Challeneged! Levels for Post

[Henchman]

Again, I'm not disagreeing with you. My thought is that if it is recorded "too" low, then it isn't recorded properly because it is too noisy. That was the point of the post (I had hoped). I never said anything about riding limiters or compressors.

recording at low levels, really doesn't add any discernible noise once boosted.

As philip said, the location BG noise is pretty much always more of an issue than the little bit of potential noise created by gaining up.

[PTA]

recording at low levels, really doesn't add any discernible noise once boosted.

As philip said, the location BG noise is pretty much always more of an issue than the little bit of potential noise created by gaining up.

Depends how low.

[Henchman]

Depends how low.

As I stated above. I have had audio, that barely registered, and it sounded fine in the end.

Too hot, is unfixable.

[PTA]

As I stated above. I have had audio,nth at barely registered, and it sounded fine in the end.

Too hot, is unfixable.

And again, I've had editors say they can't stand that. I posted (I hoped) in regard to audio that isn't recorded properly, too low, and therefore has poor signal to noise ratio, not about how it's better to record too hot and distort the audio. And I agree, too hot is not good.

[Jaymz]

Bouncing around -20 to -12 is usually my goal.

[Tim M]

I don't quite understand you Henchman, isn't that the point of neverclip, with the bottom bits being full of noise, on a camera at 16bit I can't see how that wouldn't have awful noise recorded at like -60db.

[Henchman]

I don't quite understand you Henchman, isn't that the point of neverclip, with the bottom bits being full of noise, on a camera at 16bit I can't see how that wouldn't have awful noise recorded at like -60db.

You'd be surprised.

[Marc Wielage]

The editor complaint has to do with the hassles they face gaining up audio in their NLEs--they sometimes end up doubling or even quadrupling clips to get them loud enough for their cut.  But that's just a picture editing issue   Given the choice of getting clipped or under-recorded audio I would agree that underrecorded is better--in audio post we have good ways of making clips louder. 

 

The trick there is the projects that have no audio post. If the picture editors have to "mix" a version directly for air -- which is sadly the case for news, documentaries, and some modest-budget cable shows -- I can see why they would bitch and complain if they received tracks at what we would call a "normal" level for features.

 

I try to make a judgement call based on experience, and (when I can) I'll ask the producer "will you be doing the mix on this, or will you do all the sound work in the edit bay?" If it's the latter, then I'll pop the levels up at least 5-6 dB and use a hard limiter in line. 

 

In too many years of dailies work, I've rarely heard complaints about tracks being too loud, but I've often heard complaints about tracks that were too low. I think it's possible to deliver a mix track that's pretty loud and beefy, while still protecting all the isos as much as 5-10dB lower. As far as the camera tracks being clipped, I would ask for a test if possible and see where the levels come up in the show's editing software (like Final Cut or Avid). If it don't clip, you must acquit! 

[Henchman]

And again, I've had editors say they can't stand that. I posted (I hoped) in regard to audio that isn't recorded properly, too low, and therefore has poor signal to noise ratio, not about how it's better to record too hot and distort the audio. And I agree, too hot is not good.

I don't care what an editor thinks. They are usually unable to make any judgement calls when it comes to audio quality.

They're usually in noisy rooms, listening to un calibrated speakers.

Audio recorded with peaks of -20 is completely fine,mid that's what a client asks for.

Trust me. We do not need level peaking at -5.

Keep your averages around -20.

And don't simply roll the top and bottom off.

The real signal to noise ratio issue comes from noise on set.

Again, I can't ever remember having noise issues because of low level recordings.

[Henchman]

The trick there is the projects that have no audio post. 

I didn't know we were talking about basic ENG stuff.

And if an editor has to mix, then they need to learn their tools.

Meaning the gain they can easily add without having to duplicate clips across multiple tracks.

[Matt Radlauer]

If -20 is "zero" in the digital world and you pretty much have 20dbs of headroom, why not use it?

If you're peaking at -20 then your averaging -30 for normal dialogue? That is way too low imo.

This tells me that you either dont trust your gear or you've been burned by a dp or post house.

I ride the levels pretty hot and rely on the quality of my pre's and limiters.

To me there is no reason to not use that headroom.

[David Waelder]

It may be instructive to visit a series of level tests that Sound Devices made to evaluate the effect of low levels on the final product. I don't suppose that those tests would settle all disagreements here but they are pertinent. The SD technicians made several matched recordings at different bit depths, one at normal levels and one at -40 dB.

 

The tests may be found on the Sound Devices site:

Real World Advantages of 24-bit Recording

http://www.sounddevices.com/notes/recorders/real-world-24-bits/

 

David

[PTA]

I don't care what an editor thinks. They are usually unable to make any judgement calls when it comes to audio quality.

They're usually in noisy rooms, listening to un calibrated speakers.

I'm sorry you don't care, but to say this is untrue and a little harsh. Like Marc said above, many shows, including reality shows that I work on, the editor IS making the audio decisions and the editors I know are qualified to do so.

[PTA]

I didn't know we were talking about basic ENG stuff.

And if an editor has to mix, then they need to learn their tools.

Meaning the gain they can easily add without having to duplicate clips across multiple tracks.

Yes, I was talking ENG. Sorry not to be super clear on that.

But do tell me then for my knowledge, what is the difference between duplicating clips and adding gain in post?

[Matt Radlauer]

Adding gain increases everything so your hearing noise floor as well as the sound of your mic pre however good or bad.

[Henchman]

Yes, I was talking ENG. Sorry not to be super clear on that.

But do tell me then for my knowledge, what is the difference between duplicating clips and adding gain in post?

Adding gain using a plugins gain, is much faster, and you don't wast space on unneeded tracks.

If the noise floor of your pres are that big of an issue, you need better gear.

[PTA]

Adding gain using a plugins gain, is much faster, and you don't wast space on unneeded tracks.

If the noise floor of your pres are that big of an issue, I need better gear.

But does it have the exact same net effect of raising the overall level?

[Henchman]

If -20 is "zero" in the digital world and you pretty much have 20dbs of headroom, why not use it? If you're peaking at -20 then your averaging -30 for normal dialogue? That is way too low imo. This tells me that you either dont trust your gear or you've been burned by a dp or post house. I ride the levels pretty hot and rely on the quality of my pre's and limiters. To me there is no reason to not use that headroom.

Then you

If -20 is "zero" in the digital world and you pretty much have 20dbs of headroom, why not use it? If you're peaking at -20 then your averaging -30 for normal dialogue? That is way too low imo. This tells me that you either dont trust your gear or you've been burned by a dp or post house. I ride the levels pretty hot and rely on the quality of my pre's and limiters. To me there is no reason to not use that headroom.

I said keep your average at -20. Which should keep your peaks around -10

The headroom is there so you only need your limiters on extreme levels.

You absolutely do not need to be anywhere near 0.

[Max Hirtenstein]

Seems to me like there will always be complaints from clueless editors. Might as well do things the right way which is to record up to the very top bit of signal without hitting your limiter. Otherwise you might as well record in 16 bit.

[Henchman]

Seems to me like there will always be complaints from clueless editors. Might as well do things the right way which is to record up to the very top bit of signal without hitting your limiter. Otherwise you might as well record in 16 bit.

Absolutely not.

Try sitting on a dubstage sometime.

I'm starting to realize why we have the type of issues we have sometimes on the dubstage.

Anybody thinking they need to record to the top of the signal, needs to go back to school.

And we are not even talking about the type of saturation that is going to occur when pushing the mic pres that hard.

[Matt Radlauer]

Seems to me like there will always be complaints from clueless editors. Might as well do things the right way which is to record up to the very top bit of signal without hitting your limiter. Otherwise you might as well record in 16 bit.

 

Here here...Do it right to begin with, then there is no "fix it in post" business!!

 

 

Then you

I said keep your average at -20. Which should keep your peaks around -10

The headroom is there so you only need your limiters on extreme levels.

You absolutely do not need to be anywhere near 0.

 

I must have mis-read what you said. Average at -20, peaks at -10 or so is about where I roll..I keep my output limiters at -18.

 

I would much rather an editor have to pot down the levels of my useable audio then to have to layer or gain up a track thats so low that it could be come un-useable...or crappy!

[Matt Radlauer]

Absolutely not.

Try sitting on a dubstage sometime.

I'm starting to realize why we have the type of issues we have sometimes on the dubstage.

Anybody thinking they need to record to the top of the signal, needs to go back to school.

And we are not even talking about the type of saturation that is going to occur when pushing the mic pres that hard.

 

The days of tape are over! Your playing with fire if anyone thinks it will sound good that close to Zero,

[Henchman]

But does it have the exact same net effect of raising the overall level?

Yes

[Henchman]

I'd be interested to hear where you guys put your high and low pass filters.

[Zack]

More bits you can fill up without limiting/compression, the better. I've heard this many times from very successful audio engineers. This is basically the theory of never clip IMO.

Yes, it's better to be under than over. However I think with the differences of what you're asked to do, rather than what you know what to do comes down to renmbering a basic principal, "just satisfy the ones that write you the check".

I'd be interested to hear where you guys put your high and low pass filters.

There's never a standard, it all depends.