|
Log in to post
|
Print Thread |
|
|
|
|
|
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
|
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 10,813
Veteran
|
OP
Veteran
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 10,813 |
The statement below was found in the notes for a beginning mixing class. Agree or disagree and why?
Recording/mixing at well below max level (-10 dBFS to -20 dBFS) allows for louder and cleaner masters. After all, the end product is what matters most. The old axiom of “use up all the bits” no longer applies in the age of 24-bit recordings and gear with lower noise floors.
Jim Fogle - 2025 BiaB (Build 1128) RB (Build 5) - Ultra+ PAK DAWs: Cakewalk Sonar - Standalone: Zoom MRS-8 Laptop: i3 Win 10, 8GB ram 500GB HDD Desktop: i7 Win 11, 12GB ram 256GB SSD, 4 TB HDD Music at: https://fogle622.wix.com/fogle622-audio-home
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
|
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 8,675
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 8,675 |
The statement below was found in the notes for a beginning mixing class. Agree or disagree and why?
Recording/mixing at well below max level (-10 dBFS to -20 dBFS) allows for louder and cleaner masters. After all, the end product is what matters most. The old axiom of “use up all the bits” no longer applies in the age of 24-bit recordings and gear with lower noise floors. It's a true statement but is more applicable to a beginner mixer. A good, clean recording at a higher level will require less, if any effects such as compression, eq and limiting to bring the dynamics up to level. It's always better to get the recording right than to fix it during post. With beginning mixer, it's also better to be safe than sorry so there is something to work with if the artist is gone and the recording is crud.
BIAB 2025:RB 2025, Latest builds: Dell Optiplex 7040 Desktop; Windows-10-64 bit, Intel Core i7-6700 3.4GHz CPU and 16 GB Ram Memory.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
|
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 10,327
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 10,327 |
Disagree:
You want to have the levels set just far enough down so that you don't exceed 0dB and venture into clipping. -6dB for peaks is fine. But you could push it up further if you needed to. I tend to work around -3dB on peaks.
If you record too low, yes, you can turn it up, but, when you do, you also turn up the noise and hiss that is in the track. As you turn it up, you raise the noise floor as well. -20dB is way down. That level is lower than where I run my vocal doubling secondary tracks and you can't hear them unless you solo the vocal buss. They are not recorded at that level..... they are recorded up just under 0dB, but I pull the faders back for the final mix.
You want to have the strongest signal level going in that you can possibly get without clipping. That keeps the source material well above the noise floor.
I prefer to have nice strong levels in the tracks and then pull them down for the final mix if that's needed, rather than going the other way.
Just my 2 cents
You can find my music at: www.herbhartley.comAdd nothing that adds nothing to the music. You can make excuses or you can make progress but not both. The magic you are looking for is in the work you are avoiding.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
|
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 8,675
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 8,675 |
I agree Herb. I try for around -6 db too.
BIAB 2025:RB 2025, Latest builds: Dell Optiplex 7040 Desktop; Windows-10-64 bit, Intel Core i7-6700 3.4GHz CPU and 16 GB Ram Memory.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
|
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,324
Expert
|
|
Expert
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,324 |
Well....
We all have our particular recording protocols that work for us.
For me...I've always recorded individual tracks to about -12db...give or take a couple....and I've never had any level issues at any stage.
Therefore, I see no benefit in recording at a higher input level.
Back in 2010 I'd sent (3) of my tunes to be mastered at Buffalo Sound (now called the The Ranch I think).
He said to send all raw tracks at -12db.
(He also added lead axe and B3 tracks which was very cool)
Most of us are in the digital realm so noise should not be a big issue as far as recording levels.
So...that recommended level (-12db) has more to do with the head room comfort necessary with summing of all tracks along with FX/signal processing at the stereo mix.
If you're using tape, different story, then as close to 0db is best but you can even push that level in the tape realm without issues.
If the end result has been achieved regardless of the path chosen all is well.
That's my take on it.
Carry on....
Last edited by chulaivet1966; 09/20/15 04:40 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 5,085
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 5,085 |
IF you are using plugins that emulate vintage hardware and you are recording/mixing in 24bit, then the "sweet spot" is said to be -18dbfs and it's suggested to use the trim on your DAW (or a trim plugin first in your fx chain) since the signal is prefader going into the plugins. This is from Graham at the Recording Revolution: http://therecordingrevolution.com/2013/11/25/do-you-know-how-to-read-your-meters/And I've read long discussions about that from some other places too. But personally, I just keep the peaks somewhere between -12 and -6. I use Realtracks and rarely record anything other than vocals. And i found the above advice (-18dbfs)to not work well for me mixing with the FX I use. YMMV
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
|
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 19,831
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 19,831 |
Jim,
Thanks for starting this thread. I'm finding it very interesting reading.
Noel
MY SONGS...Audiophile BIAB 2025
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
|
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 19,831
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 19,831 |
IF you are using plugins that emulate vintage hardware and you are recording/mixing in 24bit, then the "sweet spot" is said to be -18dbfs and it's suggested to use the trim on your DAW (or a trim plugin first in your fx chain) since the signal is prefader going into the plugins. This is from Graham at the Recording Revolution: http://therecordingrevolution.com/2013/11/25/do-you-know-how-to-read-your-meters/And I've read long discussions about that from some other places too. But personally, I just keep the peaks somewhere between -12 and -6. I use Realtracks and rarely record anything other than vocals. And i found the above advice (-18dbfs)to not work well for me mixing with the FX I use. YMMV Hi Josie, That's interesting that you mention -18 dBFS. I find that for my individual instrument tracks (wav), I usually have them set so that the meters, on average, oscillate around the -18 dB mark in Reaper. For my vocals, they're usually a little higher... I estimate somewhere around -12 dB. For the Master Volume, though, I set it so that it peaks a little under 0 dB. I arrived at these values purely by trial and error and I've stayed with them because they seem to work for me. (This is the main reason that I run Reaper with a version 3 skin... I like the extra height of the meters that v3 has.) Since I have Ozone as an FX in the Master fader, I find that I need to adjust the Master fader when I play around with Ozone's presets. Regards, Noel
MY SONGS...Audiophile BIAB 2025
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
|
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 10,327
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 10,327 |
Just for the record. I never... well let's just say, rarely.... I rarely use numbers to determine my levels. I record the track and look at the wave forms. This is my normal looking track view. The waveforms are 75% or more of the track. If they are more like straight lines, they were too weak and get recorded again after I adjust the input level up. It's rare that I overload anything I record because I have the max input levels set in my interface's software control panel front end.  DUST ON THE FLOOR This is a screen shot closeup of the vocal from another studio. Notice the "overs" starting around the center and going to the right (forward) from that point. The interesting thing is that listening to this, the over's don't seem to wreak to much havoc in the tune. I try to avoid this kind of thing in my studio, but there's very little control over stuff that comes in the door.  IN A WORLD WITHOUT YOU I included the links to the songs I referenced so you can hear the results. The way I determine my levels is by looking at the wave forms and also by observing the meters as I'm in playback mode and record mode. I adjust levels to stay out of the red. An occasional red blink is OK but I do not want to have constant red showing up in either mode. I look at the outputs and then after a render or export, I look carefully at the final wave to see how many peaks are touching 0dB both in the original wave and in the converted MP3 file. Just for grins, I set my levels up a bit and exported this. This is what I don't want to see. 
You can find my music at: www.herbhartley.comAdd nothing that adds nothing to the music. You can make excuses or you can make progress but not both. The magic you are looking for is in the work you are avoiding.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 7,913
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 7,913 |
Does anyone want to learn some of the terminology involved and how that matters for setting input levels? If so, this is what I picked up in EE-638 from Purdue University many moons ago.
The quantization signal to noise ratio is 48 dB better in a 24 bit recording compared to a 16 bit recording. The rule of thumb is that the QNSR improves 6 dB for every bit of the A/D conversion at hand. To hear how this works in the reverse, take a nice clean 24 bit signal and then do bit reduction to 16 bit (most won't notice), then bit reduce to 12 bit (you will probably hear this) and then 8 bit, and you'll definitely harken back to the old Castle Wolfenstein game days with it's crudely rendered words and sounds.
Quantization noise is what happens with the signal that is effectively zero and the A/D has to decide if the signal is actually all zeros, or all zeros except for a 1 in the LSB.
2^16, or 65,536 'shelves' to stick the signal on with 16 bit recording, and 2^24 or 16,777,216 potential shelves to stick the signal on with 24 bit recording.
The quantization of the signal for a 24 bit at such a finer resolution is what accounts for the 48 dB better QSNR.
Translation: There is no harm in recording near full-scale use at 24 bit resolution, but there's also WAY WAY WAY more wiggle room (maybe another WAY in there) with 24 bit vs. 16 bit. I state that there's no harm because you can scale down the full scale tracks after you've made the recording, but the chance to be introducing quantization noise at let's say -18 dBfs, is for all intents and purposes non-existent.
Last edited by rockstar_not; 09/21/15 04:27 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recording, Mixing, Performance and Production
|
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 10,327
Veteran
|
|
Veteran
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 10,327 |
I'll pass on the big fancy words. As long as I can get the results I'm looking for..... "a couple dB lower or higher" works for me". 
You can find my music at: www.herbhartley.comAdd nothing that adds nothing to the music. You can make excuses or you can make progress but not both. The magic you are looking for is in the work you are avoiding.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ask sales and support questions about Band-in-a-Box using natural language.
ChatPG's knowledge base includes the full Band-in-a-Box User Manual and sales information from the website.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Video: Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Mac®: VST3 Plugin Support
Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Mac® now includes support for VST3 plugins, alongside VST and AU. Use them with MIDI or audio tracks for even more creative possibilities in your music production.
Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Macs®: VST3 Plugin Support
Video: Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Mac®: Using VST3 Plugins
Join the conversation on our forum.
Band-in-a-Box 2025 for Mac Videos
With the release of Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Mac, we’re rolling out a collection of brand-new videos on our YouTube channel. We’ll also keep this forum post updated so you can easily find all the latest videos in one convenient spot.
From overviews of new features and walkthroughs of the 202 new RealTracks, to highlights of XPro Styles PAK 8, Xtra Styles PAKs 18, the 2025 49-PAK, and in-depth tutorials — you’ll find everything you need to explore what’s new in Band-in-a-Box® 2025.
Reference this forum post for One-Stop Shopping of our Band-in-a-Box® 2025 Mac Videos — we’ll be adding more videos as they’re released!
Band-in-a-Box 2025 for Mac is Here!
Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Mac is here, packed with major new features and an incredible collection of available new content! This includes 202 RealTracks (in Sets 449-467), plus 20 bonus Unreleased RealTracks in the 2025 49-PAK. There are new RealStyles, MIDI SuperTracks, Instrumental Studies, “Songs with Vocals” Artist Performance Sets, Playable RealTracks Set 4, two new sets of “RealDrums Stems,” XPro Styles PAK 8, Xtra Styles PAK 19, and more!
Special Offers
Upgrade to Band-in-a-Box® 2025 for Mac with savings of up to 50% on most upgrade packages during our special—available until July 31, 2025! Visit our Band-in-a-Box® packages page for all the purchase options available.
2025 Free Bonus PAK & 49-PAK Add-ons
We've packed our Free Bonus PAK & 49-PAK with some incredible Add-ons! The Free Bonus PAK is automatically included with most Band-in-a-Box® for Mac 2025 packages, but for even more Add-ons (including 20 Unreleased RealTracks!) upgrade to the 2025 49-PAK for only $49. You can see the full lists of items in each package, and listen to demos here.
If you have any questions, feel free to connect with us directly—we’re here to help!
Band-in-a-Box 2025 Italian Version is Here!
Cari amici
È stata aggerate la versione in Italiano del programma più amato dagli appassionati di musica, il nostro Band-in-a-Box.
Questo è il link alla nuova versione 2025.
Di seguito i link per scaricare il pacchetti di lingua italiana aggiornati per Band-in-a-Box e RealBand, anche per chi avesse già comprato la nuova versione in inglese.
Band-in-a-Box 2025 - Italiano
RealBand 2025 - Italiano
Band-in-a-Box 2025 French Version is Here!
Bonjour à tous,
Band-in-a-Box® 2025 pour Windows est disponible en Français.
Le téléchargement se fait à partir du site PG Music
Pour ceux qui auraient déjà acheté la version 2025 de Band-in-a-Box (et qui donc ont une version anglaise), il est possible de "franciser" cette version avec les patchs suivants:
BIAB 2025 - francisation
RealBand 2025 - francisation
Voilà, enjoy!
Band-in-a-Box 2025 German Version is Here!
Update Your Band-in-a-Box® 2025 to Build 1128 for Windows Today!
Already using Band-in-a-Box 2025 for Windows®? Download Build 1128 now from our Support Page to enjoy the latest enhancements and improvements from our team.
Stay up to date—get the latest update now!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forums58
Topics84,296
Posts777,395
Members39,612
| |
Most Online25,754
Jan 24th, 2025
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dansk
Deutsch - Windows
Español
Français - Windows
Italiano - Windows
Nederlands
Polski
Português
Svenskt
русский
Japanese
Simplified Chinese
Traditional Chinese
Korean