[mcp6453[_2_]]

With all due respect to Coleman Audio, can someone suggest a less expensive way to find a pair of analog VU meters for a
stereo program buss?

http://goo.gl/6mWuGZ

I don't even see how big the meters are. Maybe I have to roll my own.

[Scott Dorsey]

mcp6453 wrote:
With all due respect to Coleman Audio, can someone suggest a less expensive way to find a pair of analog VU meters for a
stereo program buss?

http://goo.gl/6mWuGZ

I don't even see how big the meters are. Maybe I have to roll my own.

There really aren't many. The Dorrough is even more money. You can
find surplus meters and add resistors and metalwork yourself.

I think Simpson will still sell you a real VU meter movement for $250.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[PStamler]

On Monday, December 22, 2014 2:54:54 PM UTC-6, Scott Dorsey wrote:
mcp6453 wrote:
With all due respect to Coleman Audio, can someone suggest a less expensive way to find a pair of analog VU meters for a
stereo program buss?

http://goo.gl/6mWuGZ

I don't even see how big the meters are. Maybe I have to roll my own.

There really aren't many. The Dorrough is even more money. You can
find surplus meters and add resistors and metalwork yourself.

I think Simpson will still sell you a real VU meter movement for $250.
--scott

Which means you're probably better off cannibalizing them from someplace.

Two other possibilities: National Semiconductor, in their datasheets for the LED-array drivers which power a lot of peak-reaing meters, gave a circuit which supposedly emulated BU meter ballistics. I have no idea how well it worked.

And Heathkit claimed that the meter on their Audio Analyzer (an SMPTE IM meter) had true-VU ballistics. I've found it useful as a good stand-in. Of course, for stereo you'd need two of them -- plus a way to line up your 0 VU point to the boxes'.

Peace,
Paul

[PStamler]

Er, VU.

Peace,
Paul

[Les Cargill[_4_]]

mcp6453 wrote:
With all due respect to Coleman Audio, can someone suggest a less expensive way to find a pair of analog VU meters for a
stereo program buss?

http://goo.gl/6mWuGZ

I don't even see how big the meters are. Maybe I have to roll my own.



Find an old cassette deck.

--
Les Cargill

[Les Cargill[_4_]]

PStamler wrote:
Er, VU.


.... Brutus?

Peace,
Paul


--
eLs Cargill

[Adrian Tuddenham[_2_]]

mcp6453 wrote:

With all due respect to Coleman Audio, can someone suggest a less
expensive way to find a pair of analog VU meters for a stereo program
buss?

http://goo.gl/6mWuGZ

I don't even see how big the meters are. Maybe I have to roll my own.

RS Components have a cheap meter movement in their catalogue which is
calibrated in "VU" and has a non-linear magnetic field to give a
suitable response. You would have to add a rectifier and metalwork.


--
~ Adrian Tuddenham ~
(Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
www.poppyrecords.co.uk

[Dave Plowman (News)]

In article ,
mcp6453 wrote:
With all due respect to Coleman Audio, can someone suggest a less
expensive way to find a pair of analog VU meters for a stereo program
buss?

http://goo.gl/6mWuGZ

I don't even see how big the meters are. Maybe I have to roll my own.

Thing with a VU is that to make the spec, the actual meter movement has to
be very well made. Hence the high cost. Most of the VUs you see on
domestic equipment don't meet the spec.

--
*If a mute swears, does his mother wash his hands with soap?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

[William Sommerwerck]

"Les Cargill" wrote in message ...

Find an old cassette deck.

A true VU meter has specific "ballistic" characteristics that take into
account the nature of music.

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 12/23/2014 5:04 AM, Les Cargill wrote:
Find an old cassette deck.

There are VU meters, and there are meters that look like VU meters. Old
cassette decks have the latter.

A real VU meter is a joy to use, even for digital recording when you set
the reference level properly (0 VU = -20 dBFS or so)

--
For a good time, visit http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

[Klay Anderson[_2_]]

On Tuesday, December 23, 2014 6:30:03 AM UTC-7, Mike Rivers wrote:


A real VU meter is a joy to use, even for digital recording when you set
the reference level properly (0 VU = -20 dBFS or so)

"or so." The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them....

Yours truly,
Mr. Klay Anderson, D.A.,Q.B.E.

[Scott Dorsey]

PStamler wrote:

Two other possibilities: National Semiconductor, in their datasheets for the LED-array drivers which power a lot of peak-reaing meters, gave a circuit which supposedly emulated BU meter ballistics. I have no idea how well it worked.

It was not half bad! It was not as good as the Dorrough or the vacuum
fluorescent meters that Radio Systems used in the eighties, but it was
very close to a real VU meter although it did not overshoot properly.

Oh... RTW also makes very expensive and very accurate standalone meters...
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Scott Dorsey]

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
mcp6453 wrote:
With all due respect to Coleman Audio, can someone suggest a less
expensive way to find a pair of analog VU meters for a stereo program
buss?

http://goo.gl/6mWuGZ

I don't even see how big the meters are. Maybe I have to roll my own.

Thing with a VU is that to make the spec, the actual meter movement has to
be very well made. Hence the high cost. Most of the VUs you see on
domestic equipment don't meet the spec.

Do you even see them on domestic consumer equipment today?
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 12/23/2014 2:55 PM, Klay Anderson wrote:
A real VU meter is a joy to use, even for digital recording when you set
the reference level properly (0 VU = -20 dBFS or so)

"or so." The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them....

In this case, it's not a standard, just a recommendation (mine). A
standard is 0 VU = +4 dBu or +4 dBm or +8 dBm because those are
established industry standard levels which generally allow a certain
amount of headroom above them (which is typically not specified) since
maximum output level (however that's specified) isn't always known.

The nice thing about digital audio is that you can choose the amount of
headroom that you want. 0 dBFS is absolute, so if you want 20 dB of
headroom over a 0 reading on your VU meter, you set 0 VU at -20 dBFS,
assuming your A/D converter has an input level control and you can
actually do that. If you want to live on the edge and allow only 10 dB
of headroom, you can set 0 VU to represent -10 dBFS. Or anywhere in
between.

It was typical on DAT recorders for there to be a marker at -16 or -18
dBFS, and you could calibrate that to represent 0 on your VU meter, if
you had one.



--
For a good time, visit http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

[Dave Plowman (News)]

In article ,
Scott Dorsey wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
mcp6453 wrote:
With all due respect to Coleman Audio, can someone suggest a less
expensive way to find a pair of analog VU meters for a stereo program
buss?

http://goo.gl/6mWuGZ

I don't even see how big the meters are. Maybe I have to roll my own.

Thing with a VU is that to make the spec, the actual meter movement has
to be very well made. Hence the high cost. Most of the VUs you see on
domestic equipment don't meet the spec.

Do you even see them on domestic consumer equipment today?

I made that comment with reference to :-

**********

From: Les Cargill
Subject: VU Meters
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2014 04:00
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro

Find an old cassette deck.

*********

Being UK broadcast based, VUs were simply things fitted to some pro tape
recorders and best ignored. ;-)

--
*I went to school to become a wit, only got halfway through.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

[Adrian Tuddenham[_2_]]

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ,
Scott Dorsey wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
mcp6453 wrote:
With all due respect to Coleman Audio, can someone suggest a less
expensive way to find a pair of analog VU meters for a stereo program
buss?

http://goo.gl/6mWuGZ

I don't even see how big the meters are. Maybe I have to roll my own.

Thing with a VU is that to make the spec, the actual meter movement has
to be very well made. Hence the high cost. Most of the VUs you see on
domestic equipment don't meet the spec.

Do you even see them on domestic consumer equipment today?

I made that comment with reference to :-

**********

From: Les Cargill
Subject: VU Meters
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2014 04:00
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro

Find an old cassette deck.

*********

Being UK broadcast based, VUs were simply things fitted to some pro tape
recorders and best ignored. ;-)

I find BBC-type PPMs much easier to use and the readings tally better
with the apparent loudness as well as indicating the actual signal
level.

http://www.poppyrecords.co.uk/other/images/CBAT01_3666s.JPG


--
~ Adrian Tuddenham ~
(Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
www.poppyrecords.co.uk

[Dave Plowman (News)]

In article .invalid,
Adrian Tuddenham wrote:
Being UK broadcast based, VUs were simply things fitted to some pro
tape recorders and best ignored. ;-)

I find BBC-type PPMs much easier to use and the readings tally better
with the apparent loudness as well as indicating the actual signal
level.

Oh. That's fighting talk these days. It's all now about loudness meters
that apparently anyone can read without training. But if anything levels
between programmes are now more adrift than was once the case.

--
*Heart attacks... God's revenge for eating his animal friends

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

[[email protected]]

Dave Plowman (News):


This interest in VU meters is the best thing that could happen in digital audio! No more peak-based metering and all the 'nastiness' it wrought since its inception.

[[email protected]]

Dave Plowman (News) wrote: "Oh. That's fighting talk these days. It's all now about loudness meters "


Denying that there's a problem, are we?

[John Williamson]

On 24/12/2014 10:45, wrote:
This interest in VU meters is the best thing that could happen in digital audio! No more peak-based metering and all the 'nastiness' it wrought since its inception.

The purpose of VU meters was to give an indication of levels in a way
useful when recording on tape, which could safely be overdriven to a
certain extent without sounding too nasty. The purpose of peak meters is
to give an accurate indication of the maximum levels going into
transmitters or a digital chain, where peaks that are even slightly too
high can give very unpleasant sounding clipping.

If anything, peak metering *prevents* nastiness when recording digitally
or driving a transmitter, while using VU metering in these cases can
give rise to clipped peaks unless the engineer leaves a large margin for
error.

In either case, metering is a tool to help the engineer or mixer set
levels for the best performance of the equipment in use at the time, so
it makes sense to use the right meter for the job, so VU for analogue
tape, and peak for digital and transmissions.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

[Peter Larsen[_3_]]

skrev i en meddelelse
...

Dave Plowman (News) wrote: "Oh. That's fighting talk these days. It's all
now about loudness meters "

Denying that there's a problem, are we?

There is the same issue as there was in the days of the VU-meter: operator
competence, it is no more of an issue nor no less.

Merry Christmas!

Kind regards

Peter Larsen

[Dave Plowman (News)]

In article ,
Peter Larsen wrote:
skrev i en meddelelse
...

Dave Plowman (News) wrote: "Oh. That's fighting talk these days. It's
all now about loudness meters "

Denying that there's a problem, are we?

There is the same issue as there was in the days of the VU-meter:
operator competence, it is no more of an issue nor no less.

In one. The best 'meter' in the world is a decent pair of ears. But the
suits know only too well those cost more than mere electronics.

--
*A clear conscience is usually the sign of a bad memory *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

[[email protected]]

John Williamson, et al:


Sorry, but having Zero at the top of anything just causes too many problems(getting level up too close to it, etc) despite its alleged usefulness in preventing digital overs & clipping. It's human nature to do so, and moving zero down from the top(via VU or loudness meter) will eliminate these problems.

[John Williamson]

On 24/12/2014 12:39, wrote:
John Williamson, et al:


Sorry, but having Zero at the top of anything just causes too many problems(getting level up too close to it, etc) despite its alleged usefulness in preventing digital overs & clipping. It's human nature to do so, and moving zero down from the top(via VU or loudness meter) will eliminate these problems.

No it doesn't generally cause problems. As has been said on another post
on this thread, the problem is with the person using the meters, not the
meters themselves.

The metering I use has green bars up to a certain point, then yellow,
then the top few are red.

Green is on the quiet side, yellow is okay, red is dead. It works for me...

It makes it easy to scan a board, as if I catch a glimpse of a red out
of the corner of my eye, then I know a channel is too hot without having
to constantly scan a number of meters, which would be the case if I were
using your preferred traditional VU meters.

If you have problems working with peak level meters, then use whatever
works for you, just don't tar all engineers with the same brush.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

[Peter Larsen[_3_]]

skrev i en meddelelse
...

John Williamson, et al:

Sorry, but having Zero at the top of anything just causes too
many problems(getting level up too close to it, etc) despite
its alleged usefulness in preventing digital overs & clipping.

No.

It's human nature to do so, and moving zero down from the top
(via VU or loudness meter) will eliminate these problems.

No.

At the risk of upstaging a participant from a more westerly location
relative to London: your line of reasoning has moved from the incompetent to
a lower level. It is a well established conceptual standard that zero dB is
the adjustment reference level.

Kind regards

Peter Larsen

[[email protected]]

Peter Larsen wrote: "

Sorry, but having Zero at the top of anything just causes too
many problems(getting level up too close to it, etc) despite
its alleged usefulness in preventing digital overs & clipping.

No.

It's human nature to do so, and moving zero down from the top
(via VU or loudness meter) will eliminate these problems.

No.

At the risk of upstaging a participant from a more westerly location
relative to London: your line of reasoning has moved from the incompetent to
a lower level. It is a well established conceptual standard that zero dB is
the adjustment reference level.
Kind regards

Peter Larsen "

Peter I'd be saying the same thing regardless of where I was from, LOL: I'm accounting for simple psychology in this regard. People(not just engineers, but church board operators, backyard DJs, bedroom recordists) naturally aim for zero dB, or just above it, regardless of where zero is on a scale. It's not going to make sense or seem natural for them when they are told to peak between -6 and -12 on a full-scale digital meter with zero at the top. They'll even apply compression and/or hard limiting to get that meter to 'stick' closer to 0dBfs.

But with zero at -18 or -20 on that same scale, the concept of HEADROOM(old 20th century relic to some here) becomes abundantly clear.

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 12/24/2014 1:20 PM, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In one. The best 'meter' in the world is a decent pair of ears. But the
suits know only too well those cost more than mere electronics.

When it comes to recording, that has to be coupled with proper setup and
calibration since you can't always hear distortion until you play back
the recording. If you try to calibrate your system so that 0 on the
analog meter and 0 on the digital meter agree, you're guaranteed plenty
of clipping when you start recording music that way, unless you barely
let the VU meter move.

Of course when it comes to mixing, mastering, and making it loud, that's
a matter of exercising good (or bad) taste. A loudness meter is useful
for determining whether a full program is compliant with the law.


--
For a good time, visit http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

[John Williamson]

On 24/12/2014 13:34, wrote:
Peter Larsen wrote: "
At the risk of upstaging a participant from a more westerly location
relative to London: your line of reasoning has moved from the incompetent to
a lower level. It is a well established conceptual standard that zero dB is
the adjustment reference level.
Kind regards

Peter Larsen "

Peter I'd be saying the same thing regardless of where I was from, LOL: I'm accounting for simple psychology in this regard. People(not just engineers, but church board operators, backyard DJs, bedroom recordists) naturally aim for zero dB, or just above it, regardless of where zero is on a scale. It's not going to make sense or seem natural for them when they are told to peak between -6 and -12 on a full-scale digital meter with zero at the top. They'll even apply compression and/or hard limiting to get that meter to 'stick' closer to 0dBfs.

Then the people who do this need better training. The only ones who
might be doing this out of habit while following their training are the
ones who learnt on analogue tape based systems. Anyone learning on a
digital system will rapidly work out that 0dB means the absolute
maximum, if they've got a decent set of ears.

But with zero at -18 or -20 on that same scale, the concept of HEADROOM(old 20th century relic to some here) becomes abundantly clear.

The analogue parts of the chain probably have some headroom even at 0dB
meter reading. The digital part hasn't. If I'm running an entirely
analogue desk and system, then I am a bit more relaxed about high meter
levels than I am on a digital desk.

Your perceived problem is not due to the meters, it's due to poor
training of the operator.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 12/24/2014 12:13 PM, John Williamson wrote:
The purpose of VU meters was to give an indication of levels in a way
useful when recording on tape, which could safely be overdriven to a
certain extent without sounding too nasty.

That's the practical application in recording. The original intent of
the VU meter was to show broadcasters that their speech level was correct.

When it became desirable to drive tape into non-linearity on occasion
(some say "always, for sure") we started calibrating recorders so that
the VU meter was a useful indicator of when we were in that region
between clean-as-possible and "creative distortion,"

Since A/D converters don't have such as broad a range of acceptable
distortion as tape, like, practically no range at all, VU metering for
digital recording fell out of practice in favor of a meter that shows
how much headroom you have before calamity.

But what good is a meter that people only use to show that they've
pushed as hard as they can go, not how well they're doing at adjusting
levels?


The purpose of peak meters is
to give an accurate indication of the maximum levels going into
transmitters or a digital chain, where peaks that are even slightly too
high can give very unpleasant sounding clipping.

There used to be a red light for that, and I still think that the VU
meter with an LED to indicate a user-calibrated peak level above 0 VU is
the most useful visual indicator for setting record level.


--
For a good time, visit http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 12/24/2014 1:39 PM, wrote:
Sorry, but having Zero at the top of anything just causes too many
problems(getting level up too close to it, etc) despite its alleged
usefulness in preventing digital overs & clipping.

It makes perfectly good sense if you understand the concept of headroom
and use it as a headroom meter, not a level meter. But I guess it was
the best they could do without re-educating a world of consumers.


--
For a good time, visit http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 12/24/2014 1:51 PM, John Williamson wrote:
The metering I use has green bars up to a certain point, then yellow,
then the top few are red.

Green is on the quiet side, yellow is okay, red is dead. It works for me...

What I'd like to see on every digital meter is greater resolution close
to full scale. All too often the last step on the meter before red is
-10 dBFS or so. Same goes for digital meters showing analog levels. For
example, the meter on my Mackie Onyx mixer is stepped like this:

+20 (clip)
+10
+7
+4
+2
0
with the same steps below 0

So what you have is the rough equivalent of a mechanical VU meter that
has good resolution around 0, but if you're feeding an A/D converter
from the mixer that's calibrated so that +20 on the mixer's meter is 0
dBFS, you have 10 dB of ambiguity between the last indicator before you
reach clipping. When the +10 LED is on, your record level could be
anywhere between -10 dBFS or just a hair under 0 dBFS.

While it's good advice to keep the level such that the +10 LED only
blinks occasionally, try to tell that to someone who wants slamming
drums, slamming guitars, slamming bass, and slamming vocals.

--
For a good time, visit http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

[None]

wrote in message
...
John Williamson, et al:


Sorry, but having Zero at the top of anything just causes too many
problems

Note everyone is as stupid as you are.

[Scott Dorsey]

John Williamson wrote:
On 24/12/2014 10:45, wrote:
This interest in VU meters is the best thing that could happen in digital audio! No more peak-based metering and all the 'nastiness' it wrought since its inception.

The purpose of VU meters was to give an indication of levels in a way
useful when recording on tape, which could safely be overdriven to a
certain extent without sounding too nasty. The purpose of peak meters is
to give an accurate indication of the maximum levels going into
transmitters or a digital chain, where peaks that are even slightly too
high can give very unpleasant sounding clipping.

Actually, the purpose of VU meters was to give an indication of perceived
levels on telephone lines.

VU meters were problematic even in the analogue tape era... the tape would
clip 20 dB below the +3 mark on a trumpet even though you could bring a
flute all the way up to the end of the scale.

Which is why we got PPM meters, which never caught on in the US but became
almost universal in the UK.

It is VERY nice to have the RME dual-reading meters which give you a peak
bar (with peak hold!) and a VU-ballistic bar overlaid on top of one another,
because it gives you some notion of just what your crest factor is by eye.

If anything, peak metering *prevents* nastiness when recording digitally
or driving a transmitter, while using VU metering in these cases can
give rise to clipped peaks unless the engineer leaves a large margin for
error.

Yes, precisely. Peak and average metering systems are different tools for
different jobs.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Scott Dorsey]

John Williamson wrote:
On 24/12/2014 12:39, wrote:

Sorry, but having Zero at the top of anything just causes too many problems(getting level up too close to it, etc) despite its alleged usefulness in preventing digital overs & clipping. It's human nature to do so, and moving zero down from the top(via VU or loudness meter) will eliminate these problems.

No it doesn't generally cause problems. As has been said on another post
on this thread, the problem is with the person using the meters, not the
meters themselves.

The meters come from an era when volume controls had the zero at the top and
an infinity at the bottom. Which makes perfect sense if you think about it.

The metering I use has green bars up to a certain point, then yellow,
then the top few are red.

Green is on the quiet side, yellow is okay, red is dead. It works for me...

If you believe it. The Mackie consoles start to sound funny well below the
point where the meter goes yellow. On the other hand, you can slam the
meters on the Neve and it sounds just fine.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[William Sommerwerck]

"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message ...

The meters come from an era when volume controls
had the zero at the top and an infinity at the bottom.

You mean no one made a volume control that went to 11?


Which makes perfect sense if you think about it.

Not really. Given that dBs are logarithmic, 0 is an easily understood
reference for maximum input level..

[Dave Plowman (News)]

In article ,
William Sommerwerck wrote:
"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message ...

The meters come from an era when volume controls
had the zero at the top and an infinity at the bottom.

You mean no one made a volume control that went to 11?


Which makes perfect sense if you think about it.

Not really. Given that dBs are logarithmic, 0 is an easily understood
reference for maximum input level..

Depends on your training. To someone with no training 0 would mean nothing?

100% would be maximum.

And in the UK, if you talk about 0 level to an older sound tech in
broadcast, it actually means 8dB below peak.

With the agreed EBU line-up for digital systems, this is still the case.
With 0 level referring to 18dBFS. Ie 10dB of headroom for any errors. And
some broadcasters still stick to this for transmission. Sadly some of the
radio people do not, and peak to 0dBFS. And since in the UK the TV
transmission system also carries most radio, you get the nonsense of some
radio services peaking 10dB higher than TV sound.

--
*What hair colour do they put on the driver's license of a bald man? *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

[[email protected]]

heres a good idea for an invention...

video cameras have a mode called ZEBRA STRIPES which casue any area that is oversaturated white to have ugly obvious stripes through it. This appears only in the view finder and does not go on the recording and is meant to alert the videographer that the white is being clipped.

A simialr device would be interesting in an audio monitor. If you go over clipping, it makes a loud obvious obnoxious noise to alert you...well some op amps already do that.... :-)

Mark

[Peter Larsen[_3_]]

skrev i en meddelelse
...

here's a good idea for an invention...

video cameras have a mode called ZEBRA STRIPES which
casue any area that is oversaturated white to have
ugly obvious stripes through it. This appears only
in the view finder and does not go on the recording
and is meant to alert the videographer that the white
is being clipped.

A simialr device would be interesting in an audio monitor.
If you go over clipping, it makes a loud obvious obnoxious
noise to alert you...well some op amps already do that.... :-)

First: some blind users already deploy some kind of a buzzer or tingler.

Next: what you suggest, if verbatim deployed, would be a grave hearing
damage risk and also a risk to monitoring transducers.

Third: recordists work by the credo "yellow is the new red" and thus
nowadays tend to sit on their fingers to avoid touching any gain buttons so
as to avoid having to do the inverse gain riding in post.

You come across as having only a modest, if at all any, comprehension of the
record and post workflows.

Mark

Kind regards

Peter Larsen

[William Sommerwerck]

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message ...

Not really. Given that dBs are logarithmic, 0 is an easily
understood reference for maximum input level..

Depends on your training. To someone with no training 0 would mean nothing?

Oh, I do so want to make a wisecrack about recording engineers. But I won't.


With 0 level referring to 18dBFS. ie, 10dB of headroom for any errors.

When I made live recordings, I'd ask the orchestra to play the loudest passage
from the works they were performing, then set the level about 1dB below that.
My experience was that orchestras play a bit louder during the actual
performance.

[Adrian Tuddenham[_2_]]

wrote:

heres a good idea for an invention...

video cameras have a mode called ZEBRA STRIPES which casue any area that
is oversaturated white to have ugly obvious stripes through it. This
appears only in the view finder and does not go on the recording and is
meant to alert the videographer that the white is being clipped.

A simialr device would be interesting in an audio monitor. If you go over
clipping, it makes a loud obvious obnoxious noise to alert you...

"Coaster 1.1" from 1999 does this. I still run it on Mac OS8.6 for most
of my stereo recordings.

--
~ Adrian Tuddenham ~
(Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
www.poppyrecords.co.uk