Topic: recording in 24b... run hot or not?

[jeromejello]

i have been trying to figure out what is the best way to get into the zone with my 24 bit jump.

when i was using the ua-5 >jb3/ihp120 i would throtle the gain and keep it peaking...

with my 722, i was running conservatively at first, and had to add a lot of gain in post (+9dB to +12dB), but lately have been trying to dance with the reds and only adding +3dB on average.

is there an advantage to running hot?  is it better to have the pre's do the work or is it better to add gain in post?  I have always been under the impression that although you dont want to clip, hotter was better and gain added in post was some how inferior because it was processed.

what are your thoughts?

(fwiw, with 24b i am either running mics>722 or mics>mp2>r-09... and i am using sound forge 7.0 on a xp sp3 box with AMD Athlon 3100 (2.2GHz) & 512 MB ram [although i though i was running over a gig... hmm])

[rowjimmytour]

I run my R4 to max peak @ -3dB(aprx) and average peak around -6dB(aprx) I don't me exact because every show is a little different and the R4 does not have the greatest meters. I do a lot of matrix 2 x mics and 2 x SDB recordings so I try to follow this and when I render the tracks I peak at -1.3dB. I think this works good for matrix and 2 track and I am not a huge fan of normalize so I can almost always get away w/o doing so for the 16 bit dithering.

[jeromejello]

no need to run it hot.

so adding gain in post doesnt introduce additional noise?  it seems like it would. 

[Gutbucket]

Only if you are recording something with really, really quiet parts where the noise floor of the venue is less than that of your rig without the gain turned up so much.  I often set the R-09 to peak around -12db for the start and invariably eat up a bit more headroom with peaks around -6db by the encore for something loud or from enthusiastic clapping for acoustic events (where I often need more dynamic range).  Even for those classical type super dynamic things with very low level passages, the venue HVAC noise is louder than my mic self-noise so boosting later is no problem.

24bit lets you back off a bit, relax and enjoy the music.

[RobertNC]

Running mic-in to a SD722 I always run cool. I like to see the first red hitting occasionally.  If I see the second red hitting a lot I dial it back a little.

I think most people that run 722s mic in will agree this seems to be the best way to run these boxes.   Adding 7-9 or even more dB in post to bring my recordings up to ~-1dB final is typical.

[fmaderjr]

I agree with Teddy 100%:
http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,69144.msg929333.html#msg929333

My recordings started sounding better & I stopped having to worry about clipping when I stopped running hot. I even found I could record 16 bit as low as -20 dB and not hear any noise when converted to 32 bit by Adobe Audition for boosting.

I doubt anyone here will agree with me as to 16 bit, but for 24 bit recording it's a no brainer.

[scb]

I have always been under the impression that although you dont want to clip, hotter was better and gain added in post was some how inferior because it was processed.

at 16 bit, hotter was better because you only had 16 bits to play with.  but at 24 bit, even if you peak at -12, you're still getting better resolution than 16 bit

[kcmule]

I run hot.  I keep 'er around -6db on the R4.  My thoughts are you
shouldn't have to crank your playback to hear the recording.

[fmaderjr]

kcmule's comment idicates that he wants to be able to use his actual masters for playback. Otherwise just boost in post. I'll give up sometimes not being able to listen to my recording on the drive back from the venue for the benefits of 24 bit recording peaking at -12 to -20.

[Dede2002]

I agree with Teddy 100%:
http://taperssection.com/index.php/topic,69144.msg929333.html#msg929333

My recordings started sounding better & I stopped having to worry about clipping when I stopped running hot. I even found I could record 16 bit as low as -20 dB and not hear any noise when converted to 32 bit by Adobe Audition for boosting.

I doubt anyone here will agree with me as to 16 bit, but for 24 bit recording it's a no brainier.

Right on.
Teddy's post is one the best readings ever in TS.

[kcmule]

kcmule's comment idicates that he wants to be able to use his actual masters for playback. Otherwise just boost in post.

I do like to hear masters at decent levels.  I do boost in post, but not a bunch.
Perhaps I'll try a few shows at lower levels and compare for myself.

[jhirte]

When I was running a 702 I learned that it does not like to hit 0 at all.. unlike the V3 I ran prior to the 702.. I would just set levels to peak at -3 or 4 and all was good..

[manitouman]

Running mic-in to a SD722 I always run cool. I like to see the first red hitting occasionally.  If I see the second red hitting a lot I dial it back a little.

I think most people that run 722s mic in will agree this seems to be the best way to run these boxes.   Adding 7-9 or even more dB in post to bring my recordings up to ~-1dB final is typical.

That's how I've been running the 702...

[boojum]

Recording gain is like salt in a stew: you can always add more, but it is the Devil's own job to get it out.   

[stevetoney]

What hasn't really been stated fully here is WHY running cooler in 24bit is OK versus 16bit.  Remember back in computer school about how additional bits gives more information?  Well, I don't know the exact numbers, but in 24bit, each sample has an order of magnitude more information recorded than 16bit. 

Running hot in 16bit was a little bit more important for rendering the sound information on the media accurately as it was recorded.  Since there's less information, there's less lattitude with what you can do with that information in post.  In that case, the general concensus was that it was worth the risk of clipping to run hot because alot of people felt that the sound tended to be better on the final product when they didn't have to bump the levels 10db or more in post.

In 24bit, there is an order of magnitude more information.  Most everyone agrees that the sound information captured with levels running conservatively and then bumped in post sounds no different than if you run hot to begin with.  So, the logic therefore is to run conservatively for the sake of avoiding any potential risk of clipping.

Regarding, the concept of amplifying noise, that is a concern for sure, but as someone has explained, the noise floor for most of the music that we record is such that it will not be heard, especially with modded low-noise components in the sound chain.  Bumping the noise floor 10db won't be heard anyway.  I suppose if all you record is chamber music, this would something that you might want to check out on your rig, but I have the feeling that the use of high quality, low noise components will keep the noise floor sufficiently low that using the '10db bump in post' strategy would still work out OK.