Fader levels and mixing

Coming from years of analogue recording I've been used to riding fader levels quite high (slamming the tape, etc.) However, I've noticed that in the DAW world this is actaully NOT such good practice!
I was wondering, though, if it was typical to have fader levels at such low levels. Sometimes my levels are at -18db or more!!? However, everything sounds good and the final mix comes out fine with some mastering tools. But I have found that lower fader levels allows for better mixing..its just odd, for me, to see such small scaling in the tracks' VU meters!
Am I doing something incorrectly here. Is there some kind of calibration that I am not aware of that raises the amount of fader play?
Thanks.

Clem et al,
This information was helpful as I too want to record in the -12 -18 range for tracking, but I'm struggling a bit with gain-staging, etc at the Tracking, Mixing and Mastering stages. My goal is to record as cleanly as possible and maintain headroom as I move between these three stages to a finished product. If you know of a good website that covers these fundamentals that would be also be helpful.
Here's what I'm currently doing on a typical song (I'm doing this all myself due to current budget)
TRACKING STAGE: Record each audio part (typically vocals, guitar & bass) at -12 to -18 in 24 bit / 44.1 kHz (44k to save disk space...I can do 96 on my Apogee Duet if that offers significant benefits. Note that this is the *recording level* - not where the vocal/bass/guitar sits after pulling back the track fader).
- Issues at this stage: When I record at this level I have to crank my Duet headphone output up to 100% and it still is occasionally hard to hear the part vs the backing material I've already recorded. When I track at a higher level and then pull back the fader for the mix this is not a problem.
- My Summit 2BA-221 pre appears to be barely working to get this -12 to -18 in Logic arrange window.
- Main question: What should be corrected in the above? Should I record the track at a higher level to "work" the mic/pre and add more tube "warmth" etc. or go some other route. If I track at this level does that match up more closely with Logic's default compressor/limiter, etc. plug settings? Also I notice that if I use an aux/send for drums, etc. that the level coming from that aux can also add up after a enough tracks are sent to it.
- I want strong vocals, but don't want to then hear the backing track drop (due to compresssion) when the vocal levels jump higher.
MIXING STAGE: I have heard from more experienced musicians/engineers on other websites that I should mix down (bounce) to a stereo track prior to mastering and keep this to -3 -4 prior to mastering. Is this target level correct. Should I be using a buss/mix compressor here for "glue" and/or EQ here or wait until final Mastering stage?
MASTERING STAGE: Currently I am using Ozone 4 for this...any basic guidelines or pointers you can offer are very much appreciated.
I realize that much of this is subjective and an art, but I'm looking for basic building blocks that I can work from...to that end any related info you can provide is very much appreciated. I realize you could respond with a book to the above but I'm primarily interested in correcting my gain-staging approach as related to the original tracking level discussion here.
Thanks in advance for any assistance you can offer!

Similar Messages

Saving Fader Levels

Hi
Lets say I've recorded all my tracks in Logic and I have all the fader levels set nicely, and then I need to record something again. I need to change the fader levels to suit my headphone mix while recording again, so is there a way I can save the 'bounce' version of my fader levels (and all of the control strip settings), then after messing about or whatever reload the previous 'bounce' levels. I don't really want to get into writing automation levels for each fader or using the 'save as' facility to make separate Logic projects.
Thanks!

Impressive indeed. However, as with all extensive Environments that are directly cabled to Channels, it prevents you from using the new and nifty Automatic Channel Strip Management, which takes care of creating and duplicating Channel Strips as and when you need them.
I think we have commented that many times with you Christian... But this is quite new prototype of a whole complex Environment tool and as I mentioned the Song template supports 32 Audio, 32 Instr and 32 Aux tracks. I think it is quite enough as beginning... The "Snapshot Console" is organized as one "Master" and a few slave ( have a look at the "Link" buttons next to 'Save and "Load". Any SC can be Master or Slave depends of the "Link" buttons modes. My idea was when hit "Save" on the Master all other to "save" as well, same with load. So you can copy the SC and add more tracks.Honestly I have not tested with more then these 96 channels yet, but it must work...
In addition I forgot to mention that there are a few SC tracks in the Arrange. The user can draw or record Program change messages ( it supports Program Names according your Presets names ) on any of these "Snapshot Automation" tracks to control separately some given sectors of the Logic Mixer, or to draw or record Program Change massages on the "Master Console" global "Snapshot Automation" track, to control the whole Logic mixer using one program change message only etc...
Regards,
Ivan
!http://img59.imageshack.us/img59/4967/aglogo45.gif![www.audiogrocery.com|http:/ /www.audiogrocery.com]

Levels and pre-fader metering

In the past I had always presumed the channel fader controlled the volume level of a softsynth. I know now that it obviously does not. It simply acts as a "faucet," so to speak. Meaning that increasing the fader level simply allows more of the synth's signal to pass.
So my question is this: Understanding that it is the instrument itself which is actually generating the signal (and consequetly the db's) should I keep all my faders at 0.00 on my audio instrument tracks and adjust the instrument levels instead when I mix? It would seem to make sense.
And in keeping with this method, as far as automation is concerned, would I be correct in assuming track volume should be automated via the instrument level?
I'm trying to keep all of this in the context of how it would be done in a studio with "real" instruments. Where the volume level is the volume level and if you want it louder you play harder or you turn up your amp. You want it softer you play your instrument softer.
I should add that this whole question/conundrum came up after I started recording with pre fader metering enabled and was quite surprised to see just how easy it is to clip a track (remembering of course that as long as no clipping is occuring at the master output I'm NOT actually clipping).

I don't know where all this "fader fear" is coming from.
In DSP terms, making something louder or quieter is simply a really simple DSP calculation. It doesn't matter whether you turn you softsynth down 3dB, or turn the fader down 3dB, the end result is exactly the same.
The faders are there for easy controlling of levels. It's why mixers were invented and designed this way.
I think these days someone reads a post on some esoteric audio forum about how their mix was so much better when they left the fader at 0dB in some obscure DAW back in the 90's, and translate that into "I must never use faders" or "I must never EQ" or "I must effectively work out my mix beforehand by my mic choice and positioning so all the signals magically combine into an artistic mix."
I'm trying to keep all of this in the context of how it would be done
in a studio with "real" instruments. Where the volume level is the
volume level and if you want it louder you play harder or you turn
up your amp.
You completely lost me here. Learning about gain staging is Elementary Audio Engineering Class 2 (the one afer the "what is a signal", and "what is a transducer").
You set the level of your recording device or mixer's input depending on the item you are recording, so the natural sound of whatever your source is corresponds to some nominal level for your recorder. It doesn't just magically happen on its own.
If you're recording an instrument that doesn't put out much sound level, you use the mic preamp to boost the signal to an appropriate recording level. And if you're recording Concorde taking off, you adjust your preamp, probably turning it down or padding the signal, again so it fits the range of your recorder.
Softsynths can put out a lot of level, and many preset designers don't pay much attention to volume levels in their patches. In addition, when you play a patch polyphonically, you're mixing together multiple signals (each of the notes you are playing) so you end up with higher levels still. It's good practice to pull down the output of the synth if it's too hot, but generally speaking, and avoiding getting into any "levels in Logic" complexities here, using the fader in Logic is exactly the same process.
Faders don't bite. Use 'em.

Fader Selection - Different Levels and Not Smooth

During a mix I will select all the tracks to turn down all audio/midi channels to lower their volumes. When this is done some of the track will drop to different level and slowly catch up with the channel that I am moving. In Pro Tools when this is done they move smoothly and everything stays at the same level. Is there a way to prevent this from happening in Logic 7.1?

Well, that's the code that was written automatically by coldfusion when I've chosen to create user authorisation. However when you choose to go this way coldfusion asks whether you want to authorise user by username and password only, or add permission levels. So I've chosen to authorise by all three. As mentioned in database I have added three fields: username, password and user_type. Currently I have two users. One's - admin1, and another - admin2. If I change both to admin1 - have no trouble loging in. But if second one is left as admin2, it denies access with no error.
My intentions are to separate content of the admin page with the following code:
<cfif ListContains("admin1", Session.MM_UserAuthorization)>
Content to show if user in proper access level which is Admin1.
</cfif>
but in order to achieve this I have to login users with different access level.

Playhead freezes during playback and no fader levels (Logic 8)

during playback on my powermac g5, it's a legit version from a studio.
playhead freezes and stops moving all together untill i pause and press play to refresh position.
This is happening with some but not all projects;
happening on a reasonable sized project, it contains 22 tracks overall, 16 are audio tracks (without excessive plugins) the rest of the tracks are various synths.
(i have checked the core overload and neither core is overloading and i am using the audio channel trick for the VSTs to balance it out between cores.)
got 10 bus sends but again nothing huge on them, just reverb here or there and basic FX and group EQ.
finally nothing on the master channel bar a EQ that is just analysing Freq.
I'm also not getting any fader levels at all during playback, this might be from the same issue?
the software isn't lagging at all just no playhead movement and no repsonse from faders, i've most probably pushed a button since i've recently moved over to logic from ableton on a PC.
let me know if i'm the moron or if it's a bug/something
Version No. 8.0.2

Actually, I must make correction, it is not the core audio error, it is the disk too slow error.

How do I get a descent sound level and quality when exporting out of Logic ??

Hi guys,
I know this topic's been discussed many times before but I still can't fix my problem
I'm going crazy right now. It's been weeks I've been working on beats on Logic and I think they now sound pretty cool.
So I'm trying to export them out of Logic on mp3,or wav, or aiff but everytime it comes out very low. So when I'm applying different tips (limiter, adaptative limiter and different things I found on the internet... ) the sound level is a bit higher but still the quality is not as good as it is on Logic
So here's my questions : first, is it possible to get the exact same quality as the one you have when listening into logic ?
then how to get the best quality with a normal sound level so when you listening to the mp3 or wave or aiff on itunes just after a normal song you don't have to turn the sound up
Thank you very much for you help !!
Ben

And in addition to what octopi wrote ……
Related Articles:
Mixdown for Mastering - written by Holger Lagerfeldt
http://www.onlinemastering.dk/mastering-faq.html
Loudness when Producing and Mixing - written by Holger Lagerfeldt
http://www.gearslutz.com/board/music-computers/468170-loudness-when-producingmix ing-
tips.html
Overload in Signal Conversion - written by Søren H. Nielsen and Thomas Lund
http://www.tcelectronic.com/media/nielsen_lund_2003_overload.pdf
0 dBFS+ Levels in Digital Mastering - written by Søren H. Nielsen and Thomas Lund
http://www.tcelectronic.com/media/nielsen_lund_2000_0dbfs_le.pdf
Level Control in Digital Mastering - written by Søren H. Nielsen and Thomas Lund
http://www.tcelectronic.com/media/nielsen_lund_1999_level_co.pdf
Cheers

When I set all the tracks in the latest Garageband to the same volume levels and save, when I open the file again they've changed back to a previous setting?

I'm trying to mix a recording in the latest 2014 version of Garageband, but when I set all the tracks in the latest Garageband to the same volume levels and save, when I open the file again they've changed back to a previous setting? Does anyone know why it changes even after saving the file?
Below is my iMac settings.

Do you have a back up?
If not you're into using file recovery software like File Salvage - you can download a free trial and it will scan the disk for you and tell you with might be recoverable. Actual recovery will require that you purchase the app. There may be many files with the same or similar names. Always recover the largest file size.
There are other such apps. Search on Macupdate or the App Store

It is actually possible to record and mix a complete album using GB?

in a commercial sense? (moving this from another thread as not to hijack)
Here is a scenario. Take an artist like Jose Gonzalez http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4_4abCWw-w&feature=fvw Is GB a capable enough environment to record and process music like this and perhaps even host the necessary mastering plugs to finish?
I have seen many comments about when it would be right to step up to Logic and they mainly revolve around needing something perhaps like the comping feature for example. These are aids in time saving and for rescuing imperfect takes. However, is there anything inherently wrong or uncommercial or amateurish in believing that GB is all I need to record and produce my self funded independent commercial release?
or .... whats the stigma?

gjmnz wrote:
in a commercial sense? (moving this from another thread as not to hijack)
For the most part, I think the answer is no. There are always exceptions, and GB can do a lot, but the exceptions in which people have used GB to fully produce a released album are statistically rare for legitimate reasons.
Someone brought up the Springsteen album made on a cassette as an example that you don't need professional gear to make a professional album. That's true if you're, you know, BRUCE SPRINGSTEEN! Ravel wrote the melody for Bolero on a napkin, I believe. Does that mean napkins are sufficient for notating music and musicians should abandon staff paper?
Then there's the argument that GB is more sophisticated than what many albums of the past were made on. That's true in many respects. But the sheer quality of analog components used in classic albums far surpasses the limitations of the type of consumer interfaces typically paired with GB, compounded by the inability of digital simulations to replicate their analog precursors (yet). Yeah, the Beatles may only have had a limited number of tracks, but the caliber of audio feeding those tracks was spectacular. (Aside from the music).
I'm not dissing GB.
Quite the opposite.
I love GB, use it, advocate its use, praise it to the high heavens.
GB is revolutionary and democratizing.
But the features in GB don't reach into the kind of pro features necessary to produce a typical commercial release.
Not that GB isn't a great starting point, and I think a number of artists do just that. Start in GB, but the tracks are then imported into a more full featured digital audio workstation where they can be more adequately mixed.
Somewhat motivated by this thread, I tried to produce a song this past weekend entirely in GB. I plugged expensive hardware into it - high end mics, preamps, compressors, etc. So it sounded pretty good.
The wall I hit was when I needed to edit. I need to edit some parts together and couldn't really do it without Logic's more precise editing tools, cross fading, etc. The machine I was using didn't have Logic on it, so I was all intent on staying in GB, but the song was hobbled by lack of a more complete feature set. Of course, maybe if the song didn't need those edits I wouldn't have hit a wall, but it did.
I also didn't have the plugins that I normally have in Logic available, and they would have helped. I suppose someone could invest in a lot of plugins and use them in GB, although most people who make the plugin investment would already upgrade to Logic because it makes economic sense - Logic is a bargain considering everything it comes with before you'd start adding 3rd party plugs. So it'd be weird to have, say, a thousand dollars worth of plugins and still be on GB. But I suppose you could do it... but still... you'd be missing all the editing and mixing features of Logic which are a level of magnitude more robust than GB.
I have seen many comments about when it would be right to step up to Logic and they mainly revolve around needing something perhaps like the comping feature for example. These are aids in time saving and for rescuing imperfect takes. However, is there anything inherently wrong or uncommercial or amateurish in believing that GB is all I need to record and produce my self funded independent commercial release?
or .... whats the stigma?
People can produce fantastic work in GB and, as an empty vessel, if you fill it up with top grade music, that's what matters most. But if you're serious about releasing your music above a certain threshold of production standards, the type of tools that come with Logic, ProTools, Digital Performer, Cubase, etc. start to get fairly essential fairly quick.
It's not a stigma. If you can do it in GB, if anything, that's kind of cool. But try asking this question in the Logic forum and see what kind of answers you get from musicians who regularly use Logic. Seriously. See what kind of points Logic users would make to advocate bumping up to Logic if your goal is to release a commercial production.

Line drawn with Pencil Tool appears to fade in and out

My Nme is Allen Togwell.Case No: 0183721415. Your chat line guy said I needed a graphic card to solve my problem for my CS6. He gave me a link but disconnected before I could use it. Can you help me with what type of graphic card I need. I am 75 yrs of age and not very com literate.
Thanks

Hi Allen,
I looked up that case number and watched a recording of you working with the agent and am not convinced that what you are seeing was necessarily because of the graphics card.
This is my interpretation and thoughts around what you were seeing. I noticed that you were working on an image that took up a fair amount of the screen when viewed at 16.7% zoom. This means it was a pretty large image. Next, I noticed you were using the pencil tool with a tip that was 4 pixels.
I think the combination of these two things was the reason the pencil tool was appearing choppy or to fade in and out when drawing. This occurs because you are using such a small size and are zoomed out so much that the lines are barely visible. When you zoom out the program resamples the appearance. This resampling can cause detail to be lost and the appearance to vary depending on what zoom level is used, 16.7% is particularly bad with fine details.
I think there would be two solutions, use a different zoom level to get a better view or use a pencil with a larger size.
I recorded this video for you as an example
http://screencast.com/t/e9dhiHKoKbv
I suspect the list that the agent was suggesting for video cards was the one at the bottom of this document
http://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/kb/photoshop-cs6-gpu-faq.html
Hope that helps,
-Dave

Controller volume fader changes all fader levels

Hi,
I'm using an M-Audio KeyRig 49 controller.
I set up a whole concert and it worked fine. I set up the keyboard's only fader to control the master volume. But now whenever I touch the keyboard's fader to adjust the master volume each channel's level jumps to the fader level - throwing off all my levels.
I'm new to MainStage (and Logic). How do I separate them so the volume fader only controls the master volume and I can set the channel levels once and leave them?
I have to have it up and running by this weekend.
Thanks!

I may have answered my own question. Seems that when I record with the master fader on a lower level the problem is resolved.

Inaccurate Fader levels

I remember reading about this on some forum somewhere....
The fact that the fader levels jump several number values instead of in perfect sequencial order.
For example, wanting to go to -11db, the fader will only go either -10.9 or -11.2.
Even if I try and type in the exact number (-11), it'll just show up as -10.9
Why is this? Is this a bug? A 'feature'? Is there something in the prefs that allows for better accuracy?
Thanks

Sampleconstruct wrote:
It´s due to the subdivision of the fader into 128 Midi steps.
This is partially correct. The numerical issue is simply display rounding to 128 steps. The actual volume automation data is full 10 bit, 1024 steps. As has been mentioned, you can access this resolution by controlling the numerical field on the track header. It's also available if you have a Logic/Mackie Control surface.

Fade in and Fade out components from 3d modell onClick self-made buttons

Hi,
in Acrobat Pro you can place your own 3D-model into the pdf. Than you can fade in and fade out components of your 3d-model on a acrobat-menü (see images) in the pdf-reader. Now I want to build a pdf with this functionality, but the tricky thing is, that I want to fade in and out the components from the 3d-model not on the menu, but on self-made buttons.
But how to say the buttons, that they should fade in or fade out a component from the 3d model, like it the menu from acrobat does?
Thank you for reply.
Maybe this images will help you to understand my question:

Thank you very much for your answer. But I think what you mean, is to make a full object visible=false. But what I want to make is to fade out a subordinate level.
So for example this is my hierarchy:
layer one
-sub-layer one
-sub-layer two
*sub-sub-layer one
layer two
-sub-layer one
And now I want to fade out the sub-sub-layer one. What is the code for that?
Thank you very much again!

FCP to soundtrack : clips audio fade in and out are lost !

Hi,
I sent a FCP project to soundtrack pro, but all fade in and out are lost. Only crossovers between 2 clips remain. Is it a limitation of the "send to multitrack project" function ?
Thanks

Same problem here. Tried to solve it by making an OMF export in FCP and importing it into STP: same problem. One of the many bugs. We have to wait some more versions before this promising application works on a pro level.

Fade in and Out

Hello Everyone,
I would like to ask the Pro a question.
I have a video clip which i want to cut and fade in and Fade Out the video and Audio.
I have searched on internet but i can not seems to find the right answer.Is it that complicated to do fade in and out?
Is there a simple way to fade in and fade out the entire video(video and audio) and NOT only video or Audio?
How can i do that.
Thank you very much

On a single clip, fade and dip to black are similar. If you have two clips next to each other fade will do a mix between them, using the dip to black will fade out the first clip going to black and the fade up the second clip. The yellow line shows keyframes, this is a way of changing effect parameters against time. This is an Adobe help file about them Adobe Premiere Pro Help | Adding, navigating, and setting keyframes If you search the net there are many tutorials. You can keyframe audio and video. Have you tried adding the default fade transition to the audio? I have no problems with it. The cpu can run flat out, if needs be Premiere will slow down the export to match the quality of your hardware.

Count at bin level and quant level?

what is the difference between cycle count at bin level and quant level?
Thx

If you use cycle counting inventory at quant level, the system does not set the inventory block for the entire storage bin. It sets the block instead for the quant to be inventoried.
You count only the selected materials, not all materials in the storage bin. If you manage storage bins with mixed storage, these storage bins are accessible for stock movements with other quants.
There can be open transfer orders for all materials that were not flagged for cycle counting in the inventory document. You can also create transfer orders for these materials during the inventory.
The system saves the inventory data at quant level.
In a stock movement, if you move a quant from one storage bin to another, the system deletes the quant in the source storage bin and creates a new quant in the destination storage bin.
Because the system stores the inventory data for the cycle counting inventory at quant level in the quant data, any inventory data that you previously entered is lost in this type of stock transfer.

Fader levels and mixing

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for