Topic: 722 First Impressions

[MattD]

I just wish I could change the color of 3 of the last 4  LEDs so I only hit red when I clip the unit. I might start using Peak Hold + VU just to get some separation in that red area so I can see what I'm hitting. It's hard to tell if I hit 2 LEDs or 3 at a quick glance.

I also wish the limiter were configurable, like the mp2's was.

[marc0789]

you dont' "have" to run as hot because even peaking at -6, you're still far surpassing a "16 bit dat" recording and getting a lot more dynamic range.  running hotter might be better, but peaking at -6 or so is definitely not a bad thing at 24 bit

yeah, but wouldn't you want to maximize the resolution you are getting out of 24bit?  the one time i ran the 722, i was unfamiliar with its metering and after the first song i backed off the levels a little bit.  once i listened to the recording, i was really disappointed that i did.  the first track sounded much more vibrant and dynamic than the next 5 or 6 tracks when i ran more conservatively.  the recording seemed to open up more with the increased levels. 

not sure if I'm imagining this or not, but after Waldron bumped up the levels as the fox run progressed, definitely improved the listening experience...just noticeably opened up the recording. low levels seem to be more noticeable on a 24 bit recording than 16b, but again, might just be imagining.

[wboswell]

Nick (or anyone who does so, for that matter) - can you help us understand why you're running more conservative levels at 24-bit?

I tend to run at around -10 to -5 dB. I do this because the current firmware in the Deva IV & V doesn't have limiters enabled and I don't ever want to go over 0. Even with the meters on the Deva, it's tough to distinguish -2 dB from 0 dB. There has been some talk about adding something so you know when you hit 0, and limiters are suppose to be enabled in the next rev or two of the firmware. That said, depending on how the limiters sound, I might still run somewhat weak.

Wayne

Have you ever hit 0 with the Deva?  Having run the V3 all kinds of ways, I've never been upset with occasional clips at 16bit.  Even with shows where there were steady overs, the tapes sound fine. 

I've had some overs with the 722 and the clip seems to be very soft, though I've not had nearly the experience with it as I've had with the v3.  But the one time there were noticeable overs (Tim Obrien SBD-seated show and couldn't monitor the levels the whole show), the results were very acceptable...

[nickgregory]

That is my next test...going to enable the limiters on the 722 and run it hot and see what the audible difference is....

Yeah I was wondering what they sounded like also. Let us know what you think.. Im not going to run the limiter this weekend.

I am thinking I will run hot with the limiter for the opener for the crowes on sat...dont want to risk the crowes set

[Brian]

set the limiter and run like you would a dat.  push it too hard and i bet it will sound a little "breathy".  try using it so that it controls transients.

although pushing the levels hard will give a good idea of how the limiter sounds.

either way, let us know!

[Zee]

That is my next test...going to enable the limiters on the 722 and run it hot and see what the audible difference is....

Yeah I was wondering what they sounded like also. Let us know what you think.. Im not going to run the limiter this weekend.

I am thinking I will run hot with the limiter for the opener for the crowes on sat...dont want to risk the crowes set

Yes pleaselet us know 

[nickgregory]

set the limiter and run like you would a dat. push it too hard and i bet it will sound a little "breathy". try using it so that it controls transients.

although pushing the levels hard will give a good idea of how the limiter sounds.

either way, let us know!

this is probably what I will do...turn the limiter on, and run less conservatively and see how it handles it....

may try to run wide open for the opener though

[wbrisette]

Have you ever hit 0 with the Deva? 

Yes. The YMSB/Del McCourey set, I had to crank it up to capture the music, and when people clapped and yelled at the end of the songs, I got the dreaded 0 dB overage. It's not as bad as DAT, but still it's not my best recording. I did an orchestra where at the end of a very silent piece there was a clashing of the cymbals and again I hit the dreaded 0. It's not too bad, but it bugs me that it happened.

Wayne

[BC]

the one time i ran the 722, i was unfamiliar with its metering and after the first song i backed off the levels a little bit.  once i listened to the recording, i was really disappointed that i did.  the first track sounded much more vibrant and dynamic than the next 5 or 6 tracks when i ran more conservatively.  the recording seemed to open up more with the increased levels. 

I think a big factor in this is just the fact that that the 1st part you are listening to is louder. A better test would be to take the two separate sections, boost the quieter track to the loudness of the hotter, and then do the comparison. Usually when comparing sources our ears automatically latch on to the louder source as "better".

[dmonterisi]

the one time i ran the 722, i was unfamiliar with its metering and after the first song i backed off the levels a little bit.  once i listened to the recording, i was really disappointed that i did.  the first track sounded much more vibrant and dynamic than the next 5 or 6 tracks when i ran more conservatively.  the recording seemed to open up more with the increased levels. 

I think a big factor in this is just the fact that that the 1st part you are listening to is louder. A better test would be to take the two separate sections, boost the quieter track to the loudness of the hotter, and then do the comparison. Usually when comparing sources our ears automatically latch on to the louder source as "better".

i do not think that is necessarily a good comparison.  adding gain in wavelab is different from the gain that would be applied by the pre of the 722.  so i don't really think it would be that great of a comparison.  additionally, i am aware of the tendency for our ears to trick our minds into thinking that louder is better.  I am fairly confident in my own ability to hear different aspects of the recordings.  i could hear things present in the first track that were not present in the subsequent tracks and not just because the first track was louder.  there was a better sense of space and definition overall.  you don't have to believe me, but i know what i heard.

[BC]

Nick (or anyone who does so, for that matter) - can you help us understand why you're running more conservative levels at 24-bit?

Like Matt D said, one case is when stealthing and you can't check levels. In that case better to be conservative and boost later. For example, in the case of the V3 w/ 113 dB dynamic range, if you peak at -17dB (really conservative!!) you are still getting 96dB of resolution, equivalent to a DAT recording with the levels perfect and hitting 0.

Another case to be conservative is for recording acoustic/unamplified instruments which can have a huge dynamic range, think drum kits or trumpets close to the source, or perhaps symphony orchestras.  

However, in the case of taping rock shows where the mix coming out of the PA is typically highly compressed to begin with, I don't think there is any reason to run your levels significantly more conservatively just because you are rolling at 24 bit. Maybe back off a couple o' dB just to be safe, but in these situations, I would still be shooting to peak at -3dB at least. However, with the increased dynamic range of 24 bit it doesn't hurt too much to be slightly overconservative, if you peak out at -6dB or so you are still pulling a recording with better or comparable resolution to a 16 bit tape with optimal levels.

Peace,
Ben

[BC]

the one time i ran the 722, i was unfamiliar with its metering and after the first song i backed off the levels a little bit.  once i listened to the recording, i was really disappointed that i did.  the first track sounded much more vibrant and dynamic than the next 5 or 6 tracks when i ran more conservatively.  the recording seemed to open up more with the increased levels. 

I think a big factor in this is just the fact that that the 1st part you are listening to is louder. A better test would be to take the two separate sections, boost the quieter track to the loudness of the hotter, and then do the comparison. Usually when comparing sources our ears automatically latch on to the louder source as "better".

i do not think that is necessarily a good comparison.  adding gain in wavelab is different from the gain that would be applied by the pre of the 722.  so i don't really think it would be that great of a comparison.  additionally, i am aware of the tendency for our ears to trick our minds into thinking that louder is better.  I am fairly confident in my own ability to hear different aspects of the recordings.  i could hear things present in the first track that were not present in the subsequent tracks and not just because the first track was louder.  there was a better sense of space and definition overall.  you don't have to believe me, but i know what i heard.

I have noticed something similar, I was recording a friend's cello recital, ran real conservative the 1st part since I had no idea how loud it would be, then clicked up +5 on the V3 for the 2nd part. On a casual listen the recording definitely opened up for the 2nd part (I really like that description of how the sound changed, that was my exact impression also). I can't say if how much is due to the "loudness" factor and how much is due to a change in the gain. But it totally makes sense that hotter will sound better and more true to the original source (as long as there is no clipping), since hotter levels means the the source material is being recorded at higher resolution.

[Tim]

even at 24 bit i still try to peak at like -3 or -2dB and then I add the gain post by either normalizing or doing a slight compression.

the human ear perceives average loudness over the peaks.  these 24 bit recordings aren't TRUE 24 bits.  just look at the dynamic range spec and do the math.  it's really only like 18 or 19 bits.  there is 6dB of dynamic range per bit.

so even at "24 bit"  I would still run the levels hot.  I've added some minor compression to my copies of Waldron's 24 bits from the fox for my own listening and have enjoyed the results. YMMV

Brian

edit: and yes that means our dat recordings are more like 14.5 bit recordings

Great post Brian... thanks

[sygdwm]

in not sure its been said yet, but i believe it is also advantageous to run somwhat conservative at 24 bit to leave headoom for the dithered 16 bit version. but if its going to stay at 24 bit, then crank away. this what i always did, but ymmv.

[F.O.Bean]

headroom i dont think dithering down really needs 'headroom' the 16-bit copies simplybecome 'compressed' 24-bit copies, w/ (hopefully) the same wav pattern just dithered down