Arny Krueger wrote:

My gripe is with the idea that you
can burn a CD from what amounts to being a tracking session and give it to
an end-user as a professional end-product.

Used to do that fairly often using a Studer two-track. Obviously, the
master tape wasn't the end product, but it was all that was needed for
source material from which to beget consumables.

Nowdays people don't have to learn to mix becuase that's where they're
going to get to "fix" it.

--
ha

Arny Krueger wrote:

My gripe is with the idea that you
can burn a CD from what amounts to being a tracking session and give it to
an end-user as a professional end-product.

Used to do that fairly often using a Studer two-track. Obviously, the
master tape wasn't the end product, but it was all that was needed for
source material from which to beget consumables.

Nowdays people don't have to learn to mix becuase that's where they're
going to get to "fix" it.

--
ha

"Paul Stamler" wrote in message


"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
news

If I'd had a
stand-alone CD recorder, I'd have used that, so they could have
better quality for making those edit decisions.

Nomad Jukebox 3 portable hard drive player/recorders with factory
warranty are currently closing for $139 on eBay.

Thanks for the tip, and I'll check them out, but that still means
downloading the material into the computer before I can burn CDs.

Yes, but you can transfer from the NJB3 to a computer over Firewire in an
small fraction of recorded time. Which fraction depends on the format you
record in.

I just uploaded an approx. 16 minute 44/16 wave file in 32 seconds from
click-the-file to *upload complete*.

That would be about 2 minutes of transfer time per recorded hour, right?

Right before that I uploaded over 6 hours of 192 Kbit MP3 from a seminar, in
about 2 minutes.

Having an on-location recorder means I can give them the discs or
cassettes at the end of the session.

Carry a laptop with some editing and burning software, and deliver CDs with
more than a little professional flourish.

In this case, when we were under
the gun, that made a lot of difference. So I chose to give them a
cassette today, instead of a disc tomorrow.

IME, I within the hour I can transfer quite a bit of audio to a computer
even a laptop, do some simple editing and level-setting, and burn a CD that
I'm even a little proud of.

If time is of the essence and your market is people who are just a little
computer-savvy, files you upload and edit can be quickly distributed via USB
2.0 keychains. It's a ton faster than burning CDs.

But if I'd had a disc today, all the better.

If people want to just listen to what they just played, the NJB3 can handle
that quite nicely too, thank you.

NJB3 recorded files have names that directly relate to the date and time, so
its easy to keep a large number of takes straight.

"Paul Stamler" wrote in message


"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
news

If I'd had a
stand-alone CD recorder, I'd have used that, so they could have
better quality for making those edit decisions.

Nomad Jukebox 3 portable hard drive player/recorders with factory
warranty are currently closing for $139 on eBay.

Thanks for the tip, and I'll check them out, but that still means
downloading the material into the computer before I can burn CDs.

Yes, but you can transfer from the NJB3 to a computer over Firewire in an
small fraction of recorded time. Which fraction depends on the format you
record in.

I just uploaded an approx. 16 minute 44/16 wave file in 32 seconds from
click-the-file to *upload complete*.

That would be about 2 minutes of transfer time per recorded hour, right?

Right before that I uploaded over 6 hours of 192 Kbit MP3 from a seminar, in
about 2 minutes.

Having an on-location recorder means I can give them the discs or
cassettes at the end of the session.

Carry a laptop with some editing and burning software, and deliver CDs with
more than a little professional flourish.

In this case, when we were under
the gun, that made a lot of difference. So I chose to give them a
cassette today, instead of a disc tomorrow.

IME, I within the hour I can transfer quite a bit of audio to a computer
even a laptop, do some simple editing and level-setting, and burn a CD that
I'm even a little proud of.

If time is of the essence and your market is people who are just a little
computer-savvy, files you upload and edit can be quickly distributed via USB
2.0 keychains. It's a ton faster than burning CDs.

But if I'd had a disc today, all the better.

If people want to just listen to what they just played, the NJB3 can handle
that quite nicely too, thank you.

NJB3 recorded files have names that directly relate to the date and time, so
its easy to keep a large number of takes straight.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

Yes, but you can transfer from the NJB3 to a computer over Firewire in an
small fraction of recorded time. Which fraction depends on the format you
record in.

I just uploaded an approx. 16 minute 44/16 wave file in 32 seconds from
click-the-file to *upload complete*.

That would be about 2 minutes of transfer time per recorded hour, right?

Right before that I uploaded over 6 hours of 192 Kbit MP3 from a seminar,
in
about 2 minutes.

Having an on-location recorder means I can give them the discs or
cassettes at the end of the session.

Carry a laptop with some editing and burning software, and deliver CDs
with
more than a little professional flourish.

As somebody said (I think it was you), professional flourish has more to do
with the care you take in the recording than the gear you use. If I owned a
laptop I might do just what you say, but I don't, and this group of clients
made the deliberate decision to go direct to 2-track, as many of my clients
do. We got a thoroughly professional recording out of it. I got the mix
right the first time (because that was the only choice).

But if I'd had a disc today, all the better.

If people want to just listen to what they just played, the NJB3 can
handle
that quite nicely too, thank you.

Read my post again: they spent a couple of days deciding which takes thay
wanted, where they wanted edits, etc.. I taught them how to do edit
sheets -- these are musicians with minimal computer savvy, I assure you. At
the end of the process, they gave me the edit sheets and I did the cutting.
The technology we used worked just fine, would have worked even better with
CD-Rs as the raw-take distribution medium. Sometimes simple is good.

Peace,
Paul

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

Yes, but you can transfer from the NJB3 to a computer over Firewire in an
small fraction of recorded time. Which fraction depends on the format you
record in.

I just uploaded an approx. 16 minute 44/16 wave file in 32 seconds from
click-the-file to *upload complete*.

That would be about 2 minutes of transfer time per recorded hour, right?

Right before that I uploaded over 6 hours of 192 Kbit MP3 from a seminar,
in
about 2 minutes.

Having an on-location recorder means I can give them the discs or
cassettes at the end of the session.

Carry a laptop with some editing and burning software, and deliver CDs
with
more than a little professional flourish.

As somebody said (I think it was you), professional flourish has more to do
with the care you take in the recording than the gear you use. If I owned a
laptop I might do just what you say, but I don't, and this group of clients
made the deliberate decision to go direct to 2-track, as many of my clients
do. We got a thoroughly professional recording out of it. I got the mix
right the first time (because that was the only choice).

But if I'd had a disc today, all the better.

If people want to just listen to what they just played, the NJB3 can
handle
that quite nicely too, thank you.

Read my post again: they spent a couple of days deciding which takes thay
wanted, where they wanted edits, etc.. I taught them how to do edit
sheets -- these are musicians with minimal computer savvy, I assure you. At
the end of the process, they gave me the edit sheets and I did the cutting.
The technology we used worked just fine, would have worked even better with
CD-Rs as the raw-take distribution medium. Sometimes simple is good.

Peace,
Paul

I need a drink!

"Ben Bradley" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 19:24:10 -0500, Ed Anson
wrote:

Scott Dorsey wrote:

tcanyon3 wrote:

I recently read a report claiming that the quality of sound on a cd
could be vastly improved by rerecording the cd onto a black color cd
blank. The thesis, as I understood it, was that the black color is
easier for the laser to read than standard white or silver colors.


The laser doesn't read that anyway. What is black is only the plastic
substrate. And it's only black at visible light wavelengths anyway;
it is transparent to infrared, which is all the player cares about.


The report involved extensive comparison testing. Unfortunately, I've
lost the link to the report.


If you find Fermat's theorem along with it, let me know.

That's actually a bit more likely. Fetmat's last theorem was actually
proved several years ago.

Was that FETMAT's last theorem, or FERMAT's last theorem? If
Fermat's, is it an elegant and thus rather small proof, but still too
large to write into the margin of a book? Of course, what
mathematicians were originally looking for was the proof Fermat had in
mind, but it got to the point where any proof of it is considered a
large accomplishment, and there's surely been much speculation whether
Fermat had a correct proof, or a faulty proof he only though was
correct, or what.

BTW (OOTC), for the lowdown on CDR color (and a site that fits
within the margin of this Internet), check out this site:
http://cdrfaq.org
In fact, the very question is answered he
http://cdrfaq.org/faq07.html#S7-24
-----
http://mindspring.com/~benbradley

I need a drink!

"Ben Bradley" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 19:24:10 -0500, Ed Anson
wrote:

Scott Dorsey wrote:

tcanyon3 wrote:

I recently read a report claiming that the quality of sound on a cd
could be vastly improved by rerecording the cd onto a black color cd
blank. The thesis, as I understood it, was that the black color is
easier for the laser to read than standard white or silver colors.


The laser doesn't read that anyway. What is black is only the plastic
substrate. And it's only black at visible light wavelengths anyway;
it is transparent to infrared, which is all the player cares about.


The report involved extensive comparison testing. Unfortunately, I've
lost the link to the report.


If you find Fermat's theorem along with it, let me know.

That's actually a bit more likely. Fetmat's last theorem was actually
proved several years ago.

Was that FETMAT's last theorem, or FERMAT's last theorem? If
Fermat's, is it an elegant and thus rather small proof, but still too
large to write into the margin of a book? Of course, what
mathematicians were originally looking for was the proof Fermat had in
mind, but it got to the point where any proof of it is considered a
large accomplishment, and there's surely been much speculation whether
Fermat had a correct proof, or a faulty proof he only though was
correct, or what.

BTW (OOTC), for the lowdown on CDR color (and a site that fits
within the margin of this Internet), check out this site:
http://cdrfaq.org
In fact, the very question is answered he
http://cdrfaq.org/faq07.html#S7-24
-----
http://mindspring.com/~benbradley

"hank alrich" wrote in message
.. .
Arny Krueger wrote:

OK, CD recorders are high on instant gratification, but their recorded
product is low in terms of professional quality.

Wait, you doubleblinded that? 24 bit 44.1 isn't "pro" enough? Need
192KHz or something? g


Where did you find that 24 bit CD recorder ?

geoff

"hank alrich" wrote in message
.. .
Arny Krueger wrote:

OK, CD recorders are high on instant gratification, but their recorded
product is low in terms of professional quality.

Wait, you doubleblinded that? 24 bit 44.1 isn't "pro" enough? Need
192KHz or something? g


Where did you find that 24 bit CD recorder ?

geoff

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message

Actually, if you read the fine print, I've described 16 bit 44.1 as a
perfectly adequate distribution medium. For years I've been advocating
32/44 for tracking because of the desirability of maintaining lots of
headroom.

If you ahve a bunch of 32 bit files then you're gunna need a 64 bit
processing environemt. Keep the tracking files at 24 and keep the 32 (or
whatever) relating to the processing workspace.

but you just put down CD recorders as "low in terms of professional
quality".

They are fine, as is DAT, but suufer from teh for-mentioned headroom'
syndrome. At at 16 bit you really do feel the inclination to try and
maximised the bits you have to work with.

geoff

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message

Actually, if you read the fine print, I've described 16 bit 44.1 as a
perfectly adequate distribution medium. For years I've been advocating
32/44 for tracking because of the desirability of maintaining lots of
headroom.

If you ahve a bunch of 32 bit files then you're gunna need a 64 bit
processing environemt. Keep the tracking files at 24 and keep the 32 (or
whatever) relating to the processing workspace.

but you just put down CD recorders as "low in terms of professional
quality".

They are fine, as is DAT, but suufer from teh for-mentioned headroom'
syndrome. At at 16 bit you really do feel the inclination to try and
maximised the bits you have to work with.

geoff

Garrett Cox wrote in message news:2004111115482216807%

I can't speak to highly of Marantz recently. Had a standalone burner fail
and they're flat out denying that they ever made such a product. I know
they either just got bought out or merged with someone but that was
rediculous. It's probably just over year old. YMMV.

Where I work has a warehouse full of them. It is, however, Marantz Pro,
which the average consumer-orientated support person may not even know
exists.

geoff

Garrett Cox wrote in message news:2004111115482216807%

I can't speak to highly of Marantz recently. Had a standalone burner fail
and they're flat out denying that they ever made such a product. I know
they either just got bought out or merged with someone but that was
rediculous. It's probably just over year old. YMMV.

Where I work has a warehouse full of them. It is, however, Marantz Pro,
which the average consumer-orientated support person may not even know
exists.

geoff

"Geoff Wood" -nospam wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message

Actually, if you read the fine print, I've described 16 bit 44.1 as a
perfectly adequate distribution medium. For years I've been
advocating 32/44 for tracking because of the desirability of
maintaining lots of headroom.

If you ahve a bunch of 32 bit files then you're gunna need a 64 bit
processing environemt.

Not if its 32 bit floating point.

"Geoff Wood" -nospam wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message

Actually, if you read the fine print, I've described 16 bit 44.1 as a
perfectly adequate distribution medium. For years I've been
advocating 32/44 for tracking because of the desirability of
maintaining lots of headroom.

If you ahve a bunch of 32 bit files then you're gunna need a 64 bit
processing environemt.

Not if its 32 bit floating point.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Geoff Wood" -nospam wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message

Actually, if you read the fine print, I've described 16 bit 44.1 as a
perfectly adequate distribution medium. For years I've been
advocating 32/44 for tracking because of the desirability of
maintaining lots of headroom.

If you ahve a bunch of 32 bit files then you're gunna need a 64 bit
processing environemt.

Not if its 32 bit floating point.

And not if the best converters made are only 20 bits of resolution. 32 IEEE
is already max overkill, and totally unnecessary for tracking. Just right
for processing though.

TonyP.

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Geoff Wood" -nospam wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message

Actually, if you read the fine print, I've described 16 bit 44.1 as a
perfectly adequate distribution medium. For years I've been
advocating 32/44 for tracking because of the desirability of
maintaining lots of headroom.

If you ahve a bunch of 32 bit files then you're gunna need a 64 bit
processing environemt.

Not if its 32 bit floating point.

And not if the best converters made are only 20 bits of resolution. 32 IEEE
is already max overkill, and totally unnecessary for tracking. Just right
for processing though.

TonyP.

"TonyP" wrote in message news:4199df2d$0$2678

I can't say I've ever had more than 96 dB DNR at a live gig anyway. And I
know the maximum output of the desk.
24 bit only buys you one extra bit of headroom on the M-Audio delta cards
anyway.

So you aleays set your record level by background ambient noise and rest
assured they can't go too loud ?

Or do you set your level to what you think is reasonably close to FS, but
safe, and hope like **** they didn't have to many eggs for breakfast ?

geoff

"TonyP" wrote in message news:4199df2d$0$2678

I can't say I've ever had more than 96 dB DNR at a live gig anyway. And I
know the maximum output of the desk.
24 bit only buys you one extra bit of headroom on the M-Audio delta cards
anyway.

So you aleays set your record level by background ambient noise and rest
assured they can't go too loud ?

Or do you set your level to what you think is reasonably close to FS, but
safe, and hope like **** they didn't have to many eggs for breakfast ?

geoff

"TonyP" wrote in message news:4199e01f$0$2675

And not if the best converters made are only 20 bits of resolution. 32
IEEE
is already max overkill, and totally unnecessary for tracking. Just right
for processing though.

I do't think anybody was seriously suggesting tracking to a 32 bit file.
Were they ? Maybe they were just getting carried away with "my bit is bigger
than your bit'.

geoff

"TonyP" wrote in message news:4199e01f$0$2675

And not if the best converters made are only 20 bits of resolution. 32
IEEE
is already max overkill, and totally unnecessary for tracking. Just right
for processing though.

I do't think anybody was seriously suggesting tracking to a 32 bit file.
Were they ? Maybe they were just getting carried away with "my bit is bigger
than your bit'.

geoff

"Geoff Wood" -nospam wrote in message
...
So you aleays set your record level by background ambient noise and rest
assured they can't go too loud ?

No, I set DFS to max output of the desk, and rest assured the noise level
will not be over 96 dB less.

Or do you set your level to what you think is reasonably close to FS, but
safe, and hope like **** they didn't have to many eggs for breakfast ?

??? I usually only overload the desk when they drop the mic or something.
I'm not too fussed about capturing that "undistorted".

TonyP.

"Geoff Wood" -nospam wrote in message
...
So you aleays set your record level by background ambient noise and rest
assured they can't go too loud ?

No, I set DFS to max output of the desk, and rest assured the noise level
will not be over 96 dB less.

Or do you set your level to what you think is reasonably close to FS, but
safe, and hope like **** they didn't have to many eggs for breakfast ?

??? I usually only overload the desk when they drop the mic or something.
I'm not too fussed about capturing that "undistorted".

TonyP.

"Geoff Wood" -nospam wrote in message


"TonyP" wrote in message news:4199e01f$0$2675

And not if the best converters made are only 20 bits of resolution.
32 IEEE is already max overkill, and totally unnecessary for tracking.
Just
right for processing though.

I do't think anybody was seriously suggesting tracking to a 32 bit
file.

I'm perfectly serious about tracking to 32 bit floating point because its
the *only* better alterative to 16 bit fxied point in Audition/CEP.

Were they ?

32 bit FP is way overkill for tracking, but when its all you have to work
with, and when it works so well and easily...

....what's a boy to do?

Maybe they were just getting carried away with "my
bit is bigger than your bit'.

There are just two format choices with any pretense of quality, that are
available in Audition/CEP: 16 bit fixed point and 32 bit floating point.
Pick one, and just one for the job! ;-)

"Geoff Wood" -nospam wrote in message


"TonyP" wrote in message news:4199e01f$0$2675

And not if the best converters made are only 20 bits of resolution.
32 IEEE is already max overkill, and totally unnecessary for tracking.
Just
right for processing though.

I do't think anybody was seriously suggesting tracking to a 32 bit
file.

I'm perfectly serious about tracking to 32 bit floating point because its
the *only* better alterative to 16 bit fxied point in Audition/CEP.

Were they ?

32 bit FP is way overkill for tracking, but when its all you have to work
with, and when it works so well and easily...

....what's a boy to do?

Maybe they were just getting carried away with "my
bit is bigger than your bit'.

There are just two format choices with any pretense of quality, that are
available in Audition/CEP: 16 bit fixed point and 32 bit floating point.
Pick one, and just one for the job! ;-)

Geoff Wood -nospam wrote:
"TonyP" wrote in message news:4199df2d$0$2678

I can't say I've ever had more than 96 dB DNR at a live gig anyway. And I
know the maximum output of the desk.
24 bit only buys you one extra bit of headroom on the M-Audio delta cards
anyway.

So you aleays set your record level by background ambient noise and rest
assured they can't go too loud ?

On live symphonic gigs, I will often use the audience noise as a rough
reference to get levels when there is no possibility of getting a proper
level check before the curtain.

Another trick is to ask the conductor to play the loudest sound in the piece.
The actual performance will be 6 dB louder than that, so set that at -12dBFS.

Or do you set your level to what you think is reasonably close to FS, but
safe, and hope like **** they didn't have to many eggs for breakfast ?

Sometimes that's all you can do on a live gig. That's what makes it fun!
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Geoff Wood -nospam wrote:
"TonyP" wrote in message news:4199df2d$0$2678

I can't say I've ever had more than 96 dB DNR at a live gig anyway. And I
know the maximum output of the desk.
24 bit only buys you one extra bit of headroom on the M-Audio delta cards
anyway.

So you aleays set your record level by background ambient noise and rest
assured they can't go too loud ?

On live symphonic gigs, I will often use the audience noise as a rough
reference to get levels when there is no possibility of getting a proper
level check before the curtain.

Another trick is to ask the conductor to play the loudest sound in the piece.
The actual performance will be 6 dB louder than that, so set that at -12dBFS.

Or do you set your level to what you think is reasonably close to FS, but
safe, and hope like **** they didn't have to many eggs for breakfast ?

Sometimes that's all you can do on a live gig. That's what makes it fun!
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

In article writes:

The problem is that if you are recording the distributed disc, you are on
the hot seat when it comes to head room.

Normally, I record with a minimum of 10 dB of headroom, but those tracks
don't make good listening without some processing and leveling.

If they don't make good listening, it's not because there's 10 dB of
headroom, it's because the performance wasn't consistent, or you
weren't riding gain to keep the level reasonably constant. (or dozens
of other reasons why we "produce" or "master" to make accurate
captures of a performance sound more palatable to the listener)


--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

In article writes:

The problem is that if you are recording the distributed disc, you are on
the hot seat when it comes to head room.

Normally, I record with a minimum of 10 dB of headroom, but those tracks
don't make good listening without some processing and leveling.

If they don't make good listening, it's not because there's 10 dB of
headroom, it's because the performance wasn't consistent, or you
weren't riding gain to keep the level reasonably constant. (or dozens
of other reasons why we "produce" or "master" to make accurate
captures of a performance sound more palatable to the listener)


--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

(tcanyon3) wrote in message . com...
I recently read a report claiming that the quality of sound on a cd
could be vastly improved by rerecording the cd onto a black color cd
blank. The thesis, as I understood it, was that the black color is
easier for the laser to read than standard white or silver colors.

The report involved extensive comparison testing. Unfortunately, I've
lost the link to the report.

Has anyone had any experience with this or tested the proposition?

Second question, anybody have any experience with the Marantz CDR 300
portable cd recorder? I'm considering purchasing to replace my
mini-disc, which I use at rehearsals. I've heard the Marantz limiter
may reduce the sound quality noticeably. Mini-discs compress too much
it seems, but I like the idea of having a limiter if it really works.

Thanks for any help you can give.
TCanyon3


You know I was thinking, what could be more black than a Black Sabbath
album on a black CD...and "the answer is none, none more black".

Analogeezer

(tcanyon3) wrote in message . com...
I recently read a report claiming that the quality of sound on a cd
could be vastly improved by rerecording the cd onto a black color cd
blank. The thesis, as I understood it, was that the black color is
easier for the laser to read than standard white or silver colors.

The report involved extensive comparison testing. Unfortunately, I've
lost the link to the report.

Has anyone had any experience with this or tested the proposition?

Second question, anybody have any experience with the Marantz CDR 300
portable cd recorder? I'm considering purchasing to replace my
mini-disc, which I use at rehearsals. I've heard the Marantz limiter
may reduce the sound quality noticeably. Mini-discs compress too much
it seems, but I like the idea of having a limiter if it really works.

Thanks for any help you can give.
TCanyon3


You know I was thinking, what could be more black than a Black Sabbath
album on a black CD...and "the answer is none, none more black".

Analogeezer

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

I'm perfectly serious about tracking to 32 bit floating point because its
the *only* better alterative to 16 bit fxied point in Audition/CEP.

Can Aud/CE not record a 24 bit WAV ? Jeeze - I'd be looking for a new
application then.

There are just two format choices with any pretense of quality, that are
available in Audition/CEP: 16 bit fixed point and 32 bit floating point.
Pick one, and just one for the job! ;-)

Oh I see. How inept !

geoff

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...

I'm perfectly serious about tracking to 32 bit floating point because its
the *only* better alterative to 16 bit fxied point in Audition/CEP.

Can Aud/CE not record a 24 bit WAV ? Jeeze - I'd be looking for a new
application then.

There are just two format choices with any pretense of quality, that are
available in Audition/CEP: 16 bit fixed point and 32 bit floating point.
Pick one, and just one for the job! ;-)

Oh I see. How inept !

geoff

"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message


Another trick is to ask the conductor to play the loudest sound in the
piece.
The actual performance will be 6 dB louder than that, so set that
at -12dBFS.

Or the artist in any oterh genre. Yes, this is what I do when possible.

Or do you set your level to what you think is reasonably close to FS, but
safe, and hope like **** they didn't have to many eggs for breakfast ?

Sometimes that's all you can do on a live gig. That's what makes it fun!

I that circumstance, yep, there's not much else you can do ;-) However
for regular eceryday mutlitrack tracking the first option is more
time-efficient .


geoff

"Scott Dorsey" wrote in message


Another trick is to ask the conductor to play the loudest sound in the
piece.
The actual performance will be 6 dB louder than that, so set that
at -12dBFS.

Or the artist in any oterh genre. Yes, this is what I do when possible.

Or do you set your level to what you think is reasonably close to FS, but
safe, and hope like **** they didn't have to many eggs for breakfast ?

Sometimes that's all you can do on a live gig. That's what makes it fun!

I that circumstance, yep, there's not much else you can do ;-) However
for regular eceryday mutlitrack tracking the first option is more
time-efficient .


geoff

"Mike Rivers" wrote in message
news:znr1100614733k@trad
In article
writes:

The problem is that if you are recording the distributed disc, you
are on the hot seat when it comes to head room.

Normally, I record with a minimum of 10 dB of headroom, but those
tracks don't make good listening without some processing and
leveling.

If they don't make good listening, it's not because there's 10 dB of
headroom, it's because the performance wasn't consistent, or you
weren't riding gain to keep the level reasonably constant.

As a matter of principle, I don't ride gain while tracking.

"Mike Rivers" wrote in message
news:znr1100614733k@trad
In article
writes:

The problem is that if you are recording the distributed disc, you
are on the hot seat when it comes to head room.

Normally, I record with a minimum of 10 dB of headroom, but those
tracks don't make good listening without some processing and
leveling.

If they don't make good listening, it's not because there's 10 dB of
headroom, it's because the performance wasn't consistent, or you
weren't riding gain to keep the level reasonably constant.

As a matter of principle, I don't ride gain while tracking.

In article writes:

As a matter of principle, I don't ride gain while tracking.

Suit yourself. As a matter of principle, I do. But then I listen to
what I'm recording, as a matter of principle. Given what I believe are
your usual circumstances (church) monitoring well enough to make
judgements about loudness is probably not possible.



--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

In article writes:

As a matter of principle, I don't ride gain while tracking.

Suit yourself. As a matter of principle, I do. But then I listen to
what I'm recording, as a matter of principle. Given what I believe are
your usual circumstances (church) monitoring well enough to make
judgements about loudness is probably not possible.



--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo