Best Recording Levels

[DrFord]

OG-
Everything you said in your post was both informed and eloquent. I just wish you would have approached that last post without the "showing your ignorance," reason being that what you said made me hold you in a new light of respect simply for the information you were sharing with me. It's a shame it came with an insult.

D

[O.G. Killa]

Learning begins with humility. If you can't admit you are/were wrong, or if you can't admit that you don't actually know something, then you can't learn.

I DID originally post a reply and a correction to your first post without being harsh. It was you who chose to overlook the facts presented within my first response by adding your subjective rebuttal.

If you had just read my original post with the same intent as my second, and tried to learn from it, instead of trying to use subjective opinion to refute my facts, then my second post would never have been written. In a lot of ways, I would venture to say that little comment I made focused your attention on any information that followed.

I apologize if you feel that ignorance has negative connotations. It really doesn't, the Merriam-Webster definition is "lack of knowledge, education, or awareness". By saying "showing your ignorance" i'm not saying "you are stupid", I'm saying "your lack of education in this area is showing", which are two totally different things. Being a great musician/producer/arranger doesn't automatically mean you have to be a studied electrical engineer. If you aren't exposed to these subjects, how are you expected to know about them? You're not!

[DrFord]

Originally Posted by O.G. Killa

Being a great musician/producer/arranger doesn't automatically mean you have to be a studied electrical engineer.

So you admit I am great.
I accept.

[spaceman]

thanks for the responses everyone! I normally track in stuff about half way up the PT meter, so it seems that is a pretty standard and safe way to do it.
shame that this thread, like so many others, ends up degenerating into tit for tat arguments .....c'mon guys no one is trying to diss each other, let's just keep it friendly and informative!

[digilogin]

Originally Posted by O.G. Killa

If you are recording into your DAW trying to get your peaks as close to 0dBFS as possible. That is the EXACT same thing as recording to an analog tape and trying to get your levels to tape up to +20dBVU.

hello,

that is incorrect. you do not get digital distortion per se under 0dBfs.

also, you should feel free to recalibrate you interfaces to -15 or so if you are running too hot for your console or something.

recording reasonably "hot" does indeed have an advantage as far as resolution [more bits being used for the lower amplitude information resulting in more accuracy there].

you can feel free to pull back channel faders as necessary in pro tools hd.

nevertheless, trying to record all of your tracks so that every segment of the meters gets used at all times is not productive [or reasonably possible], and it can create trouble sometimes with plug-ins being overdriven. not all plug-ins have an input level control, so you can end up having to use a trim plug in front of the processing plug-in to make things work.

basically, it makes sense to record with as much resolution as you can practically and reasonably, without turning it into an obsessive thing. you obviously have different needs if you are recording overdubs by yourself than if you are tracking a band where the drummer may all of a sudden start playing 3 times as loud as he did when you were setting levels.

digilom

[dcboucher]

Originally Posted by digilogin

also, you should feel free to recalibrate you interfaces to -15 or so if you are running too hot for your console or something.

digilom

This is a really good suggestion.

Many consoles (even the big boys) are getting pulverized by full scale digital recordings and the mixers are turning down line trims or just not noticing that their consoles are folding in on themselves. While driving a console a bit gives you some extra sauce, there is a threshold of diminishing returns met very quickly and suddenly your mixes end up airless and flat. While the difference between -20 dBFs and -14 on the input side may only mean one click of a stepped mic pre, that usually puts your mic pre at a happier, less likely to get cranky, gain setting (especially with ribbons). Also, the return to your console is lower. Unless you are working on a console with a linear fader, the resolution of your analog fader increases as it approaches 0 dB. Why not have your recorder's returns optimized for the console? Get all your faders in the most usable range. Want to drive the channel harder, turn up the line trim. Want to drive the stereo buss harder, turn up the makeup gain of your buss compressor or just push the faders hotter.

I know it accepted knowledge that most big consoles can handle +26 dBU, but across 24 or 48 faders? You've got two line trims on the 192. Set the one you don't use to -14 dBFs and experiment. You'll probably end up somewhere in between, but you'll find a use for those VU meters that were always pegged and those faders around -30 that change level when somebody breathes too close to it.

I also think that the meters on protools don't say it all. When recording, give yourself 1-2 bits of headroom, you deserve it.

[O.G. Killa]

Originally Posted by digilogin

hello,

that is incorrect. you do not get digital distortion per se under 0dBfs.

Excuse me? Your comment doesn't in any way relate to what I was talking about... go back and reread my posts, and if you need me to, I'll explain after that... I'm not even talking about digital distortion, I don't know where you got that from?!?

Originally Posted by digilogin

recording reasonably "hot" does indeed have an advantage as far as resolution [more bits being used for the lower amplitude information resulting in more accuracy there].

This is a common misconception about sampling... it's completely urban legend. There is no more "accuracy" recording hot than recording quiet. All you are doing is pushing your analog noise UP into the higher bits and in essence making your recordings MORE noisy by doing so, not to mention all the information I mentioned about VOLTAGE!!!!

If your mic and mic preamp have an SNR of 80dB, yet your recording medium has an SNR of 120dB, HOW IN THE WORLD IS RECORDING HOTTER MORE "ACCURATE"? It's the same accuracy... a bit is a bit, doesn't matter if it's the most significant bit or the 20th bit. So long as you are above the noise floor of the recording system it doesn't matter if your signal peaks at -2dBFS or -12dBFS. It's the same waveform regardless, one is not "more accurate" than the other because it was recorded hotter. All you are doing is driving your electrical components out of their ideal voltage range...which was the topic of my posts to begin with...

[Delta Music Belgium]

Please read some basic material about digital recordings. If you record at 24 bit at a level of -20 dBFS, it is the same as recording at 16 bit and losing the resolution of the highest 8 bits. Recording with a level as high as possible at 24 bit will results in a better sound with a higher resolution. You can compare it with taking pictures with thousands colors or millions of colors (what is exactly the difference between 16 bit graphics or 24 bit graphics). If your outboard mixing board or analog equipment can't handle the level, then lower the analog trim, or recalibrate your analog path, or MITB. It is not an urban legend, it is all about science and mathematics...

Btw, I have a PT 24 Mix with 888/16 interfaces and I have a PT HD 7 Accel with 24 bit 192 I/O's. They are all calibrated the same way at +4dBu. So I gain 8 bits of resolution with PT HD 7 Accel and the 192 I/O, recording at 24 bit, while the actual output level (in Volts) of both systems (16 bit and 24 bit) is identical. So this proves that recording at the same high levels at 16 bits (in PT Mix) or 24 bits (in PT HD) gives you 8 bits more of resolution and a better sound but not a higher output to your analog stage...

[Delta Music Belgium]

If your analog chain has an noise floor of -80 dB, you could be working at 16 bit without any problem (an analog cassete deck has a noise floor of -60 dB) My analog chain has a noise floor around -120dB, so recording at high levels at 24 bit has it's advantages... Btw, I did mean recording at -20 dBu, that is recording at 16 bit in a 24 bit resolution.

[O.G. Killa]

Originally Posted by Delta Music Belgium

My analog chain has a noise floor around -120dB, so recording at high levels at 24 bit has it's advantages... Btw, I did mean recording at -20 dBu, that is recording at 16 bit in a 24 bit resolution.

Then you are the only person in existence to have such an ANALOG system... As the best analog systems I've worked on, seen or even read about are usually between 90dB and 100dB dynamic range.