j boy
Max Output Level: -48 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2729
- Joined: 2005/03/24 19:46:28
- Location: Sunny Southern California
- Status: offline
RE: RMS Levels
2008/12/11 18:45:00
(permalink)
What's important is you leave yourself enough headroom to "mix into" as you sum signal paths.
|
John
Forum Host
- Total Posts : 30467
- Joined: 2003/11/06 11:53:17
- Status: offline
RE: RMS Levels
2008/12/11 18:47:48
(permalink)
Well it can be done with good solid signals by simply lowering the faders. Its better then having to raise them.
|
j boy
Max Output Level: -48 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2729
- Joined: 2005/03/24 19:46:28
- Location: Sunny Southern California
- Status: offline
RE: RMS Levels
2008/12/11 19:02:38
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: John
Well it can be done with good solid signals by simply lowering the faders. Its better then having to raise them.
Which changes your gain staging. Might lead to a sound you like, might not. Faders should be used for mixing, not gain staging. IOW, start your mix with all faders up at zero, where their resolution is maximum. Also leaves you most "throw" for fades. This is basic stuff, not specific to DAW... I use my trims to set every channel to about -12 dB peaks coming in, which means sometimes a boost if it's a weak signal, sometimes attenuate if it's a strong one. Check after every plugin using Free Gain to make sure the gain is still in this range, not creeping up or down. Then when I'm done every fader is at zero with track outputs at -12 and whole mix, after summing, is between -3 and -6 dB depending on how many busses summed etc. Now I can use the faders for their intended purpose which is mixing.
|
John
Forum Host
- Total Posts : 30467
- Joined: 2003/11/06 11:53:17
- Status: offline
RE: RMS Levels
2008/12/11 19:20:32
(permalink)
Which changes your gain staging. Might lead to a sound you like, might not. Faders should be used for mixing, not gain staging. IOW, start your mix with all faders up at zero, where their resolution is maximum. Also leaves you most "throw" for fades. This is basic stuff, not specific to DAW... Thats what I am talking about mixing when lowering the faders. I use my trims to set every channel to about -12 dB peaks coming in, which means sometimes a boost if it's a weak signal, sometimes attenuate if it's a strong one. Check after every plugin using Free Gain to make sure the gain is still in this range, not creeping up or down. Then when I'm done every fader is at zero with track outputs at -12 and whole mix, after summing, is between -3 and -6 dB depending on how many busses summed etc.
I use the faders only. Maybe its because I use an MC.
post edited by John - 2008/12/11 20:01:17
|
Wiz
Max Output Level: -77 dBFS
- Total Posts : 699
- Joined: 2006/04/29 22:20:47
- Location: Bundaberg Australia
- Status: offline
RE: RMS Levels
2008/12/11 19:46:45
(permalink)
Dont forget offset mode...8)...
once I have my "static" fader mix set up, I then make a note of the setting of each fader, go into offset mode, reduce the faders by that amount, then out of offset mode and reset all the faders to 0.
Now i do my mix automation, using the maximum resolution on the fader...
there are many ways to skin the cat...8)...not that I endorse the skinning of cats....I like cats, but alas...I digress...
8)
cheers
Wiz
|
blueoneblue
Max Output Level: -84 dBFS
- Total Posts : 314
- Joined: 2008/01/23 19:20:29
- Location: Tustin, CA
- Status: offline
RE: RMS Levels
2008/12/11 21:45:00
(permalink)
Thanks for the discussion and all of the pointers. I guess I should break out my Owinski engineering book I bought about 8 months ago when I first started recording. At the time it was a bit over my head(it still might be) and decided to keep it simplle.
Thanks again
Robert Anthony
Applesoggy Stuff I use: Sonar 7 Producer Digitech GNX4 Some sort of laptop Turion 64X2 Chip 3 gig Ram Epiphone Casino, Xaviere XV600, home built tele copy, Hofner bass, Epiphone acoustics Cheap midi keyboard Baldwin organ from the 70's
|
tarsier
Max Output Level: -45 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3029
- Joined: 2003/11/07 11:51:35
- Location: 6 feet under
- Status: offline
RE: RMS Levels
2008/12/12 10:57:40
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: Wiz
but relationships between instruments, good dynamics control, space, depth, dynamic change...all those things are consistent....and are helped by a consistent approach to tracking and mixing...
it also helps a lot with ear fatigue, repeatable mixing, etc etc etc...seriously.
I'm with Wiz on this. Everything he's said is IMO the correct way to approach recording. Bob Katz K-System doesn't just work for mixing/mastering, it is excellent for tracking as well because it focuses more on the sound than where the meters lie. Since digital has no "headroom" in the normal sense and since early digital recording had resolution issues (to put it mildly) the practice became to record so that your peaks came as close to 0 dBFS as possible without going over. (Price Is Right recording). But since nowadays we have really good A/D converters with even the bad ones having a dynamic range of 100 dB and really good linearity throughout that range, it's not nearly as important to get as close to 0 as possible. Instead you should calibrate the actual SPL of your speakers to an RMS reference on your meters--which is what the K-System is. And then once things are calibrated and you gain experience with how the various loudnesses sound/feel, you can set levels using only your ears and you won't clip. Katz' K-System is perfectly fine to use for recording, except that maybe might want to go for a "K-31" system. But that's the beauty of the K-System. You can choose however much "headroom" you want in your digital system, but the SPL reference remains constant. Your ears become your level setting tools, and that is how it should be IMO. Film sound guys have done it this way for years. I don't know why the music guys don't.
|
John
Forum Host
- Total Posts : 30467
- Joined: 2003/11/06 11:53:17
- Status: offline
RE: RMS Levels
2008/12/12 11:23:48
(permalink)
Katz' K-System is perfectly fine to use for recording, except that maybe might want to go for a "K-31" system. But that's the beauty of the K-System. You can choose however much "headroom" you want in your digital system, but the SPL reference remains constant. Your ears become your level setting tools, and that is how it should be IMO. Film sound guys have done it this way for years. I don't know why the music guys don't.
One reason is music is a living breathing amorphous thing. I am not opposed to the "K system" but I don't want my stuff to be like any one else's stuff. Each song/composition is its own thing and should be given a blank slate as much as possible. It should evolve to what it can be. Doing this "by the numbers" is making it as if its a cookie cutter thing. A mass produced item that music is not well suited to. Film and video are using sound in a very different way and it is unfortunate that some of their techniques have migrated over to music recording. It may solve some problems for those that want to not put the time and hard work into creating a finished sound that gives the very best possible interpretation to a song but it is only one of many ways to work with audio. Just another point of view.
|
tarsier
Max Output Level: -45 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3029
- Joined: 2003/11/07 11:51:35
- Location: 6 feet under
- Status: offline
RE: RMS Levels
2008/12/12 11:33:00
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: John
Katz' K-System is perfectly fine to use for recording, except that maybe might want to go for a "K-31" system. But that's the beauty of the K-System. You can choose however much "headroom" you want in your digital system, but the SPL reference remains constant. Your ears become your level setting tools, and that is how it should be IMO. Film sound guys have done it this way for years. I don't know why the music guys don't.
One reason is music is a living breathing amorphous thing. I am not opposed to the "K system" but I don't want my stuff to be like any one else's stuff. You obviously don't understand the K-System if you think it will somehow homogenize your music.
Each song/composition is its own thing and should be given a blank slate as much as possible. It should evolve to what it can be. Doing this "by the numbers" is making it as if its a cookie cutter thing. A mass produced item that music is not well suited to. Film and video are using sound in a very different way and it is unfortunate that some of their techniques have migrated over to music recording. It may solve some problems for those that want to not put the time and hard work into creating a finished sound that gives the very best possible interpretation to a song but it is only one of many ways to work with audio. Just another point of view.
I'm dumbfounded that you could actually say that. Your point of view seems based on your ignorance of what the K-System is. Have you tried recording using a calibrated monitoring system?
|
John
Forum Host
- Total Posts : 30467
- Joined: 2003/11/06 11:53:17
- Status: offline
RE: RMS Levels
2008/12/12 11:54:01
(permalink)
My system is calibrated and has been so for years. I also know it like the back of my hand. I also have looked into the K system and saw no reason for me to change anything I do. If you think I don't know about this stuff then we are at an impasse. Sorry you had to approach this in the way you did in your answer. Clearly you like the K system I don't.
|
j boy
Max Output Level: -48 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2729
- Joined: 2005/03/24 19:46:28
- Location: Sunny Southern California
- Status: offline
RE: RMS Levels
2008/12/12 12:40:33
(permalink)
Proper gain structure isn't an artistic descision... it's fundamental engineering practice. If the signal's level at the first plugin in the fx bin is not optimal, nothing you do at the fader (post fx) is going to change that.
|
John
Forum Host
- Total Posts : 30467
- Joined: 2003/11/06 11:53:17
- Status: offline
RE: RMS Levels
2008/12/12 12:45:31
(permalink)
Proper gain structure isn't an artistic descision... it's fundamental engineering practice. If the signal's level at the first plugin in the fx bin is not optimal, nothing you do at the fader (post fx) is going to change that.
And who said its not? Or that I don't know how to get a good signal? One thing to keep in mind here is great recordings were made long before the K system was even conceived. Or before Mr. Katz was born.
post edited by John - 2008/12/12 12:55:28
|
Wiz
Max Output Level: -77 dBFS
- Total Posts : 699
- Joined: 2006/04/29 22:20:47
- Location: Bundaberg Australia
- Status: offline
RE: RMS Levels
2008/12/12 17:30:23
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: John
Proper gain structure isn't an artistic descision... it's fundamental engineering practice. If the signal's level at the first plugin in the fx bin is not optimal, nothing you do at the fader (post fx) is going to change that.
And who said its not? Or that I don't know how to get a good signal?
One thing to keep in mind here is great recordings were made long before the K system was even conceived. Or before Mr. Katz was born.
everyone play nice....8)...or I will send you to bed without desert...8).. Everyone here is right. The K system is cool...but it is only an arbitrary thing. Film people have been doing a similar thing for years, and when I read about the K system in Bob Katz's book, which by the way has virtually no plot, and very little character development...8)..., he talked about that....and how long time engineers, usually ended up working at a really similar actual volume coming out of the speakers... John-- I wonder what SPL you are monitoring at , and I wonder if it is close to 83db SPL?? I would bet a nice big cold beer its around there....8)... Everyone who is happy with the way they mix, and the mixes that come out of their room are doing it the way they should. The K System, made my eyes roll back in my head a few times when I started reading about it....but I perservered and went through the set up, with Pink Noise and a SPL meter, and made the markings for K14 and K20 on my monitor controller....and have been using it for about 12 months... For me, in my audio development, every now and then, you come across a simple piece of advice or teaching, that has a large impact on my mixes, this is one of them for me. of course each to his own..and whatever works...works... but if you have nothing better to do sometime, run an SPL meter up at your normal mix volume and let me know what it is...I would bet its around 83dB... Cheers Wiz PS, I think I here Santa revving up those reindeer....8)...
|
John
Forum Host
- Total Posts : 30467
- Joined: 2003/11/06 11:53:17
- Status: offline
RE: RMS Levels
2008/12/12 17:48:54
(permalink)
everyone play nice....8)...or I will send you to bed without desert...8)..
Everyone here is right.
The K system is cool...but it is only an arbitrary thing. Film people have been doing a similar thing for years, and when I read about the K system in Bob Katz's book, which by the way has virtually no plot, and very little character development...8)..., he talked about that....and how long time engineers, usually ended up working at a really similar actual volume coming out of the speakers...
John-- I wonder what SPL you are monitoring at , and I wonder if it is close to 83db SPL?? I would bet a nice big cold beer its around there....8)...
Everyone who is happy with the way they mix, and the mixes that come out of their room are doing it the way they should.
The K System, made my eyes roll back in my head a few times when I started reading about it....but I perservered and went through the set up, with Pink Noise and a SPL meter, and made the markings for K14 and K20 on my monitor controller....and have been using it for about 12 months...
For me, in my audio development, every now and then, you come across a simple piece of advice or teaching, that has a large impact on my mixes, this is one of them for me.
of course each to his own..and whatever works...works...
but if you have nothing better to do sometime, run an SPL meter up at your normal mix volume and let me know what it is...I would bet its around 83dB...
Cheers
Wiz
PS, I think I here Santa revving up those reindeer....8)... Very rational position.
|