Ok...So Jeff Was Right About VU Meters-Actually Are Pretty Handy lol!

https://soundcloud.com/aaudiomystiks/the-organik-eye
 
Ok I've been busy working on my mixing and mastering technique over the last 3 weeks...waiting to start my Fine Arts research degree.  Even though I've been close in regards to mixing and mastering and even by luck have had good results, last night it all fell into place...see above link...the vocal isn't my best...it was done in 2005, and I'm a much better vocalist now but I worked out after setting up a mix, you need to go back and tighten everything...so in effect mix twice.
 
First you need to set the mix...this includes the gain stage...I've found that Sonar is a very comprehensive in regards to "its sound"...meaning all the components interact.  By using the Pro Channel compressors...I only have the two included ones, I was able to set the average for the individual tracks at the "standard" of -18 to -12 RMS...note you need to set your meters to RMS and Peak.  Because the components of the song were recorded somewhat badly 10 years ago with nothing more than a Behringer Ultra-Gain and a 150 dollar Audio Technica mic, I was limited in what I could do to get a better sound, the above components were fed into an unbalanced Creamware audio connection, and were compressed badly on the way into the system.  But by using the Pro Channel master buss compressor set to limit or 10:1 ratio, I was still able to turn the tracks up to the above average and catch the peaks.  I would then carve out the EQ, using the black backdrop theory, sometimes using E Type EQ...which whilst dipping the selected frequency band also raise's the preceding frequency band-audio engineers call this a "musical" type EQ, my point is experiment with the Pro Channel EQ...you will be amazed by the results.  Personally I only need one more type of EQ...which the ubiquitous Pultech and I'd be happy.  I also did some compression with Pro Channel channel compressor and once I figured it out...I was amazed at how "musical" the result was.  Finally I used the console emulator to catch the peaks...once you figure out what you are listening for...you will be amazed at how it affects the sound http://blog.cakewalk.com/console-emulation-in-sonar/ this was particularly useful in deciding which console emulation to use.  One of the mistakes I was making was using the console emulator in one way...i.e. using the N Type across the mix, rather than experiment to see which one sounds right.  Although I would use a one size fit's all, if I was mixing just an acoustic track or a rock track but experiment.  Another thing to do is whilst your pulling a mix together...but before you set the levels...check your pan law...if the pan law is set to zero, you will find the mix bunches up in the middle...it's alight if you want that sound, but it also means there is less head room...if you want a wider sound change the pan law to minus 3...I think minus six is for broadcast...TV and Video.
 
Here is a bit of controversy...it doesn't matter if your individual channels are hot or peaking...lets clarify this...on the way into your DAW, when the recording signal is going through the converters...peaking is a NO!...but once it's inside the DAW, because of 32 bit and 64 bit processing...the dynamic range is much larger...I'm not saying burn your way to the top...use your ears but a few DB over once inside the box is fine...use the console emulator to tame the peaks somewhat too, and if you set the compressor right...this will make a marked difference as well.
 
Once the mix is set up...and this is where I was making a huge mistake...I could go yea ha and just master, you need to finesse the mix or mix a second time.  HERE IS WHERE JEFF IS RIGHT ABOUT VU METERS...over the last few weeks I've been getting really good results but sometimes the mix would not fall into place, transients would smear...things would sound out of time and out of tune...the mix just would not jell.  So last night I went back and tuned all the compressors and EQ...and wham...the vocal which was a bit wonky or the timing that was a bit wonky...fell into place.  I know ball park settings, so this is how I would set up the mix...ball park settings, because I have terrible concentration I wasn't really listening but after my ADHD medication last night I was able to sink into the mix and just slowly tighten every little transient...and JEFF IS RIGHT, those VU meters-even the virtual ones rock back and forth in a particular way, which indicates you have the settings right...I knew this already...its something you learn in audio school but it does get a bit boring when Jeff rabbits on about it and in particular when he starts telling newbies to go and buy the real thing...but I will concede he is right.
 
Anyway, I will one day get a screen capture program and do some tutorials...I'm always broke because I'm an unsuccessful polymath...always too busy at the coal face of new ideas...or this is how it seems.  But I think if you listen to this https://thedigitalpoet55....-organik-eye/ and read over what I've just read you might get a better understanding of how to mix in Sonar and how Sonar is a complete mixing environment and how all the components interact with one another to create "a sound" a very musical sound but I'd be happy to answer any questions...I haven't really spoke about how I set up the mix and effects buss's which I use a similar technique but it is slightly different-this is where I use the tape emulator but that's another day.
 
Cheers Ben 

synkrotron
Nice write up Ben.
 
I'm in a quandary now, because I had all but given up on anything to do with the ProChannel and its plug-ins, which I know is a waste, having spent so much money on the extra bits and pieces. I do not have the skills to set up compressors and what have you from scratch and, unlike third party plug-ins, the PC plugs do not come with presets, which would at least give me a starting point.
 
I bought the VUMT plug a couple of years ago, when Jeff recommended them to me, but since then I have never got to grips with them.
 
I am currently trying to mix a project that wasn't recorded by me, and I am using that to try and understand gain staging and getting levels right through the signal path, and, to say the least, I am not having a good time. I'm mixing the project, and it sounds okay, but I have not been paying any mind to all the stuff that is being discussed in the Techniques forum lately.
 
I think I'm okay with the principles of sound sculpting with EQ in order to make room for everything. At least in theory... I'm still winging it when it comes to applying my cuts though.
 
Anyway, onwards and upwards, and thanks for your words above...
 
cheers
 
andy

Hey Andy, thanks...I'm just reporting my experiments...it's taken me 15 years to get to this point...although I've been to Audio School ugh...three degrees...none of them taught me the skills I have now...although I did pick up a tip or two but my point is it takes time...the last mix of yours that I had a listen to sounded pretty good...I was impressed.
 
Gain staging...it's a black art and one that I'm still making mistakes with...ADHD.  The thing is and I'm not sure the "pros" will agree...they tend to ignore me because I've offended their sense of propitiatory...lol...they should of course understand I have ADHD/ASD and I have a hard time keeping my mouth shut...oh and I waffle ;) but the thing is with gain staging...break it down into the individual components...don't worry about the master buss till the end...it does not matter if the master buss is clipping...oh the "pros" won't like that...as I said in my previous post...absolutely worry about the input that goes through the converter...but once it's in...all your trying to do is get each track to be even...aim for -18 to -12 db RMS and the closer to -12 the better...and it does not matter if the channel is in the red...in fact-in theory the emulator plugs all have a sweet spot...so going into the red can produce pleasing results...your going to do some levelling anyway so it's unlikely the channel will actually clip...only internally.  64 bit internal processing...not computing means that the dynamic range of the plugin is huge...I'd have to look up the number...even older 32 bit plugins have a huge dynamic range!!  Don't be afraid to use the gain stage or trim pot on each of the channel either...they are your best friend and one of the reasons Sonar is the best DAW in DAW land...the mixer actually behaves like a real mixer!!...amazing I know!!
 
Once you have set up the mix...i.e. the gain stage...then start bussing stuff...drums into a buss...sometimes bass and drums together...particularly for rock and pop...even a bit of parallel compression can do wonders for that sort of production...the 1176 Pro Channel actually lets you blend the wet and dry signal...so there is no need to parallel compress the old way...sorry your probably lost with this...effects buss are just as important in regards to gain staging too...make sure you aim for the -18 RMS again...I don't think that it's as important to go much higher...use the tape sim as a mild compressor and tone control...it's really cool for that...this should be first in the chain after EQ and effects...then use the console emulator just to round it out...http://blog.cakewalk.com/...lation-in-sonar/  this helps in choosing the type of emulator you need...just concentrate and train your ears to hear what's going on...I'm almost 40...so my hearing isn't what it's use to be!  You'd be amazed at what you can train your ears to hear...true story.
 
Finally use the gain stage on the master buss when you are ready for mastering and turn it down...I tend to listen to the track a few times...work out how far I am over...normal about 4db I then turn the gain stage down 6db...giving me about 3db of headroom for mastering...although I'm still working on this theory...I use the linear phase EQ to scoop some low and top end...then place the tape emulator over that...just to turn down the mix another db and catch the very top peaks finally a master buss console emulator...then I master as normal.
 
The point is gain staging...is done in stages...and all the time...you are constantly re-jigging the gain stage.
 
I don't have my audio school books with me...so I can't really help with compression settings...and the attack and release times don't really correspond with the pro channel attack and release.
 
Once I get some screen capture software...I will make some tute vids.
 
Ben

https://thedigitalpoet55.wordpress.com/2015/07/15/the-organik-dream/
 
This is a much better example...better recording!
 
Hi Andy...gosh normalizing tracks...I've never done that...but that is what gain staging using the trim within Sonar is for...it's much better to use the trim knob because you can go back and turn it up or down!! I'm not sure who is telling you should not turn the track up...if the track is suppose to be soft just be judicious...are you saying -6db peak...I hope so...just remember to turn the RMS meters on in Sonar.
 
Ben  

BenMMusTech
just remember to turn the RMS meters on in Sonar.

 
Yeah, Ben, I've done that now.
 
I'm also switching between Pre (to check gain) and Post (for mixing level). Am I doing that right?
 
I should start off my own topic on this, with the tracks involved...

Hi Jeff,
 
I think the problem is, for me at any rate, is that peeps like yourself are so used to looking at VU meters that you can read and see so much, where as all I see is a needle going up and down. It's probably going to take more time than I have left of my life to learn how to read one of those things, and fully understand what I am seeing.
 
I can understand, I guess, what you are saying, with regards to how the needle moves differently  when looking at compressed tracks versus uncompressed tracks. I can see, in my mind's eye, that the uncompressed track will send the needle up and down in large sweeps, whereas with a compressed track, the needle will tend to hover more or less around the same level.
 
I am trying though, really I am... And I've just finished one of my own projects so I suppose this is a good time to look at mixing specifically, rather than trying to compose something new...

batsbrew
people that record their signals too hot,
even if not peaking,
have 'crunchy' sounding mixes, to me.
 
using up all available headroom on each individual track,
is like chasing your tail.
gets you nowhere, quickly.

Exactly! The number one thing that I have learned over the last 15 years is that the better the recorded track, the better the overall mix.  Tracking, is a profession in its own.  

The issue is not who is right or wrong about using VU meters, it is that fundamentally, they are a tool in the change. If you did not have analog level meters, you can still mix very professionally. You don't need them to get great results. 
What you do need above all else are good ears!
Of course if you compress s signal the VU meters will not jump as much as uncompressed. Gee wiz!

VU neters are not compulsary but if you think of them as an added tool then you have more control over your monitoring.  Everywhere from input tracking to buses and your final stereo buss.
 
VU's are good for showing rms values ballistics aside.  Keeping all your track levels at the desired ref level such as -18 or -20 results in consistent rms VU levels across all your tracks before you even start to mix.  Peaks can survive within the headroom provided. 18 and 20 is enough headroom to handle peaks.
 
Now as you mix often you are just pushing up faders up part of the way in groups and things fall into good balance almost immediately.
 
-14 is a great rms ref level to work at. Still plenty of transient peaks but louder now and much less work to do in mastering. The compression and limiting over a -14 db master can be effective and very transparent.
 
I was watching ballistics again this morning over a master. I saw them swaying too smooth like making me look at the release setting in the main compressor. Speeding it up changed the ballistic again and the mix became more punchy, dynamic and hit a little harder.  Attack settings also effect this a lot.
 

Audio Verite is what we are talking about here...So Bat lets get this straight...there is one small element of crunch...which is on the vox yea??  Because I've tested the mixes on crappy phone speakers and they sound pretty solid to me-you can hear everything clear and dandy...which from my understanding is the key and the point!! Yea??
 
Ben

With digital level meters showing various db levels with different metering types, we have the means necessary to know how our signal is flowing through the channel, buss, and master. Of course you have to use some kind of metering to know these values so that you maintain an efficient signal flow. 
Whether that is an analog VU or digital level meter makes no difference to me as long as you know your levels. Seems like some of the information on this thread is making that much more complicated than it needs to be!
What am I missing hear?

I have always stated it is good to have both types of metering. VU rms and digital peak.  Back in the days I sometimes felt there was not enough interest in peak instantaneous levels with tape machines and things, it was always about rms.  When we shifted over to digital they got all careful about peak metering and seemed to have pushed rms metering aside. Most DAW's now are showing some form of rms indicator too. You just have to use it.  It is the actual body of the signal and the most important part so why not meter it nice.
 
Rms and peak combined they tell the whole story. Once some signals get real fast, transient and short, the VU is not going to show much. Peak readings mean more.
 
But you can put back the rms metering and keep that consistent across all parts of your signal flow and let the heights of the peaks vary. None of them will bring the clip light on. The headroom of the system will take care of it.  You still need some distance between the loudest peak in the recording and 0 dB FS though.  I don't see 10dB as being bad. 6 dB is cutting it fine in case something gets loud and it can.  It is not hard to add 6 dB to a snare hit.
 
 

Jeff Evans
Thanks guys appreciate it.  I don't mind talking about VU's and things at all.  I am more old school but definitely combined with newer concepts too.  Some of my early teachers were very precise about levels being consistent through a system or a chain of devices.  Metering for me just makes sense when you take the VU metering form the past and put it into the digital world we have now. And add peak metering at the same time.
 
Ben as you say you have been metering digitally now anyway.  Many DAW's put the rms level into their metering.  Some take it a little further.  The issue with how the modern DAW shows rms is that it is a small line that hovers a long way down on the scale and that rms indicator may not move that correctly either.  What I do like is the older VU with the needle on the scale and seeing it move the way it does.
 
That rms level now jumps right up to 0 dB VU now on our scale which is almost all the way over.  Our ref level is now very clear. The first job of the VU is to show level. (after calibration) The ballistics of a quality real VU are nice to look at.  VST's are doing a good job of it so far.  It is something that needs to be emulated just as much as say reverb does.  It may be hard to emulate something that moves so well in the physical world.  Could be like flanging.  The use of tape machines just produces a certain sound that way that can be very hard to emulate.
 

Actually it was the VU Meter on the Waves H-Comp which gave me the heads up...it's a needle VU, I was using it to set the attack and release of a very tricky track I was trying to master...it's sonic art piece-from my Honours project from last year, with filtering so the track is all over the place...I realized Id been a double dip****...I really needed to squash the first section of the piece...then I realized by way of the VU meters that I could use the wet and dry knob on the H-Comp I could have a nice squashed sound and a sightly less compressed sound...all because the VU meter gave me the hint.
 
Ben

ampfixer
I set up Sonars' meters to show RMS and Peak levels with the peaks locking. I'm not sure if I'm correct but my reasoning is to see where the transients are in relation to the body of the music. I can also see at a glance if the track is heavily compressed by simply looking at the space between the two meter signals.
 
I was using an old analogue system the other day and loved the old Tascam Vu meters. It would be cool if a meter bridge could be inserted into a DAW set-up. Something about those nice glowing meters.

You are correct John re:rms and peak meters in Sonar...the Pro Channel ones are very usable too...just be careful if you use either the console emulator or tape sim ones if you switch between peak and rms on these two device's it actually changes the sound of the devices...no ****...I've only just worked this out in the last couple of weeks...amazing. 
 
Ben