AGAIN about channel volumes

[Distorted Horizon]

There's a good case for not having a fader on the master - so many new to music production run into problems when they start using their master fader as a volume control.

I like this idea Maybe combine it with the Logic/Garageband thing of having a master playback volume control that is nowhere near your mixer controls and has a different UI.

You can hide it it Reaper

[Burillo]

Playing with the pre-render mix-bus fader (in REAPER this is the volume fader on "MASTER") is a good way of getting headroom before mastering.

this myth needs to die already.

However, it would be a daft thing to do if you have brickwall limiting or clipping set up on that bus, because you would be making the track quieter without increasing the usable headroom - or boosting the signal into uncontrolled clipping.

precisely. it won't help getting headroom if you have a limiter there, nor would it even help with headroom if you don't. "headroom" is dynamic range, not peak volume. removing master bus compressor will (generally) increase headroom. removing individual tracks compressors will (generally) increase headroom. removing master bus limiter will (generally) increase headroom. moving the master fader just makes things quieter or louder, but does not increase or decrease headroom in any way.

[Burillo]

TL;DR
for some FX, levels don't matter.
for other FX, use your ears.
don't clip your master, even if it doesn't sound like it's clipping (it will once you do your mixdown).

Okay this was simple enough

But I had another question popping in my mind. There's lots of arguing about VU vs peak vs PPM..
I adjust the volume with combination of VU and peak and ear. What would be the best method? RMS is what I'm most interested but peak is useful since (for me) it shows if a track needs some compressing. Some exceptions are of course, like closed hats.

Is there any method that'd be more new/accurate/useful?

accurate or useful for what purposes? there's no surefire way to know when track needs compressing - it's in your ears.

[Distorted Horizon]

moving the master fader just makes things quieter or louder, but does not increase or decrease headroom in any way.

So basically the output sausage would only be a thinner sausage?

[Burillo]

moving the master fader just makes things quieter or louder, but does not increase or decrease headroom in any way.

So basically the output sausage would only be a thinner sausage?

yes. moving the master fader up can decrease headroom if you're clipping the output, but that's an obviously extreme scenario. the same track peaking at -1dB vs. adjusted to peak at -6dB will have the exact same amount of headroom.

[imrae]

Playing with the pre-render mix-bus fader (in REAPER this is the volume fader on "MASTER") is a good way of getting headroom before mastering.

this myth needs to die already.

Maybe I should have been clearer. What I meant was: playing with the pre-render mix-bus fader is a good way of avoiding unintended clipping before mastering.

I don't accept your definition

"headroom" is dynamic range

because we have a perfectly good term ("dynamic range") for that already. The meaning I assign to "headroom", which I believe is usual, is "signal range which is generally empty but allows for occasional peaks to be contained". This is analogous to "headroom" in other contexts, pretty similar to the definition given by wikipedia and seems to be consistent with this SoundOnSound Q&A and what I've seen of technical papers. I think the distinction is really that "headroom" is associated with a recording setup, whereas "dynamic range" is a property of the actual audio material.

the same track peaking at -1dB vs. adjusted to peak at -6dB

will have the same amount of dynamic range and not the same amount of headroom.

[Burillo]

Playing with the pre-render mix-bus fader (in REAPER this is the volume fader on "MASTER") is a good way of getting headroom before mastering.

this myth needs to die already.

Maybe I should have been clearer. What I meant was: playing with the pre-render mix-bus fader is a good way of avoiding unintended clipping before mastering.

I don't accept your definition

"headroom" is dynamic range

because we have a perfectly good term ("dynamic range") for that already. The meaning I assign to "headroom", which I believe is usual, is "signal range which is generally empty but allows for occasional peaks to be contained". This is analogous to "headroom" in other contexts, pretty similar to the definition given by wikipedia and seems to be consistent with this SoundOnSound Q&A and what I've seen of technical papers. I think the distinction is really that "headroom" is associated with a recording setup, whereas "dynamic range" is a property of the actual audio material.

the same track peaking at -1dB vs. adjusted to peak at -6dB

will have the same amount of dynamic range and not the same amount of headroom.

it's a question of terminology. when people talk about "leaving headroom for mastering engineer", what they really mean is dynamic range, not headroom. in a mastering context, headroom is meaningless - it's the dynamic range that matters. yet, people keep talking about "headroom" when they mean "dynamic range", so i just follow the commonly used terminology, however incorrect it is.

and yes, clipping before the master bus is unintended reduction of dynamic range. it is not a reduction in headroom in the original meaning of the word. "headroom" as a term is useless in already recorded material - it does not apply there.

[annode]

I tend to keep my channel volume at around -12dB.

Which one YOU think is better: bringing the volume down from mixer slider, or bringing the levels down from the synth/audiofile while fader sits at 0dB?

Or maybe let the synth/audio play at the volume it plays, but adjust the volume with some separate tool like Sonimus Satson? Or compressor?

What is the best way to work audio wise and why?

I'll add my 2cents...You can take the channel signal chain into consideration if you like. Depending on the DAW, FX can be loaded post or pre-fader.
If post-fader, the input of the FX will only be effected by the synth/file gain.
With some FX, the input gain is important for a proper FX response.
If the signal is hitting the FX pre-fader, your fader gain running through your FX could make that FX not work right because your fader level signal is too low.
Just something to consider.

When your creating your project, not until you have all your signals will it be necessary to adjust your mixer faders for a properly summed output balance.
You do this when your working on getting a good balanced mix. (no dynamics FX in the master buss)

[do_androids_dream]

when people talk about "leaving headroom for mastering engineer", what they really mean is dynamic range, not headroom.

Yes this is absolutely correct. There's quite a bit of misinfo floating around about this particular 'issue'. The amount of times I get fatally squashed tracks with a useless 6dB of 'headroom' tacked on in my job as mastering engineer..

When we talk about headroom on the master what we're basically encouraging is 'good' gain staging habits that should eliminate problems along the way in mixing and producing your song. It's far better to mix with plenty of headroom to allow for peaks than to mix close to 0dB and forever have your attention wandering from the job at hand (mixing) to gain staging and avoiding clipping.

[_al_]

In 32 floating point math DAW's it really doesn't matter much.

This I don't understand. If I keep channel volume max at 0dB, the master channel starts to distort when enough stuff is playing. Of course limiter can prevent this but it changes the sound so I tend to keep volumes at -12dB and limiter only grabs some of the wildest lonely peaks.

It does seem like a strange statement, but here is a quick practical test you can do yourself, to show you what he means:
Take a simple gain plugin that lets you boost and cut the volume by a large amount.
Place two of them, one after the other onto your kick track.
Ok, so with no plugins active, your kick should be peaking at 0db.
Now switch on the first gain plugin, and turn it's volume to max (i use blue cat, so we'll say +60db).
So now we have a kick playing at +60db, and obviously it's sounding a little distorted.
Now, leaving the first plugin switched on, also switch on the second plugin, and set it to reduce the gain by -60db.

At this point, many people would assume that a +60db horribly distorted kick is going into the second plugin, and being turned down in it's distorted state.
This is not the case. The kick will sound exactly as it did before we added any gain plugins.

So what does this show us?
The kick was peaking at 0db, and when we added the 60db boost, we assumed that the boost was actually being applied in that plugin, but if that was the case, we wouldn't be able to 'unclip' it with the next plugin.

I'm not very technical with all this, but it seems 0db is only a useful reference at the end of the chain, when everything is being output to the soundcard, or a wav

[Burillo]

I'm not very technical with all this, but it seems 0db is only a useful reference at the end of the chain, when everything is being output to the soundcard, or a wav

this has to do with floating point vs. integer format. if you're exporting to floating point, you can clip your master just like you're allowed to do that when playing stuff back. if you're exporting to integer formats, those cannot represent values higher than 0dB.

[SoundPorn]

Okay "head room" and "Dynamic Range" imo are and should be 2 completely different terms with different meanings. Like if you have 6db of head room on a squashed mixed then use the 6db to add more dynamic range. Most mainstream music only has about 6db of avg dynamic range anyway. Most people listening to music could give 2 shxts about dynamic range or they would be listening to classical music.

With that said I've been obcessed with mid side and stereo imaging lately and I'm trying to find ways of just panning things around with multi band mid side imagers will help open space in a mix without turning anything down. I'd rather turn nothing down...ever...but still have space.

[annode]

A dynamic range is the range from some defined lowest level to some highest level.

[do_androids_dream]

Okay "head room" and "Dynamic Range" imo are and should be 2 completely different terms with different meanings.

True and there does seem to be confusion between the two.

Like if you have 6db of head room on a squashed mixed then use the 6db to add more dynamic range.

You can't 'add' dynamic range to a squashed mix (well you kinda can with a transient designer or expander to some extent but it's a last resort at the mastering stage..). If you're still at the mixing stage you can reassess your compression decisions to result in a less squashed mix.

[vurt]

A dynamic range is the range from some defined lowest level to some highest level.

or a funky oven, where you can use all the different compartments for different temperatures for cooking and baking.