Go Back   Cockos Incorporated Forums > REAPER Forums > REAPER Q&A, Tips, Tricks and Howto

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-02-2021, 03:04 PM   #1
rMidi
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 58
Default Gain Staging, Confusion, Reaper Meters, Waves Vu Meter.

I am attempting to gain stage.
- dBfs = Decibel full scale.

Most (if not all) of my plugins emulate analog hardware (mostly Slate Digital)
With that said I understand that 0db on a plugin meter (VU) really means -18dbfs.
Additionally, I understand that analog emulations are sort of optimized to operate at -18dbfs.

Question / Verification:
Reaper Stereo Peak meter is dBfs? Yes?

MODO Track:
- I have a MODO bass on a track named MODO.
- I am sending the output of the MODO track to another track named Bass.
- I send it at -3.00dB, pre-fader (post-FX)

Bass Track:
- Bass track is floating around -18dB and peaking at -15 dB
- Put a single instance of Waves VU Meter Stereo on this track (only thing on track).
- 'Headroom' is set to 18dB.
- According the the Waves documentation this should cause the VU meter to show 0dB at -18dB. It does not. It looks
to me as if it is centered around 12dB. Additionally, it looks like it is peaking at -7dB.

What am I doing wrong here?
This may be a question for the Waves forum. I thought I would ask here first before going there.

Thanks.
rMidi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2021, 03:29 PM   #2
schwa
Administrator
 
schwa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: NY
Posts: 15,750
Default

Yes, REAPER meters display dBFS, unless you set them to loudness metering (LUFS, etc).


Definitely do things however you want to, but imo gain staging to optimize the output of analog simulating plugins is not likely to be productive. You'll be spending a lot of time with various tools that don't necessarily measure and display the same thing, with the ostensible goal of adjusting a floating-point signal (that has effectively infinite headroom) to hit some mysterious sweet spot that probably doesn't exist.
schwa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2021, 03:29 PM   #3
White Tie
Pixel Pusher
 
White Tie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Blighty
Posts: 4,950
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rMidi View Post
I am attempting to gain stage.
Oh dear

Quote:
Originally Posted by rMidi View Post
I understand that analog emulations are sort of optimized to operate at -18dbfs.
This is myth. If a plugin is level dependent on the way in, be that because it is a dynamic processor or having some input saturation, it will have provided metering and a gain control to set it. I guarantee it.

The marketing departments of some plugin companies are so eager to imply that buying their products is exactly the same as owning the hardware that they are willing to imply they've even cloned the weaknesses, such as a high noise floor and low headroom resulting in a narrow dynamic range for best results. This is bollocks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rMidi View Post
What am I doing wrong here?
Perhaps you've been watching some of the YouTube channels that propagate this nonsense? They stick meters all over the place and constantly talk about ideal numbers and where levels should reach, which is impossible to say about audio you haven't heard. You say you are confused, well I have good news for you. It doesn't make sense to you because it doesn't make sense. Trust your ears, learn the craft, have fun, don't listen to silly buggers
__________________
The House of White Tie
White Tie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2021, 03:55 PM   #4
rMidi
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 58
Default

Perhaps I gave to much information in my original post.
I will attempt to re-focus this thread.

My real question is:
- Bass track Reaper meter is showing ~ -18dB peaking at -15dB.
- Waves VU meter is showing ~-12dB peaking at -7dB
- Expected: VU meter ~0dB peaking 3dB
- Waves manual:
'This calibrates the VU meter to the DAW’s reference level. When Headroom is set to
“18,” then a -18 dBFS reference tone will equal 0 dB VU on the meter. Therefore,
there will be 18 dB of headroom between 0 dB VU and digital clipping.'

Again, perhaps this is an issue with Waves (not Reaper).
rMidi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2021, 04:29 PM   #5
White Tie
Pixel Pusher
 
White Tie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Blighty
Posts: 4,950
Default

There's a lot to learn about meters, and it seems you've got in quite a muddle already. I urge you to stop caring; in your context of a digital plugin sound source inside a floating point digital DAW, a meter plugin is meaningless. Its just maths.
__________________
The House of White Tie
White Tie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2021, 07:17 PM   #6
Philbo King
Human being with feelings
 
Philbo King's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 3,202
Default

If it helps, VU does not equal peak nor LUFS nor RMS. A VU meter is basically an RMS meter with a rise and fall time of 300 mS, but the 0 dB definition of a VU meter is 1.228 volts, which is not directly related to any particular dBFS level.

So, let confusion reign supreme!
__________________
Tangent Studio - Philbo King
www.soundclick.com/philboking - Audio streams

Last edited by Philbo King; 12-02-2021 at 07:26 PM.
Philbo King is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2021, 07:21 PM   #7
schwa
Administrator
 
schwa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: NY
Posts: 15,750
Default

FWIW the REAPER meters are definitely displaying peak dBFS correctly, there is no ambiguity in the definition or calculation of peak dBFS.

If a plugin meter on the track is showing an unexpected number, there is some misunderstanding about what the expected number should be. It may be that the plugin is measuring loudness rather than peak, or that it's combining the the stereo signal in some way, or it simply has some calibration setting that is not clear.

[edit] I believe the answer to your question is that the plugin is calibrated to display 0dB when fed a sine wave (reference tone) that peaks at -18 dBFS. You're feeding it a signal that is not a sine wave, so there's no reason to expect the plugin to display any particular number. The plugin is measuring loudness, not peak, in a particular way in order to give some reference that is intended to be useful when comparing different kinds of signals. To put it another way, if the plugin displayed +0 dB, that would mean the signal you are feeding it is "as loud" as a sine wave that peaks at -18 dB -- but still with the previous caveats about what exactly is being measured, how the stereo signal is being handled, and what the calibration settings are. (And the caveat that gain staging a digital signal is not likely to be a productive exercise.)

Last edited by schwa; 12-02-2021 at 07:36 PM.
schwa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2021, 08:41 PM   #8
kirk1701
Human being with feelings
 
kirk1701's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Ontario
Posts: 1,676
Default

I'll sound in on this. I use many analog-style plugins, so I've developed a fairly sound methodology.

I would put the Waves VU in the monitor fx chain. It's in parallel there.

You can set the analog plugins to whatever reference you like, due to the floating point. I decided to reference all my analog plugins to -18dbfs because it happens to coincide with 0VU on most of these plugins.

If you make the majority of your tracks hit roughly 0VU, that's as close as you need to get. It doesn't really work for drums, the transients are a bit too fast. If you aim for around -10, you should be fine.

The key word is "ballpark." Once you've got the basic tracks roughed in or around 0VU, you can forget about it. Don't fuss over the numbers, if it sounds like music, you're good. If something's too loud, turn it down and vice versa.

Paul Third has a couple videos on this that really cut through a lot of the garbage:

https://youtu.be/0-2zTMjPAqk
https://youtu.be/w0DTz1XGDJo
__________________
"I've never trusted Klingons and I never will. I can never forgive them for the death of my boy."
kirk1701 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2021, 08:53 PM   #9
ashcat_lt
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 7,272
Default

I’m pretty sure philbo has the closest answer: the VU meter is showing an integrated average of some sort rather than actual peak sample levels, and that is expected to - basically must - be something less than the actual sample peak levels.

Of all the confusion around “gain staging” this is actually the biggest and most common misunderstanding. That -18dbFS “sweet spot” is actually about average - integrated, rms - levels, not peak. Not like “the loudest samples average x but occaisionally go higher”, but rather “if we average every sample (including the quietest) over a given time interval, it comes to x”.

Basically, if your sample peaks are at -18dbFS, then it is in fact quite a bit quieter than even the proponents of the -18 standard intend.


Edit - well, I mean everybody who is saying that the whole idea of gain staging in digital is overemphasized and kind of silly are also completely correct, but...
ashcat_lt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2021, 10:24 PM   #10
Lynx_TWO
Human being with feelings
 
Lynx_TWO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: St Petersburg FL
Posts: 996
Default

There are indeed some analog modeled plugins that emulate high noise floors… and I avoid them like the plague. Adding noise is a slap in the face to all the engineers out there striving for a clean signal chain.

FYI. You can use plugin doctor to scientifically test to see if gain-staging is needed for any specific plugins. I think you’ll find in most situations, it isn’t needed.

https://ddmf.eu/plugindoctor/
__________________
My mixes from the Cambridge multitracks library
SoundCloud link & Youtube (ThemTube?) link
My preferred adjectives are “Handsome” and “Brilliant”
Lynx_TWO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2021, 11:27 PM   #11
ramses
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,231
Default

I agree that it's not strictly necessary to gain stage into plugins, for the most part. I do believe it's a great habit to learn how to gain stage into the master bus however, and the main reason is this; it will allow you to monitor your work at one or several set loudness levels, which will allow your brain to get accustomed to how things sound at different sound pressure levels in the room that you're working in.
ramses is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2021, 01:01 AM   #12
rMidi
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 58
Default

Thanks all for your opinions and directions.

Special thanks to Kirk1701 for directing me to the very informative videos by Paul Third. Very concise and informative.

Kirk1701: 'Balance of Terror' is still hands down the best Trek episode / Movie ever!

Cheers all.
rMidi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2021, 02:42 AM   #13
TomL
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Location: London, U.K
Posts: 125
Default

VU meters were used to measure line loss on telephone lines using a reference tone. They need interpretation if used on solo instruments.
For example on percussive sounds they will massively under read the peak yet on purer/longer signals they could, in the days of tape be left all day happily bending themselves around the right hand end stop.

On a mix the complexity of the signal going into a VU tends towards a meeting with the meters averaging behaviour but you still have to interpret what you see.

As was said earlier. Turn down the input gain on the plugin to -18. If they are analogue modeled they will have an input gain control.

if you want a vague idea of what is going on, use a VU. For all other applications use a peak meter.
TomL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2021, 03:16 AM   #14
White Tie
Pixel Pusher
 
White Tie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Blighty
Posts: 4,950
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kirk1701 View Post
Paul Third has a couple videos on this...

https://youtu.be/0-2zTMjPAqk
https://youtu.be/w0DTz1XGDJo
Ah yes! Someone has posted these before, this chap Paul Third is a perfect example of one of the YouTubers who recirculate this misunderstanding. Though certainly a better example, since he is at least very up front about just learning himself, and he also shows the old analogue recording book that he is using to learn about digital gain staging, so he can be forgiven for running astray.

Here's a little story I wrote last time this came up:

---

A tale of the practical difference between analogue and digital gain staging.

Imagine two audio engineers, both working exclusively in analogue, comparing their mixes of the same material. The less experienced of the two is astonished to hear that the more experienced engineer's mix is cleaner, clearer and with a lower noise floor.

This is because the less experienced engineer has failed to pay attention, throughout his mix, to gain staging. No individual track will necessarily sound 'wrong' but across all the tracks and busses, dozens of active devices will be operating slightly above (introducing non-linearities) or below (introducing noise) their optimal level. It is not possible for the less experienced engineer to fix this except to tear down the mix and start again, paying attention to gain staging at every step. In analogue workflows, gain staging is critical and necessary and a discipline you have to learn and follow, to prevent ill effects creeping up on you, which they will.

Now imagine them working in floating point digital. If somewhere in the less experienced engineer's mix a plugin is running above or below its optimal level, it will sound... the same. There's no such thing as optimal level. Its 100% identical, because its just maths. So the less experienced engineer can, with a clear conscience, just not worry about this nonsense, and pay attention instead to all the million other things that absolutely do matter.

---

So, the functional practice of gain staging within the session, so crucial in analogue, if repeated within your DAW is just a bizarre and meaningless ritual. It does no harm whatsoever to the sound, so that is fine, but it seems to do untold harm within the minds of users, often beginners who have a hard enough road ahead of them, sowing confusion and uncertainty by making them think they must do something because of reasons they cannot hear. The "you might not be able to hear this, but trust me you should be doing it" line is horribly toxic and totally backwards. There is no 'hack' or 'secret' to mixing or audio engineering in general that does not begin and end with your ears and your judgement - it is a craft.

The analogue sweet-spot plugin

This is a lie. The build up of saturation and non-linearities if repeated in tiny bits across multiple tracks most certainly can sound wonderful, and in ways that can be very hard to judge when soloing a single source. We know this from track saturation plugins (shout out to Liteon non-linear) or tape emulation plugins. Now lets take that principle and percolate it through the marketing department of some less-than-honest plugin companies. Not the kind of plugin companies I've ever worked for, you understand, I swear Here's what they imply, its f***ing ludicrous, but if anyone has any other explanation I'd like to hear it:

---

We started with an empty plugin, which is something that perfectly replicates its input to its output. And then we added digital signal processing for it to change sound in useful ways. And then we added controls so the user could adjust how it changed the sound, and perhaps metering and other providers of information so that the user could apply that control in an informed way. Because we want the user to like our product and get the best out of it.

Okay, but we didn't stop there lol. What we did next, right, for ...er... reasons, dunno, is we got the DSP engineers to make a breakthrough beautifully nuanced and delicate emulation of the input circuit of some hardware. It was lovely, so lovely we didn't release it as a plugin, instead we stuck it on the front of this plugin without telling anyone. Ha! And even though its absolutely essential that it receives a signal in the -18dBfs range, we didn't provide a meter before it to indicate that, not even a signal LED, and even though a volume control, in DSP, is literally just a number multiplied by a variable, we didn't add one of them either.

And then we sold the whole thing in a fake sale for 20 dollars.


---

The mythical pseudo-analogue plugin that has a level dependent input, tuned to operate at a perfect sweet spot, yet lacking the most basic of DSP tools, an input level control (multiply digital number by variable value) ...that plugin doesn't exist. Or if it does it was made by an absolute moron who is intentionally inconveniencing users out of ..what? Malice?

Its all bollocks. And, if you think about it, you know its bollocks. And if you listen to it and you can't tell, then it doesn't matter whether its bollocks or not, it because if you can't tell then you shouldn't care. And that is a good thing. More time and brain power to apply to other things, things that do matter. And remember : If you can't trust your ears then the whole endeavour is madness.

-------------------------------------------------------------

If you really insist on learning this stuff from youTube:

Gregory Scott, designer of some of the worlds best hardware and plugins has a YouTube channel, and he's not even going to try to sell you anything:



If you want an absolute authority to take you through the technicalities and perhaps even correctly interpret those confusing plugin doctor graphs, well look no further than Dan Worrall:



And then, of course, there's this guy. Who you should be watching anyway:

__________________
The House of White Tie
White Tie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2021, 04:21 AM   #15
Lynx_TWO
Human being with feelings
 
Lynx_TWO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: St Petersburg FL
Posts: 996
Default

Great information from White Tie
__________________
My mixes from the Cambridge multitracks library
SoundCloud link & Youtube (ThemTube?) link
My preferred adjectives are “Handsome” and “Brilliant”
Lynx_TWO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2021, 09:47 AM   #16
DrFrankencopter
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 293
Default

The -18 dBFs/0 VU thing is only an issue with non-linear plugins that don't have input knobs (I'm looking at you SoundToys Decapitator).

Reaper's floating point busses/signal path will happily let you go way way above 0dBFS all the way through to the last fader prior to either conversion to analog (or digital output), or render.

I ran a test eons ago, where I applied a stupid amount of gain, and brought the master fader down accordingly. Results nulled to 0 with the original file. Floating point math works just fine (as expected)!

Beyond those oddball saturation plugins with no input level control there is one other situation where I think 'gain staging' matters, and that's at the end of the plugin chain before you hit the fader. The importance of gain staging here is not from a sonics/null perspective, but mostly from a workflow perspective. If you set up your mix with all the channel faders at either 0, or say -6 dB, you can insert a trim plugin at the end of each channel's plug in chain, and set a static mix level there. Here you're not looking for some 'target level', you're setting the trim so that the track sounds good with a static (no fader automation) mix. Now you can move on to your faders for automation moves. The advantage here is that your faders have the best resolution around 0dB...plus you likely won't find yourself in a situation where the fader is topped out. There may even be an argument that you get less fader 'zipper noise' by working the faders closer to 0 dB...but it's been a long time since I looked at zipper noise in Reaper (there wasn't much at all....Logic had way way more owing to low resolution faders).

I wish there was a way to force a plugin to sit at the end of the chain in Reaper....or does this exist already?

PS: As mentioned in posts above, Peak, VU, RMS, and LU meters all show different things depending on what the source material is like. They will have different levels and ballistics.
__________________
RME TotalMixFX Actions for Reaper here: https://stash.reaper.fm/v/29339/reape...MixOSC_x64.dll
DrFrankencopter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2021, 10:34 AM   #17
White Tie
Pixel Pusher
 
White Tie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Blighty
Posts: 4,950
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrFrankencopter View Post
The -18 dBFs/0 VU thing is only an issue with non-linear plugins that don't have input knobs (I'm looking at you SoundToys Decapitator).
I'm not sure Decapitator is a great example, is it not non-linear at any practical input level, like a waveshaper that was set so its 'gain' couldn't be turned to zero? Less of a '-18dB sweet spot' and more of a 'send me anything, I'll cook it'
__________________
The House of White Tie
White Tie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2021, 10:37 AM   #18
DrFrankencopter
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 293
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by White Tie View Post
I'm not sure Decapitator is a great example, is it not non-linear at any practical input level, like a waveshaper that was set so its 'gain' couldn't be turned to zero? Less of a '-18dB sweet spot' and more of a 'send me anything, I'll cook it'
Yeah, I don't disagree...still wish the damn thing had an input knob! Sometimes even with the drive on 0 it's too much
__________________
RME TotalMixFX Actions for Reaper here: https://stash.reaper.fm/v/29339/reape...MixOSC_x64.dll
DrFrankencopter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2021, 10:50 AM   #19
ashcat_lt
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 7,272
Default

Even in analog, the right way to gain stage is to listen! You turn the knob until it sounds good and maybe use the meters for a sanity check every once in a while. Sometimes it really does sound better when you smash the transients into the rails a little bit. Sometimes you can live with a little more hiss as long as the peaks don’t get crunched. Most of the time you’re trying to compromise between too much noise and too much distortion. But no meter can tell you what sounds best in any given context.

In digital it’s even more true. If you don’t want distortion then don’t use plugins which distort, and if you do want distortion, then you absolutely must dial in the amount of distortion by ear. And sure, maybe a noob just doesn’t even know what they’re supposed to be listening for, or maybe they hear something but can’t be sure where it’s coming from. Well, that’s the craft, kid! Learning that IS learning to mix, so get in there and do it. Actually useful instructional videos would be extremely boring listening exercises that nobody would really sit through.
ashcat_lt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2021, 12:25 PM   #20
kirk1701
Human being with feelings
 
kirk1701's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Ontario
Posts: 1,676
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rMidi View Post
Thanks all for your opinions and directions.

Special thanks to Kirk1701 for directing me to the very informative videos by Paul Third. Very concise and informative.

Kirk1701: 'Balance of Terror' is still hands down the best Trek episode / Movie ever!

Cheers all.
I want to emphasize that the numbers don't matter. You don't need to know the physical or mathematical principles behind anything. You're leveling your tracks to roughly the same relative output.

You want to hear them all playing together, as if a band were playing live. This is very broad stroke, pushing up the faders on a console kinda work.

("Balance of Terror" is indeed one of the best Star Trek episodes. The contemporary writers would do well to study it.)
__________________
"I've never trusted Klingons and I never will. I can never forgive them for the death of my boy."
kirk1701 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2021, 12:29 PM   #21
schwa
Administrator
 
schwa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: NY
Posts: 15,750
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kirk1701 View Post
("Balance of Terror" is indeed one of the best Star Trek episodes. The contemporary writers would do well to study it.)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Enemy_Below .. same plot, almost beat for beat.
schwa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2021, 01:28 PM   #22
rMidi
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 58
Default

So, if I am performing Unity gaining, why not simply target -18dBfs (the supposed 'magic' number?

No one has said this will hurt, they have simply said it does not matter, is busy work, is a waste of time,...

Quote:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Enemy_Below .. same plot, almost beat for beat.
That is known, it was an omague to The Enemy Below.
rMidi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2021, 02:34 PM   #23
DrFrankencopter
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 293
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rMidi View Post
So, if I am performing Unity gaining, why not simply target -18dBfs (the supposed 'magic' number?

No one has said this will hurt, they have simply said it does not matter, is busy work, is a waste of time,...
You can certainly do it. It's not a terrible practice...and there could even be some advantages. For example, if you are consistent with gain staging from plugin to plugin across your tracks then your plugin presets are going to be more 'universal'. This will also let you re-order your plugins without big changes being required. Plus, you're likely to get better metering performance from whatever plugins you're using.

That said, there's no need to get overly accurate/pedantic about this. That's why there was the discussion about VU vs RMS, vs LUFs vs Peak. You can't really compare a PPM (peak) meter to a VU directly. So if you want to keep a reasonably 'consistent' gain level from plugin just use the built in metering (maybe set it to pre-fader so you can just use the track meter) and use your eyes to:
1) Get the approximate average level around -18 (or whatever)
2) Without peaking above 0

Depending on the sound, whether it's transient heavy, or more sustained you'll need to adjust the input trim. Obviously, if you want to go down this road you'll need to have a trim plugin as your first in line.

Again, there's not much point in going too crazy about it, as the input levels early on in your plugin chain (prior to compressors, limiters, saturators) are likely to be pretty variable.

And finally, I don't think you want a -18dB target at the final output of your plugin chain...so you might want a trim as the last plugin. My thinking here is that you want the final trim value so your faders up in their "sweet spot", which is near 0 dB. Not much point in having something that's intended to be a background sound coming in at -18 RMS, and needing say -40dB of fader to get it in the right spot in your mix. The resolution of the faders gets lower the lower they get...they work best in a nominal -12 to +12 dB range.

If you set up that final trim value on each track such that you have a reasonably balanced mix with all faders at 0 then you're in good shape.


All that said...when it comes time for me to mix I just grab the faders and go. I'll insert a gain trim if I start running out of room (either on the channel faders, or plugin meters).
__________________
RME TotalMixFX Actions for Reaper here: https://stash.reaper.fm/v/29339/reape...MixOSC_x64.dll
DrFrankencopter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2021, 04:21 PM   #24
Geoff Waddington
Human being with feelings
 
Geoff Waddington's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Posts: 11,184
Default

Wow, all this talk of meters and DBs and such, learn somethin' new every day.

I always thought gain staging meant making sure your previous device could deliver, oh, let's say 40 frikkin' volts into a 600 ohm balanced load -- see, the idea was to see if you could catch the next device in the chain's input transformer windings on fire

Now that's what I call Gain Staging !!!
__________________
To install you need the CSI Software and Support Files
For installation instructions and documentation see the Wiki
Donate -- via PayPal to waddingtongeoff@gmail.com
Geoff Waddington is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2021, 04:24 PM   #25
DrFrankencopter
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 293
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoff Waddington View Post
I always thought gain staging meant making sure your previous device could deliver, oh, let's say 40 frikkin' volts into a 600 ohm balanced load -- see, the idea was to see if you could catch the next device in the chain's input transformer windings on fire

Now that's what I call Gain Staging !!!
Or alternatively plugging your Big Muff into your Tube Screamer and then your DS-1 and finally the Rat. Definitely enough gain for the stage!
__________________
RME TotalMixFX Actions for Reaper here: https://stash.reaper.fm/v/29339/reape...MixOSC_x64.dll
DrFrankencopter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2021, 04:34 PM   #26
White Tie
Pixel Pusher
 
White Tie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Blighty
Posts: 4,950
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rMidi View Post
No one has said this will hurt, they have simply said it does not matter, is busy work, is a waste of time,...
Exactly so. Its just a nothing, so the solution to your confusion is to not be, and the answer to what you are doing wrong is very very much this: Nothing. You're doing great. Ignore the nonsense at will.
__________________
The House of White Tie
White Tie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-03-2021, 04:37 PM   #27
DrFrankencopter
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 293
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by White Tie View Post
Exactly so. Its just a nothing, so the solution to your confusion is to not be, and the answer to what you are doing wrong is very very much this: Nothing. You're doing great. Ignore the nonsense at will.
Bingo! Very Yoda 'esque answer BTW. Whatever gets you to the desired end results faster...
__________________
RME TotalMixFX Actions for Reaper here: https://stash.reaper.fm/v/29339/reape...MixOSC_x64.dll
DrFrankencopter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2021, 02:28 AM   #28
enroe
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 1,575
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rMidi View Post
No one has said this will hurt, they have simply said it does not matter, is busy work, is a waste of time,...
Yes, yes - but it's a question of where you let your energy flow to.
Song composition is a complex undertaking and rarely crowned with
success. That is why it would be all the more important not to
bother with side scenes.
__________________
free mp3s + info: andy-enroe.de songs and weird stuff: enroe.de
enroe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2021, 05:53 AM   #29
beingmf
Human being with feelings
 
beingmf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Jazz City
Posts: 5,065
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rMidi View Post
- Bass track Reaper meter is showing ~ -18dB peaking at -15dB.
- Waves VU meter is showing ~-12dB peaking at -7dB
Because Reaper measures RMS + peak FS and the Waves meter measures VU?

Quote:
Originally Posted by White Tie View Post
If a plugin is level dependent on the way in, be that because it is a dynamic processor or having some input saturation, it will have provided metering and a gain control to set it. I guarantee it.
Test London Acoustics Taipei in N4 (Player) - that's one of the most sensitive* plugins regarding its input level (not the virtual input level, but the source's) - you can boost or attenuate and thus alter the machine's behaviour after the fact, independently from the record level hitting the tape, but if you feed it too hot, there is no way to cure it, it sounds terrible.

* and IMVHO clearly the best - as in "real" as well as beautiful - sounding
__________________
Windows 10x64 | AMD Ryzen 3700X | ATI FirePro 2100 | Marian Seraph AD2, 4.3.8 | Yamaha Steinberg MR816x
"If I can hear well, then everything I do is right" (Allen Sides)
beingmf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2021, 05:42 PM   #30
kirk1701
Human being with feelings
 
kirk1701's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Ontario
Posts: 1,676
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by schwa View Post
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Enemy_Below .. same plot, almost beat for beat.
I suppose I should have said "modern Star Trek writers."
__________________
"I've never trusted Klingons and I never will. I can never forgive them for the death of my boy."
kirk1701 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2021, 04:12 AM   #31
Amberience
Human being with feelings
 
Amberience's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: swing on the spiral of our divinity
Posts: 2,242
Default

Forget the numbers. Look at it in principle.

Do you want to be struggling to set your faders to the levels required to have elements in your mix pop out? Do you want to struggle to make things quiet enough without resorting to extreme fader settings?

If you do want that.... then record extremely hot and peg all of the meters and then just turn down the master to avoid clipping at the final stage.

There you go. You've got a crap mix.


The numbers aren't important. What is important is to make sure you're giving yourself enough headroom through the entire signal chain so that the culminative effect is enough headroom at the output.

Think about leaving all of the faders at unity - what do you want the "default" sound of your song to sound like? Aim for that when setting your recording levels, and you should be able to get a passable mix without doing ANYTHING to your signal levels.

This obviously gets a bit more complicated when everything is in the box with VSTinstruments and what not; but the principle is the same.
Amberience is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2021, 08:02 AM   #32
JonLinnarson
Human being with feelings
 
JonLinnarson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Posts: 724
Default

The easiest answer to this is: just because a dBFS meter is showing that your signal is floating around -18dB it doesn't automatically mean that a VU-meter will show you that it's around 0VU.

If you really want it to be around 0VU, just insert the VU-meter and set your level according to it.
JonLinnarson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2021, 08:31 AM   #33
Lynx_TWO
Human being with feelings
 
Lynx_TWO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: St Petersburg FL
Posts: 996
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amberience View Post
Forget the numbers. Look at it in principle.

Do you want to be struggling to set your faders to the levels required to have elements in your mix pop out? Do you want to struggle to make things quiet enough without resorting to extreme fader settings?

If you do want that.... then record extremely hot and peg all of the meters and then just turn down the master to avoid clipping at the final stage.

There you go. You've got a crap mix.


The numbers aren't important. What is important is to make sure you're giving yourself enough headroom through the entire signal chain so that the culminative effect is enough headroom at the output.

Think about leaving all of the faders at unity - what do you want the "default" sound of your song to sound like? Aim for that when setting your recording levels, and you should be able to get a passable mix without doing ANYTHING to your signal levels.

This obviously gets a bit more complicated when everything is in the box with VSTinstruments and what not; but the principle is the same.
This is why I track-prep with Rx Advanced. I normalize all tracks to -26 LUFS, vocals to -22LUFS, and all drums but the kick to -32 LUFS. Then when I’m mixing, everything gets turned up or down in 1-3dB increments and I’m done with a mix in 20 minutes max. Mixing faster = better mixes in my experience since you don’t get ear fatigue or second guess yourself
__________________
My mixes from the Cambridge multitracks library
SoundCloud link & Youtube (ThemTube?) link
My preferred adjectives are “Handsome” and “Brilliant”
Lynx_TWO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2021, 10:39 AM   #34
kirk1701
Human being with feelings
 
kirk1701's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Ontario
Posts: 1,676
Default

I wouldn't say it's just busy work. When you're learning penmanship, you have lots of guide lines to help you train your fingers. We forget what it was like when we first learned. Telling beginners guides are useless is like throwing a child who can't swim into the deep end of the pool. They may figure it out, but they'll more than likely panic and drown.

I found when I was learning to mix, 0VU was a good training guide by which I trained my ears. It's a longer line for a horse, a lifejacket, etc. A training aid is never a waste of time.
__________________
"I've never trusted Klingons and I never will. I can never forgive them for the death of my boy."
kirk1701 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2021, 11:44 AM   #35
White Tie
Pixel Pusher
 
White Tie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Blighty
Posts: 4,950
Default

How can a VU be a meaningful training guide for what you hear? The relationship between the two is so undefinable as to be meaningless. This whole misunderstanding confuses people, pointlessly, so its A Bad Thing.

Watch this.

__________________
The House of White Tie
White Tie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2021, 07:17 PM   #36
kirk1701
Human being with feelings
 
kirk1701's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Ontario
Posts: 1,676
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by White Tie View Post
How can a VU be a meaningful training guide for what you hear? The relationship between the two is so undefinable as to be meaningless. This whole misunderstanding confuses people, pointlessly, so its A Bad Thing.
Again, I don't disagree. I think you're being a bit dogmatic, though.

It's true that there's far too much meter-watching and not enough listening (among us amateurs anyway).

I like Dan Worrall a lot. This is a very helpful video indeed. You'll notice he recommends -23lufs on the master? That's what I mean by training wheels. This is a good video for the OP to check out.

Look, I'm a blues and rock musician. I think in analogue. Much of my early listening was on my dad's silver Sony hi-fi. The vu meters on the amp were also largely meaningless, but somehow I figured out where a solid listening level sat. Guess what? It was roughly 0VU.

My mixes started sounding better to me when I discovered Sonimus Britson. First, I liked the subtle saturation.

Second, the VU meters reminded me of Dad's hi-fi. I had no understanding of floating point math, but I did know how to use a volume pot and a VU meter. Get that needle bouncing somewhere close to 0--while listening carefully of course--seemed to put all the individual tracks together in a general way.

I started with drums, then bass, then guitars, etc. Usually when I got to the kick/bass relationship, I had a pretty good idea of the overall balance.

Please note I'm not using any absolutes here. The music always dictates the level. I'd be a fool to recommend using VU meters without actively listening. Sometimes you may hit the red line bang on, other times not. If you're listening to how the individual track sounds against the rest, you'll find the spot.

This is just a broad, basic methodology to get started. It's not a law. I think we agree that the word "should" is the real barrier. In fact, let me adjust Yoda's axiom: "There is no should; only try."
uck
The OP may like to try this method to get him started feeling out balances. If he finds it foolish or a waste of time, he can chuck it out.

What you're saying (or perhaps the way you're saying it) sounds like you're telling the man to step into the mix completely blind, with no tools whatsoever.

"Hey man," *tokes joint "nuthin' don't matter, man. Dave's not here man."

I think Dan's method in your recommended video is as good a method as any to get one stuck in.

But to answer the OG question, you're doing nothing wrong.

Does it sound good? Are you clipping the master buss?

Other than that, the numbers you're talking ain't hurtin' nothin'.
__________________
"I've never trusted Klingons and I never will. I can never forgive them for the death of my boy."
kirk1701 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2021, 02:16 AM   #37
White Tie
Pixel Pusher
 
White Tie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Blighty
Posts: 4,950
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kirk1701 View Post
What you're saying (or perhaps the way you're saying it) sounds like you're telling the man to step into the mix completely blind, with no tools whatsoever.
I'm saying this particular nonsense is nonsense, which it is. I don't see how you conflate that into 'no tools whatsoever', but clearly I didn't say that, perhaps you are being disingenuous?

If I take your point correctly, its that none of this is much of a hardship and may be somewhat helpful to some people. If so, I disagree vehemently; you or whoever it was posted videos of a youtuber getting very confused about it, and the comments sections of those and other videos are full of unhappy people getting tied up into all kinds of knots about being confused and uncertain about this thing they've been told is important yet they can't hear. When it spreads here to the Reaper forum, with people using terms like 'confused' and 'uncertain' and while talking about 'gain staging' and '-18dB' and 'plugin sweet spots' then it breaks my heart. Because its objectively, provably wrong and the kind of superstitious, marketing led bullshit we haven't have around here in the past.
__________________
The House of White Tie

Last edited by White Tie; 12-08-2021 at 02:39 AM.
White Tie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2021, 06:54 AM   #38
Pashkuli
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: United Kingdom, T. Wells
Posts: 2,454
Default

rMidi,
make a poll as a Reaper feature request to have an option to hide all meters.
Apparently... you do not need them. "Use your ears.", right?

Never used Waves VU plugin. Does it trim the input audio to fit the headroom of 18dBFS?
Your bass track might not get affected automatically, I do not know how this plugin works.

But here is more info on understanding this kind of problems. If you send me a clip of that bass (not a whole thing) as it is, I might find out what is going on. I got some old Waves license somewhere, but for the sake of experiment might install the "peoples" version.

You, rMidi, wrote:
Quote:
I am attempting to gain stage.
- dBfs = Decibel full scale.

Most (if not all) of my plugins emulate analog hardware (mostly Slate Digital)
With that said I understand that 0db on a plugin meter (VU) really means -18dbfs.
Additionally, I understand that analog emulations are sort of optimized to operate at -18dbfs.

Question / Verification:
Reaper Stereo Peak meter is dBfs? Yes?

MODO Track:
- I have a MODO bass on a track named MODO.
- I am sending the output of the MODO track to another track named Bass.
- I send it at -3.00dB, pre-fader (post-FX)

Bass Track:
- Bass track is floating around -18dB and peaking at -15 dB
- Put a single instance of Waves VU Meter Stereo on this track (only thing on track).
- 'Headroom' is set to 18dB.
- According the the Waves documentation this should cause the VU meter to show 0dB at -18dB. It does not. It looks
to me as if it is centred around 12dB. Additionally, it looks like it is peaking at -7dB.

What am I doing wrong here?
This may be a question for the Waves forum. I thought I would ask here first before going there.

Thanks.
You need to refer to the plugin manufacturer's specification on whether they have such intended reference value of 0VU = -18dBfs.
Even if they do, it would be more regarding compressors\saturators\clippers\synth and distortion plugins (usually non-linear gain involved in them).

This -18dBfs value is not about the Peaks, rather about the average (in terms of time" milliseconds window) measurement of 'volume' of the sound (finite sum of peaks envelope curve if you will). This average is called RMS (root mean square; a mathematical calculation of a sum of peaks in a sinewave).

-18dBfs is a recommended reference value (not for the Peaks!), rather the assumption is that in digital realm it will allow for a "headroom" of hr = 18dBfs, till the short and high volume little peaks, which can be captured by modern audio interfaces (ADC, analogue to digital converters) to stay intact (not digitally clipped at "digital ceiling" of 0dbFS).
0dBfs - hr = reference value
0dBfs - 18dBfs = -18dBfs
(assign to 0VU)

If you'd like to not worry about the peaks (as they did not worry about them back in analogue era, at least not scientifically), you can put clipper plugin (some limiters have such clippers) on the Master track and forget 'worrying about the peaks' going above 0dBfs at the DAC (digital to analogue converter of your audio card).

At least that is how I do it. I use Limiter №6 (free\old version of Tokyo Dawn Record 'Limiter 6 GE').

Then, of course with some signals on the tracks you would see (occasionally) the Peaks clipping in the red of the corresponding track's meter, but do not worry about it as Reaper processes sound data internally as floating point and in the audio data bits it's got enormous headroom.

Nothing stops you from using clipper plugin (such as Venn Audio clipper) on the visually clipping tracks, it is up to you.
As long as you use a clipper limiter (such as Limiter №6 or Venn Audio instance) on the Master track only, that unit on the Master track will get you covered.
I bet you won't be able to hear peaks clipping anyway (at normal volumes, of course).

And since I said "normal volumes", you should calibrate your audio devices to produce such volume of sound, which is comfortable to you.

Play a reference track in Reaper, adjust its clip event trim knob (up left corner of the clip event) till the meters read an RMS (on the Master track) of about -16dBfs to -12dBfs (somehow modern audio stream value, which usually averages to about -14dBLU: loudness units).
You can use Reaper\s master track settings to show dbLU or RMS for this measurement or separate dedicated plugin. It is up to you.

Then when around that value, go and adjust the hardware knob of your audio speakers or headphone output volume knob, till you feel comfortable listening.



In Reaper I am at -18dbFS RMS usually for recording (red threshold of the Master track).
In Reaper I am at -16dbFS RMS (red threshold of the Master track) usually for mixing.
For final mastering tend to process\loudness-normalise it at -14dbLU (and peaks at around -1dbFS to -0.5dbFS to cover samplerate conversion or lossy file format conversion later: .mp3, .ogg, .aac).

In Foobar I am at -12dbFS RMS, but then I use ReplayGain (which adjust the overall stream to -14dbLU) and calculates per track.









Last edited by Pashkuli; 12-10-2021 at 05:33 AM.
Pashkuli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2021, 07:10 AM   #39
karbomusic
Human being with feelings
 
karbomusic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 29,260
Default

Quote:
make a poll as a Reaper feature request to have an option to hide all meters.
Apparently... you do not need them. "Use your ears.", right?
Right, only the naïve think they need anything beyond a peak meter to mix.

I've suggested the ability to hide meters in the past. Some of the most beloved mixes of all time were done exactly that way (and still are). This whole mix with your eyes things is just a decade or two old and is in many ways a detriment to up and coming mixers. And internet fool's game.

Anyone who thinks you need meters to create a great mix, is naïve and/or deluded. Period.
__________________
Music is what feelings sound like.
karbomusic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2021, 07:37 AM   #40
Pashkuli
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: United Kingdom, T. Wells
Posts: 2,454
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by karbomusic View Post
Anyone who thinks you need meters to create a great mix, is naïve and/or deluded. Period.
Meters are helpful tools for the eyes (awareness), not for the ears.
The Peak ones (they are the Track meters in Reaper) give a general ideal of what might clip the DAC after the Master\Bus to hardware output track.

99.9999999% of the people can not hear Peaks clipping on "normal" volume.
That does not mean the DAC also can not. It can.
And generally that is considered as "bad event". But in some extreme genres of electronic music, such clipping baked as an FX is part of the style.

Most music after year 2000 has Peaks clipped, because they pushed the RMS\Loudness with limiters to even RMS at -6dBfs.

Loud is good, is perceived as better. So only certain audiophiles were shaking heads in a facepalm.

Meters are warning signs. Pushing the levels down so the respective Peaks do not clip, does not mean your mixes will sound better.

It means that your incoming signals are "in good care".

I do not care much about them at all (unless it is some acoustic, orchestral music), with a clipper\limiter plugin as mentioned.

But for acoustic\orchestral the average signal is not over-compressored anyway. Peaks are not squashed, nor they are pushed up and up to make the volume (RMS) louder.
Pashkuli is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 10:19 PM.


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