Volume when recording guitar tracks

[80's_Metal]

Maybe this is a dumb question???

I was wondering if there is a sought after "target" for the amount of volume in front of a mic to record the sound "properly" a general idea of where to start kind of thing. 110db or so ?

I understand the speakers should be moving air and really pushed hard.

I am using both an sm57 and an e609 if that helps.

Maybe it's not really a thing? Maybe it's not anything to do with The volume, more about the recorded tone.... ? What say you guys?

I'm playing metal, Marshall tsl 100 through 4x12 can with g12 t75's and v30's. If that matters.

Just thought I'd throw this out there.

 

[Demanic]

Re: Volume when recording guitar tracks

I don't think that the volume of the amp matters as much as the level set on the recording device. As long as you are happy with the sound that you are getting, just set the level of the recording so it's around -6db when it peaks.

Sent from my Alcatel_5044C using Tapatalk

 

[dystrust]

Re: Volume when recording guitar tracks

Maybe this is a dumb question???

I was wondering if there is a sought after "target" for the amount of volume in front of a mic to record the sound "properly" a general idea of where to start kind of thing. 110db or so ?

I understand the speakers should be moving air and really pushed hard.

I am using both an sm57 and an e609 if that helps.

Maybe it's not really a thing? Maybe it's not anything to do with The volume, more about the recorded tone.... ? What say you guys?

I'm playing metal, Marshall tsl 100 through 4x12 can with g12 t75's and v30's. If that matters.

Just thought I'd throw this out there.

Whatever volume works to get the sound you're after. The only time I worried about volume while recording, was worrying if the neighbors would call the cops :lol:

Edit: In hindsight I was lucky to have some pretty understanding neighbors. These days I prefer to use a load box and IRs because while I no longer have neighbors, I have kids and a lot of my music time is after they're asleep. It's also nice to use microphones I can't afford and not have to deal with problematic room sound.

 

[dystrust]

Re: Volume when recording guitar tracks

I don't think that the volume of the amp matters as much as the level set on the recording device. As long as you are happy with the sound that you are getting, just set the level of the recording so it's around -6db when it peaks.

Sent from my Alcatel_5044C using Tapatalk

That level can be a bit hot depending on how many tracks are in the mix. For a full band mix with overdubs, I tend to shoot for -10 to -12db.

 

[Demanic]

Re: Volume when recording guitar tracks

That level can be a bit hot depending on how many tracks are in the mix. For a full band mix with overdubs, I tend to shoot for -10 to -12db.

I suppose that makes sense for multiple tracks, though I figure that I can always back a track off a bit when mixing down. Usually I tend to record live in stereo and it seems to work fine for me.

Sent from my Alcatel_5044C using Tapatalk

 

[beaubrummels]

Re: Volume when recording guitar tracks

Set the amp to whatever level sounds the best and place the mic where it sounds best to your ears in the room.

As long as you are not getting capsule distortion in the mic or overdriving the mic pre amp, you can put the mic where you need, even close to the cab to reduce room reverberation.

I tend to bring tracks into the recorder at unity (0db) to capture as much of the wave over the noise floor as I can, and then manage the final level in the mix.

 

[GuitarStv]

Re: Volume when recording guitar tracks

I've found that my tube amp seems to sound better distorted when it's pretty loud. Like I've recorded it with the same settings playing the same riffs at low volume, slightly higher volume, medium volume, medium-high volume, and very high volume . . . and there's something that my ear likes better in the latter. I'm not sure if it's that the speaker response changes when they're driven harder, or if there's a tiny amount of power tube distortion, or some kind of slight compression, but it's there and it's audible. It's annoying, because it limits when I'm free to do recording to weekends only. (I can get really nice clean sounds at much lower volume levels though.)

Your typical dynamic mic (sm57 or e609 both) on a guitar cab will take a tremendous amount of volume and you can put it just about anywhere. A condenser mic is more sensitive and usually needs to be backed off from the cab if you're recording loud, or it'll distort and sound bad. Mic placement makes a big difference in the final sound that you get too, so play around with it until you hear something you like. (Then mark out the exact spot you like best on my amp grille with some masking tape so it's easy to find in the future.)

Once I get a sound that I like, I'll play the part I'm going to record and check that it's not crossing -3 dB at any point so there's no clipping (even if I get excited and whack the strings a bit too hard). After it's recorded, you can drop the volume easily if it's too loud. I find that bringing up a quiet signal is more likely to introduce noise into your recording.

Once everything is mixed down with the rest of the band I set the amplification so that the recording all together gets right up to (but not crossing) 0 dB.

 

[TwilightOdyssey]

Re: Volume when recording guitar tracks

-3 to -6dbFS is incredibly loud if you are recording 24 bit (and you should be) and not necessary. You will have to do a lot of gain reduction after the fact. It's better to record into your daw at a more sane level so that your faders can be set to zero and you essentially have a a rough mix without having to apply much gain reduction. I record each track at about -14dBFS. With a full mix, it will still require buses to be gain reduced to avoid clipping plugins and keeping the 2-bus at a sane level.

Otherwise, I don't think there's a standard SPL level for the guitar amp itself. Most amps sound best when they are working hard, especially valve amps -- that's when you get all the harmonic goodness going. However, it can make the recordist's job harder if your room is less than great because you are now exciting all those ugly room modes and standing waves; all that nastiness will get back into your microphone if you are not close-mic'ing. Even if you are close mic'ing, the placement of the cab in the room as well as the microphone will have a profound affect on how it sounds recorded. Also, if you are recording a 4x12, make sure to make a test recording on all four speakers and pick the one that sounds the best; they will all sound different.

So, you want to have some control over the space itself as well as the level you are playing the amp and the level of the recording. It's a balancing act.

 

[TwilightOdyssey]

Re: Volume when recording guitar tracks

Once I get a sound that I like, I'll play the part I'm going to record and check that it's not crossing -3 dB at any point so there's no clipping (even if I get excited and whack the strings a bit too hard). After it's recorded, you can drop the volume easily if it's too loud.

This is not best practice for recordings of any sort!

I find that bringing up a quiet signal is more likely to introduce noise into your recording.

If you are observing a good signal:noise ratio, changing the gain of the recorded track has no bearing the noise floor. It is also unrelated to recording level. When recording in 24bit it is better to record at a nominal level of -14 to -11dBFS per track. The bit depth is sufficient enough where there will be none of the stepping associated with 16 bit recordings, which need to be tracked a little louder to compensate for crappy converters and digital aliasing.

When people were recording to tape you needed a much hotter signal because of the loss you got from multiple playbacks; also, those values are based off of ANALOG VOLTAGES in dBu, not DIGITAL FULL SCALE, which is 14dB hotter than analog.

Once everything is mixed down with the rest of the band I set the amplification so that the recording all together gets right up to (but not crossing) 0 dB.

This is also not best practice.

I mean, you can record any way you like, but stating personal preference as recording and mixing advice is not very helpful.

Sorry if this is coming across as harsh, it's totally not meant that way. But your advice is not good or helpful and leads to the development of bad habits.

 

[Mincer]

Re: Volume when recording guitar tracks

To me, a good sound for the song is a good sound. I don't shoot for a particular volume. I also record direct most of the time.

 

[El Dunco]

Re: Volume when recording guitar tracks

This is not best practice for recordings of any sort!


If you are observing a good signal:noise ratio, changing the gain of the recorded track has no bearing the noise floor. It is also unrelated to recording level. When recording in 24bit it is better to record at a nominal level of -14 to -11dBFS per track. The bit depth is sufficient enough where there will be none of the stepping associated with 16 bit recordings, which need to be tracked a little louder to compensate for crappy converters and digital aliasing.

When people were recording to tape you needed a much hotter signal because of the loss you got from multiple playbacks; also, those values are based off of ANALOG VOLTAGES in dBu, not DIGITAL FULL SCALE, which is 14dB hotter than analog.


This is also not best practice.

I mean, you can record any way you like, but stating personal preference as recording and mixing advice is not very helpful.

Sorry if this is coming across as harsh, it's totally not meant that way. But your advice is not good or helpful and leads to the development of bad habits.

Doesn't seem harsh to me. It needed to be said. Also note that qualifiers for db (etc dbFS, dbV etc.) are important as db is otherwise relative. When someone says "3db" without any qualifier or comparison to another audio source, it's tantamount to saying your yard is "30 long."

Now, depending on the cabinet and what kind of sound I'm trying to capture, I like to note where "speaker excursion" starts to happen and have the speaker working almost to that point. There's an awesome spot in the room where the low end really blooms to put supplemental mics. On the whole, it's all about finding a sound I like right out of the cabinet and then accurately capturing it. I can deconstruct exactly how I do that but it will take a while, how long you got? :laugh2:

TO is right about not recording too hot. There is a nominal gain structure to strive for and recording super loud is a leftover from the tape days when you had to print very hot to drown out hiss and other artifacts inherent in recording to magnetic tape. With digital, it isn't necessary and can in fact be counterproductive with the way digital sampling works.

 

[NecroPolo]

Re: Volume when recording guitar tracks

Ages ago I dimed the amps when recording, using dynamic mics only that can cope with the high volume. Later, working for guys who knew the craft better than me I learned that it is not the way. 90% of time they used drastically less volume. Peavey 5150 around 2, Marshall JCM800 around 3, Mesa Recto around 2 and the like, you get the idea. The only exceptions were those non-master volume old heads like the Plexi. Here they used attenuators or just used tiny heads, those toy-sized 1-5W amps that people keep asking about if they are loud enough. Not joking! Here is the pic of a reamp session I did when I had the chops too. Guess who won at the end of the day...



The idea behind this is: all audio recording gear has a healthy operation where it doesn't start to develop artifacts. If you want full control during mixing (and if you want to max it out, you must have it) then it is best to record the souce as clean as possible. That enables to add controlled dirt later if necessary (like hard driven outboard gear) but if you have the soup already spicy like hell, you can't remove it, only add more and more stuff to fade it and to save the guests from dying of stomach bleeding.

Mics driving too hard start to break soundwise and start to develop unwanted artifacts, way before capsule distortion. That was the thing that guys who were more skilled than me tried to avoid all the way. The input stage/sensitivity of certain preamps were pushed hard, but never the microphone or the output stage.

Folks around speak about driven speakers, power amp distortion and the like. I very rarely met a dimed setup and man, the guys I worked for recorded many heavenly (or hellspawn) tones. It was all about keeping the signal healthy but clean, mic placement wizardry and mic choice. The most minimalistic setup was using 2, a simple dynamic like the SM57 and something different, placed somewhere else, in general: old ribbons, electrets, big membrane condensers and so on. Stuff that maybe don't suit high volume levels that much but can add timbre and colour, without destroying the signal.

About recording levels, it was recommended not to go over -6dB peaks through the A/D converters (that is approx. -8dB program for driven and -10dB program for clean / acoustic). It gives a headroom big enough for sudden gamma ray bursts while providing a dense enough data for later calculations.

 

[Demanic]

Re: Volume when recording guitar tracks

Definitely some good info in this thread.

Sent from my Alcatel_5044C using Tapatalk

 

[GuitarStv]

Re: Volume when recording guitar tracks

-3 to -6dbFS is incredibly loud if you are recording 24 bit (and you should be) and not necessary. You will have to do a lot of gain reduction after the fact. It's better to record into your daw at a more sane level so that your faders can be set to zero and you essentially have a a rough mix without having to apply much gain reduction.

Why is that better?

I record each track at about -14dBFS. With a full mix, it will still require buses to be gain reduced to avoid clipping plugins and keeping the 2-bus at a sane level.

That's a valid personal preference I suppose. But most of us are recording digitally. It's no difficulty at all to gain reduce different channels by any amount. Every track should have an easy to adjust slider.

This is not best practice for recordings of any sort!

Could be. I'm just a guy in my basement with some mics. Why is it not a best practice?

If you are observing a good signal:noise ratio, changing the gain of the recorded track has no bearing the noise floor. It is also unrelated to recording level.

This is not true, and is easily demonstrated. Even with the best quality equipment, if you record something at -50 dB and then boost the recorded track by 40 dB, your noise floor (and the quality of your recording) will be much lower than if you record something at -14 and boost the track by 10 dB. Please, take a couple minutes and try. It's not subtle at all.

When recording in 24bit it is better to record at a nominal level of -14 to -11dBFS per track. The bit depth is sufficient enough where there will be none of the stepping associated with 16 bit recordings, which need to be tracked a little louder to compensate for crappy converters and digital aliasing.

You've stated this preference for -14, and it may well be right. Can you explain why this is objectively better than recording to -15, -10, -5, -3, or any other particular value?

(FWIW, the first recordings I ever made on my computer were 16 bit with crappy converters as that's all that the audio interface I had in the early '00s was capable of. It's certainly possible that I've picked up habits from working with that that aren't applicable any more.)

When people were recording to tape you needed a much hotter signal because of the loss you got from multiple playbacks; also, those values are based off of ANALOG VOLTAGES in dBu, not DIGITAL FULL SCALE, which is 14dB hotter than analog.

I've never recorded anything to tape, and have always gone by the dB value on the DAW that is being used. Good to know that there are different dB values in the off chance I ever use analog equipment for recording though.

This is also not best practice.

As mentioned, I'm just a guy in a basement with some mics, everything I'm doing may well be wrong. Could you tell me why this isn't a best practice?

I mean, you can record any way you like, but stating personal preference as recording and mixing advice is not very helpful.

You can correct me if I'm wrong, but much of music production isn't really a defined science with 'right' and 'wrong' answers. To a certain extent, all recording and mixing advice is personal preference is it not?

Sorry if this is coming across as harsh, it's totally not meant that way. But your advice is not good or helpful and leads to the development of bad habits.

If I'm doing something horribly wrong, I'd love to learn to do it better. Simply saying that what has been working for me is wrong and my advice isn't good doesn't really help though. If you can explain what bad habits are developed and the reason why these are considered bad habits I'd appreciate it (and could learn from it).

 

[TwilightOdyssey]

Re: Volume when recording guitar tracks

Unfortunately, I don't have the time to break down the how and why of recording and mixing. Fortunately, there's a ton of free information on the Internet that you can look up and read/watch. Recording Revolution on YouTube is a great place to start; his videos break down recording and mixing topics in very easy to understand blocks. Music Tech Help Guy is another, but his videos are a bit more in-depth. In the Mix is another. And there are dozens more.

Or you can try a browser search gain staging in recording, optimal recording levels for digital recording, etc if you are really interested in learning.

These videos are quite good, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2YdMwehSOM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tZ8-RFPsgI

 

[80's_Metal]

Re: Volume when recording guitar tracks

Love all the info and insight guys!

I've been watching and learning a ton on YouTube. Today I ran home and into the garage, threw down a quick track and played with a simple EQ trick I learned today.
That plus the mic placement tricks I've recently learned have really opened my eyes.

And..... Made my mix sound SOooo much better.

 

[GuitarStv]

Re: Volume when recording guitar tracks

So, I haven't had time to watch the videos, but will check them out tonight. It appears that there exist two reasons to record at lower levels:
- Many plugins are calibrated to work at around -18 dB, and might not sound as good at higher levels / might have problems because the plugins will raise the gain of your track.
- If you're using logarithmic faders, they're harder to control at extremes.
- You might clip the signal, thereby ruining the track.

There certainly doesn't appear to be any benefit to recording with high levels with 24 bit audio, which is why -18 to -10 appears to the recommendation. If you're not having an issue with the above three issues, there is no negative to higher level recordings though.

- https://www.soundonsound.com/techniques/gain-staging-your-daw-software
- https://www.musicianonamission.com/gain-staging/
- https://vintageking.com/blog/2018/03/gain-staging/
- https://producelikeapro.com/blog/gain-staging-modern-recording/
- https://neelmodi.com/gain-staging-or-why-you-should-record-quietly/



I'm kinda excited to try out recording at lower levels to see if it makes a difference to the plug-ins I use. Had no problems with clipping or adjusting volumes though, so don't anticipate any benefit on that front.

 

[Demanic]

Re: Volume when recording guitar tracks

As I have said previously, I tend to record mostly live stereo tracks and setting the levels on my recorder so that they don't peak above the -6db indicator seems to work fine for me.
However the next time I do anything in 4 track mode, I'll keep all of the above recommendations in mind.

Sent from my Alcatel_5044C using Tapatalk

 

[El Dunco]

Re: Volume when recording guitar tracks

So, I haven't had time to watch the videos, but will check them out tonight. It appears that there exist two reasons to record at lower levels:
- Many plugins are calibrated to work at around -18 dB, and might not sound as good at higher levels / might have problems because the plugins will raise the gain of your track.
- If you're using logarithmic faders, they're harder to control at extremes.
- You might clip the signal, thereby ruining the track.

There certainly doesn't appear to be any benefit to recording with high levels with 24 bit audio, which is why -18 to -10 appears to the recommendation. If you're not having an issue with the above three issues, there is no negative to higher level recordings though.

- https://www.soundonsound.com/techniques/gain-staging-your-daw-software
- https://www.musicianonamission.com/gain-staging/
- https://vintageking.com/blog/2018/03/gain-staging/
- https://producelikeapro.com/blog/gain-staging-modern-recording/
- https://neelmodi.com/gain-staging-or-why-you-should-record-quietly/



I'm kinda excited to try out recording at lower levels to see if it makes a difference to the plug-ins I use. Had no problems with clipping or adjusting volumes though, so don't anticipate any benefit on that front.

You're on the right track. It's to do with how digital audio sampling works and what levels are optimal for that. It would take a long time to explain exactly how it works and I'd essentially be doing a lecture (which is how I learned in the first place in my AE course).

 

[Demanic]

Re: Volume when recording guitar tracks

I don't tend to use plugins.

Sent from my Alcatel_5044C using Tapatalk