Recording levels

[nikkdust]

Was wondering how hot you guys record at? Just in general.

 

[Vocalpoint]

When I track - no more than -18dbFS to -14dbFS on any track that is not drums/percs or a maybe an electronic sound with tons of transients.

Drums - I will allow the meters short term hops up as high as -8dbFS

Master buss has nothing but a limiter on it and that level must conform to be no hotter than -3dbFS at all times during tracking.

AND - the secret sauce is the obscure but so essential Hornet Plugins VU Meter MK4 on every track.

It's Auto Gain feature has been a game changer for me.

VP

 

[nikkdust]

When I track - no more than -18dbFS to -14dbFS on any track that is not drums/percs or a maybe an electronic sound with tons of transients.

Drums - I will allow the meters short term hops up as high as -8dbFS

Master buss has nothing but a limiter on it and that level must conform to be no hotter than -3dbFS at all times during tracking.

AND - the secret sauce is the obscure but so essential Hornet Plugins VU Meter MK4 on every track.

It's Auto Gain feature has been a game changer for me.

VP

Ok. Do you peak at -18dbFS, or is it average?

 

[Vocalpoint]

Ok. Do you peak at -18dbFS, or is it average?

These are all average ballpark starting points. The bottom line is gain staging. Can definitely tell you I do not subscribe to any concept of "overs", any red lights flashing on any track, any peaking at -0.00001 dbFS or any of the other myths and misconceptions that are out there.

My background is very old school (recording in the 70's and 80's) when headroom ruled, mixes were punchy and no one was reaching for the volume knob due to the Loudness Wars.

I ensure my final mixes conform to a general LUFS of between -14 to -11 and everything sounds "in pocket".

Using the Hornet plugin now - and it's auto gain staging calibrated to the standard -18dbFS - most of my stuff just mixes itself.

If one uses common sense when tracking - everything will simply fall into place.

VP

 

[sintil8]

AND - the secret sauce is the obscure but so essential Hornet Plugins VU Meter MK4 on every track.

It's Auto Gain feature has been a game changer for me.

VP

That's an interesting plugin, as you say obscure, Having watched the demo it has a lot to offer, money well spent I think.
Thanks for the info.
Kind regards

 

[Balinas]

Plugin

That's an interesting plugin, as you say obscure, Having watched the demo it has a lot to offer, money well spent I think.
Thanks for the info.
Kind regards

Today, maybe tomorrow, the Hornet plugins appear to be 88% off! I got the Hornet Plugins VU Meter MK4 for about 90 Cents US. And I will be trying it out.

 

[Jemusic]

I use either real VU meters or very good software ones set at various ref levels such as 0 dB VU = either -12 dB FS, -14 dB FS, -18 dB FS or -20 dB FS as the ref levels. You can put these on the input channels and monitor rms levels before the signals even hit the track. 90% of most material will move a VU meter very well. Just aim for a nice 0 dB VU meter reading on the way in and you will never have issues with clipping ever. Do this for all tracks and you will have excellent rms consistency over all your tracks. For instruments with fast transients like drums use your peak metering to ensure the loudest hits are well under 0 dB FS.

I also got the Hornet meter and yes its OK but just be aware of the fact that when its in AUTO mode etc it actually effects the signal level leaving the meter. Something that normal meters do not do. There does not seem to be a manual on it either that I can see. For me VU meters are still nicer and easier to read than any bar graph meter. Bar graphs dont tell you as much about the signal as the ballistics of a well deigned hardware VU meter that is for sure. The closest software meter to the hardware meters I found was the Waves VU meter.

 

[nikkdust]

Soo... Is the Hornet a good way to go ?

 

[sintil8]

Hornet, my take, I think I will use it as a ref tool and maybe as a starting point for getting an impression of levels.
I have yet to try it out, so cannot comment if it's the way to go or not.
However, If you just want a ref then as @Jemusic says the ballistic on a VU have their uses also. I suggest each to his own and what works for you.

Best regards

 

[Craig Anderton]

Here's a detail about fader levels when mixing...the lower the level, the harder it is to make precise edits because the dB range is compressed into a small space. After tracking, I select all tracks and move the faders to a comfortable zone, for example, the tracks that will be mixed at higher levels have fader settings around -3 to -6 dB.

Also, the Input Controls (outlined in orange) are very helpful if track is recorded at level that causes a mixer fader to not be where you want it to be.



Just remember that the input controls set the level going into the mixer channel. If there's a level-sensitive insert effect, it's probably simpler to inserts a Mixtool after the level-sensitive effect.

 

[Vocalpoint]

Soo... Is the Hornet a good way to go ?

It is the fastest way I have found to get any track right into the ballpark.

My use of this plugin is to save time not to allow it to run the show. Like others - AFTER Hornet does it's thing - I take the wheel and lean on old school VU meters etc to complete the overall work. Regardless of all the tools available - I still need to assume control.

As long as there are no red clip lights flashing and my specific limits (described earlier) are not being violated - I know it is going to sound great. Hornet simply makes gain staging about 100 times faster than messing around track by track - manually

VP

 

[Edu]

Here's a detail about fader levels when mixing...the lower the level, the harder it is to make precise edits because the dB range is compressed into a small space. After tracking, I select all tracks and move the faders to a comfortable zone, for example, the tracks that will be mixed at higher levels have fader settings around -3 to -6 dB.

Also, the Input Controls (outlined in orange) are very helpful if track is recorded at level that causes a mixer fader to not be where you want it to be.

View attachment 519

Just remember that the input controls set the level going into the mixer channel. If there's a level-sensitive insert effect, it's probably simpler to inserts a Mixtool after the level-sensitive effect.

Very good idea.
Thanks for sharing

 

[Jemusic]

What Craig is saying is great and true but this also does not mean that you should set all your faders to unity gain either and do the mix elsewhere eg with the trim controls etc. I have seen this touted as the only way but its wrong. You get no visual feedback from the faders as to what parts are louder and softer in the mix. There is a compromise where you can have it both ways. The faders mostly end up higher but still you can also see variances in all of them and which ones are down lower meaning you have got those parts sitting further back in the mix. eg a pad sound.

Remember back in the analog tape days the VU's on the tape machine were all ticking 0 dB VU mostly (meaning consistent rms levels over ALL tracks) and the mix was created with the faders on the console. You can still apply this approach now. It actually works best and no clipping in sight either.

Also with our current mixer faders in software you can always increase the height of the faders to quite a bit larger than normal during the mix if you have a decent monitor. Then you can actually make finer adjustments lower down. For faders lower down you can also hold down SHIFT for even finer adjustments. With Faderport holding SHIFT and moving the actual slider will not give you the fine adjustment. You need to hold SHIFT and use the mouse on the software mixer fader instead. The Faderport slider will follow suit.

 

[Craig Anderton]

this also does not mean that you should set all your faders to unity gain either and do the mix elsewhere eg with the trim controls etc. I have seen this touted as the only way but its wrong.

Yes indeed, thank you for adding that clarification. The input trims are excellent for handling corner cases. For example, with track-to-track recording, the faders feeding the main bus may be low, but the track they're feeding might have saturation or a dynamics processor that needs to be hit with a much higher level. Also, when I group doubled tracks, I want their fader levels to be at the same physical position. But one of the doubled tracks might have a processor that brings up the level a dB or two. The input trim can pad it down so that the faders have the same physical position on the mixer. This also gives me a visual cue that the faders are grouped.