Mixing, signal peaking...

If you're recording at 24Bit resolution, leave some headroom when recording.
IOW, Don't try to push the peaks of each track fully up to 0dB.
When you go to sum 24+ tracks... and the peaks are all close to 0dB, you'll just have to reduce the level anyway.
Even if you leave some headroom on each track, you'll still likely have to reduce the overall level a bit. 
 
If you leave 6-12dB of headroom on each track, you'll notice that the track peak meters won't go into the red when applying additive EQ, compression with a boost, etc.  As a side benefit, you won't have to worry about clipping the A/D converters. 
 
When summing with 32Bit Float or 64bit Float resolution, the individual tracks can go into the red without affecting (distorting) the final output.  Just make sure the master output is NOT going into the red.
 
Yes, compression/limiting can help to keep peaks under control (whether assigned to a track, or a bus)

glisando, although a limiter will prevent your levels from going into the red, it also affects the overall sound, sometimes profoundly. Consequently, it should not be your primary strategy. Lowering your track levels is the best place to start. Then, if necessary, use the trim control on your master bus to bring everything down until there is at least 6db (12db would be better) headroom before you hit the master limiter.

And no, it is not necessary to push even the final mastered levels right up to 0db. In fact, it's probably better if you don't. For most of us, a target of -1db or even -2db maximum peaks is safer. Don't worry about your music not being loud enough; loudness perception depends on RMS, not peak levels.

Hi Guys,
Thanks so much for the responses, I appreciate it. Just a few more questions?
Track View:
If I were to expand any given track, I see things like mute, solo buttons, input and output parameters and on the extreme right I see this value that says
-3
-6
-9
-12
 dB-
12
-9
-6
-3
What does it denote?
Console View:
In the console view, for any given audio track strip there is a volume fader which is flanked on both sides by what appears to be volume level on the left and metering
on the right.
1. What do the values on the right denote?
2. What is the unit of measure for volume?
I believe the metering is measured in decibels. When you guys mention '6-12b headroom', do you mean to say that the meter on the right of the volume fader should not
raise up beyond -12 or -6 db?
Do let me know guys, thanks.
regards
glisando

I don't think you'll get too many people buying into the idea that "louder is better" in digital, let alone having everything "as hot as possible"

If you haven't read it already, you should read this thread in its entirety.

I like the generic put down by the way:

What people on this forum and most engineers don't get

BenMMusTech


Bit flipper is correct, dont worry about going into the red when your mixing in the box, just don't have it in the red all the time.  Use the trim fader on the master buss and lower that by around 6db, this will give you the headroom you need for the master.

For recording into your interface, once again it does not matter as long as there are no overs, you ca use the indivdual trims on each channel to regain structure the indivdual tracks.

What people on this forum and most engineers don't get is louder is better with digital, this is because the best part of the digital waveform is the top (I have got this from micheal stavrou).  What this doesn't mean though is when you have finshed recording/sequencing or whatever you keep it that way.  As I say you regain structure everything so it all fits.  This is a good example of my technique http://soundcloud.com/aaudiomystiks/nowandthen the vocal, had peaks of -1db, the bass was the same, it seems so was the accoustic guitar.  I am looking at the track as I write.  In fact by the looks of things I have ignored all the above advice and everything I have recorded pretty hot. 

My theory is to make digital warm we must record and have everthing as hot as possible and as bitflipper and I have suggested use the trim on the master buss to readjust and give you headroom.

Fianlly I have to disagree with Bitflipper -3db is more than enough headroom for mastering and this fits in with my theory of loud=digital warmth, as I say listen to the above link and this should be proof enough of my theory.

I am not trying to throw my credtials around but I am at the cutting edge when it comes to music and digital technology and this is the conclusion I have come to after 10 years of study and my own research.

Peace

Best piece of deadpan sarcasm I've ever read. Big lulz. 

Or as Pete Townsend said "If I told you what it takes
                                         to reach the highest high,
                                         You'd laugh and say 'nothing's that simple'
                                         But you've been told many times before
                                         Messiahs pointed to the door
                                         And no one had the guts to leave the temple"

"These should be the years of dash and daring, instead of rashes and scaring" 

Peace

Boxy drums and hashed cymbals, but that was the style in the 60's. Certainly doesn't sound like George Martin at the controls, more like Yoko.

But the track peaks at -4 and has an average RMS level of -21dB, so it's certainly not running as hot as you're advocating. 

This is a bit all over the place. It's not clear what point you're trying to make at all.

Getting "warmth" in any recording setup will usually involve some sort of analog processing at some point between capture & output.

In traditional analog recording it was possible to achieve warmth by deliberately driving signals into the red because of the way in which tape distortion complemented the sound and acted as a "glue" on submixes.

If you drive that hard in digital, you'll get digital clipping which nobody likes.

In my honest & humble opinion, the only way to go in digital is to leave at LEAST 6db of headroom when tracking, maybe even -9 to -12. Watch your gain staging constantly!

Mix it to the best of your ability before even considering putting any mastering FX on your master bus.

And in order to judge what's really going on in your mixes, make sure your listening environment is up to the job. AND GET SOME DECENT MONITORS.

make sure your listening environment is up to the job. AND GET SOME DECENT MONITORS. 

yup

BenMMusTech


Ok pretext, I am under the weather!!! 

Is that a euphemism for "tired and emotional" or "so ****ing baked right now"?

First JT, I am advocating a new paradigm in recording, I will come back to it in the morning, suffice to say, what cost hendrix a million costs us 10,000. 

You still don't need to make it sound like ass. Hendrix's talent shines through the godawful lo fi recordings that he made. 

Also think of it this way, what must have Tommrow Never Knows sounded like, to teenagers in 1966, this is where we are at, with our DAW's. 

No it isn't. Recording tech has come a long way since George Martin was gluing tape together and committing overdubs on four tracks. 

As for PR, actually our converter's are never at 144db (correct me if i am wrong) the best I have seen is 118 db, but what Iam taliking about is getting the best frequency responce.  To do this with digital it has to be loud, huh what about jazz and other hi fi recordings, these use multi microphone techniques amd harmonics to get "that: sound. 

Never at? You clearly don't understand headroom. And the 2nd sentence is just utter dog-egg. Digital has the same frequency response regardless of voltage. It's your ears and gear that are changing how it sounds. Look up Fletcher Munson curves for ears. Check that you're not overdriving your monitors and output chain for gear. And check your room.

As for PR's final comment, NEW WORLD, we do bussiness a different way and I am just staring to learn, this one.

It shows. But there's no harm in that, until you start dishing out misinformation as advice. 

Have a nice day. 

The tapes from the Hendrix sessions sound very good.

The recently remixed, by Eddie Kramer, versions reveal just how well they were recorded.

Bristol_Jonesey

I am not trying to throw my credtials around but I am at the cutting edge when it comes to music and digital technology

I have Beyerdynamic 990 headphones, I use crap speakers, I use Tannoy speakers and I use various meters to check I am in range

That sounds like a really cutting edge monitoring chain.

Are you taking the piss Bristol, it's ok I can take it, I am a big boy.  If not thanks for the support, ah the old problem of subjective hearing, you say it sounds like Potatoes and I think it sounds like Sweet Potatoes.  Sound is subjective!!!!
 
Ok on to the next point, everything that I am reading and experimenting with ok operative word experimenting with, suggests that I am right.  In the old days we used to drive our consoles, compressers preamps whatever into the red!!!!!  This was to get to a certain tone, ok, this does not happen with digital but the theory is if they the recording engineers of yesterday year recorded hot, then we must do the same, because I don't believe it was just a case of of driving equipment to get harmonics, I also believe, this is how they acheived some of that warmth.  I say again, I can hear in Now and Then and howl me down a quality and warmth that is lacking in most digital recordings today.  Even the really crap recordings I have put up, The Punk Song being one has somthing that, IMHO most digital recordings are lacking and this is because I have followed my theory.
 
Another thing people are not taking into account, is virtual emulations, these plugs are designed to be pushed into the red, this is because, they have been designed to behave like the original hardware units.  So if you want the Fairchild to act like a Fairchild, there is a point in that emualtion, if it is designed well were it will do exactly that and that means normally you have the meter peaking.
 
Paul seems to be the only one attacking my mix of Now and Then, may I enquire what you were using to meter the track with, because my meters tell me a different story and the waveform tells a different story.  I also have the dynamic range meter, I like dynamic range.  I also have two frequency analysers that I use, a phase meter, a real VU on my TL Audio A2 (I think this at least puts me in the playground with the bigboys) and of course the RMS meters in Sonar, although Jeff Evens (some may know) has indicated that these meters are out by arounf two DB.
 
Finally under the weather is indeed a euphomisim for I was Pissed!!!!
 
Peace 
PS Yes I do understand headroom, really well, it is somthing I have been researching for the last year, I have got my head around it.  In the begining I used a track that was similar to mine and watched what it did in Sonar with the Sonar meters, once I knew what was going on I experimented until I figured out how to achieve that with my track.  As for Fletcher Munson curves, they are what I use for mastering.  I get the spectrum analysers up and I make sure each of my tracks conform to certain frequency standerds.  If fact if you listen to all my masters up on Soundcloud, you will find a uniformity.