Freesound Forums

No I'm bored of this post matey.

The volume levels that an ADC imparts on to ur audio is tiny and is insignificant compared to any audio over the top including background noise... dithering algorithms etc. And to be honest i'd want to keep any noise that my pre-amp was making.

I think people should get it out of their head that things need to be loud. The 24bit enviroment gives a huge amount of flexibility and people shouldn't stress about getting levels in to their DAW that are maxed out as the audio will suffer.

I've offered evidence that 24bit allows this flexibility with links and you've chosen to ignore it and given me your double whammy ADC and pre amp noise that is clouding ur audio.

If only that knob went to 11 eh?

No, actually my knobs go to 12!!!!!! Take a look.

http://www.ericfortin.com/12.jpg

i think you mean higher. The higher the SNR is the more dynamic range there is between the signal and the noise.

With 24bit and good equipment (and nowadays even semi-pro portable is becoming good) there is not much panic about the noise - noise you record on location is much louder. I am surprised that there was so much debate about such basic matter. Just make shure it does not clip and record at appropriate values - if I record soft sounds I don't push them close to 0 because they sound awful, but if you record something with excessively loud peaks that stand way above the rest of the recording - you might even benefit form a quality limiter or compressor. (Actually - someone said never ever compress - that is kinda purist approach - in music recording many vocals, bass guitars, etc. are recorded with compressors already and once again compressed during mixing if needed)

But with 24 bit and field-recording - just attenuate the gain and record it more silent - you can raise the volume and compress in post-production.

Maybe there was some confusion between you who argued - if someone was speaking about peaks in the -5dBFS to 0dBFS region that is ok - but another one insisted about having some more headroom - he probably meant the RMS values being in that region (ca. at -20 to - 14dBFS).

The choice how loud to allow the peaks to be is aesthetic - does the string quartet sound fine if peaks are at 0? Or would you normalize quiet breathing to 0 (if you want it to sound natural?) - NO.

But there is nothing wrong for massive and bass heavy sounds to peak at 0 (but not clipping! - although clipping of high-end mastering AD converters is one of the tricks to achieve transparent excessive loudness in contemporary "loudness wars" mastering).

Maybe some more information you never asked for: http://www.digido.com/bob-katz/level-practices-part-2-includes-the-k-system.html

I also recommend Bob Katz's book about mastering audio.

And to repeat the true cliche: use your ears - also when recording - when it sounds fine, it is fine!
peace!

Satoration
I am surprised that there was so much debate about such basic matter. Just make shure it does not clip and record at appropriate values

lol well what am I supposed to do if people are telling me I'm wrong when I'm telling them they don't need to record as hot as they possibly can? You basically just summed up my whole argument.

Mike-T3

yes, but your definition of "appropriate levels" are much different than mine, as well as the rest of the industry. From what you have said -12 to -18db peak levels are ok to record at. This is utterly untrue in my opinion.

Satoration - if you mean levels generally peaking between 0 and -5db on your peak meter, then yes your statement is perfectly correct. If you agree that -12 to -18 peak levels are ok, then I would have to disagree.

Hi guys,

I just pointed out, that you probably talk about two different things - peak levels VS. RMS values.

I'm a "headroom" guy myself, so I would take sides with "mike-t3" probably if this would be a (loudness) war, otherwise if "ejfortin" is for a reasonably loud (and clear) recordings - then I agree. But do keep in mind that normalizing or recording to 0 peak of quiet sounds is of no use.
Regarding that, you could really read at least the part called "Full scale peaks and SNR" from the article I linked in my previous post. I think it is logical and useful information:

Full scale peaks and SNR

It is a common myth that audible signal-to-noise ratio will deteriorate if a recording does not reach full scale digital. On the contrary, the actual loudness of the program determines the program's perceived signal-to-noise ratio. The position of the listener's monitor level control determines the perceived loudness of the system noise. If two similar music programs reach 0 on the K-system's average meter, even if one peaks to full scale and the other does not, both programs will have similar perceived SNR. Especially with 20-24 bit converters, the mix does not have to reach full scale (peak). Use the averaging meter and your ears as you normally would, and with K-20, even if the peaks don't hit the top, the mixdown is still considered normal and ready for mastering, with no audible loss of SNR.

And to define what I meant with "appropriate levels" - the levels at which certain sounds sound well... if it is a whisper it should stay a whisper (if it is not meant to be some special FX - noise of giants' nostrils or something) and if it is heavy machinery it should be heavy machinery, not mice playing with needles...
Dynamics is what makes sounds and music alive and dramatic and causes emotional impact!

Much is dependant on calibration of metering and recording levels and playback monitor levels - Bob Katz (his web-site and article I linked) is very informative in those subjects.

best regards

Yea, i've been through Bob Katz's website. There is great info there and in his book too.