Go Back   Cockos Incorporated Forums > REAPER Forums > Recording Technologies and Techniques

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-11-2021, 02:43 PM   #41
Pashkuli
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: United Kingdom, T. Wells
Posts: 2,454
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
...they aren't as beginners going to be doing 80 track mixes with 100 plugins.
Have you seen a beginner to a bit more less-beginner mixes.
That is what they do - plugins all over the place, expecting it this way because with less it definitely did not sound like XYZ on the record\stream.

That is why beginners do not know how to prepare for a mixing.
That is why they think it must be this or that plugin, they still have not used in their chain.
They do not know how the process gets translated from devices to digital domain. And quite frankly, they do not care; no time for that.

And then they hear Loudness LUFS, streaming platforms recommendation...
Getting it to Loudness levels must be "the key". Let's Normalise by Loudness... Peaks go in the red. Nevermind, can't hear "red" anyway.
John Smith on the forum said it is floating point so the red on the track meter does not matter. Put limiter on the master and Normalise the Loudness.

Often (all the times) beginners do not care about the process, let alone about any preparation. They just want to throw plugins at the FX-slots, because XYZ uses them, so must they, in order to sound like XYZ.
Pashkuli is offline  
Old 08-11-2021, 03:28 PM   #42
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 29,254
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pashkuli View Post
Have you seen a beginner to a bit more less-beginner mixes.
That is what they do - plugins all over the place, expecting it this way because with less it definitely did not sound like XYZ on the record\stream.
Right, gain staging isn't the reason those mixes suck.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like.
karbomusic is offline  
Old 08-11-2021, 04:15 PM   #43
Stoneglow
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Posts: 119
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
^Ha! There's nothing wrong with being organized with levels, usually makes the entire job easier with less jumping around and compensating but it isn't hurting the audio and...

Gain staging is really an historical analog term that doesn't align well with digital, and for this reason we try not to call it that because it causes misinformed confusion that spreads like a virus which is what most of us want to avoid. That's right, we are in the middle of gain staging pandemic as I type this.

Regarding non-linear plugins that are "happy with minus some amount of dBFS". All that means is you give the plugin more signal, it does more of what it does, you give it less, it does less of what it does. But at the end of the day, you and your ears are what decides what that should be - they have knobs, turn them until you like what you hear.
Good advice and good to know. I did still Normalize Loudness and then revisit the drum tracks to make sure they didn't peak above -6LUFS. I understand it's not necessary but the detail oriented side of me just "felt" better with this step.

I'm also adjusting volume using Neutron 3 so it just felt better to have them go into their Visual Mixer (where I adjust volumes and pans) at the same volume.

May not make sense but didn't hurt I'm thinking. And I will definitely rely more and more on my ears and less and less on hard rules like this understanding it's all relative in the end.

Thanks!
Stoneglow is offline  
Old 08-11-2021, 04:15 PM   #44
Stoneglow
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Posts: 119
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mschnell View Post
Not of any significance in the digital world of Reaper.

-Michael
Thank you sir
Stoneglow is offline  
Old 08-11-2021, 04:26 PM   #45
Stoneglow
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Posts: 119
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pashkuli View Post
Since using "gain staging" in a DAW (nowadays) is a bit of misnomer, thus with my proposal to be substituted by the term "gain back-staging", you do not need to normalise by loudness each time you process your track\item\recording.
Thank you - I only normalized volume prior to putting any EQ, compressors, saturation, etc.. but good to know.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pashkuli View Post
I have never used Melodyne, Vocal rider, RX8 - can not help you with those. Vocal rider seems cool auto-automation tool though.

To make a good comparison between 'Noramilising (by Loudness)' and 'Manual RMS setup' (gain back-staging), maybe it is better to show us some examples (3~5 sec. of performance in original format, .wav or .aiff, .flac, .wv) before\after this normalisation.
Thanks, my good man - I think I've gotten my answer, mind you. So I think I'm good here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pashkuli View Post
What value would you like to achieve (in terms of loudness and RMS)?
I chose -23LUFS based on stuff I read but the real key was I wanted them all the same loudness. I understand now it's probably a moot point and unnecessary. Karbomusic was helpful.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pashkuli View Post
"To degrade the signal" after multiple renderings in what sense? As in stems for stem mastering or as in pre-mixing.
I'm at the mixing stage right now so that was premixing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pashkuli View Post
It will depend on the settings of the plugins, which take participation in that preparation for rendering.
Good to know, thanks!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pashkuli View Post
I am sure it will be shite performance anyway, if you really needed Melodyne (unless for some "robotic" vocal effect). So, how good is the source? Is it degraded\faulty in the first place?
I gotta say that this is actually not something you're sure of. At all. I'm no Luther Vandross, fair enough. But I can certainly sing so you might want to keep your surety there to yourself, lol. I don't "need" Melodyne but if certain notes/words are 6-14 cents off of perfect pitch, I will make decisions on whether to leave that note where it is or to adjust it either slightly closer to 0 cents, or to put it at 0 cents exactly, all depending on which I think sounds better in context.

I like making these decisions and they help me sleep at night. I will say nobody's ever accused me of shite singing performances in the last 10 years of my life so it's far out that it comes from a total stranger on the internet. And he's sure of it to boot!

I do appreciate the help though. Thanks!

And, no, nothing is wrong with the original signal. It's not even shite!
Stoneglow is offline  
Old 08-11-2021, 04:31 PM   #46
Stoneglow
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Posts: 119
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ashcat_lt View Post
Any time you’re rendering anything other than the final distribution master, you really should render to a floating point format. That way you don’t have to worry at all about clipping or quantization distortion or level in general. You can do that about infinitely without anything like “generation loss”.

In 24 bit, there actually are limits in both directions, and even if you watch the levels so it doesn’t clip, you will start to accumulate distortion/noise/errors near the zero crossings (of the waveforms, not talking db). Those things usually aren’t a big deal until you start adding a bunch of gain and compression and stuff, and yeah you probably can “get away with” several consecutive renders as long as you’re not doing truly insane things in between. You just have to watch for clipping.

But since even 32 bit FP means you don’t have to watch or worry about anything ever, it’s just the obvious answer. It’s as close to not rendering as you can get, iykwim.
Wow, this is good to know, although I probably only understand half of it. Am I right in getting that:

- If I'm recording in 32 bit I don't have to worry about this at all?
- If I'm recording in 24 bit and rendering several times I should expect some (probably inaudible) distortion/noise/errors that may come out with strong compression and the like?
- Don't do truly insane things if I plan to render after? Or maybe stay arm's length from insanity in general?

If I got those correctly I think I'm all set. I don't know what rendering to a floating point format is but I will look it up.

Thanks!

Last edited by Stoneglow; 08-11-2021 at 06:43 PM.
Stoneglow is offline  
Old 08-11-2021, 04:34 PM   #47
Stoneglow
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Posts: 119
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vdubreeze View Post
Yeah, same here After recording for decent levels, if I'm mixing I generally don't do anything. In the tape days many people would gain stage the trims of the faders so that there was a rough unity fader level when the tracks were roughly in balance, but there's no reason for that now. As far as the plugins liking a certain level, it's one of those things where my personal feeling is it's pointless to do it at the file level. If something's too low where I had concern about how it was hitting a plugin I might do something, maybe at file level but usually in an insert to put it in the ballpark of where it's most helpful. Otherwise I just don't bother. It's putting the horse before the cart in the grand scheme of the secretarial work one has to do to share up the mix, IMO.

And if I won't be mixing I won't do anything like that. I give the original files and if the mixer likes to get into that then they will. Since it's more a mixing function that a recording one it's not on my radar to get into gain staging recorded files. And if I'm mixing what someone else has recorded I'd rather they left such gain staging to me. YMMV.
Thanks - this is starting to add up. I am mixing it myself (yes, ambitious) and I do expect the mix will be "shite" but it will be my first one and I have to start somewhere. But you had good info in there. Thanks!
Stoneglow is offline  
Old 08-11-2021, 04:37 PM   #48
Stoneglow
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Posts: 119
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mschnell View Post
You should not manually render any intermediate audio data to files.
If Reaper does intermediate renders (e.g. subprojects) it uses floating point format, hence gain does not matter at all.
-Michael
You know when you know so much that when you speak ppl who know very little feel like they're tumbling on the dry cycle? Lol, that's us right now. And I'm not the one who knows a lot in this scenario.

I'm not even sure what a subproject is and, as I said above, I need to look up floating point format. I'll understand more after I look up these 2. And I will.

Also, the multiple renders question wasn't about the gain - that was intended to be a diff question, my bad. I just wanted to know if the sound quality of that item would degrade from multiple renders, irrespective of gain considerations.

I will look up subprojects as well. You're giving me homework! Thanks

Last edited by Stoneglow; 08-11-2021 at 04:59 PM.
Stoneglow is offline  
Old 08-11-2021, 04:39 PM   #49
Stoneglow
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Posts: 119
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cosmic Pig View Post
Generally, when mixing I use my ears. That's those sticky outy things on the side of your head you use to keep the mask on.

This is my first gain staging thread so I'll tell you what I do. Gain staging is as obvious as it appears. Check the efx to make sure nothing's going over zero.

If you hear distortion make sure you don't like the distortion before chasing it down. Which is another way of saying there are no rules and use your ears to guide your mix. Distortion is often your friend when mixing. Like... run a feed off your snare into a track with a guitar overdrive plug on it. Then slide up the overdrive to taste. Sure it's an old trick but if you're here wondering about gain staging...

I might be more interested to hear how you guys deal with heavy gain changes, like a very quiet vocal that gets very loud when they open the pipes.

But even then, I might split the track into two, then apply different compression to each. Or sometimes I put two compressors on the track.

Not sure why I joined in on this thread as I have no worthy input. Morning coffee I guess.
Thanks - hope the coffee tasted good. I keep getting the "use your ears" advice over and over so I'm getting what the universe wants me to learn....
Stoneglow is offline  
Old 08-11-2021, 04:41 PM   #50
Stoneglow
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Posts: 119
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mschnell View Post
Distortion only can be created by (nonlinear) plugins, not by Reaper itself.

Nonlinear plugins that don't feature an input gain control, IMHO are bad design and should not be used.

Hence, if using decently crafted plugins, gain staging in Reaper is no more than cosmetic to make level meters look nicer.

If course the final gain when auditioning or when rendering to a non-floatingpoint file format does matter

-Michael
That's it - I'm starting to understand it's cosmetic. Thanks.

And I understood this whole post (minus the floating point part which I'll look up)!

For these plugins without input gains on them, couldn't I just put a JS:Volume in front of them and adjust gain pre-plugin that way?
Stoneglow is offline  
Old 08-11-2021, 04:43 PM   #51
Stoneglow
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Posts: 119
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
Usually, I'll just split the item and turn those parts down or up depending on which there are more of to be mostly even with the rest - that can be done visually by just looking at the waveform and is a pretty quick process (no need for meters to do this). I'm a fan of item-level changes early on as it removes a lot of work or processing that would need to happen further down the signal path.

Then after that, whatever compression I want to smooth the overall performance out + some character, then at the end of that some type of vocal rider if needed just to keep the overall level consistent throughout the mix. If I nail that, it removes the need for any automation.
Really useful stuff - thanks! I have some vocal tracks where I will use this. I was thinking of using automation but I think splitting and item volume is faster and just as good. Thanks!
Stoneglow is offline  
Old 08-11-2021, 04:47 PM   #52
Stoneglow
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Posts: 119
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
Please leave "we" out of your suggestions. Luckily the OP got the info they needed and moved on already.
I did and you were a big part of it - thanks!
Stoneglow is offline  
Old 08-11-2021, 04:49 PM   #53
Stoneglow
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Posts: 119
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
Irrelevant - your ongoing mission has been promoting "gain staging" which is a confusing term we'd like to avoid. Don't start moving goal posts now by talking about a knob called gain on an amp SIM or volume knob on a guitar.

And to be clear, I could record 20 tracks right now, go "straight to mixing" while ignoring everyone of your gain stage suggestions and the mix will be as good as it can be when I'm done. This is precisely why your convoluted and overly complex explanations to beginners is simply not helping, if not out right discouraging to beginners trying to digest it.
I can't disagree with your analysis here. I'm just a spectator at this point but it's interesting....
Stoneglow is offline  
Old 08-11-2021, 04:56 PM   #54
Stoneglow
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Posts: 119
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pashkuli View Post
Have you seen a beginner to a bit more less-beginner mixes.
That is what they do - plugins all over the place, expecting it this way because with less it definitely did not sound like XYZ on the record\stream.

That is why beginners do not know how to prepare for a mixing.
That is why they think it must be this or that plugin, they still have not used in their chain.
They do not know how the process gets translated from devices to digital domain. And quite frankly, they do not care; no time for that.

And then they hear Loudness LUFS, streaming platforms recommendation...
Getting it to Loudness levels must be "the key". Let's Normalise by Loudness... Peaks go in the red. Nevermind, can't hear "red" anyway.
John Smith on the forum said it is floating point so the red on the track meter does not matter. Put limiter on the master and Normalise the Loudness.

Often (all the times) beginners do not care about the process, let alone about any preparation. They just want to throw plugins at the FX-slots, because XYZ uses them, so must they, in order to sound like XYZ.
Brother, I'm new to DAW production, true. But I'm not new to life. I do understand people pretty well. And if I were in a position to advise you (I'm not) I'd advise you to take in karbomusic's very reasonable points in response to yours.

I understand what he says and he doesn't come off as trying to be a know it all. I don't know you and I like to believe you're an awesome guy in real life. But you're not translating well here.

Mostly I have no clue what you're talking about, and you veer towards overly technical explanations that nobody else here seems to support. And you can overstep and be a bit condescending at times as well. I'm just giving you feedback for edification.

Maybe you know so much about mixing that you have that right in some ppl's eyes. Not for me to say. But I believe you could learn a bit about speaking with human beings and effectively communicating ideas. And not rushing to assumptions.

Again, I say this as kindly as I can and only to provide you some insight into how you may not realize you're coming across. Thanks for the efforts to help - I do appreciate effort.

Last edited by Stoneglow; 08-11-2021 at 06:41 PM.
Stoneglow is offline  
Old 08-11-2021, 09:43 PM   #55
Pink Wool
Human being with feelings
 
Pink Wool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 1,493
Default

OP, you know you can multi-quote, right? Right next to quote there is multi-quote. That way you can answer to several people in one post!
Pink Wool is offline  
Old 08-11-2021, 11:01 PM   #56
Stoneglow
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Posts: 119
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pink Wool View Post
OP, you know you can multi-quote, right? Right next to quote there is multi-quote. That way you can answer to several people in one post!
Yeah, but I enjoy looking like an idiot. Boy, it's hard work....

Thanks my man - I will do in the future
Stoneglow is offline  
Old 08-12-2021, 01:03 AM   #57
White Tie
Pixel Pusher
 
White Tie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Blighty
Posts: 4,936
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pashkuli View Post
I know.
Tell that to White Tie and some of the other purists.
Quoting just to put a pin in the fact that I was not a part of this thread.
__________________
The House of White Tie
White Tie is offline  
Old 08-12-2021, 02:10 AM   #58
White Tie
Pixel Pusher
 
White Tie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Blighty
Posts: 4,936
Default

The need for active analogue audio devices to receive a signal in a tightly defined level range is an unavoidable consequence of the realities of analogue circuit design. Even the very best designs have a noise floor to get above and a ceiling of non-linearity to get beneath.

This ceiling (but never the noise floor) is sometimes desirable, from creative sound purposes, and can be emulated in digital plugins.

This is also, almost always, an inconvenience because it requires diligence at every stage of the analogue workflow. There is a phrase for this. This inconvenience can also be emulated in digital plugins, if the person making that plugin wants to intentionally inconvenience his users.

Digital plugins that emulate 'classic' outboard can do so but over a vast dynamic range that users of the outboard would never have dreamed of. They can also emulate the input stage or preamps of that outboard, if they wish, and with staggering ease provide all the control and metering required to make best use of them.

Perhaps, somewhere out there, there is a plugin where the DSP engineer has carefully and diligently modelled the input stage of a piece of hardware, such that his algorithms require audio as close as possible to an ideal range, or 'sweet spot', but then decided to hide all of that and rely instead on the user engaging in some manner of pseudo-analogue workflow where the user recreates many of the inconveniences of analogue mixing while superstitiously muttering '-18dB' under the breath as they strive to 'take their mixes to the next level'.

No. No one would do that. Its all bullshit.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoneglow View Post
I want to gain stage my tracks before applying any mixing plugins... ...I have not gain staged until now
You were correct before. If you want to improve your mixes, just keep working at it. There is no nonsense magic bullet 'trick' or 'hack' that you are missing out on. You're doing great, trust your ears, stick at it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoneglow View Post
2 – Should I have indeed gain staged before putting any of the above plugins on the tracks?
No. Not then, not ever.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoneglow View Post
I've read that some plugins are calibrated to affect the signal best at about -18dBVU or thereabouts. Is that unreliable advice to your mind?
No, that could be true for a certain plugin, but that plugin will make that fact clear, and will give you all the metering and control you need, within the plugin, to get the best out of it. If that stuff isn't there then that's because it is not needed

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoneglow View Post
I read the following, which is where the question came from:

...When mixing with plugins, gain staging matters because plugins are designed to operate at a “nominal level,” which is generally equivalent to an average (not peak!) level of -18 dBFS.
OK, so this is false. And you can see how sources like this get confused, because the misinformation has mutated from 'some plugins might do this' to a sentence you might well read as 'all plugins do this' which is objectively nonsense and the kind of talk that really makes beginners anxious.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoneglow View Post
Loudness normalization brings the average loudness of the file to a specified level, which is what we want for gain staging purposes.
How the hell can they say this? They don't know what audio you are working with. They don't know the dynamic range of the source of the recording, or of the final result you are looking for. Nonsense. So, to be clear, they are telling you to do something that they have no way of knowing the truth of, in the pursuit of an outcome that is nonsense.

There's a lot of this talk going on, particularly on YouTube. Its like a poisonous worry meme that the inexperienced are spreading to each other.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoneglow View Post
From the same article:...generally go for a loudness for all tracks (average level—not peak!) of -20 LUFS. This seems to satisfy the plugins’ need to be fed audio at the correct level.
This 'one size fits all' approach, that you can say is good for all audio before you've even heard it is desperately, tragically wrong. Use ears not meters, unless your audio is not intended to be delivered in an audible form. Right? Oh, and just to reiterate, that 'plugins correct level' thing is nonsense.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoneglow View Post
my faders are in a usable place (not too low)
Having your faders in a good area, particularly before you start writing any automation, is all well and good. You can achieve this by using any volume control you like - clip gain, output on a plugin, a volume JS, whatever. Floating point digital volume change is just maths.

However, to be clear, if you have a quiet sound that you want as a background element or bit of ear-candy, its totally fine that you have the fader down low. I mean, obviously. It seems nuts to even have to say that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoneglow View Post
I did still Normalize Loudness and then revisit the drum tracks to make sure they didn't peak above -6LUFS.
Peak your drums wherever you damn well please. If it sounds good, its good. If you can't tell the difference then it doesn't matter.
__________________
The House of White Tie
White Tie is offline  
Old 08-12-2021, 05:44 AM   #59
Pashkuli
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: United Kingdom, T. Wells
Posts: 2,454
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
Right, gain staging isn't the reason those mixes suck.
From White Tie's perspective (you are using 'gain staging wrongly') it would be... yes, gain staging is important (otherwise... noise, hiss, static DC offset, etc.).
If you meant "gain digi-staging" then... not necessarily but it very well might be a part of the ignorance about the process in any beginners mind.


Quote:
Originally Posted by mschnell View Post
Nope. They are scaled to peak level of the floating point number +/- 1, also called 0dB, which is just some arbitrary value in the scale of FP-number, ranging from - to + many billions, with a resolution that always fits our need.

-Michael
You seem to have not taken into consideration that meters on the track have a scale - visible (not the internal floating point processing). This scale does not scale. No one would be able to read ± thousands of decibels. That would be simply impractical. Hence we stick to the human range and its partials: 120dB at max, often in practice DAW meter scales show us -90dBFS (practically much or less this is 'silence of a living room') to 0dBFS.

You now divide into 6dB (more or less average human perception of increased loudness in a specified signal and frequency) per bit and you get the bit depth needed: 120 : 6 = 20 bit.

That is it. That is what your meters SHOW you, not what (how many thousands of dB-bits) the internal code COULD process.
Those meters are there for your yes to see and for your mind to realise: "Peaks would clip if I do not treat them before the DAC output. I can't hear them, so should it matter? No = you are dumb, Yes = you know what you are doing".


(Peak values above 0 are displayed in a predefined pixel block that turns in a red colour when values of Peaks go above 0dBFS).

Last edited by Pashkuli; 08-14-2021 at 02:06 AM.
Pashkuli is offline  
Old 08-12-2021, 05:47 AM   #60
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 29,254
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pashkuli View Post
From White Tie's perspective (you are using 'gain staging wrongly') it would be... yes,
Since it is obvious why I used your pet term, to point out and rebut your irrelevant post, I'm questioning your ability to be rational and lucid at this point. I no longer trust that you are sincere or here to help anyone at all.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like.

Last edited by karbomusic; 08-12-2021 at 05:55 AM.
karbomusic is offline  
Old 08-12-2021, 06:01 AM   #61
White Tie
Pixel Pusher
 
White Tie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Blighty
Posts: 4,936
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pashkuli View Post
From White Tie's perspective
And again.

Stop drawing me into your misinformed nonsense, its pathetic.
__________________
The House of White Tie
White Tie is offline  
Old 08-12-2021, 06:05 AM   #62
Pashkuli
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: United Kingdom, T. Wells
Posts: 2,454
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoneglow
I chose -23LUFS based on stuff I read but the real key was I wanted them all the same loudness. I understand now it's probably a moot point and unnecessary. Karbomusic was helpful.
That is probably a good value for Noramlisation by Loudness. Seems pretty safe (conservative).
But since you ask technical questions, you might want to look a bit deep into their definitions, structure, meaning, application. That is Normalisation, Loudness, Gain Staging (both in Analogue and in DAWs).


Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoneglow View Post
Brother, I'm new to DAW production, true.
But you're not translating well here.
It is not about me, rather about what you would like to get as answer to your questions. You do not need to be a forum moderator and you do not have to.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoneglow View Post
Mostly I have no clue what you're talking about, and you veer towards overly technical explanations that nobody else here seems to support.
You are asking technical questions. What did you expect as answers?
I am still learning myself.

With this said here is some concerns about your questions and this is my answer, whether you like it or not:

Loudness in those digital file treatments of signal, mix, etc. is not what you have really as a signal and what you would perceive as Loudness. Depending on the used algorithm and "weighting", those Normalisations might not take into consideration the low-build-up of frequencies (as they are not "musically important"), thus your Noramlisation by Loudness might reduce your headroom for that recording, or later for the submix (should you wish to export it that way Noramlised), then will accumulate into the mixing.

With this said it is better for your recordings to be "Normalised" by using the so called "gain staging" (in DAWs you can translate it to: gain D-staging).

You said you Normalise to -23LUFS (which by definition is the same as -23dBFS). That is even more dangerous for the eventual build up of low freq. (in low levels, if your monitors are well calibrated to your DAW system). You won't be able to hear them at all (look up the 'Fletcher-Munson curve'), but they will be there and later when you mix and raise the signals overall, the RMS might show you it is powerful, yet your mix will just be low-dominant. Then you will push it with a limiter, the lows will start to distort and it will sound like shit.

If you use RMS (usually referred to "gain D-staging") the low frequencies are taken into consideration and the mids are intact (in LUFS the mids are usually boosted before the calculation of the LUFS occurs, although this boost does not get applied to the signal at the end of the calculation at all).

It is technical. Your questions are technical.

Last edited by Pashkuli; 08-14-2021 at 02:11 AM.
Pashkuli is offline  
Old 08-12-2021, 06:06 AM   #63
Pashkuli
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: United Kingdom, T. Wells
Posts: 2,454
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by White Tie View Post
And again.

Stop drawing me into your misinformed nonsense, its pathetic.
It is humour! A bit sarcastic, I know, but there is no harm intended at all.
Pashkuli is offline  
Old 08-12-2021, 06:09 AM   #64
White Tie
Pixel Pusher
 
White Tie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Blighty
Posts: 4,936
Default

Your humour is not funny. Your delusion that you know what you are talking about is misplaced. Your willingness to lead others astray is grotesque.

Leave me out of it, I am not here for your childish amusement.
__________________
The House of White Tie
White Tie is offline  
Old 08-12-2021, 06:25 AM   #65
maxdembo
Human being with feelings
 
maxdembo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: All Hallows End
Posts: 2,132
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pashkuli View Post
If you meant "gain digi-staging" then...
maxdembo is offline  
Old 08-12-2021, 09:27 AM   #66
Stoneglow
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Posts: 119
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by White Tie View Post
The need for active analogue audio devices to receive a signal in a tightly defined level range is an unavoidable consequence of the realities of analogue circuit design. Even the very best designs have a noise floor to get above and a ceiling of non-linearity to get beneath.

This ceiling (but never the noise floor) is sometimes desirable, from creative sound purposes, and can be emulated in digital plugins.

This is also, almost always, an inconvenience because it requires diligence at every stage of the analogue workflow. There is a phrase for this. This inconvenience can also be emulated in digital plugins, if the person making that plugin wants to intentionally inconvenience his users.

Digital plugins that emulate 'classic' outboard can do so but over a vast dynamic range that users of the outboard would never have dreamed of. They can also emulate the input stage or preamps of that outboard, if they wish, and with staggering ease provide all the control and metering required to make best use of them.

Perhaps, somewhere out there, there is a plugin where the DSP engineer has carefully and diligently modelled the input stage of a piece of hardware, such that his algorithms require audio as close as possible to an ideal range, or 'sweet spot', but then decided to hide all of that and rely instead on the user engaging in some manner of pseudo-analogue workflow where the user recreates many of the inconveniences of analogue mixing while superstitiously muttering '-18dB' under the breath as they strive to 'take their mixes to the next level'.

No. No one would do that. Its all bullshit.



You were correct before. If you want to improve your mixes, just keep working at it. There is no nonsense magic bullet 'trick' or 'hack' that you are missing out on. You're doing great, trust your ears, stick at it.



No. Not then, not ever.



No, that could be true for a certain plugin, but that plugin will make that fact clear, and will give you all the metering and control you need, within the plugin, to get the best out of it. If that stuff isn't there then that's because it is not needed



OK, so this is false. And you can see how sources like this get confused, because the misinformation has mutated from 'some plugins might do this' to a sentence you might well read as 'all plugins do this' which is objectively nonsense and the kind of talk that really makes beginners anxious.



How the hell can they say this? They don't know what audio you are working with. They don't know the dynamic range of the source of the recording, or of the final result you are looking for. Nonsense. So, to be clear, they are telling you to do something that they have no way of knowing the truth of, in the pursuit of an outcome that is nonsense.

There's a lot of this talk going on, particularly on YouTube. Its like a poisonous worry meme that the inexperienced are spreading to each other.



This 'one size fits all' approach, that you can say is good for all audio before you've even heard it is desperately, tragically wrong. Use ears not meters, unless your audio is not intended to be delivered in an audible form. Right? Oh, and just to reiterate, that 'plugins correct level' thing is nonsense.



Having your faders in a good area, particularly before you start writing any automation, is all well and good. You can achieve this by using any volume control you like - clip gain, output on a plugin, a volume JS, whatever. Floating point digital volume change is just maths.

However, to be clear, if you have a quiet sound that you want as a background element or bit of ear-candy, its totally fine that you have the fader down low. I mean, obviously. It seems nuts to even have to say that.



Peak your drums wherever you damn well please. If it sounds good, its good. If you can't tell the difference then it doesn't matter.
Wow, brother. You just laid a smackdown on this subject, thanks! That alleviates a lot of my beginner fears. Thank you!

A lot of other good guys here were telling me the same - that I can forget about gain staging altogether and trust my ears but I figured "better safe than sorry".

You gave a full dissertation on the reasons why it's irrelevant. I'm still at "if it's irrelevant I may still take the 90 seconds it takes to normalize loudness on all tracks once all faders are at 0 and go from there" but it's good to know that if I don't do this there are no penalties.

To be totally clear, I normalized all loudnesses and THEN proceeded to adjust volume up or down from that point to balance them in the mix. So I'm def using my ears in the end, but felt maybe an even playing field would help first. I now am hearing loud and clear that that playing field may not really be in any real way even. Great to know.

Thank you for the write up. It's very appreciated!

Last edited by Stoneglow; 08-12-2021 at 09:36 AM.
Stoneglow is offline  
Old 08-12-2021, 09:33 AM   #67
Stoneglow
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Posts: 119
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pashkuli View Post
That is probably a good value for Noramlisation by Loudness. Seems pretty safe (conservative).
But since you ask technical questions, you might want to look a bit deep into their definitions, structure, meaning, application. That is Normalisation, Loudness, Gain Staging (both in Analogue and in DAWs).



It is not about me, rather about what you would like to get as answer to your questions. You do not need to be a forum moderator and you do not have to.


You are asking technical questions. What did you expect as answers?
I am still learning myself.

With this said here is some concerns about your questions and this is my answer, whether you like it or not:

Loudness in those digital file treatments of signal, mix, etc. is not what you have really as a signal and what you would perceive as Loudness. Depending on the used algorithm and "weighting", those Normalisations might not take into consideration the low-build-up of frequencies (as they are not "musically important"), thus your Noramlisation by Loudness might reduce your headroom for that recording, or later for the submix (should you wish to export it that way Noramlised), then will accumulate into the mixing.

With this said it is better for your recordings to be "Normalised" by using the so called "gain staging" (in DAWs you can translate it to: gain D-staging).

You said you Normalise to -23LUFS (which by definition is the same as -23dBFS). That is even more dangerous for the eventual build up of low freq. (in low levels, if your monitors are well calibrated to your DAW system). You won't be able to hear them at all (look up the 'Fletcher-Munson curve'), but they will be there and later when you mix and raise the signals overall, the RMS might show you it is powerful, yet your mix will just be low-dominant. Then you will push it with a limiter, the lows will start to distort and it will sound like shit.

If you use RMS (usually referred to "gain D-staging") the low frequencies are taken into consideration and the mids are intact (in LUFS the mids are usually boosted before the calculation of the LUFS occurs).

It is technical. Your questions are technical.
Thanks Pashkuli. This may be way more technical than I need at this point and the unanimous disdain for your advice on this particular topic by ppl who seem to know what they're talking about in concerning, in terms of my researching what I'd need in order to follow this advice.

That said, if I ever run into any of the problems you describe I will certainly look this threat up again. Thanks!
Stoneglow is offline  
Old 08-12-2021, 10:00 AM   #68
Pashkuli
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: United Kingdom, T. Wells
Posts: 2,454
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoneglow View Post
Thanks Pashkuli. This may be way more technical than I need at this point... Thanks!
That is how it works, I am afraid.
It is called Audio Engineering for a reason.
Pashkuli is offline  
Old 08-12-2021, 02:15 PM   #69
Stoneglow
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Posts: 119
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pashkuli View Post
That is how it works, I am afraid.
It is called Audio Engineering for a reason.
I know it's probably not intentional but you're hilarious. I look forward to more of your "help" as I progress on my journey. Thank you.
Stoneglow is offline  
Old 08-12-2021, 02:17 PM   #70
Pashkuli
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: United Kingdom, T. Wells
Posts: 2,454
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoneglow View Post
I know it's probably not intentional but you're hilarious. I look forward to more of your "help" as I progress on my journey. Thank you.
Was a sarcasm.
Do not forget, my help is for free. Do not get to picky on a free horse. And it is quite a decent horse.

p.s. And I am looking forward to reading your technical questions, which technically you do not like answered (pun intended).

Last edited by Pashkuli; 08-12-2021 at 02:25 PM.
Pashkuli is offline  
Old 08-12-2021, 03:20 PM   #71
maxdembo
Human being with feelings
 
maxdembo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: All Hallows End
Posts: 2,132
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pashkuli View Post
And it is quite a decent horse.
maxdembo is offline  
Old 08-12-2021, 03:49 PM   #72
Pashkuli
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: United Kingdom, T. Wells
Posts: 2,454
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by maxdembo View Post
Salvatore Ganacci - Horse (Official Music Video)
Just to make it clear:
I was inferring to his (Stoneglow's that is) passive aggressive personal remarks totally out of place.

There is no harm in reading and knowing about multiple points of view on a subject, such as those related to both technical and creative processes.

I also wish things were not so "technical and heavy" and I do not know even half of what there is to know about it.
Pashkuli is offline  
Old 08-13-2021, 08:18 AM   #73
jazznfunk
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Riga Latvia
Posts: 194
Default

Be careful with JS: Volume Adjustment!!!

For reasons unknown for me slider "Max Volume (dB)" hard clips everything, that exceed threshold set by this slider!!

Just set it to max setting (150 dB) and use this plugin. Of course, if Your levels will go above 150 dB, hard clipping will occour.

P.S. Salvatore Ganacci is generating very funny sh*t
jazznfunk is offline  
Old 08-13-2021, 08:23 AM   #74
Stoneglow
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Posts: 119
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pashkuli View Post
Just to make it clear:
I was inferring to his (Stoneglow's that is) passive aggressive personal remarks totally out of place.

There is no harm in reading and knowing about multiple points of view on a subject, such as those related to both technical and creative processes.

I also wish things were not so "technical and heavy" and I do not know even half of what there is to know about it.
Wow, so telling you you don’t know how to speak to human beings, that you’re condescending, and that what you say doesn’t make any sense to me is aggressive? Passive? I’d say it’s neither. It’s as directly as I can speak to you without being mean. I’m not a mean person or about to make you an enemy over your shortcomings. But I feel I reported them to you very clearly and directly.

I even left room for you possibly being such a good engineer (I said mixer) that maybe others feel you have this right to put on these airs. I was as honest and direct as I could be.

I can tell you’re not someone who can self-correct and your natural tendency is to simply double down and defend when challenged, so I left it at that. If I thought you were capable of hearing others I would have said more. But I’ve seen your behaviour in two threads now and it’s clear to me that you just don’t get how to get along with other humans in order to MEANINGFULLY exchange ideas.

You speak to the open air - you speak AT ppl, not with them. And that’s fine. If telling you this is passive or aggressive so be it. I call it direct reporting.
Stoneglow is offline  
Old 08-13-2021, 08:41 AM   #75
Stoneglow
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Posts: 119
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mschnell View Post
You should not manually render any intermediate audio data to files.
If Reaper does intermediate renders (e.g. subprojects) it uses floating point format, hence gain does not matter at all.
-Michael
Michael, am I understanding this correctly?

I'm getting that I should not render out audio from any item until ALL changes are made in the mixing phase and then I should only render it once. Am I misunderstanding you?

Right now, after Melodyne, Vocal Rider, and RX8, I don't want all those plugins sitting on every single vocal track in my project (35 or so vocal tracks). So to free up resources I print those changes to audio before I get into mixing and adding more plugins on many of these tracks and certainly to the project on a whole.

Are you saying this is a bad idea?

Thanks!
Stoneglow is offline  
Old 08-13-2021, 08:42 AM   #76
Stoneglow
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Posts: 119
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by maxdembo View Post
Brother this is one of the funniest videos I've ever seen. THANK YOU!
Stoneglow is offline  
Old 08-13-2021, 11:03 AM   #77
RovingEye
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jun 2021
Posts: 55
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoneglow View Post
Michael, am I understanding this correctly?

I'm getting that I should not render out audio from any item until ALL changes are made in the mixing phase and then I should only render it once. Am I misunderstanding you?

Right now, after Melodyne, Vocal Rider, and RX8, I don't want all those plugins sitting on every single vocal track in my project (35 or so vocal tracks). So to free up resources I print those changes to audio before I get into mixing and adding more plugins on many of these tracks and certainly to the project on a whole.

Are you saying this is a bad idea?

Thanks!
There is an option to render to a 32 or 64 bit floating point file in the render menu if you want. Reaper is 64 bit FP internally if I recall correctly. I'm guessing many folks render PCM and don't have any issues, but it's there if you want it.
RovingEye is offline  
Old 08-13-2021, 11:25 AM   #78
Pashkuli
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: United Kingdom, T. Wells
Posts: 2,454
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoneglow View Post
Wow, so telling you you don’t know how to speak to human beings...
...when challenged.
Not challenged at all. No need to overexaggerate to personal "attacks".
This is a technical subject, not Oprah.

You said you are not into technical matters. Ignorance is bliss, as they say.
Pashkuli is offline  
Old 08-13-2021, 12:59 PM   #79
Pink Wool
Human being with feelings
 
Pink Wool's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 1,493
Default

Just cause you look down on everyone doesn’t mean they are looking up to you...
Pink Wool is offline  
Old 08-13-2021, 01:17 PM   #80
Pashkuli
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: United Kingdom, T. Wells
Posts: 2,454
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pink Wool View Post
Just cause you look down on everyone doesn’t mean they are looking up to you...
That is your perspective. I am always looking forward and slightly upward.
No need to look down at whatever it is there.

As I said to Stoneglow:
I am looking forward to reading your technical questions.
Pashkuli is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:11 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.