Become a Site Supporter and Never see Ads again!

Author Topic: CEP: Normalizing vs. Amplifying  (Read 3742 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Nigeria

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 54
CEP: Normalizing vs. Amplifying
« on: September 30, 2008, 09:43:07 PM »
Which do you prefer, and are either of these lossy in any way to the quality of a recording?

dorrcoq

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: CEP: Normalizing vs. Amplifying
« Reply #1 on: September 30, 2008, 10:12:51 PM »
I amplify, and no, as far as I have ever heard they are not "lossy" in any way.

Offline itook2much

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1526
  • Gender: Male
  • AKA rspencer
    • my masters
Re: CEP: Normalizing vs. Amplifying
« Reply #2 on: September 30, 2008, 10:50:42 PM »
Peak normalizing is amplifying to a set point (for example, 0dB or -.1dB).  It preserves the dynamics of the performance (RMS normalizing can destroy them if you're not very careful).
DPA 4060 (CS HEB) > CS BB > Edirol R-09

Backups:  DPA 4060 (1/8"), SP-BMC-2, SP-SPSB-6, Sony MZ-NH1

Quote from: tomluvsgiants
rule #1 - get the show taped
rule #2 - see rule #1    >:D

Quote from: Grace Hopper
“If it's a good idea, go ahead and do it. It's much easier to apologize than it is to get permission.”

Offline Dede2002

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1217
  • Gender: Male
Re: CEP: Normalizing vs. Amplifying
« Reply #3 on: October 01, 2008, 10:32:53 AM »
Peak normalizing is amplifying to a set point (for example, 0dB or -.1dB).  It preserves the dynamics of the performance (RMS normalizing can destroy them if you're not very careful).

What he said  ;)
Mics..........................SP-CMC-8, HLSC-1 and HLSO-MICRO
BB and Preamps........MM Micro bb / MM Custom Elite bb / Church 9100
                              
Recorders...................Tascam DR-100MKIII, Marantz PMD 620 MKII, Edirol R-09

Offline Liquid Drum

  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 661
  • Gender: Male
Re: CEP: Normalizing vs. Amplifying
« Reply #4 on: October 01, 2008, 10:41:33 AM »
Peak Normalize. Why try and guess with amplify when you can normalize to say -0.5db and it does the working out for you.  :)

Mics:
AT933/C

Batt-Boxes, Pre-amps:
CA-9100

Recorders:
Edirol R-09
iRiver H120 (CF Modded)
Sony MZ-RH910 Hi-MD

Video: Canon HV20 E

Offline tilomagnet

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Taperssection Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 148
Re: CEP: Normalizing vs. Amplifying
« Reply #5 on: October 01, 2008, 11:49:02 AM »
Just FYI: When normalizing you need to apply that to the whole, untracked file. Otherwise you'll screw things up.

Offline Jeremy Lykins

  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 931
Re: CEP: Normalizing vs. Amplifying
« Reply #6 on: October 01, 2008, 12:19:19 PM »
After reading a few threads here on TS about it I made the decision to go with amplifying instead of normalizing.

Offline DaveG73

  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 559
  • Gender: Male
  • Beer and Music.
Re: CEP: Normalizing vs. Amplifying
« Reply #7 on: October 01, 2008, 02:38:05 PM »
After reading a few threads here on TS about it I made the decision to go with amplifying instead of normalizing.

Would you care to elaborate/provide links?

I don't tend to do either unless I really need to but I always thought normalising was generally considered better/less destructive.

Now I am confused.

Dave.
Always Taping Under The Influence.

I was under the assumption that as a taper, we're all geeks?  I just thought it went with the territory?

Offline willndmb

  • Trade Count: (17)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 6792
  • Gender: Male
Re: CEP: Normalizing vs. Amplifying
« Reply #8 on: October 03, 2008, 01:28:45 PM »
isn't normalizing good if you have a peak over 0???
Mics - AKG ck61/ck63 (c480b & Naiant actives), SP-BMC-2
XLR Cables - Silver Path w/Darktrain stubbies
Interconnect Cables - Dogstar (XLR), Darktrain (RCA > 1/8) (1/8 > 1/8), and Kind Kables (1/8f > 1/4)
Preamps - Naiant Littlebox & Tinybox
Recorders - PCM-M10 & DR-60D

Offline jefflester

  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1586
  • Gender: Male
Re: CEP: Normalizing vs. Amplifying
« Reply #9 on: October 06, 2008, 03:59:02 PM »
isn't normalizing good if you have a peak over 0???
You can't get a peak power over 0 dB. If you already have a peak power = 0 dB you are already peak normalized.
DPA4061 HEB -> R-09 / AT943 -> CA-UGLY -> R-09
AKG CK63 -> nBob actives -> Baby NBox -> R-09/DR2d
AKG CK63 -> AKG C460B -> Zoom F8/DR-680MKII
Line Audio CM4/Superlux S502/Samson C02/iSK Little Gem/Sennheiser E609/Shure SM57 -> Zoom F8/DR-680MKII (multitracked band recordings)

Offline Javier Cinakowski

  • !! Downhill From Here !!
  • Trade Count: (11)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4325
  • Gender: Male
Re: CEP: Normalizing vs. Amplifying
« Reply #10 on: October 06, 2008, 04:05:15 PM »
if you already have peaks at 0db, you hardlimit.  This will reduce your dynamics, but give you more amplification....

As far as the difference between normalizing and amplification, in regards to CEP, I don't see how amplify could be better....
Neumann KM185mp OR DPA ST2015-> Grace Design Lunatec V2-> Tascam DR-100mkIII

Offline cybergaloot

  • Trade Count: (7)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4079
  • Gender: Male
  • Poohbah!
Re: CEP: Normalizing vs. Amplifying
« Reply #11 on: October 06, 2008, 06:58:44 PM »
It seems that with normalizing, even to 0db, my recordings are too quiet. I've been amplifying them lately and letting some of the peaks clip as long as it is just an occasional very short peak. On playback that minor clipping isn't noticeable to my ears. They are usually just short cymbal crashes. I'm coming to the conclusion that not every peak is sonically sacred. But then what do I know, I'm still a noob.
--
Walter

Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects. Will Rogers

this>that>the other

Offline hawghunter

  • Trade Count: (4)
  • Taperssection Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 384
  • Gender: Male
  • Planet of Sound
Re: CEP: Normalizing vs. Amplifying
« Reply #12 on: October 06, 2008, 09:50:30 PM »
Wouldn't it all depend on the WAV your looking at, or have. At least I, not even close to expert, treat each WAV file different. Some need, some don't need.
ISO: NIRVANA :), 8/15/91 - The Roxy

930's > MMe

Offline Brian Skalinder

  • Complaint Dept.
  • Trade Count: (28)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 18868
  • Gender: Male
Re: CEP: Normalizing vs. Amplifying
« Reply #13 on: October 06, 2008, 10:19:34 PM »
In CEP, Amplifying to a set point is very, very easy, and AFAICT, works the same as Peak Normalizing (that's not to say I've confirmed the results are identical).  Select the whole range of the WAV file, Amplify, press the button to find the highest peak.  Then Amplify by whatever dB value you wish.  Sort of a slightly more manual peak normalization.  No real guesswork involved.

For those whose recordings are too quiet, even after peak normalization - in particular, if you have a small number of very strong peaks - search the Computer Recording forum for compression, limiting, and/or volume envelope.

I think one of the reasons people say amplify over normalize, is because <a> some programs RMS normalize, <b> some people don't know which programs use peak v. RMS normalization, and <c> some don't know certain apps allow both, and people are concerned about doing the wrong thing.  With amplify, there's no guesswork as to whether one is amplifying based on peak or RMS - it's always peak.  Perhaps there's a good reason to amplify instead of peak normalize, but I don't know what it is.
Milab VM-44 Links > Fostex FR-2LE or
Naiant IPA (tinybox format) >
Roland R-05

Offline cybergaloot

  • Trade Count: (7)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 4079
  • Gender: Male
  • Poohbah!
Re: CEP: Normalizing vs. Amplifying
« Reply #14 on: October 06, 2008, 10:49:19 PM »
Wouldn't it all depend on the WAV your looking at, or have. At least I, not even close to expert, treat each WAV file different. Some need, some don't need.

Certainly, I wouldn't do anything to the raw files just by habit. I do as little as possible, I only make changes when I think the recording calls for it and then try to use a light hand. I don't want it to sound over-processed. However, I tend to run my levels a bit on the conservative side in order to have headroom for the unexpected so they usually need a little tweaking volume-wise in post.
--
Walter

Everybody is ignorant, only on different subjects. Will Rogers

this>that>the other

 

RSS | Mobile
Page created in 0.068 seconds with 39 queries.
© 2002-2024 Taperssection.com
Powered by SMF