Become a Site Supporter and Never see Ads again!

Author Topic: Matrix in post best practice workflow  (Read 7091 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline tim in jersey

  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (8)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 3795
  • Gender: Male
Matrix in post best practice workflow
« on: December 21, 2011, 11:37:52 PM »
n00b to the matrix in post thing...

Scenario:

Deck 1 is a SBD feed, Deck 2 is my aud recording. Neither is jammed to timecode. I mix/correct for drift in post using Vegas.

I run levels on each very conservatively. About -9 to -6 dbfs, peak.

Should I normalize/amplify each file prior to bringing it in to the DAW or just mix and then amplify?



Offline justink

  • Trade Count: (4)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1973
  • Gender: Male
Re: Matrix in post best practice workflow
« Reply #1 on: December 21, 2011, 11:44:41 PM »
i amplify both sources to about -5 or -4 db (for a 50/50 mix).  then align.  then mix/render (the joining will amplify some waves).

there's a great thread about this using audacity, pretty easy.
Mics:
DPA 4023 (Cardioid)
DPA 4028 (Subcardioid)
DPA 4018V (Supercardioid)
Earthworks TC25 (Omni) 

Pres and A/D's:
Grace Design Lunatec V3 (Oade ACM)
Edirol UA-5 (bm2p+ Mod)

Recorders:
Sound Devices MixPre10 II
Edirol R-44 (Oade CM)
Sony PCM‑M10

Offline page

  • Trade Count: (25)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 8388
  • Gender: Male
  • #TeamRetired
Re: Matrix in post best practice workflow
« Reply #2 on: December 22, 2011, 12:45:41 AM »
I use the following:

1) Align via preferred method (stretch in Vegas/Reaper or time-align in Audacity)
2) Determine what I like about either source (sbd has less reverberation in the 1-3khz range, aud has a warm gooey bass, etc), and EQ to bring out what I like about both, maybe a net change of 2db tops, just enough to nudge it in a direction. Don't overdo it.
3) Make sure the peaks in either are at least -6 or lower.
3.5) double check alignment.
4) Render to 2ch. (Assuming a render is required to apply editing to both sources equally)
5) EQ/process anything else.
6) Amplify the remaining db and do any limiting and dither.

I used to keep the peaks between -3 and -6 which mathematically should bring your render to just under 0, but I kept having the occasional overage and having to redo the render so I figured the additional few DB of amping in Ozone or whatever is clean enough I'm not worried about it. Make sure to double check your alignment, I prefer to check mine now over the course of a couple of listening sessions and in both loud and quiet sections throughout the recording since non-clocked sources can drift at different speeds (ever so slightly which is a pisser but usually not much of a problem). I don't think I've forgotten anything....
"This is a common practice we have on the bus; debating facts that we could easily find through printed material. It's like, how far is it today? I think it's four hours, and someone else comes in at 11 hours, and well, then we'll... just... talk about it..." - Jeb Puryear

"Nostalgia ain't what it used to be." - Jim Williams

Offline justink

  • Trade Count: (4)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1973
  • Gender: Male
Re: Matrix in post best practice workflow
« Reply #3 on: December 22, 2011, 12:52:01 AM »
I use the following:

1) Align via preferred method (stretch in Vegas/Reaper or time-align in Audacity)
2) Determine what I like about either source (sbd has less reverberation in the 1-3khz range, aud has a warm gooey bass, etc), and EQ to bring out what I like about both, maybe a net change of 2db tops, just enough to nudge it in a direction. Don't overdo it.
3) Make sure the peaks in either are at least -6 or lower.
3.5) double check alignment.
4) Render to 2ch. (Assuming a render is required to apply editing to both sources equally)
5) EQ/process anything else.
6) Amplify the remaining db and do any limiting and dither.

I used to keep the peaks between -3 and -6 which mathematically should bring your render to just under 0, but I kept having the occasional overage and having to redo the render so I figured the additional few DB of amping in Ozone or whatever is clean enough I'm not worried about it. Make sure to double check your alignment, I prefer to check mine now over the course of a couple of listening sessions and in both loud and quiet sections throughout the recording since non-clocked sources can drift at different speeds (ever so slightly which is a pisser but usually not much of a problem). I don't think I've forgotten anything....

he said it best.
Mics:
DPA 4023 (Cardioid)
DPA 4028 (Subcardioid)
DPA 4018V (Supercardioid)
Earthworks TC25 (Omni) 

Pres and A/D's:
Grace Design Lunatec V3 (Oade ACM)
Edirol UA-5 (bm2p+ Mod)

Recorders:
Sound Devices MixPre10 II
Edirol R-44 (Oade CM)
Sony PCM‑M10

runonce

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Matrix in post best practice workflow
« Reply #4 on: December 22, 2011, 07:45:46 AM »
n00b to the matrix in post thing...

Scenario:

Deck 1 is a SBD feed, Deck 2 is my aud recording. Neither is jammed to timecode. I mix/correct for drift in post using Vegas.

I run levels on each very conservatively. About -9 to -6 dbfs, peak.

Should I normalize/amplify each file prior to bringing it in to the DAW or just mix and then amplify?


If they are 16 bit sources - you might want to skip normalization until the end (as recommened by page in the last post) - You're going to need about -6db of extra headroom to handle the higher peaks that result when you combine sources.

Offline tim in jersey

  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (8)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 3795
  • Gender: Male
Re: Matrix in post best practice workflow
« Reply #5 on: December 22, 2011, 10:51:18 AM »
That answers my questions. Thank you, gentlemen.

Offline Walstib62

  • Site Supporter
  • Trade Count: (32)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *
  • Posts: 3266
  • Gender: Male
Re: Matrix in post best practice workflow
« Reply #6 on: December 23, 2011, 11:40:36 AM »
I could be totally wrong on this, and if so, please someone let me know. But, I have always imported the tracks and normalized them first. The reason being that normalizing removes any possible dc offset. That way, all tracks are nulled to 0 offset prior to any other processing. To make things easier level-wise, I normalize to -6bB. Then, when the tracks are combined, the result is always a little below 0 without going over.

Offline justink

  • Trade Count: (4)
  • Taperssection All-Star
  • ****
  • Posts: 1973
  • Gender: Male
Re: Matrix in post best practice workflow
« Reply #7 on: December 23, 2011, 01:00:08 PM »
I could be totally wrong on this, and if so, please someone let me know. But, I have always imported the tracks and normalized them first. The reason being that normalizing removes any possible dc offset. That way, all tracks are nulled to 0 offset prior to any other processing. To make things easier level-wise, I normalize to -6bB. Then, when the tracks are combined, the result is always a little below 0 without going over.

nothing wrong with that.
Mics:
DPA 4023 (Cardioid)
DPA 4028 (Subcardioid)
DPA 4018V (Supercardioid)
Earthworks TC25 (Omni) 

Pres and A/D's:
Grace Design Lunatec V3 (Oade ACM)
Edirol UA-5 (bm2p+ Mod)

Recorders:
Sound Devices MixPre10 II
Edirol R-44 (Oade CM)
Sony PCM‑M10

Offline page

  • Trade Count: (25)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 8388
  • Gender: Male
  • #TeamRetired
Re: Matrix in post best practice workflow
« Reply #8 on: December 23, 2011, 02:34:45 PM »
I could be totally wrong on this, and if so, please someone let me know. But, I have always imported the tracks and normalized them first. The reason being that normalizing removes any possible dc offset.

I just checked in Audacity and there is an option to remove the offset when you do it (news to me). I don't recall there being one in reaper, and I know in RX it's a separate function. In Ozone, they have it chained to occur at the end before dither or the output gain structure.

but you bring up a good point; do you strip it before you do anything or at the end? All of my current gear produces so little offset naturally that I haven't had much reason to do it any earlier in the chain, but from a best practices standpoint, it's a valid question.
"This is a common practice we have on the bus; debating facts that we could easily find through printed material. It's like, how far is it today? I think it's four hours, and someone else comes in at 11 hours, and well, then we'll... just... talk about it..." - Jeb Puryear

"Nostalgia ain't what it used to be." - Jim Williams

Offline morst

  • I think I found an error on the internet; #UnionStrong
  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 5978
Re: Matrix in post best practice workflow
« Reply #9 on: January 01, 2012, 01:56:02 PM »
I could be totally wrong on this, and if so, please someone let me know. But, I have always imported the tracks and normalized them first. The reason being that normalizing removes any possible dc offset. That way, all tracks are nulled to 0 offset prior to any other processing.
I think you might be totally wrong. Normalization just brings up overall output levels, DC Offset Removal is a separate function. Unless you are using some offset-correcting normalizer plugin?

You'll get WAY better results mixing 24-bit signals if you can master that way...
https://toad.social/@morst spoutible.com/morst post.news/@acffhmorst

Offline kubacheck

  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2244
    • My Flickr site
Re: Matrix in post best practice workflow
« Reply #10 on: January 01, 2012, 02:40:48 PM »
I could be totally wrong on this, and if so, please someone let me know. But, I have always imported the tracks and normalized them first. The reason being that normalizing removes any possible dc offset. That way, all tracks are nulled to 0 offset prior to any other processing.
I think you might be totally wrong. Normalization just brings up overall output levels, DC Offset Removal is a separate function. Unless you are using some offset-correcting normalizer plugin?

You'll get WAY better results mixing 24-bit signals if you can master that way...

the one time I tried to do a matrix in Vegas, it wouldn't let me render the matrix of the two 24 bit sources as a resultant 24 bit output file, it automatically dithered it down to 16/44.1.... if there was a way to keep it at 24/48, I couldn't figure it out....

Offline morst

  • I think I found an error on the internet; #UnionStrong
  • Trade Count: (2)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 5978
Re: Matrix in post best practice workflow
« Reply #11 on: January 01, 2012, 04:52:48 PM »
it automatically dithered it down to 16/44.1.... if there was a way to keep it at 24/48, I couldn't figure it out....
If that's really true, I would advise you to find something other than Vegas to do your work. No sense in wrecking your bits like it's the only option!!?
https://toad.social/@morst spoutible.com/morst post.news/@acffhmorst

Offline kubacheck

  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2244
    • My Flickr site
Re: Matrix in post best practice workflow
« Reply #12 on: January 01, 2012, 05:35:43 PM »
it automatically dithered it down to 16/44.1.... if there was a way to keep it at 24/48, I couldn't figure it out....
If that's really true, I would advise you to find something other than Vegas to do your work. No sense in wrecking your bits like it's the only option!!?

its been a couple years, but as I recall, the pull down menus only went up to 16 and 44.1, I could've rendered at lower bit rates, but 16/44.1 were the highest quality values I could select..... perhaps that was specific to the version of Vegas I was using, I think it was Vegas 8.....

Offline beatkilla

  • Trade Count: (70)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2115
  • Gender: Male
Re: Matrix in post best practice workflow
« Reply #13 on: January 01, 2012, 05:44:23 PM »
Thats definetely not true for Sony Vegas. You can work with and render up to 24bit 192khz.      I just checked and you must have the lite version of vegas and that one goes no higher than 16  48.
« Last Edit: January 01, 2012, 05:53:34 PM by beatkilla »

Offline kubacheck

  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Needs to get out more...
  • *****
  • Posts: 2244
    • My Flickr site
Re: Matrix in post best practice workflow
« Reply #14 on: January 01, 2012, 05:52:15 PM »
Thats definetely not true for Sony Vegas. You can work with and render up to 24bit 192khz.

well, like I said, if there was a way ( and I looked and looked), I could not figure it out..... the details are not fresh since it's been a couple years, but I recall I could not find any options anywhere that allowed me to render the output audio file at 24/48..... as I mentioned, I was using Vegas 8, if that means anything....

 

RSS | Mobile
Page created in 0.076 seconds with 39 queries.
© 2002-2024 Taperssection.com
Powered by SMF