Stereo file too low

[Marcel]

Anyone have this issue?
when I export the tracks 23&24 to a music file and pop it into my computer to play i can barely hear it.
I have to then dump it into Audacity or something to normalize it and then it is still very low...

 

[Marcel]

i guess I should add, yes I know about gain staging

 

[JBL822]

Yes, I see that also. I record at a decent level according to the level meters on the Model 24, But whenever I mixdown and export to my computer and open the file , it shows the level down as low as -24db. I then have to do what you do and import into a sound editor and normalize to get a decent level

 

[-mjk-]

I don't use a Model 24, but every mix master I've ever done requires Mastering to get it where it needs to be.

 

[Mark Richards]

Also don't own a Model 24. But this issue pops up regularly in the DP-24/32 forum.

Record a steady tone at -12dBFS on your Model 24. Port the result to your computer.

If the computer shows the same level, it's your recording techniques.

If the computer shows something less, then it could be any number of reasons...too many to speculate about...or guess at.

 

[Matthew Fogel]

@marcel.9739 that's by design. The Line on the display and on the LEDs for 0 is actually -12 db. This represents where the analog components just start to breakup (giving a bit of warmth) but the digital recording still has 12 db of headroom to prevent clipping. This is on purpose so that you can mix in an analog workflow without digitally clipping the WAV files. I find that the noise floor of the micpre's (-124) is so quiet that I can just normalize the wave files once I'm in Reaper and then start my digital mixing workflow. Also, unlike on a Tascam Portastudio which is a hardware based DAW, where an export is analogous to "bouncing tracks" in a software DAW, in order to get a complete mixdown of your session to tracks 23/24 or to export a Stereo wav file, you first need to rewind to the beginning of your session, set your levels and EQ positions for each track (I just audition this using play) and then when you are happy with your mix, hit record without arming any of the tracks. You will then have to record all the way through the song/session. (If you want any automation of levels during your recording, you will have to literally ride the faders during mixdown like they did back in the day.) This will create a new mixdown on tracks 23/24 that you can then export using the Export to Stereo or just copying the tracks 23/24 for final mastering in DAW.

 

[Mark Richards]

Looking at the Level Diagram in the Model 24 OM, it seems that the digital signal going to the SD card (the MTR) is actually almost -20 dBFS; while the signal going to the mixer's stereo meters and main outputs remain in the analog domain at a nominal 0 dBu (.775 volts). That would reinforce what Mathew wrote above.

Are the LCD display screen track meters calibrated to the MTR (i.e. to dBFS)?

 

[Matthew Fogel]

Yes. The line on the display is -12 and the Physical LED VU meter for the Master channel can go into the red and it will not clip. I have mixed down really hot and the actual track is pegged at -3 when imported into Reaper but not actually clipped. I found that the mix was very saturated at that level.
The OL red will result in a clip showing 0db in your DAW when you move the file. +15 on the LED will show up as around -3 in the digital domain and +6 will show up around -5. In all cases the analog saturation will almost sound distorted. Like edge of Break up on an amp type stuff. (Which makes sense - I had to crank the MicPres to +30 range ie 3 o’clock) so unless it’s for a heavy guitar or metal vocals, you probably do not want.
Did not like. But it was a good exercise to see the limits of the MTR. I usually keep my levels at or below the -12 line when recording and watch my gain when mixing down. And then when I drag over the files to my DAW I just hit normalize or use “loudness” in Goldwave before I go to work.

 

[-mjk-]

Also, unlike on a Tascam Portastudio which is a hardware based DAW, where an export is analogous to "bouncing tracks" in a software DAW

Actually, on the DP machines, Export is only an export of a track or series of tracks. The Export function puts all the track edits together into a single, useable file. To do a mix on a DP machine, one has to record it in Mixdown mode, in real time.

 

[Matthew Fogel]

Thanks for the clarification that it works the same if you want to commit your mix for both DP or Model.

 

[Marcel]

Looking at the Level Diagram in the Model 24 OM, it seems that the digital signal going to the SD card (the MTR) is actually almost -20 dBFS; while the signal going to the mixer's stereo meters and main outputs remain in the analog domain at a nominal 0 dBu (.775 volts). That would reinforce what Mathew wrote above.

Are the LCD display screen track meters calibrated to the MTR (i.e. to dBFS)?

ahhh this helps.

 

[Bambi]

Hello, I'm having the same problem with my Model 12. The volume is so low that I don't think it's just a matter of mastering or not, but something else. The Mark Richards comment about the Model 24 Level Diagram has really made me think. I've checked the Model 12 Diagram and it seems that it also records at a maximun of around -20 dBFs on the SD card. Mark or MJK, could you confirm me this is so? I'm not very sure if I understood the Diagram correctly. In case it is like that, and being the Main outputs able of sending a +22 dBu signal, I was thinking of recording the output signal into my Tascam DR-100 MK3 recorder to see if I get a louder recording. It sounds a little bit absurd having to use a second recorder to register the sound from a first recorder but, given the SD card low volume results, it may not be a bad thing to try. However, it will only work if the own DR-100 MK3 doesn't have an SD card volume limitation too. I've tried to find a Level Diagram of the DR-100 MK3 but haven't found. Do you know how could I find out? In fact all my recordings with the DR-100 MK3 sound very low to me, too

 

[Bambi]

I've recorded a constant tone of -20 dB on my DR-100 MK3 and measured it with online software and it gave me almost the same level, so the DR-100 MK3 doesn't seem to record at a lower level on the SD card. Do you think that connecting the Model 12 output to the DR-100 MK3 would give me a better result? As I'll send a very high signal from the first to the second, I'll have to lower the DR-100 gain, so I'm not sure if I'll get any different result. Regarding mastering, to avoid confusion, I won't question it's importance at all. It's just that my recordings are so low that it seems that I should get a much louder starting point even before thinking of mastering

 

[-mjk-]

Does the M12 have a normalize function?

OK, it does not (the term doesn't exist in the UM).

I'm gonna discuss some things about my workflow that I hope will be helpful.

I took a look at the block diagram and the level diagram, and unless I'm missing something, it appears that there is 18dBU of headroom in the DAC and that the DSP engine can function up to 0 dBFS. Given that the mic/line inputs have lots of gain (on the order of 50/60 dB) I don't see why anyone would have trouble getting their levels up to a reasonable recording level.

Given the dynamic nature of performed music like drums and guitars, the peak levels might prevent one from going really hot into the recorder, but, as long as there is a reasonable level and the noise floor is low, the digital audio level can be manipulated to wherever it needs to be, later.

I think the issue might be monitoring levels rather than mixing levels. FWIW, my target mixdown level is -20 dBFS. That gives me the headroom that I need for whatever peaks are happening in the mix. Things like drums and acoustic guitars can be as dynamic as they need and I don't have to worry about clipping (over 0 dBFS). Once I have a stereo mixdown file, I then proceed to do the Mastering to get the track level wherever it needs to be for delivery to whatever platform. These days I'm using the Adam T8V powered monitors and they have plenty of gain. I also use a Mackie Big Knob Studio, and that has trim pots on it to match levels between sets of monitors. I have a set of Tascam VL-S3BT monitors that I really like a lot. I have those matched to the apparent volume of the Adams by using the trim pot on the Big Knob Studio. My point is, I have a lot of gain and precise control over my monitoring. The importance of that cannot be overlooked. Some of the comments from Model series users seem to indicate that studio monitoring is of secondary importance to the recording. Monitoring is everything. You cannot mix what you cannot properly hear.

During mixing, the level at which I have to crank up the monitor volume is considerably higher than when Mastering and as I raise the level of the limiting, I turn the monitors down to compensate for the increasing level of the track.

So, maybe some of you Model series users need to turn up your monitor level. It really shouldn't matter what the mix level is in order for you to properly hear what you are mixing. If I'm working with something very quiet, I turn up the monitors and carefully do what needs to be done.

The Model 12 does not have a dedicated Control Room monitoring section. The UM suggests using the Sub bus and fader for monitoring. Looking at the block diagram, that is less than ideal because it's pre the final EQ section. I would probably try using the Main outs and a monitor controller like the one I mentioned. That way, I would be monitoring off the same bus that's going to the mixdown track in the recorder.

 

[Bambi]

Hello MJK, thank you for your message and for your patience explaining your methods. I admit that I understimate the importance of monitoring. Besides, I have to work at very low levels as I have extremely sensitive ears and can't stand volumes higher than very soft. However, as I know the importance of checking things at higher volumes, I always listen to my recordings and mixes that way for the brief period of time that my ears allow me, and then correct from there. In spite of that, the final volume I get on my 2 track stereo masters is so low that, in addition to the monitoring and lack of mastering issues, I think that there is something else I may be doing wrong. I can't send you any audio reference yet but, if I'm able to record one in the following weeks, I'll post it here so you can give me your opinion. For curiosity, if you follow a correct recording, mixing and mastering process of a soft song, let's say acoustic folk with soft percussion, how much difference in volume can you get between the initial recording and the final master track? (I mean a rough estimation)

 

[Bambi]

And forgive me one last question. Looking at the Diagram Level, I can see the 18 dB headroom you said before. But I have a doubt. I understand headroom when it refers to recording, for example when aiming at -18 dBFS to allow instrument peaks to happen without clipping. But, inside the Model 12 Diagram, what does that 18 dB headroom refer to? Does it mean that the SD card can record at a maximum level of -18 dBFS? And that you could only raise that level to near 0 DBFS by mastering the file on the computer? If that is the case, the option of recording the Model 12 Main output into my DR-100 MK3 recorder would work for breaking the -18 dBFS barrier of the SD card?

 

[-mjk-]

OK @Bambi there is a bit of confusion going on. The recording limit in the digital domain is -0 dBFS. Higher levels can be achieved but at the expense of distortion:

The Model 12 is capable of recording at any level you put into it. Some of these issues like headroom are beyond the scope of the forum and you should research what headroom is. Simply stated, headroom is the space you have to work with.

What you really want is generically called a "maximizer" and the DP machines have a basic form of mastering built in that does the job pretty well. But the Model series has no such capability, and given the integration with a DAW that was part of the design philosophy, I would venture to say that with the Model 12 alone it is likely that one cannot achieve release-ready productions within the unit alone; it requires a DAW or standalone mastering solution. I think Tascam expects that people will use a DAW for editing and mastering.

As for mastering, the truth is, the lower the initial level of the track is, the better as there is more headroom (there it is again!) to work with. That just means I can use a limiter and bring up the level where I need it without running into distortion as easily as if the track were hot to begin with. As for your question of final level, the answer is "whatever the level needs to be" and that all depends upon the format of the consumption. For streaming services, I (of course) master to whatever the streaming services recommend.

 

[Arjan P]

As for mastering, the truth is, the lower the initial level of the track is, the better as there is more headroom (there it is again!) to work with.

I have to disagree here. When people send me tracks for mastering, I want a healthy level - and any peak below 0 dBTP (True Peak) is fine by me. The mentioned -18 dB value earlier in this topic is not a final mix type of level in my book - although also depending on the bit depth of the file. I'm quite happy with a stereo mix true peaking between -12 and -0.1 dB. And ofcourse that could be a single hard snare hit with the rest of the mix staying at -12 for instance.

What unfortunately happens too often these days, is that I get mixes that already have compression or limiting applied on the stereo bus (usually from a DAW). Now these can be hard or even impossible to work with..

 

[Bambi]

Hello MJK and Arjan. I'm starting to think that the solution may be easier than what I was thinking. As an inexperienced person in recording and mixing by myself, I was deceived with my final mixes little volume, and at the same time reluctant to use compression, EQ, etc. But I'm starting to think that maybe normalizing my file I could just get what I need. I was dubious of this option as I thought it altered the signal in other ways that just raising the volume. But maybe if I normalize using Peak normalization I can preserve the natural sound of the instruments and the inter-relation between them, only that everything sounding at a more professional level, right? I don't need to enter the Loudness War at all. As I was telling you in my previous post, I've had strong ear sensitivity all my life, and I hate loud volumes. But at the same time I need to reach the closest results to professional standard levels regarding volume.

MJK, if you wish, we can continue the discussion about normalizing on my thread "Basic questions about recording and mixing with Model 12", as I think I have moved too far from the original subject of this thread posted by Marcel. I don't want to result tiring to the rest of the readers

 

[-mjk-]

@Bambi, since we're talking about digital audio, these are files not audio tapes. Make backups of everything and try everything you can think of! Try normalizing, try compression, limiting EQ etc., and see what sounds best. If you need some guidance, you can post a link in the forum for review and critique. But don't be afraid to try anything as you have copies of the files. It's basically non-destructive.

I appreciate your concern for the thread. Sometimes, we (the mods) go back and move individual posts to other places for continuity and to help with the search function.