sonar5 user making the switch..question(s)

[Chris]

hope you don't mind my nubile type questions....

in sonar5 i can view the wave file as i record a track. i like this cuz i can see what kind of signal i'm getting and can adjust my play to optimize that signal.

i can't find info in the manual. can i set ss to do this?


thanks,
Chris

[trock]

Hi Chris and welcome

i have been on SAW for about a year and half. i came from cubase among other platforms and this threw me for a loop at first also. you cannot see the WAV as you record. others here with more knowledge than i can tell you why. i did get used to that pretty quick and it no longer phases me, when i record i just watch and set my levels on the record view and have always been good to go. i try and record around -12 to -8 in.

good luck with everything, i really think you are going to like it here and love SAW

[DavidandMary]

You may want to go to the Multitrack menu and choose Record Mark Display. Having this checked lights the track as you record. I like that a lot.

Now, for the levels, you may want to Record Arm the Track and hit REC RDY. This gives you the levels without wasting hard drive space. Then, when set, hit REC and you will be going into SAW funland.

[Bob L]

Drawing waveforms as you record takes a lot of cpu resources away from the machine which needs those resources to make sure you don't glitch a track out of the 48 you may be recording while still being able to monitor and process the signal for monitoring and foldback thru aux sends to the performers.

The record meters are very fast and acurate in SAWStudio and that is where you look to set levels...

I am very focused on cpu utilization and pay close attention to not wasting it on things that really do not contribute to the effectiveness of the recording and mixing process... at least in my opinion. :)

Bob L

[Chris]

wow! thanks all for the super fast reply's..i think i can live with using the meters only...

which leads me to my next qusetion...

what are/ is there a typical meter setting to start with (peak/rms/scale):confused: .. i write pop/punk, hard rock music for tv (if that helps you somehow).

[Microstudio]

wow! thanks all for the super fast reply's..i think i can live with using the meters only...

which leads me to my next qusetion...

what are/ is there a typical meter setting to start with (peak/rms/scale):confused: .. i write pop/punk, hard rock music for tv (if that helps you somehow).

When recording in the digital world you just DO NOT want to go over Zero.

I just get my levels to stay between -10 & -6 this gets me a good signal and I never go over ZERO.

[Alex_G]

i think i can live with using the meters only...


This is the way that recording industry has worked forever.

To see waves in the screen while recording, its more related to GUI software developers with little experience in the real world of audio recording... at least in my opinion. :D
Alex

[Chris]

now a really important question..i use bfd exclusively and use the piano roll in sonar5 to create/edit patterns and fills. can i do this in ss as easily?

never mind...i see it's and add on and has it's own manual..

[MMP]

If you compose music for picture you are going to love the tightness of the video viewer in SAW. I recently compared all the top PC DAWs for video sync, and IMO SAW has the best video of any of them.

Regards,

MM

[Bob L]

I designed the color scheme of the SS meters for quick and simple visual reference... when recording, if you just keep the signal slightly into the red, you will have a good safe level positioned nicely in the MT for good mixes with enough headroom left over for reasonable signal processing.

Your main concern is that none of the record meters ever reach clipping.

In the SS mix engine, you have no need of trying to maximize signals right at the top of the meters... there is really no noise floor to worry about as with analog tape...

The math is very analog sounding and will allow you to raise the gain considerably later during the mix for low level signals with no real audio quality loss.

Bob L

[lofi studios]

i have tried most of the daws out there, and they all made me feel flat, not really enjoying the recording process, then a guy on here ( in fact a few - thanks guys!!) pointed me in this direction, sold to the fool in the UK!!

i honestly have never looked forward to working out the intricacies(?) of a daw so much!!! you are going to love the ride, so strap in, hang on and let fly!!

Iain

[trock]

there is a great post in terry manning's forum on REP about recording in the digital world at lower levels, not going near 0 coming in and getting much better results on your mixes coming in at -12 to -8 or so, maybe even lower.

also about panning only LCR

[Brent Bennett]

what are/ is there a typical meter setting to start with (peak/rms/scale)

Chris, here is my previous post regarding analog and digital levels (http://www.sawstudiouser.com/forums/showthread.php?p=59216#post59216) in recording, and how they correlate.

[antiClick]

there is a great post in terry manning's forum on REP about recording in the digital world at lower levels, not going near 0 coming in and getting much better results on your mixes coming in at -12 to -8 or so, maybe even lower.

also about panning only LCR

LCR only? Seems interesting
Would you post the link?

Thnank you

[trock]

http://recforums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/t/13724/7478/

for me i never thought this would be true, why limit yourself to just full L full R and Center??

well i went back and remixed some songs just this way and they were much clearer and not nearly as muddled as the original mixes

i don't limit myself to just this but i start every mix this way now and most stay this way

[trock]

Hey Chris

i am also wondering why you are switching from sonar 5?? i downloaded the sonar 6 demo to see what it was like and i added a drum track i use in one of my songs here in SAW and my CPU was 17% on that one track alone, no effects or anything. that same track doesn't even register when i play it in SAW, same 44.1/24, same volume etc

was CPU usage a consideration??

just curious

thanks

[Cary B. Cornett]

http://recforums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/t/13724/7478/

for me i never thought this would be true, why limit yourself to just full L full R and Center?? I for one would like to be able to read the original old article written on the subject (pic shown in the above thread), rather than all the comments about it.

There have been various philosophies about what "good" or "proper" panning is, all of them used by one or another of very successful engineer/producers. The only one with what I would consider a "scientifically" explained basis is the one about "Center Channel Buildup" which is largely addressed to mono compatibility.

Say you have 3 parts of equal level, and you pan them Left, Center, Right. When you sum to mono, the Center part will be louder than the other two. Why? Because equal sound from two channels does not sum the same way "in air" from two speakers as it does electrically and played from one speaker. That is why the pan law in most mixers cuts the level to both channels by 3 dB when panned center. The standard practice for avoiding center channel buildup is either
A) do not pan anything to the hard left or hard right, or
B) do not pan anything to dead center.

Since most engineers are not comfortable "leaving the center empty", the result is that we get a LOT of mixes that sound almost mono even when played in stereo.

I take a different view on this. If something should be dominant in the mono balance, it should be panned to the center. If you have something that you would like to be able to "kick up" a bit in the stereo mix without being too loud when played in mono, pan it hard left or right.

Sounds to me like "Cardinal Points" mixing is a kind of rebellion against "Center Channel Buildup" doctrine more than anything else. I say, don't be afraid of the sides, don't be afraid of the center, and don't be afraid to pan anywhere else you like if it sounds better to you that way.

Did somebody mention mixing a "power trio"? For a crude concert recording I did, I tried panning the bass hard left and the guitar hard right (the way the guys were on stage). It made sense to me, and the bass player certainly did not complain about not being in the center. About 30 years ago, there was a live recording of Jeff Beck live with the Jan Hammer Group, and the liner notes made a point of saying that the mix was panned to match where the musicians actually were on stage. That record made a lot of money, and I don't recall anyone complaining about the "image"...