to a rough demo I just did of a band in one room tracked through my RNP preamps and new RME converter.

I HAVE READ A LOT OF THREADS OF PEOPLE WHO LIKE THIS SET UP, NOW I AM SECOND GUESSING MY DECISION OF BUYING THE MINI-ME OVER THE RNP AND RME. AS I UNDERSTAND IT, AN ADVANTAGE TO THE RME IS D/A NOT TO MENTIONS 8 INS AND OUTS. IN THE 1K PRICE RANGE CAN THE RME DO 8 CHAN OF HIGH QUALITY A/D AND D/A THAT RIVALS APOGEE PRODUCTS??? IF SO, THE RME SOUNDS LIKE A GREAT VALUE, BUT IF THE APOGEE SOUND AND CLOCK IS BETTER, MAYBE I MADE THE RIGHT DECISION. I DO KNOW THAT I AM NOT LOCKED INTO THE MINI-ME AS IT DOES OUTPUT CLOCK ON AES AND SPDIF. THE AES CAN CONNECT TO A WORD CLOCK DIST. AMP AND THEN ANOTHER A/D D/A DEVICE CAN ALSO BE CONNECTED, HOWEVER, THE MINI-ME WOULD HAVE TO BE THE MASTER CLOCK. ACCORDING TO APOGEE, THE CLOCK FROM THE MINI-ME IS AS GOOD AS ANY APOGEE CLOCK. I THINK I MADE THE RIGHT DECISION ON THE MINI-ME AS I DO NEED A PORTABLE SOLUTION. I AM A SINGING ENGINEER AND I WANT TO MOVE THE MINI-ME BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN MY LIVE ROOM AND MY CONTROL ROOM. I HAVE A REMOTE PT WORKSTATION IN MY LIVE ROOM. I STILL WOULD REALY LIKE TO KNOW IF SOMEONE COULD OR HAS DONE A SHOOT OUT BETWEEN THE MINI-ME AND THE RNP/RME.

NOW, THERE IS THE ISSUE OF D/A. CURRENTLY I AM MONITORING D/A FROM THE MASTERLINK WICH IS MILES BETTER THAN THE D/A ON THE 001. I AM WONDERING WHAT DIFFERNCE I WOULD HEAR IF I WAS COMPARING IT TO THE RME D/A OR EVEN THE MINI-DAC??? TO FURTHER CONFUSE ME, IF I AM RECORDING A CD IN THE MASTERLINK, WHY DO I NEED BETTER D/A THAN WHAT I CAN MONITOR FROM THE MASTERLINK D/A UNLESS I SHOULD BE RECORDING INTO THE MASTERLINK ANALOG FROM A D/A???

WHAT DO Y'ALL THINK OF THIS SCENARIO:

MIX IN PT, SPDIF TO MASTERLINK AT 24/44.1, ANALOG OUT OF MASTERLINK TO MINI-ME, SPDIF TO PT 16/44.1, SPDIF TO MATERLINK AND BURN REDBOOK CD.

OR

24/44.1 MIX IN PT, SPDIF OUT TO MINI-DAC, ANALOG OUT INTO MINI-ME, SPDIF OUT AT 16/44.1 INTO MASTERLINK, BURN REDBOOK CD.

WHAT ABOUT THROWING MY MACKIE 1202 VLZ PRO SOMEONEWHERE IN THE MIX DOWN CHAIN???

SORRY FOR THE LONG WINDED QUESTIONS, I JUST HAVE SO MANY. CARL.

I'm so happy with the sound quality I have a new outlook in recording in the digital world. Keep your levels lower in PT, and DO NOT overload your mix bus. Why don't you tell us exactly how you are mastering your stuff, than we can give you better feedback on this two bus issue. Good luck.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">
__________________
http://www.michauxmusic.com/

3rd LP Record - In progress, coming soon!
2nd LP Record - http://www.cdbaby.com/cd/michaux2
1st LP Record - http://www.cdbaby.com/cd/michaux
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 01-25-2003, 11:51 AM
davidp158 davidp158 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Belleuve, WA, USA
Posts: 804
Default Re: Getting the best sound quality in PT

I'm trying to decide on new gear purchase. Until recently, I was thinking a good mic pre was my priority; something like an Avalon, Great River, Sytek, Vintech mic pre. With all the recent buzz about the new converters, I'm wondering if I'd be better off to invest in a converter.

I have a Presonus Digimax and Focusrite Penta, and wonder if a new converter will be a better investment. I already have a FRM RNC, and could probably afford a converter and the FRM RNP, which seems like a popular combo. I know I will get other preamps eventually; I'm just wondering about the best short term investment.

Any advice on this? Thanks in advance,
dave patterson

Quote:
Originally posted by H-man:
Carl- as soon as you get your new mini-me, I guarantee you will hear a huge improvement in the sound quality. I'm listening to a rough demo I just did of a band in one room tracked through my RNP preamps and new RME converter. I'm so happy with the sound quality I have a new outlook in recording in the digital world. Keep your levels lower in PT, and DO NOT overload your mix bus. Why don't you tell us exactly how you are mastering your stuff, than we can give you better feedback on this two bus issue. Good luck.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
better quality power cable = better quality sound? dbvoyager General Discussion 22 04-15-2012 06:08 PM
Sound quality gervaisservice 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Mac) 9 01-27-2011 02:22 PM
What makes the quality of the sound...sound 100 times better... musiclovin 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Win) 14 07-11-2009 04:55 PM
sound quality! acq1 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Win) 2 01-29-2008 02:43 PM
LE and TDM sound quality Wcutta 003, Mbox 2, Digi 002, original Mbox, Digi 001 (Win) 8 10-24-2005 04:32 PM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:15 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited. Forum Hosted By: URLJet.com