Track fader brings down the volume of the track yes but this is post 
processing. So for example if you use the track fader to bring down the volume 
of a loud file, and take a post fader meter reading it may reflect that the 
level has been lowered. However if you take a pre fader reading you will see 
that the track is still at the previously loud volume. This means that the file 
 will hit any processing put o that track hot and will probably have to 
compensate by turning down the input/output gain in all the plug ins placed on 
that track. If you use Trin/Item Volume/Region Gain to bring the level down to 
a reasonable place first it will hit the plug ins at a reasonable level and you 
probably won’t end up having to play with the plug ins input and output gains 
as much.

And as it relates to your current Delia If one DAW is taking its readings pre 
fader and the other is taking it post fader and you used the tracks fader to 
bring the volume down then that could explain the vast  differences you are 
experiencing. 
> On Jul 27, 2017, at 2:22 PM, Christopher-Mark Gilland <clgillan...@gmail.com> 
> wrote:
> 
> So, I'm then confused what the point is of the track fader?
> ---
> Christopher Gilland
> Co-founder of Genuine Safe Haven Ministries
>  
> http://www.gshministry.org <http://www.gshministry.org/>
> (980) 500-9575
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: TheOreoMonster <mailto:monkeypushe...@gmail.com>
>> To: ptaccess@googlegroups.com <mailto:ptaccess@googlegroups.com>
>> Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2017 2:20 PM
>> Subject: Re: Asking once again about Meterring
>> 
>> The first question I’d ask is where are the meter reading being taken from? 
>> Pre fader, post fader etc.  Also you will  want to use Trim in  Pro tools, 
>> Item volume in reaper, and region gain in logic to bring down the level of 
>> the audio file it self not the track fader. 
>>> On Jul 27, 2017, at 12:27 PM, Christopher-Mark Gilland 
>>> <clgillan...@gmail.com <mailto:clgillan...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Sorry for the crosspost, but I'm wanting to also put this on PTAccess so we 
>>> can approach this from both DAW angles, and to help leverage getting me the 
>>> most responses.
>>>  
>>> Guys, I asked this question on list about 2 or 3 months ago, and quite 
>>> frankly, I never ever got a very direct answer. Everyone who did answer, in 
>>> fact, some of which you'd never imagine saying this on the RWP list, told 
>>> me, who cares, just use your ears, and let them be your guide. that's not 
>>> what I'm seeking here. I really want some true and frank answers here.
>>>  
>>> Here's the situation. I am trying to help an incredibly dear friend of mine 
>>> start up learning audio production, and by the way, no, it's not the friend 
>>> I said who cannot do audio worth a damn. This is someone totally different. 
>>> LOL! This guy actually is very very very open to suggestions!
>>>  
>>> Anyway, he hasn't done anything at all when it comes to pro grade audio.
>>>  
>>> One of the things that we now are working on is microphone lead vocal gain 
>>> staging.
>>>  
>>> What I'm trying to get him to see is that if you record into your DAW too 
>>> hot, you'll start clipping, and even if you don't! clip the  vocal track, 
>>> leave not enough headroom, and in the long run, you'll clip your master 
>>> fader. He gets this concept entirely.
>>>  
>>> What we did is, he sent me a recording he did in Reaper. He sent me the 
>>> stems.
>>>  
>>> First, I loaded it up actually in ProTools as it's the DAW I'm most 
>>> familiar with. But, the point is, he sent me the unprocessed raw stems 
>>> which included his vocal that he initially recorded in Reaper.
>>>  
>>> Here's where things went absolutely awri kurfunkity wacko jacko.
>>>  
>>> In ProTools, I interacted with the track channel strip that contains his 
>>> vocals. Note that right now, I don't have Flowtools installed. Yes, in the 
>>> long run, this message is ProTools related even though I'm discussing 
>>> Reaper right now. Please please I beg you, stick with me on this!
>>>  
>>> In this track strip, I navigated one VO+right arrow passed the output 
>>> volume fader for that track, and landed on the peek meter. I have ProTools 
>>> set where the peek meters hold infinent until reset.
>>>  
>>> On the loudest peek of his vocal, ProTools indicates that he's peeking at 
>>> -1DB. So, he's really really really hot! Really no headroom at all. And 
>>> trust me. I can hear it too! It sounds God aweful! Even he! agrees it 
>>> sounds terrible. How to fix this is another issue in and of itself, but 
>>> here is the strange thing that I just! can't! fathom!
>>>  
>>> I imported these exact same stem wav files that were created in Reaper, 
>>> originally, back into Reaper.
>>>  
>>> I then had him, using Osara, go into the peek meter watcher settings with 
>>> CTRL+Shift+W. Essentially, we set both combo boxes for first and second 
>>> track to follow current. We checked both boxes to watch the tracks. I set 
>>> it to hold the meter until reset, which I think was the default radio 
>>> button value anyway.
>>>  
>>> Finally, when level reaches, I had him set this to minus 12. My reason of 
>>> thinking was, if he can come into the DAW from his interface at around 
>>> negative 12DB, that gives plenty of headroom, and we then could use a 
>>> compressor, or other means later in the mixing phase to get that vocal up 
>>> in the mix.
>>>  
>>> This is how I was tought to do it with ProTools, or really with any DAW, 
>>> for that mind. Record in low, then later adjust and compensate for the gain 
>>> loss. - Don't try starting out by going in at a really hot level.
>>>  
>>> So, anyway, I then after setting up the meter watcher in Reaper had 'em 
>>> play the recording. Because in ProTools, he was peeking at -1DB, I was 
>>> hoping! that the peek watcher in Reaper would pick up on this, and would 
>>> automatically without him doing anything let him know. Well, nothing 
>>> happened at all. Oh, we could hear the clipping all right! Oh baby could we 
>>> ever! It sounded disgusting! But, the watcher yielded nothing!
>>>  
>>> Finally, In Reaper, I told him, Ronald, try something for me. I told him 
>>> with the watcher set, hit W to go to the beginning of the song. Note that 
>>> his vocal track only contained 1 item. We then hit space bar to play. As 
>>> soon as his vocal started, I let it run for about 20 seconds, then, without 
>>> pausing, I had him hit Alt+F9 to query the peek meter on first track. Note 
>>> that actually, the vocal was the second track in the project, and his 
>>> karaoke music was the first, but he was focused on the second reaper track 
>>> as being selected with his arrow keys up and down. I had him try alt+F10 as 
>>> well for the second track though, and got the same results, so I don't know 
>>> that's entirely our issue. Anyway, both are showeing around -21.9DB for the 
>>> peek. Obviously, I then had him hit Alt+F8 to reset the watch meters.
>>>  
>>> I don't get it though! Hitting J and K are telling us he's around -21DB as 
>>> well. When I had him lower the level in the watcher settings, I told him 
>>> when level reaches, instead of putting -12, try some really overexagerated 
>>> thing like -30. He did this, created a new track, armed it, started talking 
>>> in the mike, and boom! it worked beautifully! It told him right away he had 
>>> reached that point or higher.
>>>  
>>> So, watcher isn't the issue either, it doesn't appear.
>>>  
>>> I don't understand how in the tarnation he could be peeking at -1 within 
>>> ProTools, yet, bring him into Reaper, regardless mac or Windows, now, that 
>>> exact same level is showing -21.9. I could see maybe the two DAWS being a 
>>> DB or 2 different in either direction, so like, I could see -1, and maybe 
>>> -2.5. or -1, and 0.5. but not no -1, and 21.9. That's like a 28DB 
>>> difference, which is really damn steep!
>>>  
>>> OK, let's go back to what I said, yeah yeah, I know, use your ears, they're 
>>> your best judge. I'm sorry. I don't now, nor will I ever! adapt that 
>>> concept entirely. I'm sorry, I just won't do it! Maybe now, I'm! the 
>>> stubborn one here, but I feel very very strongly that regardless what 
>>> you're recording, it is ab, suh, lootly! paramount! that you know egg? 
>>> zactly! where you sit in your mix with your meters. How else're you gonna 
>>> get your gain staging correct? Sure you can listen, but, you're not always 
>>> gonna hear certain things audibly that your meters could actually clue you 
>>> in upon. So no! You'll never! catch me saying meters shouldn't be used. 
>>> Seems a lot on the RWP list feel that way, that meters really don't matter. 
>>> Call me an extremist, but... Really?
>>>  
>>> But seriously, what on earth am I doing wrong in both DAWS put together 
>>> with the workflow? Regardless recording, or playing back, I'm getting that 
>>> much difference in meter readouts between the two.
>>>  
>>> Do the meters change drasticly from one DAW to another? By that I mean, 
>>> where 1 DAW may consider a signal to be -minus 12, does another possibly 
>>> see it at a different value? Again, I could see the meters being calabrated 
>>> a little offset from each other, but God bless America, land that I love! 
>>> -12 vs. -21.9 just call it -28? I'm sorry, but good! greif! 
>>> That seems a bit much. That's enough difference in fluctuation that I 
>>> question where levels really are! sitting in the mix truly.
>>>  
>>> In Reaper, if you hit CTRL+P, are there settings within preferences which 
>>> might effect this, and how those meters are actually showing up?
>>>  
>>> Same goes with ProTools, are there any settings in preferences that would 
>>> cause there to be this much difference in calibration from Reaper?
>>>  
>>> Ultimately, what I'd want is for the meters in both DAWS to be as dang 
>>> close to one another as possible. I know they may not be exact, I get it, 
>>> but can we not get them within say 1 or 2 DB's difference? Otherwise, I 
>>> really don't know what! I'm coming in at, and, neither does he. For me, 
>>> this is a dealbreaker. I refuse attimantly to use Reaper until I can figure 
>>> this out. If I can't read my meters, then it's a done deal! Period! I'll 
>>> then just stick with PT entirely, and will try figuring out a way to get 
>>> him started on PT.
>>>  
>>> Chris.
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>>> "Pro Tools Accessibility" group.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
>>> email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
>>> <mailto:ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>.
>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout 
>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>.
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
>> "Pro Tools Accessibility" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
>> email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
>> <mailto:ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout 
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>.
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "Pro Tools Accessibility" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com 
> <mailto:ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout 
> <https://groups.google.com/d/optout>.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Pro 
Tools Accessibility" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to