This particular process and concept, above all others, truly was the game changer and got me to a point that I could make a mix, instead of mixing a variety of clipping noise.
The idea with peak normalizing is to do it on the raw tracks, and it has no impact on their final level in the mix. They still need to be mixed. What is gives you is a more predictable result when you are using plugin chains that you have setup in advance for the expected level. So it can be a time saver.
@@franlarsen80 No one said anything about tonality dude. I suggest you look up what normalizing is. Also, if you're talking about things on the master bus that create K-14 you understand that doesn't take into account actual listening levels and it is a summing tool. It's not what the maker of this video warns against which is leveling all sounds regardless of dynamic range together. So a symphony orchesta at the same level as a solo flute, LOL.
In 1982 I custom built a recording mixer for my studio, that would allow me to set the input level of each strip, and then apply any eq (usually high pass or similar) to deliver the best signal level for each input to its corresponding track of the tape recorder - in essence, so that the peak of each instrument or voice would be the same on each track of the tape. The signals were returned to the corresponding channels on the console just ahead of the fader, pan and often reverb send (post fader). The faders represented the loudness of each returning track, allowing a mix to be made without interfering with the level going to tape. So your shaker channel would have the fader set at a different position than the kick drum, which would be different from any of the other returned signals. When I get tracks from someone else to mix, often live recorded tracks, the firs thing I do is load them all into a simple application that allows me to run a normalize function to make their peaks equal -6 db. This makes them similar to signal on the tape I used to record to. I then load them into Logic, or other DAW, and set the faders and pans as I would expect the various levels to be represented visually for the mix. At -6db, there's enough room if a channel requires work using an equalizer or other plugin without overloading it, but it also allows me to see the waveforms clearly for every channel. I also only bring up sounds like kick, bass, and vocal to -6 on the fader to begin with, to allow everything to be added without overloading the mix buss. What I've found is that some plugins are not designed very well and require that I insert the "gain" plugin (Logic) prior to the other plugin so I can set the gain (staging) so as not to overload, or not to under feed, that plugin. In the analogue world, we would gain stage to control at which stage the signal was to be amplified cleanly, or to control an amount of overdriving the gain going into a piece of analogue gear. I don't think of the concept of gain staging as a complex or confusing one, at least it wasn't during the time I instructed courses in the early 80s. That said, music and recording are very subjective in the creative phases, and I would override actual electronic engineers when the numbers didn't look good, in favour of the achieved sound.
I had an employer who was a mastering engineer and a teacher previously. He told me he used to have students make a mix using only level faders. Then do it again using faders and panning. Then do it again with faders, panning, and hi pass filters. And so forth for a few more steps. I think people will over utilize plugins and processing without knowing what they want to hear or feel. I feel like most my mixes are just levels, pans, and filters.
I agree, i will get excited about exciters, new compressors, and saturation but taking a step back and keeping it simple has helped my mixed much more live and in the studio. I think live mixing really helped me realize that less is more.
If the production is quality, there shouldn’t be much else needed besides level, panning, and simple EQ and compression. If I produce a track and have control over the sound design, the mix part is easy, as the sounds already fit together!
I think a bit of both helps - and it really does go back to the days of printing to tape…noise floor, tape ‘hiss’ etc but you can’t go past a fader/pan mix as if the ‘band’ was playing live IMHO JPMusic
I needed this video, and the mixing Gods heard my prayers! I trust Joe when it comes to these topics! The best part is that I think he read my mind, I’m doing a lot of math and not a lot of music! I have an acoustically treated room and Neumann KH 150 monitors & 750 subwoofer, but I spend too much time looking at the Clarity M meter and VU meters! 🤦🏽♂️
The main thing is you know why you’re looking at meters, so if you look at them less, when you DO look you’ll know what it means to you. Math is music and music is math. When the ear doesn’t like something it’s because of poor math. Now you know the rules, you can likely trust your ear to do that musical math a bit more by instinct as part of your process. Cheers!
One of the reasons to gain stage correctly is to allow head room. Tracks tend to creep up in level during a mix so if you’re aiming for -14LUFS overall it’s worth starting at - 18 to allow for this. Once automation is used it can be hard to drop overall levels
yeah, it's a clumsy video. Gain staging is important and I think he agrees, but there is a thing now where a lot of people are normalising EVERY SINGLE TRACK to -18db because they heard the "gainstaging" buzzword and the magic number. They aren't really gainstaging at all ie using their ears, and I think that's what this vid is about
@@elreyabeja4539 yea that “-18” varies by daw too lol, like from what I’ve heard that’s pro tools sweet spot, I can tell u I use reason and the number is “-10”, and I’ve seen people using logic and other daws say different numbers too, I really think all daw’s can make same end result, but the road to get there is not the same in any 2 daws lol
I’ve tried all the internet fad techniques and I’ve got a theory about them, (because you all care and asked.) You’ve got real-world engineers who develop practices for real-world reasons, who begin teaching on TH-cam. Then, you have aspiring engineers with little to no real-world experience and a drive to share knowledge or be content creators, who take those practices they learn on TH-cam and try to recapitulate them, but in the process, it can lose its actual initial attachment to reality, and it just becomes a barrier instead of an aid. I appreciate Joe puts so much effort into keeping the main things the main things.
Joe, I love your videos and I think you carry the RR torch very well. In this case, I think you understand "gain staging" different than I do. I certainly wouldn't do any normalisation or change the fundamental audio in any way unless I had to for some reason. The way I understand gain staging is more akin to your first example, but taken further down the line. Gain staging as I understand it, is more akin to how you drive the console. Recording the audiot levels so the channel has some headroom, then setting the channel levels to keep some headroom at the input of your plugins and especially on your busses, and master 2 bus. Sometimes I had to lower the level of the audio in the file itself so I could turn the fader to the sweet spot yet keep that headroom, especially in the busses and mixes. Driving a channel for "color" can be done in the ssl strip or whatever (within the plugin) whilst still keeping headroom on the fader. But healthy headroom in the busses and faders is paramount, and why I gain stage every time.
I’m reason user, and they really like model there signal flow off analog, from the virtual synth in rack, to the input gain-dynamics-eq-insert-send-fader, so I do gain stage the sounds coming in at the gain input knob to -10db to start for headroom, don’t have to do it to every sound, a lot come in around there naturally, but if certain patches or samples are too low or too high, I will bring up or down, that way I have an even starting point “pre” processing, then they all go down the channel strip “through” the processing, and then I adjust the “levels” of mix, with the faders, post processing, which usually after all the set up along way, are minimal fader movements, sometimes I break these rules for creative reasons, like pushing input gain into channel comp on a parallel track, stuff like that, but for the most part I always do that way, I don’t know how other daws work with the channel strip, but in reason, gain staging definitely immensely improved my mixes once I properly understood it lol
Thanks Joe, I put a template together with all plugins turned off. (1st plugin on every track is a trim which is also turned off). Then when recording a track set a good input level not too weak & definitely well below clipping. Do a rough mix as you continue to record other tracks. It helps to get the overall picture of the song. Finally, use only needed plugins to enhance or color tracks in the context of the song.
All fully agreed. I fell into that gain staging black hole for awhile and after never hearing any audible results from anything I did I just abandoned the entire subject.
Gain staging isn't about levelling recorded tracks with other recorded tracks. It's about maximizing the power on your channel that you get from the instrument or microphone. To set the channel gain, first turn it all the way down. Set the channel's and master faders to the unity. Now turn up the gain as high as necessary while playing until you see the channel's VU meter indicates your average desired level, around -18db in most cases. For a mic input use your voice or use the line level instrument at the same volume it would be used normally. This insures that you have, in fact, taken as much power from the microphone or instrument as possible before using amplification from another part of your mixer. After you gain stage the channels individually, you're ready to mix them together to a stereo track, using your ears, (your most important instrument), to around -6db, then import that stereo track to a new project to master it. The gain staging of individual channels is also valuable for live music setups as well. Getting the channels mixed together well is about 90% of a good mix, get it right :)
I'm not sure what "maximizing the power" means. The shaker track in my song doesn't need to have the same amount of "power" as the snare drum or lead vocal.
I’m sorry man this argument doesn’t really make any sense. Gain staging videos like this should be for tracking, not mixing. Normalizing raw tracks, without degradation to have a nice solid starting point BEFORE I mix is not harmful at all. This is incredibly helpful when you’re tracking yourself.
I use clip gain to get my tracks around to the so called sweet spot (I check my plugins recommended input level in the manual or even just use dbvu) and then use my faders to get a static mix and then a gain plugin on each channel at the end for level automation. I don’t think it’s a waste of time and not even a particularly big use of time.
I think the only approach is to realize that you are gain staging in every mix and to learn how that affects how you process tracks, how you utilize plugins and how gain staging can free or limit what you do in you mixing/mastering.
I'm totally down with trying something different - after all, I have no idea what I'm doing when it comes to mixing. I followed one of Graham Cochrane's mixing videos and if a track had a signal he thought was too hot, he turned the trim down. And if he came across one he thought was too soft, he turned the trim up. He did that for all the tracks "before" doing the static mix. I don't know what normalizing is, LOL, but Graham and others tried to have all the tracks around -18db to -12db, excluding things like shakers or hi-hats. Anyway, yours is a different approach and I'm going to give it a try. By the way, the only thing I record outside the box is my sax, so I feel like I'm making this much more difficult than need be.
i agree that the static mix is very important, it will feed you and clothe you, you will need very little automation, a lot less processing, but that's not what gain staging is. gain staging is setting the input volume of your tracks, with a view to the processing, not the output volume - and then, cascading down, the input level through all processors down the chain. all hardware, and hardware emulating plugins have a sweet spot that you need to hit, to be able to work with the device/plugin properly, and for it to sound good. and the no plugin approach works when you record everything with hardware - "for real" - but when when all your guitar and bass amps are in the box, and your drums are a virtual drummer, too, you can't start with no plugins to do a mix, cause there's nothing there to mix. i have to start with a ton of plugins, before even going into the "mixing" phase, only to get my tones - amps, cabinets, pedals, coloring pres, and tape - that's just emulating the "recording" stage - and believe me when i say that the level at which you hit an amplifier - even virtual - makes a night and day difference - seems like a no brainer, right? i wish all interfaces had a unity gain setting on their pres, so that that problem be removed - what goes into the virtual amp (the level of the recorded d.i.) be the corresponding level to a guitar going straight into the amp, with no interface. that would simplify a lot of things. i wish you talked about that a little, and offered your experience. cheers!
@@recordingrevolution yeah, but the question i always ask myself is what level i should be hitting the amp at, to match unity gain. and should it be unity gain, or is it a different calibration, like the standard -18 dbfs? i wonder if you could speak about that. so far i've been doing it by ear, i like the timbre and oomppf, but it's hard to take out the mud.
Most of the ppl who jumped on this video “hell yeah thank” couldn’t mix a cake let a long a song..I gain stage and my mixes sound great and getting the balance is even easier. To each their own tho. And when you peak normalize track to say-12db their highest peak is at -12db but they aren’t at the same level still. And you’d still balance afterwards, so this video really threw me way off.
I see why it's so confusing for you. I'm guessing you haven't spent a lot of time recording analog sources. In that environment, you need to set the input gain on the tracks first (first stage of gain) to get a CLEAN signal before adjusting the faders to put instruments into the overall mix (2nd stage of gain -- positive or negative, usually negative gain).
I record almost exlusively analog sources. The idea of "clean" signal is a leftover from the old analog tape days, where the signal-to-noise ratio was a legitimate problem. Digital systems have such a low noise floor that recording something as loud as possible without clipping is unnecessary (and I would argue harmful).
@@recordingrevolution Even with digital recording, if you record the signal with too few bits (too low of gain), you end up with noise. Try recording an analog signal with peaks around -48db and you'll quickly see what I mean.
If you dont gain stage properly you either get clipping or your noise floor is to high in relation to the recorded audio ,.. all this happens before you even start mixing. Been listening to you for years Joe but seems like this vid is more about mixing levels...
I am shocked, sorry do not agree with the opinions expressed in this video. Its TH-cam, we hear a lot of bad advice. The main flaw in this video is that it does not recognise that many plugins are designed for input at a nominal level. Besides he talks about normalising to a peak level, but that is absolutely wrong, its about normalising to a similar RMS level. TH-cam is both good and bad, but you have to kiss many frogs to find the prince.... Totally inconsistent advice, that makes absolutely no sense. He does not understand what he is talking about at all. Ignore his advice in this video - TH-cam expert.... The real question is which hits has this TH-cam producer mixed. Anyone I know of ??
I did mention that some plugins are designed to receive certain levels. Also, normalizing to either peak or RMS doesn't really make much of a difference. I don't want my 16th background vocal to be the same RMS level as my lead vocal. Normalizing it to be a "similar RMS level" as you put it just means I have to go back and turn it down later. It's an unnecessary step. Inefficient.
Ah man. I disagree. Gain staging is not something to be obsessed over, but it is an actual thing. This vid is about mixing, not starting out with a track that has a workable level. I think this vid is very vague and just makes more confusion. I disagree that gain staging isn't a thing. It really is a thing, to a point. There is a pretty decent ballpark in the -12 area. I do -18 or so. You have to have a decent signal to start out with, and it is well known that plugins have a correlating sweet spot on the input. I'm sorry but when I started I researched this stuff and confusion is everywhere. You have to have your signal in the ballpark, that's what gainstaging is.
I think usually what people mean by gain staging is not about making everything the same level, but leaving room for the mix to not clip when you put every track together. That's the main goal for me at least.
It's not about not clipping. You can avoid clipping at literally any step of your process. Is your mix coming into your stereo output too hot? Just slap on any plugin with an input and output knob and adjust it there. Your mix is no longer clipping. Problem solved, right? No, not really. You still might be feeding in signal too hot at any step of the process. It might be happening three levels down and you don't even realize it. It's about not overloading plugins and allowing yourself enough headroom for dynamics. If it was just about not clipping at the very end of the chain, you could just put on a true peak limiter and be done with it.
@@rome8180 The problem is when you use a compressor and compress so much, o you have to move so much the input, output or threshold or when you need to ride faders, remember de fader scale is logarithmic, near to 0 is more detailed.
Isn't there a difference between gain staging, (making sure that the signal being recorded is at the appropriate gain in the beginning and then going from one device and or plug in to the next), and relative volume levels between the different signals or tracks? I thought those were 2 different issues...
Yes. Volume balance between sounds (using faders) is the last step in mixing. After gain staging and using the plugins u want, u have to balance ur mix (cause effects affect the volume level)
I understand what you’re trying to say but gain and level are two different things. Gain staging in mixing isn’t really a thing, gain staging only applies to recording as an engineer, not a mixer. Like you said briefly it applies to analog hardware, and setting the right gains through a chain of analog hardware on the way IN to the DAW. Which is very important it have proper gains hence gain staging. I think the conversation you’re trying to have is about a great balanced mix, not gain staging.
Gain staging in mixing is absolutely a thing. Plugins have levels they perform best at. Also, you need enough headroom at the end of the mix to allow for full dynamics and proper mastering. For example, if you want the chorus to be 3 db louder than the verses, that can only happen if you have 3 db of room to work with. And if you're hitting a compressor harder than you want to because the level you're feeding into it is too hot, you might be getting unwanted distortion. You might not realize the signal is too hot because it might not be too hot AFTER it goes through the compressor. The input is too hot, not the output. So you look at the volume fader on your track and it looks fine. But you haven't properly gain staged.
Yes, all this works BUT : You need to have good RECORDING LEVELS FIRST . That is where gain staging is crucial. Because even if you record too hot , you can get a good static mix with faders and panning ... BUT inserts are PRE-FADERS, and if you throw an analog emulation where -18db Vu is a good starting point(most of them are calibrated this way, ) on a track recorded too hot, that's where problems start...
Yeah he seems to have misunderstood the definition of gain staging. Gain staging is about individual tracks. What he's actually referring to is mix balance volume
I heard you make a lot of valid points but none were a case against gain staging. This is the process of maximizing a signal's level so as to minimize noise and optimize it for the next amplification stage in the chain. Normalizing tracks so the waveforms look bigger is not gain staging and it never was.
I gain stage for multiple reasons, if I don’t gain stage then I’ll have issues where adding a plugin will clip the track if it’s too high coming in for example. Gain staging helped me to mix and sound better, the thing about mixing that’s cool and fun is everyone has their own workflow. And for me the mix balance is more easier for me after gain staging.
You're not balancing right... Turn your faders to infinity, then raise them one by one. If you find your stereo out clipping by the time you're done with this, simply select every track and turn down the faders; and remember for next time not to turn up that first track so loud. You're literally not balancing right if you're having this problem. It's basically the first step of mixing. You're so focused on nonsense like "gain staging" that you lost control of the first real step of mixing after the setup: Balancing.
He really does gain stage, just a different way. After he records at the proper levels, he adjusts the mix on inputs instead of the faders. Since it's all digital at that point it keeps his facers closer to zero. But his signal is definitely the right amounts pre and post fader.
Absolutely agree - really sensible advice. It seems that gainstaging has become something of a cult. Of course, balance the input and output levels in the stream but sorting a static/simple level/pan balance before whamming on those plugins is such a really good discipline. You might also find that you don’t need all those plugins after all…
On a fundamental level I totally agree that it's more important to focus on making music rather than fretting if the gain of everything is perfect. However I think the misunderstanding of gain is the main issue. Gain is not the same as setting levels. Gain is setting how much of the signal is available. It's like plumbing. You have the gain/main water line which limits how much water you can pull at a given time. The fader is like a faucet. You can control how much of the source you want to use. 😀
Sure I agree with you. I just disagree that every track needs to be normalized to a specific, measurable peak volume. It's an unnecessary step. More busywork and less music-making.
@@recordingrevolution Absolutely. It's definitely not something people need to spend a lot of time on. It's just more of a utility thing that people should know so they can have full control. I think that's what I love about sources like this, it helps people understand those tools better so they can utilize them when needed. 👍
@@recordingrevolution Or you could use a DAW like Reaper, wherein you can get an action installed to normalize everything to a desired level. Select all items, run Normalizer. Done in less than 15 seconds, give or take. No busy work at all 😉
Tell us you don’t understand the electrical side of audio engineering and gain staging/structure without telling us. But sure! I’ll totally buy your tutorial. 🥴
@@KevinWayne Dude, you're HILARIOUS. You can't know unless you're doing four track EDM or something, similar, or even, regardless of genre... To help retrain your thinking, let's use the shaker example. Even if your music is ridulously simple, unless it's 'identical' on every song, you can't know what to tell Reaper (all DAWs have something like this feature for years or decades, dude) to normalize to. If you're making a House track where you want shaker only during a build, it will be loud. If you're doing some sort of Bollywood dance track and it only comes in after some dude says 'awright,' you want it soft. Unless you have the ears of John Barry (when he was alive) there's no way you can know what to normalize for in advance, unless you're creating idential songs every single time out. I won't invoice you.
A discussion of "Gainstaging" without talking about signal-to-noise ratio, clipping, and headroom, is not a discussion of gain-staging at all. This video is about mixing. I don't think you understand the fundamental concept of gain-staging.
You literally don't do music at all. Neither do your commenters. There is no concept of gain staging. It's synonymous with mixing. It's a catch phrase. For some it's turning the input down 10db on every track. It's something totally different for others. It's a buzzword for TH-camrs and noobs who don't understand how to balance a mix. Where's your music?
If you use analog modeled plugins it’s good to be aware that -18 db is unity gain for many plug-in algorithms. Also, on the way in, you also don’t want to be too hot. It’s best to be around -18 when tracking. Or you are actually pushing the converters. It seems like he really misunderstands that you set the levels so they are correct for processing and then you use the faders for the balance like a normal person. Really weird he doesn’t get it.
"Gain Staging".. For some, it's putting an SSL channel with its input lowered 10dB... for others... it's Normalize Region Gain... But it's never described in stages. It's always one move or... just describing the mixing process itself... the balancing phase. It's so silly. List the "stages", and explain how it's different than just the balancing, if you're going to talk about it. Literally saw a TH-camr point out that with all his faders at unity, his 2bus was clipping. No shit. Terrible for people who are trying to learn, and they come across videos like that. It puts them behind. You can't find a video of CLA talking about Gain Staging, or Veit Renn. There's a reason. Man, these buffoons annoy me, misleading people trying to learn.
This video misrepresents, or misunderstands, the type of gain staging that I see most people doing. It is actually so bad that it kinda diminishes my trust in the channel. Setting levels saves a lot of time for me, and yes some things do then get turned down cos they should be quieter, but by setting a few levels (like we do with live instruments) I have more headroom and a clearer starting point - hell, tweaking a level takes a second and if you do it when you're loading the VST it can make recording easier - my 18 analog inputs are already set, as is my pedal board. You don't persuade me that your methods are worth trying/paying for by trash talking a technique that I'm sure I'd be able to spot aspects of in your method. Disappointing, tbh. Being aware of levels is basic preparation. Fail to prepare, prepare to fail.
@@recordingrevolution Yeah, gain staging. It isn't that you don't do gain staging, it is that it is partially already done thanks to the defaults you develop on both hardware and software.
Going simple and calm about using aggressive audio processes is the best. If I find my plugins add up so much in a strip I lean back and then say "Now do I need all of them? I believe I can create the same effect with less process" And then I optimize all the processes to their core level fixing what is essential instead of bashing plugins on it. Reforging the tonal balance, going surgical but not complex with the eq, and listening again Then I find myself deleting 5-6 vst's from the strip. Especially think twice before applying aggressive compression or exciter sort of dynamic changes It might sound fine on your monitor but come harsh on your phone speakers. This is for the mix, For mastering, going surgical but very light-handed with the master EQ will make your master sound nearly the same and consistent among most audio devices. Tamed high mids, variety in dynamic range and harmonics, opened up and relaxed out unwanted squeezed signals, etc. (I am mostly speaking about a natural and pro-sounding result for noisy genres you can go with more distortion and compression of course if it's intentional even there you have to relax the high-mids a bit though for consistency against the frequency response of different devices)
THANK YOU! I was doing static mixes all my life until I started hearing about gain staging. So I researched it, tried it, and struggled with it. I did get some decent results, but I kept wondering why they weren't better results than what I'd always done. And then you made this video. And I thank you for "giving me permission" to go back to static mixes. That's what I know, where I'm comfortable, and what gives me the results I want. [for readers of this comment, I've been recording for over 40 years, so it's not a matter of being a relatively new kid on the block who doesn't grasp the concept of mixing well. ;-) ]
What sounds good is good…and there isn’t one “right way” to do things. A lot of these things are holdovers from analog recording where you had to be very mindful of gain levels, distortion , and noise. It’s why I just smh at guys who emphatically insist that analog sounds better than digital. I’m like, “Have you forgotten about all the noise that turned up in even the best analog recording?” That was the first thing that struck me back in 1984 when I heard my first CD: The noise is gone….
i've never "normalized" signals when gain-staging, but i do "averages" like those through a VU or RMS meter. so "around" -14dBFS, not always exactly -14. that's not to say that this level is maintained throughout the mix, it's just a strong initial signal, that can be turned down if needed, or up. if turned up, that initial -14dBFS gives me plenty of room to work with. as i understand it, it's usually involving recording hardware or all analog recordings, to maintain a good S/N ratio. in the digital or DAW world, its most useful when processing through analog style plugins or to maintain whatever levels you have of a certain instrument going in & coming out of processors (ie; a hi hat goes into a compressor at -11 & so it comes out of the compressor at -11 or so) at the end, it's intending on allowing a predetermined amount of headroom (~ -6dB), to accommodate any peaks or spikes on the master
BUT when you start adding plugins, then you run into issues. SO if you're 'gainstaging' with the faders, the input signal into a(distortion) would be at a certain level lets say -10dB causing the signal to distort more than it would at -18dB. You make the argument for normalizing to -18db, the next step at that point is to start mixing without plugins.. SO essentially the first input stage is normalizing to-18db which anyone can do, then starting to mix with the faders.. You gave the EXACT method of gainstagingin the proper context to say the hell with it? BUT ... i totally see why.
Gain and volume aren't interchangeable. This was important for me when I started. The differences are huge. Gain staging is very easy and important for mixing without problems IMO.
I just never thought this was a thing before I started watching TH-cam for mixing strategies. I make sure a track is close to zero. I add fx, and make sure it can go close to zero without sacrificing dynamic range. Then when I’m mixing, I can turn everything down, or bring it all up depending on what the mix needs.
To me gain staging is merely optimising the level for the next processor in the chain. Therefore, putting a level adjustment device (such as a utility plugin in ableton, if your working ITB) achieves this. Personally I think the concept of gain staging has become overly complex when speaking to a largely digital audience.
The concept of gain staging is the result of recording live amps through microphones..... when live tracking basic tracks. You keep your amps low and you use your console and outboard gear to compensate. Because once you start the "chain" your microphones are the greatest source of NOISE. Literally where the heck did all this nonsense come from? Who is legit making this stuff up? The entire point of a mixing console is to ADJUST levels as needed when you are mixing your final project. It's mind numbing where this industry has gone since I bailed 15 years ago. Not sure I want to come back at this point hahaha! I swear TH-cam is where you go if you want setbacks and bad information haha.
The concept of gain staging has been misunderstood completely in this yt video. Should the loan shaker be the same volume as the snare drum? Has nothing to do with gain staging. Gain staging is the process, which you already mention, of making sure what is fed into the analogue gear, comes in at a certain sweet spot for the gear to handle. What level you choose to have the shaker, after the processing - so long as is not going through more analogue gear, can be any level you want it to be. It baffles me why so many TH-cam videos on this subject, to miss this and don't grasp it. The thing which baffles me, is nobody moans or highlights the pointlessness of calibrating all the analogue gear with test tones, which we would do at the BBC or Abbey Road, with every piece of outboard gear, including all the calibration work with tape machines, yes gain-staging included, because it is all necessary and vital to achieving a mix which - ultimately becomes easier to mix. People wonder why they don't have 3d space and depth in a mix, they wonder why their mixes sound a little muffled, or squashed, they wonder why their mixes don't travel to other setups on playback, they wonder why they are stacking 8 compressors and 5 eq's just to get things to sit in the mix. The first thing they don't wonder about, is an obvious hidden secret, gain stage and level match and level balance, and you'll all be stunned at how much clearer, deeper, sonic and better your mix sounds, and that's before any eq or, panning and or other fx. Rant over.
Doesn’t do gain staging. Then describes making a static mix with gain staged tracks. 😂 Good video though. And your definition of game station it’s not the same is it I would have because it sounds like you’re doing the same thing when you doing a static mix. I think the idea of making everything-6db (or whatever random value) is what you’re talking about. For the type of music, I make, EDM and hip-hop, I usually start out with the kick about -10db and do a static mix around that. I’ll generally keep my main buss tracks (drums, instruments, etc) about -6, to start. So I guess it’s gain staging to make a static mix. But gain staging is mandatory in mixing. Just my opinion of course. Again, love the videos, brother.
You've just demonstrated a complete lack of understanding of audio, well done. The whole reason for gain staging is to treat every channel as it's own line in a system that operates at "line level" i.e. 0dBu We want each signal to max out at 0dB VU (this is not peak) and depending on how you calibrate your system this will give you 18-24dB of headroom for peaks. Then when you gain stage properly, you know which tracks need compression to restrict the dynamic range enough to reach 0VU without clipping. Measuring your VU level also lets you know where to set the threshold on your compressors. It's called audio "engineering" for a reason. Use the tools available to measure, then act.
recordingrevolution You've had excellent content over the years. Are you still planning on making additional videos or are you after this span of time, all "audio-ed out?" Either way, cheers.
That's why you mix AFTER gain staging to locate optimal and final levels. If you recorded a song with only a shaker, then the shaker would be at it's optimum level-if that's what you really wanted. Gain staging is a starting point, not the end point.
Do you have a commercial release that you have mixed ? Gain staging is a fad ? It’s been an industry standard for decades . You need to take a formal course . You are giving the worst ideas here . Minus 18 is the default trim on actual mixing desk. It is the standard trim for most analog gear . If you using analog emulation plugins . If you under drive the login like a compressor won’t respond properly . Over drive you are adding audio distortion and artefacts the original gear wouldn’t produce. There is reason plug-ins like that are default minus 18.
I don't think anyone things "the shaker should be the same levels as the snare & vocal." The idea is to get the levels away from clipping as much as reasonably possible. Then within that gain structure, decide the bass should be at X level. The strings should be at level Y. I think you're rebutting an argument no one is making. I used to think all the Anti-gain staging arguments were so cool. "Hey, it's a bit of elbow grease I don't have to put in." Then I tried it for real. Whattya know, things improved audio-wise. Haven't heard a convincing counter-argument since, including just now ;-)
I start at negative 18 in and out of plug ins so they are all getting the proper input to function the best the plug in can and don't have to worry about clipping. It's cake tho. It takes no time at all with a vu meter. Put a vu meter 1st then slide it down to open up the slotI keep after I add a plug in. I just slide the vu meter down a slot and make sure I keep it around negative 18. Then I put it on my group bus first then slide it down a slot then slip my plug in in the slot it was in. Some time I'll just do the volume check once I get it set at the start to AROUND negative 18. The bypass back and forth and match the volume. Quickly I don't agonize over it . I probably spend 10 seconds checking it and adjusting it. Always leaves me headroom and I've never had a problem with clipping. I put a vu meter in the last insert slot and start with no plug ins getting my level to -18 then check it after each plug in and adjust it quickly to get back to -18. I don't know if that's the right way but it's always worked for me. I should point out I mostly only record and process vocals. Always great content Joe.
All equipment is different. There’s a certain amount of gain in order to receive proper levels that are loud enough to see a noise floor and not too loud to cause clipping. There’s a difference between mic,line,and instrument output. Try recording a bass without accounting for it and it’ll blow every speaker in your system.
Joe, after listening to this twice I believe you are talking more about balancing levels of tracks at fader stage. Gain is surely better understood as being about input trim, not output level. It’s about not overdriving the input of a track or buss or plug-in with too hot a signal. That’s where the caution needs to happen for a good mix. This video does not seem to address input level? I only hear you talking about balancing, and I think you mean outputs. Happy to be corrected by you, but I personally found this rather unhelpful and counter to my own experience in studying gain staging approaches on both analogue mixers and in using those principles inside DAWs. Again, I mean gainstaging as not overdriving any input stage in the process.
I agree but I also gain stage. I take Hornet VU meter, put it on first track. set it to -18db for the reference setting and 0db for peak just to limit anything way out there, set to group 1. Now drag that over to every other track. Open any instance, click auto, you will see the gain dial move. Play your song from start to finish then click stop. Auto will turn off and every track has been set to a reference level. Basically you have given yourself some headroom without moving a fader yet. Now do your static mix, adjust panning as you deem necessary. Check in mono to see if anything pops out, adjust, switch back to stereo, repeat. At end you should have a decent mix without a single plug-in yet. Now start listening for what the tracks need in context with one another, compression, eq, etc. I work this way especially now I’ve gone to hybrid mixing. I know if I’ve done the above, when I send out a track via adat into my Ferrofish ad/da converter and into whatever 500 series modules i want to use on the track that I started into that chain with headroom. I don’t obsess over it, I use an automated tool, listen to the song as it is doing its thing and move on, never to mess with gain staging any further. This way of working may not be for everyone, but it works for me, it is cheap and maybe takes 10 minutes to setup part of which I’d be listening to the track anyways just to get an idea of where I want to take things. Good luck everyone and have fun mixing (which I think Joe is spot on about here!)
Gain staging is so your audio is prepped for upcoming edits, such as soft compression, EQ, hard compression etc, when the audio is at its correct levels it hits them plugins in its best possible format
ALL major engineers and professors stress gain staging. You are so off base here. I would not believe any of your mixes would make the grade as professional.
I agree that the "set everything to -18 db" is a waste of time. Some instruments need to be -30 db. Why would you want to set it 12 db louder than it needs to be when you're just going to turn it down later? That said, one thing I would say is helpful is to start with your loudest instrument and set THAT to a reasonable level. Let's say it's your snare or kick. If you start with that at -6 db, you're going to run out of headroom very fast. But if you start with it at -12 db and build the track around it, everything else will be at a reasonable level. I picked -12 db randomly, so don't take that as gospel. It really depends on how much louder I want the kick than the rest of the music, what genre it is, and how many instruments I'm working with. I also pay attention the level I'm feeding into my plugins. I'm not saying you need to follow the manufacturer's suggestions. If you like the way it sounds, who cares? But I want to be aware if I'm "overloading" a plugin, and I want to be doing it for a reason. But obsessing over -18 or -12 is silly. Beyond that, I don't worry about it. In the digital realm, you can back off signal at any point in the process. If your whole mix is too hot going into the stereo output, just grab all your instrument busses and turn them down by 2db. Readjust your master bus plugins so they're behaving the same as they were before your level adjustment, and voila. (It also helps if you always have your sends set to pre-fader.)
I find myself using a looooooooooooooooooooot less plugins just by learning to choose the right (instruments, fx, song key...) and doing a good job at panning and leveling things professionally
Can't you just use 2 gain plugins, one at the beginning of the FX chain set for analog level and then a gain plugin at the end of the chain to mix to the level you want it in the mix. Don't do it myself as I don't think the analog requirement makes that much difference
i use gainstaging for ride my faders near to 0, or unit level, but i dont waste so much time in details. Also try to don't saturate so much my plugings and is much easier to compress some stuff. But i insist, i don't waste so much time making gainstaging !!!
I like your videos, and I subscribed. I especially love your idea of Lcr. I have a question about it: if I have to mix a string quartet, how can I use it? How do I distribute-between L, C, and R-two violins, a viola, and a cello? Thank you and have a good day.
How I think of gain staging is that when recordign vocals for example I record with a lot of headroom and in the box you can just drag the volume up or down within the playlist before the sound even hits the mixer inserts with the plugins. So even though I have a pre made vocal chain ready for that microphone I use (on the mixer insert ), all I need to make sure of is that the recording isn't clipping after each plugin and that the level stays the same as the recording after everything. Then after that (how loud the vocal should be in the mix) I just refference and set it later when I am balancing the volume of the track when I have more tracks ready. But I like to record many vocal takes at around -21 dB peak so when you stack 10 takes together into the same mixer insert channel it will not cause any clipping. because if you record at -7 peak for each vocal you will need to lower them manually later in the playlist each time you want to add more vocal takes. And becasue it is a digital signal in it will not change much how much gain IN you use because the noise floor is the same pretty much. I just set a healthy Gain IN on the interface and then gainstage the playlist when I have all the vocal tracks ready to hit the mixer at a healthy level. For example if you gain stage something to quiet into the mixer you need to crank the compressor +32 dB to even get a -5db gain reduction and that is probably why when using the "-18" rule you gain stage the recording inside the playlist to "some average decent level" giving the plugin a healthy amount of signal IN for it to process. Like a vocal that needs compressing but later will be set to a lower volume for a backing track. But you don't need gain staging for everything. for example the hi hat on my track im working on is hitting -51 dB peak (kick at -10 dB giving the drums a 41 dB of dynamic range) and is plenty loud with only a EQ and after the master chain it hits at -31dB peak. One element that is quiet and static dynamically needs almost nothing just a correct level.
👍 Great videos, thanks! 🙏 I also compose and mix practically simultaneously, so I adjust the levels from the beginning and if I decide to add or remove an instrument somewhere, I adjust the volumes of the rest with automation if needed. I put the effects (compressor, Eq, etc) almost at the end of the job, then I make sure I have the correct overall volume for the MixBus effects chain. I'm not a sound engineer, much less a mix or mastering engineer, but with this system, it seems to me that I have more control of the balance during composition and get to the mastering phase faster.
Interesting! I actually take this approach for tracks I'm using heavy compression on, because Graham had previously mentioned many plug-ins function optimally at around -18db. I do find that my plug ins react better with the input in that range, BUT I now realize that I probably have been skipping or RUSHING the static mix because I can "fix it later" with plug ins. This is another super useful video for breaking a bad habit I didnt realize I did, thank you Joe! Maybe a 5 minutes to breaking habits series is in order 👀
Gain-staging is about getting the right amount of signal to the next device in the chain while maximizing the signal-to-noise ratio overall. It's not as relevant when dealing with fully arbitrary digital mixing, but it's a habit from live audio that I don't feel like giving up and it proves useful when dealing with emulation plug-ins. As for track normalization, I find it very useful when working from templates to do fast turnarounds on recurring projects with consistent elements. Normalizing the raw tracks will set up the templates properly for fine-tuning rather than scratch-building.
Your first paragraph here is one of the only accurate paragraphs in this entire comment section. A lot of people seem to think they understand gain staging but don't. You're absolutely right about digital mixing. The only two reasons to really gain stage in the box: 1) certain plugins behave better at certain levels; 2) you want to make sure you have enough headroom at the very end of your chain for proper dynamics. That's about it as far as I'm concerned. Clipping isn't a concern because you can just back off the signal at any point in the process before the final stereo output.
This makes sense. I think the idea of normalizing everything to get more headroom comes from the bad practice of recording everything way too hot. I record very conservative levels, and therefore I don't need to re-introduce headroom when I start mixing.
@@recordingrevolution yeah, but that is you, like a mixing engeneer we resive a lot of stuff from others, so they don't record everything with a resonable headroom
Great vid as always. As a decade long follower, I respect your teachings. Gain Staging (GS) is fundamental to recording and mixing. It Is done in every recording studio, house of worship, club house, vehicle. It’s just not called gain staging. Most just say “setting levels”. I agree some get hung up on calling it GS and spending so much time on that process. However, every mixing engineer will have to go through this phase. I used to GS with a plugging from hornet and now I do it as I go using the input and normalize gain features in Studio One. 1000 x faster. I set my levels as I go or prior to starting the static mix. GS will make the difference in how balanced your mix is. I can get a loud mix at -18dbfs because I spend time on setting the proper levels at the front end. Mixing will be much easier if levels are set to where the faders can stay at 0 thereby making minimal fader ( attenuator) moves. You’re awesome Joe.
I think that's part of the problem. I'm with you on how to set levels. But there are a lot of people who say that during MIXING you should set levels to X dB before starting. That's the par that I feel is unnecessarily complicated.
There are a couple of advantages to setting every track and bus to a consistent level and then using faders to adjust the balance in the mix. And that is over a series of similar mixes, you start to get a numerical feel for where the faders need to go for a certain type of track. So in terms of drums, for example, your kick might be somewhere around 0, but your hi-hat is probably going to be something like -12db. Assuming you use a reverb buss with sends, similar principle, after a few mixes you get to know a rough fader level where it's not too overwhelming, but also audible. Secondly, it pairs nicely with a philosophy of where possible, do volume cuts on faders rather than boosts, and anything that is too loud will stick out like the proverbial sore thumb.
I think there's a lot of things we tend to overcomplicate. I find that if I think of things in big picture ideas it helps keep me on track. When I think of all the potential possibilities something can do I get bogged down trying a million things. Typically I end up doing what my gut told me to do in the first place, but it just took me longer.
Thank you. I was trying to mix a track. I was throwing in plugins instead of balancing the volumes to make the song sound good to ears.(I don't know if I got the lesson right)
Gain staging is a technical process that helps you feed the correct gain into your gear - be it hardware or plugin. It's mostly something that goes on in recording and mix prep and it has nothing to do with creative decisions during mixing or mix balance. That's how tech people back in the day got to that +4dBu (0dB VU) mark, it's the place that still gives you enough headroom to accommodate transient heavy material without clipping and keeps you away from the noise floor. The +4dBu is still a standard professional line level in every studio in the world and it will not "make" your mix, but it can certainly "break' it. My 0.2c
Im gonna drop a gem for yall right here, this is the absolute foundation of the track your mixing "all sounds are not the same, why would they be at the same volume"...yes. the problem im having is, Gain staging..and leveling are 2 different processes. you need to keep signal flow in mind. if your recording a vocal..the signal flow is..the artist, the microphone, interface/preamp, then the DAW.and so on. *if you dont gain at EACH stage of the signal flow, then by time you get to master youre going to get unwanted distortion.* also these plugins are based off of analogue gear as you said, they work BEST with a certain amount of signal going into them..and everytime you make an adjustment within a plugin..theres a gain option built into, pretty much every plugin for a reason. if your signal is at -27db..and you make a change in a plugin that turns your sound up to -20...you then need to gain stage down within that plugin. gain staging is something you should have in the back of your mind through out an ENTIRE session. every change you make..gain stage. after the initial gain staging of your sounds (before Processing with plugins) youd move onto leveling/panning on the mixer to set the appropriate levels for your elements of the track. because as you said..a shaker should not be at the same level as a snare..thats why its called leveling..and gain staging is called gain staging. love the videos.. its all love. keep creating!
Joe, I've got a series of RND 511 preamps that have no output transformer. When I drive the input to get a little grit/character, the signal coming into Logic is so hot that I'll peg the main outs with only a piano and vocal recorded, let alone drums, bass, etc. So, I nudge down the gain on the tracks in post until they're at that -18 level. Then I feel I've got the tracks prepped for a static mix, and from there also primed them for whatever compression, etc. I feel is needed. I avoid normalizing the tracks, maybe that's just me. For me, gain-staging isn't about getting all the tracks to the same volume, per se (to your shaker point), it's more about controlling the levels and then going to the faders to get that static mix. Could be your message is for beginner engineers, but I recon one of the first mistakes they'll make is starting their mix process either pegging the main outs with no headroom left, or pulling faders way down and losing fidelity in subtle volume changes. I'm not saying I disagree with your point, but hoping to learn something if I'm approaching this wrong...
This particular process and concept, above all others, truly was the game changer and got me to a point that I could make a mix, instead of mixing a variety of clipping noise.
The idea with peak normalizing is to do it on the raw tracks, and it has
no impact on their final level in the mix. They still need to be mixed.
What is gives you is a more predictable result when you are using plugin
chains that you have setup in advance for the expected level. So it can
be a time saver.
Normalizing all tracks will sound bad
@@BR_READDY225 Normalizing does not change the tonality of a track at all.
@@franlarsen80 No one said anything about tonality dude. I suggest you look up what normalizing is. Also, if you're talking about things on the master bus that create K-14 you understand that doesn't take into account actual listening levels and it is a summing tool. It's not what the maker of this video warns against which is leveling all sounds regardless of dynamic range together. So a symphony orchesta at the same level as a solo flute, LOL.
In 1982 I custom built a recording mixer for my studio, that would allow me to set the input level of each strip, and then apply any eq (usually high pass or similar) to deliver the best signal level for each input to its corresponding track of the tape recorder - in essence, so that the peak of each instrument or voice would be the same on each track of the tape. The signals were returned to the corresponding channels on the console just ahead of the fader, pan and often reverb send (post fader). The faders represented the loudness of each returning track, allowing a mix to be made without interfering with the level going to tape. So your shaker channel would have the fader set at a different position than the kick drum, which would be different from any of the other returned signals.
When I get tracks from someone else to mix, often live recorded tracks, the firs thing I do is load them all into a simple application that allows me to run a normalize function to make their peaks equal -6 db. This makes them similar to signal on the tape I used to record to. I then load them into Logic, or other DAW, and set the faders and pans as I would expect the various levels to be represented visually for the mix. At -6db, there's enough room if a channel requires work using an equalizer or other plugin without overloading it, but it also allows me to see the waveforms clearly for every channel. I also only bring up sounds like kick, bass, and vocal to -6 on the fader to begin with, to allow everything to be added without overloading the mix buss.
What I've found is that some plugins are not designed very well and require that I insert the "gain" plugin (Logic) prior to the other plugin so I can set the gain (staging) so as not to overload, or not to under feed, that plugin. In the analogue world, we would gain stage to control at which stage the signal was to be amplified cleanly, or to control an amount of overdriving the gain going into a piece of analogue gear. I don't think of the concept of gain staging as a complex or confusing one, at least it wasn't during the time I instructed courses in the early 80s.
That said, music and recording are very subjective in the creative phases, and I would override actual electronic engineers when the numbers didn't look good, in favour of the achieved sound.
I had an employer who was a mastering engineer and a teacher previously. He told me he used to have students make a mix using only level faders. Then do it again using faders and panning. Then do it again with faders, panning, and hi pass filters. And so forth for a few more steps. I think people will over utilize plugins and processing without knowing what they want to hear or feel. I feel like most my mixes are just levels, pans, and filters.
Wow, that’s actually a great exercise!
This is excellent, thank you for sharig this
I agree, i will get excited about exciters, new compressors, and saturation but taking a step back and keeping it simple has helped my mixed much more live and in the studio. I think live mixing really helped me realize that less is more.
The longer i do it, the less plugins i use. And i use primarily stock plugins these days...many channels don't even have plugins
If the production is quality, there shouldn’t be much else needed besides level, panning, and simple EQ and compression.
If I produce a track and have control over the sound design, the mix part is easy, as the sounds already fit together!
I think a bit of both helps - and it really does go back to the days of printing to tape…noise floor, tape ‘hiss’ etc but you can’t go past a fader/pan mix as if the ‘band’ was playing live IMHO
JPMusic
I needed this video, and the mixing Gods heard my prayers! I trust Joe when it comes to these topics! The best part is that I think he read my mind, I’m doing a lot of math and not a lot of music! I have an acoustically treated room and Neumann KH 150 monitors & 750 subwoofer, but I spend too much time looking at the Clarity M meter and VU meters! 🤦🏽♂️
The main thing is you know why you’re looking at meters, so if you look at them less, when you DO look you’ll know what it means to you. Math is music and music is math. When the ear doesn’t like something it’s because of poor math. Now you know the rules, you can likely trust your ear to do that musical math a bit more by instinct as part of your process. Cheers!
One of the reasons to gain stage correctly is to allow head room. Tracks tend to creep up in level during a mix so if you’re aiming for -14LUFS overall it’s worth starting at - 18 to allow for this. Once automation is used it can be hard to drop overall levels
Gain staging is crucial. I think your point is more on having a good balance in mix context
Agreed. Despite what he says about plugins, they really do perform better within a specific input range.
yeah, it's a clumsy video. Gain staging is important and I think he agrees, but there is a thing now where a lot of people are normalising EVERY SINGLE TRACK to -18db because they heard the "gainstaging" buzzword and the magic number. They aren't really gainstaging at all ie using their ears, and I think that's what this vid is about
@@elreyabeja4539 yea that “-18” varies by daw too lol, like from what I’ve heard that’s pro tools sweet spot, I can tell u I use reason and the number is “-10”, and I’ve seen people using logic and other daws say different numbers too, I really think all daw’s can make same end result, but the road to get there is not the same in any 2 daws lol
@@elreyabeja4539 Normalising is all about PEAKS level...The "-18db" is about RMS , and more precisely -18dbVU.... Not the same thing at all
This!
I’ve tried all the internet fad techniques and I’ve got a theory about them, (because you all care and asked.) You’ve got real-world engineers who develop practices for real-world reasons, who begin teaching on TH-cam. Then, you have aspiring engineers with little to no real-world experience and a drive to share knowledge or be content creators, who take those practices they learn on TH-cam and try to recapitulate them, but in the process, it can lose its actual initial attachment to reality, and it just becomes a barrier instead of an aid. I appreciate Joe puts so much effort into keeping the main things the main things.
Joe, I love your videos and I think you carry the RR torch very well. In this case, I think you understand "gain staging" different than I do. I certainly wouldn't do any normalisation or change the fundamental audio in any way unless I had to for some reason. The way I understand gain staging is more akin to your first example, but taken further down the line. Gain staging as I understand it, is more akin to how you drive the console. Recording the audiot levels so the channel has some headroom, then setting the channel levels to keep some headroom at the input of your plugins and especially on your busses, and master 2 bus. Sometimes I had to lower the level of the audio in the file itself so I could turn the fader to the sweet spot yet keep that headroom, especially in the busses and mixes. Driving a channel for "color" can be done in the ssl strip or whatever (within the plugin) whilst still keeping headroom on the fader. But healthy headroom in the busses and faders is paramount, and why I gain stage every time.
Thank you! I been saying this for sooooo long! People make creating music more complicated than it needs to be.
I’m reason user, and they really like model there signal flow off analog, from the virtual synth in rack, to the input gain-dynamics-eq-insert-send-fader, so I do gain stage the sounds coming in at the gain input knob to -10db to start for headroom, don’t have to do it to every sound, a lot come in around there naturally, but if certain patches or samples are too low or too high, I will bring up or down, that way I have an even starting point “pre” processing, then they all go down the channel strip “through” the processing, and then I adjust the “levels” of mix, with the faders, post processing, which usually after all the set up along way, are minimal fader movements, sometimes I break these rules for creative reasons, like pushing input gain into channel comp on a parallel track, stuff like that, but for the most part I always do that way, I don’t know how other daws work with the channel strip, but in reason, gain staging definitely immensely improved my mixes once I properly understood it lol
Nicely explained. I doubt any "consumer" stops and thinks "Maaaaaaaaan! I wonder what kind of compressor they used?" etc........
Thanks Joe, I put a template together with all plugins turned off. (1st plugin on every track is a trim which is also turned off). Then when recording a track set a good input level not too weak & definitely well below clipping. Do a rough mix as you continue to record other tracks. It helps to get the overall picture of the song. Finally, use only needed plugins to enhance or color tracks in the context of the song.
That's gain staging.
All fully agreed. I fell into that gain staging black hole for awhile and after never hearing any audible results from anything I did I just abandoned the entire subject.
Gain staging isn't about levelling recorded tracks with other recorded tracks. It's about maximizing the power on your channel that you get from the instrument or microphone.
To set the channel gain, first turn it all the way down. Set the channel's and master faders to the unity. Now turn up the gain as high as necessary while playing until you see the channel's VU meter indicates your average desired level, around -18db in most cases. For a mic input use your voice or use the line level instrument at the same volume it would be used normally.
This insures that you have, in fact, taken as much power from the microphone or instrument as possible before using amplification from another part of your mixer.
After you gain stage the channels individually, you're ready to mix them together to a stereo track, using your ears, (your most important instrument), to around -6db, then import that stereo track to a new project to master it. The gain staging of individual channels is also valuable for live music setups as well. Getting the channels mixed together well is about 90% of a good mix, get it right :)
I'm not sure what "maximizing the power" means. The shaker track in my song doesn't need to have the same amount of "power" as the snare drum or lead vocal.
@@recordingrevolution "The shaker track in my song doesn't need to have the same amount of "power"", right but the channel that it is on does.
I’m sorry man this argument doesn’t really make any sense. Gain staging videos like this should be for tracking, not mixing. Normalizing raw tracks, without degradation to have a nice solid starting point BEFORE I mix is not harmful at all. This is incredibly helpful when you’re tracking yourself.
I use clip gain to get my tracks around to the so called sweet spot (I check my plugins recommended input level in the manual or even just use dbvu) and then use my faders to get a static mix and then a gain plugin on each channel at the end for level automation.
I don’t think it’s a waste of time and not even a particularly big use of time.
I think the only approach is to realize that you are gain staging in every mix and to learn how that affects how you process tracks, how you utilize plugins and how gain staging can free or limit what you do in you mixing/mastering.
I'm totally down with trying something different - after all, I have no idea what I'm doing when it comes to mixing. I followed one of Graham Cochrane's mixing videos and if a track had a signal he thought was too hot, he turned the trim down. And if he came across one he thought was too soft, he turned the trim up. He did that for all the tracks "before" doing the static mix. I don't know what normalizing is, LOL, but Graham and others tried to have all the tracks around -18db to -12db, excluding things like shakers or hi-hats. Anyway, yours is a different approach and I'm going to give it a try. By the way, the only thing I record outside the box is my sax, so I feel like I'm making this much more difficult than need be.
i agree that the static mix is very important, it will feed you and clothe you, you will need very little automation, a lot less processing, but that's not what gain staging is.
gain staging is setting the input volume of your tracks, with a view to the processing, not the output volume - and then, cascading down, the input level through all processors down the chain. all hardware, and hardware emulating plugins have a sweet spot that you need to hit, to be able to work with the device/plugin properly, and for it to sound good.
and the no plugin approach works when you record everything with hardware - "for real" - but when when all your guitar and bass amps are in the box, and your drums are a virtual drummer, too, you can't start with no plugins to do a mix, cause there's nothing there to mix. i have to start with a ton of plugins, before even going into the "mixing" phase, only to get my tones - amps, cabinets, pedals, coloring pres, and tape - that's just emulating the "recording" stage - and believe me when i say that the level at which you hit an amplifier - even virtual - makes a night and day difference - seems like a no brainer, right? i wish all interfaces had a unity gain setting on their pres, so that that problem be removed - what goes into the virtual amp (the level of the recorded d.i.) be the corresponding level to a guitar going straight into the amp, with no interface. that would simplify a lot of things.
i wish you talked about that a little, and offered your experience. cheers!
YEah of course you leave the amp plugins on when doing a static mix.
@@recordingrevolution yeah, but the question i always ask myself is what level i should be hitting the amp at, to match unity gain. and should it be unity gain, or is it a different calibration, like the standard -18 dbfs? i wonder if you could speak about that. so far i've been doing it by ear, i like the timbre and oomppf, but it's hard to take out the mud.
Gain Staging (structure) = adjusting gain relationship between devices (stages) that the input matches the output. Simple.
More shaker! 🔊🎚️🎶🥚🎶🎚️🔊
Note to the guy sticking out in the choir: Just quit the choir and be an opera singer.
Worked for me! 🙂
Thx Joe for this one.
😂 EXACTLY
Would this apply to vocals being mixed to a two track beat? Does the beat have to be at the same level of the vocals that is normalized?
Most of the ppl who jumped on this video “hell yeah thank” couldn’t mix a cake let a long a song..I gain stage and my mixes sound great and getting the balance is even easier. To each their own tho. And when you peak normalize track to say-12db their highest peak is at -12db but they aren’t at the same level still. And you’d still balance afterwards, so this video really threw me way off.
gain and volume arent the same thing... gain staging to my understanding is not about making your shaker as loud as your snare lmao.
I see why it's so confusing for you. I'm guessing you haven't spent a lot of time recording analog sources. In that environment, you need to set the input gain on the tracks first (first stage of gain) to get a CLEAN signal before adjusting the faders to put instruments into the overall mix (2nd stage of gain -- positive or negative, usually negative gain).
I record almost exlusively analog sources. The idea of "clean" signal is a leftover from the old analog tape days, where the signal-to-noise ratio was a legitimate problem. Digital systems have such a low noise floor that recording something as loud as possible without clipping is unnecessary (and I would argue harmful).
@@recordingrevolution Even with digital recording, if you record the signal with too few bits (too low of gain), you end up with noise. Try recording an analog signal with peaks around -48db and you'll quickly see what I mean.
Sure but the noise floor is almost a non-issue if you just record at reasonable levels.
@@recordingrevolution And recording at reasonable levels is the definition of gain staging.
If you dont gain stage properly you either get clipping or your noise floor is to high in relation to the recorded audio ,.. all this happens before you even start mixing. Been listening to you for years Joe but seems like this vid is more about mixing levels...
I am shocked, sorry do not agree with the opinions expressed in this video. Its TH-cam, we hear a lot of bad advice. The main flaw in this video is that it does not recognise that many plugins are designed for input at a nominal level. Besides he talks about normalising to a peak level, but that is absolutely wrong, its about normalising to a similar RMS level.
TH-cam is both good and bad, but you have to kiss many frogs to find the prince.... Totally inconsistent advice, that makes absolutely no sense. He does not understand what he is talking about at all. Ignore his advice in this video - TH-cam expert....
The real question is which hits has this TH-cam producer mixed. Anyone I know of ??
I did mention that some plugins are designed to receive certain levels. Also, normalizing to either peak or RMS doesn't really make much of a difference. I don't want my 16th background vocal to be the same RMS level as my lead vocal. Normalizing it to be a "similar RMS level" as you put it just means I have to go back and turn it down later. It's an unnecessary step. Inefficient.
Ah man. I disagree. Gain staging is not something to be obsessed over, but it is an actual thing. This vid is about mixing, not starting out with a track that has a workable level. I think this vid is very vague and just makes more confusion. I disagree that gain staging isn't a thing. It really is a thing, to a point. There is a pretty decent ballpark in the -12 area. I do -18 or so. You have to have a decent signal to start out with, and it is well known that plugins have a correlating sweet spot on the input. I'm sorry but when I started I researched this stuff and confusion is everywhere. You have to have your signal in the ballpark, that's what gainstaging is.
I think usually what people mean by gain staging is not about making everything the same level, but leaving room for the mix to not clip when you put every track together. That's the main goal for me at least.
It's not about not clipping. You can avoid clipping at literally any step of your process. Is your mix coming into your stereo output too hot? Just slap on any plugin with an input and output knob and adjust it there. Your mix is no longer clipping. Problem solved, right?
No, not really. You still might be feeding in signal too hot at any step of the process. It might be happening three levels down and you don't even realize it. It's about not overloading plugins and allowing yourself enough headroom for dynamics. If it was just about not clipping at the very end of the chain, you could just put on a true peak limiter and be done with it.
@@rome8180 The problem is when you use a compressor and compress so much, o you have to move so much the input, output or threshold or when you need to ride faders, remember de fader scale is logarithmic, near to 0 is more detailed.
@@rome8180unmmm that’s literally what he meant dude!
Isn't there a difference between gain staging, (making sure that the signal being recorded is at the appropriate gain in the beginning and then going from one device and or plug in to the next), and relative volume levels between the different signals or tracks? I thought those were 2 different issues...
Yes. Volume balance between sounds (using faders) is the last step in mixing. After gain staging and using the plugins u want, u have to balance ur mix (cause effects affect the volume level)
I understand what you’re trying to say but gain and level are two different things. Gain staging in mixing isn’t really a thing, gain staging only applies to recording as an engineer, not a mixer. Like you said briefly it applies to analog hardware, and setting the right gains through a chain of analog hardware on the way IN to the DAW. Which is very important it have proper gains hence gain staging. I think the conversation you’re trying to have is about a great balanced mix, not gain staging.
Gain staging in mixing is absolutely a thing. Plugins have levels they perform best at. Also, you need enough headroom at the end of the mix to allow for full dynamics and proper mastering. For example, if you want the chorus to be 3 db louder than the verses, that can only happen if you have 3 db of room to work with. And if you're hitting a compressor harder than you want to because the level you're feeding into it is too hot, you might be getting unwanted distortion. You might not realize the signal is too hot because it might not be too hot AFTER it goes through the compressor. The input is too hot, not the output. So you look at the volume fader on your track and it looks fine. But you haven't properly gain staged.
Yes, all this works BUT : You need to have good RECORDING LEVELS FIRST . That is where gain staging is crucial. Because even if you record too hot , you can get a good static mix with faders and panning ... BUT inserts are PRE-FADERS, and if you throw an analog emulation where -18db Vu is a good starting point(most of them are calibrated this way, ) on a track recorded too hot, that's where problems start...
And when you didn't record the tracks yourself (pretty common) , you need to check their levels first...so.... gainstage ;)
Yeah he seems to have misunderstood the definition of gain staging. Gain staging is about individual tracks. What he's actually referring to is mix balance volume
I heard you make a lot of valid points but none were a case against gain staging. This is the process of maximizing a signal's level so as to minimize noise and optimize it for the next amplification stage in the chain. Normalizing tracks so the waveforms look bigger is not gain staging and it never was.
I gain stage for multiple reasons, if I don’t gain stage then I’ll have issues where adding a plugin will clip the track if it’s too high coming in for example. Gain staging helped me to mix and sound better, the thing about mixing that’s cool and fun is everyone has their own workflow. And for me the mix balance is more easier for me after gain staging.
any nonlinear plugin that might clip the signal will have its own input level knob
You're not balancing right... Turn your faders to infinity, then raise them one by one. If you find your stereo out clipping by the time you're done with this, simply select every track and turn down the faders; and remember for next time not to turn up that first track so loud. You're literally not balancing right if you're having this problem. It's basically the first step of mixing. You're so focused on nonsense like "gain staging" that you lost control of the first real step of mixing after the setup: Balancing.
I don't think you understand gain staging at all.
He really does gain stage, just a different way. After he records at the proper levels, he adjusts the mix on inputs instead of the faders. Since it's all digital at that point it keeps his facers closer to zero.
But his signal is definitely the right amounts pre and post fader.
Absolutely agree - really sensible advice.
It seems that gainstaging has become something of a cult.
Of course, balance the input and output levels in the stream but sorting a static/simple level/pan balance before whamming on those plugins is such a really good discipline.
You might also find that you don’t need all those plugins after all…
On a fundamental level I totally agree that it's more important to focus on making music rather than fretting if the gain of everything is perfect. However I think the misunderstanding of gain is the main issue. Gain is not the same as setting levels. Gain is setting how much of the signal is available. It's like plumbing. You have the gain/main water line which limits how much water you can pull at a given time. The fader is like a faucet. You can control how much of the source you want to use. 😀
Sure I agree with you. I just disagree that every track needs to be normalized to a specific, measurable peak volume. It's an unnecessary step. More busywork and less music-making.
@@recordingrevolution Absolutely. It's definitely not something people need to spend a lot of time on. It's just more of a utility thing that people should know so they can have full control. I think that's what I love about sources like this, it helps people understand those tools better so they can utilize them when needed. 👍
@@recordingrevolution Or you could use a DAW like Reaper, wherein you can get an action installed to normalize everything to a desired level. Select all items, run Normalizer. Done in less than 15 seconds, give or take. No busy work at all 😉
Tell us you don’t understand the electrical side of audio engineering and gain staging/structure without telling us. But sure! I’ll totally buy your tutorial. 🥴
@@KevinWayne Dude, you're HILARIOUS. You can't know unless you're doing four track EDM or something, similar, or even, regardless of genre... To help retrain your thinking, let's use the shaker example. Even if your music is ridulously simple, unless it's 'identical' on every song, you can't know what to tell Reaper (all DAWs have something like this feature for years or decades, dude) to normalize to. If you're making a House track where you want shaker only during a build, it will be loud. If you're doing some sort of Bollywood dance track and it only comes in after some dude says 'awright,' you want it soft.
Unless you have the ears of John Barry (when he was alive) there's no way you can know what to normalize for in advance, unless you're creating idential songs every single time out. I won't invoice you.
A discussion of "Gainstaging" without talking about signal-to-noise ratio, clipping, and headroom, is not a discussion of gain-staging at all. This video is about mixing. I don't think you understand the fundamental concept of gain-staging.
Correct.
Thats so true
You literally don't do music at all. Neither do your commenters. There is no concept of gain staging. It's synonymous with mixing. It's a catch phrase. For some it's turning the input down 10db on every track. It's something totally different for others. It's a buzzword for TH-camrs and noobs who don't understand how to balance a mix. Where's your music?
If you use analog modeled plugins it’s good to be aware that -18 db is unity gain for many plug-in algorithms.
Also, on the way in, you also don’t want to be too hot. It’s best to be around -18 when tracking. Or you are actually pushing the converters.
It seems like he really misunderstands that you set the levels so they are correct for processing and then you use the faders for the balance like a normal person. Really weird he doesn’t get it.
Wow the first definition you use on gain staging its wrong
"Gain Staging".. For some, it's putting an SSL channel with its input lowered 10dB... for others... it's Normalize Region Gain...
But it's never described in stages. It's always one move or... just describing the mixing process itself... the balancing phase. It's so silly. List the "stages", and explain how it's different than just the balancing, if you're going to talk about it. Literally saw a TH-camr point out that with all his faders at unity, his 2bus was clipping. No shit. Terrible for people who are trying to learn, and they come across videos like that. It puts them behind. You can't find a video of CLA talking about Gain Staging, or Veit Renn. There's a reason. Man, these buffoons annoy me, misleading people trying to learn.
This video misrepresents, or misunderstands, the type of gain staging that I see most people doing. It is actually so bad that it kinda diminishes my trust in the channel. Setting levels saves a lot of time for me, and yes some things do then get turned down cos they should be quieter, but by setting a few levels (like we do with live instruments) I have more headroom and a clearer starting point - hell, tweaking a level takes a second and if you do it when you're loading the VST it can make recording easier - my 18 analog inputs are already set, as is my pedal board. You don't persuade me that your methods are worth trying/paying for by trash talking a technique that I'm sure I'd be able to spot aspects of in your method. Disappointing, tbh. Being aware of levels is basic preparation. Fail to prepare, prepare to fail.
If you make it a point to not have every track super loud to begin with, then the headroom is already there.
@@recordingrevolution Yeah, gain staging. It isn't that you don't do gain staging, it is that it is partially already done thanks to the defaults you develop on both hardware and software.
Going simple and calm about using aggressive audio processes is the best. If I find my plugins add up so much in a strip I lean back and then say "Now do I need all of them? I believe I can create the same effect with less process" And then I optimize all the processes to their core level fixing what is essential instead of bashing plugins on it. Reforging the tonal balance, going surgical but not complex with the eq, and listening again Then I find myself deleting 5-6 vst's from the strip. Especially think twice before applying aggressive compression or exciter sort of dynamic changes It might sound fine on your monitor but come harsh on your phone speakers. This is for the mix, For mastering, going surgical but very light-handed with the master EQ will make your master sound nearly the same and consistent among most audio devices. Tamed high mids, variety in dynamic range and harmonics, opened up and relaxed out unwanted squeezed signals, etc. (I am mostly speaking about a natural and pro-sounding result for noisy genres you can go with more distortion and compression of course if it's intentional even there you have to relax the high-mids a bit though for consistency against the frequency response of different devices)
whoa graham looks really different now. didnt realize how long its been
THANK YOU! I was doing static mixes all my life until I started hearing about gain staging. So I researched it, tried it, and struggled with it. I did get some decent results, but I kept wondering why they weren't better results than what I'd always done. And then you made this video. And I thank you for "giving me permission" to go back to static mixes. That's what I know, where I'm comfortable, and what gives me the results I want. [for readers of this comment, I've been recording for over 40 years, so it's not a matter of being a relatively new kid on the block who doesn't grasp the concept of mixing well. ;-) ]
What sounds good is good…and there isn’t one “right way” to do things.
A lot of these things are holdovers from analog recording where you had to be very mindful of gain levels, distortion , and noise.
It’s why I just smh at guys who emphatically insist that analog sounds better than digital. I’m like, “Have you forgotten about all the noise that turned up in even the best analog recording?”
That was the first thing that struck me back in 1984 when I heard my first CD: The noise is gone….
i've never "normalized" signals when gain-staging, but i do "averages" like those through a VU or RMS meter. so "around" -14dBFS, not always exactly -14. that's not to say that this level is maintained throughout the mix, it's just a strong initial signal, that can be turned down if needed, or up. if turned up, that initial -14dBFS gives me plenty of room to work with.
as i understand it, it's usually involving recording hardware or all analog recordings, to maintain a good S/N ratio. in the digital or DAW world, its most useful when processing through analog style plugins or to maintain whatever levels you have of a certain instrument going in & coming out of processors (ie; a hi hat goes into a compressor at -11 & so it comes out of the compressor at -11 or so)
at the end, it's intending on allowing a predetermined amount of headroom (~ -6dB), to accommodate any peaks or spikes on the master
BUT when you start adding plugins, then you run into issues. SO if you're 'gainstaging' with the faders, the input signal into a(distortion) would be at a certain level lets say -10dB causing the signal to distort more than it would at -18dB.
You make the argument for normalizing to -18db, the next step at that point is to start mixing without plugins.. SO essentially the first input stage is normalizing to-18db which anyone can do, then starting to mix with the faders.. You gave the EXACT method of gainstagingin the proper context to say the hell with it?
BUT ... i totally see why.
I think you are confusing gain staging with leveling... lol
Gain and volume aren't interchangeable. This was important for me when I started. The differences are huge. Gain staging is very easy and important for mixing without problems IMO.
I just never thought this was a thing before I started watching TH-cam for mixing strategies. I make sure a track is close to zero. I add fx, and make sure it can go close to zero without sacrificing dynamic range. Then when I’m mixing, I can turn everything down, or bring it all up depending on what the mix needs.
To me gain staging is merely optimising the level for the next processor in the chain. Therefore, putting a level adjustment device (such as a utility plugin in ableton, if your working ITB) achieves this.
Personally I think the concept of gain staging has become overly complex when speaking to a largely digital audience.
The concept of gain staging is the result of recording live amps through microphones..... when live tracking basic tracks. You keep your amps low and you use your console and outboard gear to compensate. Because once you start the "chain" your microphones are the greatest source of NOISE.
Literally where the heck did all this nonsense come from? Who is legit making this stuff up?
The entire point of a mixing console is to ADJUST levels as needed when you are mixing your final project.
It's mind numbing where this industry has gone since I bailed 15 years ago. Not sure I want to come back at this point hahaha!
I swear TH-cam is where you go if you want setbacks and bad information haha.
The concept of gain staging has been misunderstood completely in this yt video. Should the loan shaker be the same volume as the snare drum? Has nothing to do with gain staging. Gain staging is the process, which you already mention, of making sure what is fed into the analogue gear, comes in at a certain sweet spot for the gear to handle. What level you choose to have the shaker, after the processing - so long as is not going through more analogue gear, can be any level you want it to be. It baffles me why so many TH-cam videos on this subject, to miss this and don't grasp it. The thing which baffles me, is nobody moans or highlights the pointlessness of calibrating all the analogue gear with test tones, which we would do at the BBC or Abbey Road, with every piece of outboard gear, including all the calibration work with tape machines, yes gain-staging included, because it is all necessary and vital to achieving a mix which - ultimately becomes easier to mix. People wonder why they don't have 3d space and depth in a mix, they wonder why their mixes sound a little muffled, or squashed, they wonder why their mixes don't travel to other setups on playback, they wonder why they are stacking 8 compressors and 5 eq's just to get things to sit in the mix. The first thing they don't wonder about, is an obvious hidden secret, gain stage and level match and level balance, and you'll all be stunned at how much clearer, deeper, sonic and better your mix sounds, and that's before any eq or, panning and or other fx. Rant over.
Doesn’t do gain staging.
Then describes making a static mix with gain staged tracks.
😂
Good video though.
And your definition of game station it’s not the same is it I would have because it sounds like you’re doing the same thing when you doing a static mix.
I think the idea of making everything-6db (or whatever random value) is what you’re talking about.
For the type of music, I make, EDM and hip-hop, I usually start out with the kick about -10db and do a static mix around that.
I’ll generally keep my main buss tracks (drums, instruments, etc) about -6, to start.
So I guess it’s gain staging to make a static mix.
But gain staging is mandatory in mixing.
Just my opinion of course.
Again, love the videos, brother.
You've just demonstrated a complete lack of understanding of audio, well done.
The whole reason for gain staging is to treat every channel as it's own line in a system that operates at "line level" i.e. 0dBu
We want each signal to max out at 0dB VU (this is not peak) and depending on how you calibrate your system this will give you 18-24dB of headroom for peaks.
Then when you gain stage properly, you know which tracks need compression to restrict the dynamic range enough to reach 0VU without clipping.
Measuring your VU level also lets you know where to set the threshold on your compressors.
It's called audio "engineering" for a reason.
Use the tools available to measure, then act.
recordingrevolution You've had excellent content over the years. Are you still planning on making additional videos or are you after this span of time, all "audio-ed out?"
Either way, cheers.
That's why you mix AFTER gain staging to locate optimal and final levels. If you recorded a song with only a shaker, then the shaker would be at it's optimum level-if that's what you really wanted. Gain staging is a starting point, not the end point.
Do you have a commercial release that you have mixed ? Gain staging is a fad ? It’s been an industry standard for decades . You need to take a formal course . You are giving the worst ideas here . Minus 18 is the default trim on actual mixing desk. It is the standard trim for most analog gear . If you using analog emulation plugins . If you under drive the login like a compressor won’t respond properly . Over drive you are adding audio distortion and artefacts the original gear wouldn’t produce. There is reason plug-ins like that are default minus 18.
I don't think anyone things "the shaker should be the same levels as the snare & vocal." The idea is to get the levels away from clipping as much as reasonably possible. Then within that gain structure, decide the bass should be at X level. The strings should be at level Y. I think you're rebutting an argument no one is making.
I used to think all the Anti-gain staging arguments were so cool. "Hey, it's a bit of elbow grease I don't have to put in." Then I tried it for real. Whattya know, things improved audio-wise. Haven't heard a convincing counter-argument since, including just now ;-)
I start at negative 18 in and out of plug ins so they are all getting the proper input to function the best the plug in can and don't have to worry about clipping. It's cake tho. It takes no time at all with a vu meter. Put a vu meter 1st then slide it down to open up the slotI keep after I add a plug in. I just slide the vu meter down a slot and make sure I keep it around negative 18. Then I put it on my group bus first then slide it down a slot then slip my plug in in the slot it was in. Some time I'll just do the volume check once I get it set at the start to AROUND negative 18. The bypass back and forth and match the volume. Quickly I don't agonize over it . I probably spend 10 seconds checking it and adjusting it. Always leaves me headroom and I've never had a problem with clipping. I put a vu meter in the last insert slot and start with no plug ins getting my level to -18 then check it after each plug in and adjust it quickly to get back to -18. I don't know if that's the right way but it's always worked for me. I should point out I mostly only record and process vocals. Always great content Joe.
Gain staging is what separates the big boys from the rest of us. That overly complicated thing is simply a standard for them
All equipment is different. There’s a certain amount of gain in order to receive proper levels that are loud enough to see a noise floor and not too loud to cause clipping. There’s a difference between mic,line,and instrument output. Try recording a bass without accounting for it and it’ll blow every speaker in your system.
Joe, after listening to this twice I believe you are talking more about balancing levels of tracks at fader stage. Gain is surely better understood as being about input trim, not output level. It’s about not overdriving the input of a track or buss or plug-in with too hot a signal. That’s where the caution needs to happen for a good mix. This video does not seem to address input level? I only hear you talking about balancing, and I think you mean outputs. Happy to be corrected by you, but I personally found this rather unhelpful and counter to my own experience in studying gain staging approaches on both analogue mixers and in using those principles inside DAWs. Again, I mean gainstaging as not overdriving any input stage in the process.
I agree but I also gain stage. I take Hornet VU meter, put it on first track. set it to -18db for the reference setting and 0db for peak just to limit anything way out there, set to group 1. Now drag that over to every other track. Open any instance, click auto, you will see the gain dial move. Play your song from start to finish then click stop. Auto will turn off and every track has been set to a reference level. Basically you have given yourself some headroom without moving a fader yet. Now do your static mix, adjust panning as you deem necessary. Check in mono to see if anything pops out, adjust, switch back to stereo, repeat. At end you should have a decent mix without a single plug-in yet. Now start listening for what the tracks need in context with one another, compression, eq, etc. I work this way especially now I’ve gone to hybrid mixing. I know if I’ve done the above, when I send out a track via adat into my Ferrofish ad/da converter and into whatever 500 series modules i want to use on the track that I started into that chain with headroom. I don’t obsess over it, I use an automated tool, listen to the song as it is doing its thing and move on, never to mess with gain staging any further. This way of working may not be for everyone, but it works for me, it is cheap and maybe takes 10 minutes to setup part of which I’d be listening to the track anyways just to get an idea of where I want to take things. Good luck everyone and have fun mixing (which I think Joe is spot on about here!)
What the hell’s? Lol
I record at -18 so my levels start off the same anyway. Then I adjust them afterwards.
Tried it and didn’t like it.
Gain staging is one of those things like a summing plugin, it can be helpful no doubt, just not really necessary.
Gain staging is so your audio is prepped for upcoming edits, such as soft compression, EQ, hard compression etc, when the audio is at its correct levels it hits them plugins in its best possible format
ALL major engineers and professors stress gain staging. You are so off base here. I would not believe any of your mixes would make the grade as professional.
I agree that the "set everything to -18 db" is a waste of time. Some instruments need to be -30 db. Why would you want to set it 12 db louder than it needs to be when you're just going to turn it down later? That said, one thing I would say is helpful is to start with your loudest instrument and set THAT to a reasonable level. Let's say it's your snare or kick. If you start with that at -6 db, you're going to run out of headroom very fast. But if you start with it at -12 db and build the track around it, everything else will be at a reasonable level.
I picked -12 db randomly, so don't take that as gospel. It really depends on how much louder I want the kick than the rest of the music, what genre it is, and how many instruments I'm working with.
I also pay attention the level I'm feeding into my plugins. I'm not saying you need to follow the manufacturer's suggestions. If you like the way it sounds, who cares? But I want to be aware if I'm "overloading" a plugin, and I want to be doing it for a reason. But obsessing over -18 or -12 is silly.
Beyond that, I don't worry about it. In the digital realm, you can back off signal at any point in the process. If your whole mix is too hot going into the stereo output, just grab all your instrument busses and turn them down by 2db. Readjust your master bus plugins so they're behaving the same as they were before your level adjustment, and voila. (It also helps if you always have your sends set to pre-fader.)
Gain staging is pre fader volume period... Don't overload your plugins simple...
I find myself using a looooooooooooooooooooot less plugins just by learning to choose the right (instruments, fx, song key...) and doing a good job at panning and leveling things professionally
Can't you just use 2 gain plugins, one at the beginning of the FX chain set for analog level and then a gain plugin at the end of the chain to mix to the level you want it in the mix. Don't do it myself as I don't think the analog requirement makes that much difference
i use gainstaging for ride my faders near to 0, or unit level, but i dont waste so much time in details. Also try to don't saturate so much my plugings and is much easier to compress some stuff. But i insist, i don't waste so much time making gainstaging !!!
I think Andrew Scheps says he doesnt gain stage either. I like Streaky's 6db trick. It's intuitive and easy.
Gain staging its not about loudness,its about amplitude on bits or voltage, clearly u are confusing Amplitude with Loudness
I like your videos, and I subscribed.
I especially love your idea of Lcr. I have a question about it: if I have to mix a string quartet, how can I use it? How do I distribute-between L, C, and R-two violins, a viola, and a cello?
Thank you and have a good day.
i reckon gain staging was definitely something a drummer thought of first lol
How I think of gain staging is that when recordign vocals for example I record with a lot of headroom and in the box you can just drag the volume up or down within the playlist before the sound even hits the mixer inserts with the plugins. So even though I have a pre made vocal chain ready for that microphone I use (on the mixer insert ), all I need to make sure of is that the recording isn't clipping after each plugin and that the level stays the same as the recording after everything. Then after that (how loud the vocal should be in the mix) I just refference and set it later when I am balancing the volume of the track when I have more tracks ready.
But I like to record many vocal takes at around -21 dB peak so when you stack 10 takes together into the same mixer insert channel it will not cause any clipping.
because if you record at -7 peak for each vocal you will need to lower them manually later in the playlist each time you want to add more vocal takes.
And becasue it is a digital signal in it will not change much how much gain IN you use because the noise floor is the same pretty much.
I just set a healthy Gain IN on the interface and then gainstage the playlist when I have all the vocal tracks ready to hit the mixer at a healthy level.
For example if you gain stage something to quiet into the mixer you need to crank the compressor +32 dB to even get a -5db gain reduction and that is probably why when using the "-18" rule you gain stage the recording inside the playlist to "some average decent level" giving the plugin a healthy amount of signal IN for it to process. Like a vocal that needs compressing but later will be set to a lower volume for a backing track.
But you don't need gain staging for everything. for example the hi hat on my track im working on is hitting -51 dB peak (kick at -10 dB giving the drums a 41 dB of dynamic range) and is plenty loud with only a EQ and after the master chain it hits at -31dB peak. One element that is quiet and static dynamically needs almost nothing just a correct level.
👍 Great videos, thanks! 🙏
I also compose and mix practically simultaneously, so I adjust the levels from the beginning and if I decide to add or remove an instrument somewhere, I adjust the volumes of the rest with automation if needed.
I put the effects (compressor, Eq, etc) almost at the end of the job, then I make sure I have the correct overall volume for the MixBus effects chain. I'm not a sound engineer, much less a mix or mastering engineer, but with this system, it seems to me that I have more control of the balance during composition and get to the mastering phase faster.
I don't gain stage any more, as long as I don't distort in the inputs, I am good.
But what if the name of the song is "Shaker"?
Interesting! I actually take this approach for tracks I'm using heavy compression on, because Graham had previously mentioned many plug-ins function optimally at around -18db. I do find that my plug ins react better with the input in that range, BUT I now realize that I probably have been skipping or RUSHING the static mix because I can "fix it later" with plug ins.
This is another super useful video for breaking a bad habit I didnt realize I did, thank you Joe! Maybe a 5 minutes to breaking habits series is in order 👀
Gain-staging is about getting the right amount of signal to the next device in the chain while maximizing the signal-to-noise ratio overall. It's not as relevant when dealing with fully arbitrary digital mixing, but it's a habit from live audio that I don't feel like giving up and it proves useful when dealing with emulation plug-ins.
As for track normalization, I find it very useful when working from templates to do fast turnarounds on recurring projects with consistent elements. Normalizing the raw tracks will set up the templates properly for fine-tuning rather than scratch-building.
Your first paragraph here is one of the only accurate paragraphs in this entire comment section. A lot of people seem to think they understand gain staging but don't. You're absolutely right about digital mixing. The only two reasons to really gain stage in the box: 1) certain plugins behave better at certain levels; 2) you want to make sure you have enough headroom at the very end of your chain for proper dynamics. That's about it as far as I'm concerned. Clipping isn't a concern because you can just back off the signal at any point in the process before the final stereo output.
This makes sense. I think the idea of normalizing everything to get more headroom comes from the bad practice of recording everything way too hot. I record very conservative levels, and therefore I don't need to re-introduce headroom when I start mixing.
Give this man a beer
@@recordingrevolution thats gain staging
@@recordingrevolution yeah, but that is you, like a mixing engeneer we resive a lot of stuff from others, so they don't record everything with a resonable headroom
Listen 1st…
You are so good at explaining things, thank you so much, great video!
Don’t clip. Next.
What? You mean your old school? 😎 lol me too!
Great vid as always. As a decade long follower, I respect your teachings. Gain Staging (GS) is fundamental to recording and mixing. It Is done in every recording studio, house of worship, club house, vehicle. It’s just not called gain staging. Most just say “setting levels”. I agree some get hung up on calling it GS and spending so much time on that process. However, every mixing engineer will have to go through this phase. I used to GS with a plugging from hornet and now I do it as I go using the input and normalize gain features in Studio One. 1000 x faster. I set my levels as I go or prior to starting the static mix. GS will make the difference in how balanced your mix is. I can get a loud mix at -18dbfs because I spend time on setting the proper levels at the front end. Mixing will be much easier if levels are set to where the faders can stay at 0 thereby making minimal fader ( attenuator) moves. You’re awesome Joe.
I think that's part of the problem. I'm with you on how to set levels. But there are a lot of people who say that during MIXING you should set levels to X dB before starting. That's the par that I feel is unnecessarily complicated.
@@recordingrevolution that’s not complicated, that’s simple. As quick in logic as 2 clicks. Select all. Normalize region gain. Cheers.
There are a couple of advantages to setting every track and bus to a consistent level and then using faders to adjust the balance in the mix. And that is over a series of similar mixes, you start to get a numerical feel for where the faders need to go for a certain type of track. So in terms of drums, for example, your kick might be somewhere around 0, but your hi-hat is probably going to be something like -12db. Assuming you use a reverb buss with sends, similar principle, after a few mixes you get to know a rough fader level where it's not too overwhelming, but also audible.
Secondly, it pairs nicely with a philosophy of where possible, do volume cuts on faders rather than boosts, and anything that is too loud will stick out like the proverbial sore thumb.
"Unnecessarily complicated" is a good description. I think some use it like the Emperor's New Clothes - this video is spot on - thanks Joe.
I think there's a lot of things we tend to overcomplicate. I find that if I think of things in big picture ideas it helps keep me on track. When I think of all the potential possibilities something can do I get bogged down trying a million things. Typically I end up doing what my gut told me to do in the first place, but it just took me longer.
Thank you. I was trying to mix a track. I was throwing in plugins instead of balancing the volumes to make the song sound good to ears.(I don't know if I got the lesson right)
Where’s Graham?
Tell EM JOE LMAO
Gain staging is a technical process that helps you feed the correct gain into your gear - be it hardware or plugin. It's mostly something that goes on in recording and mix prep and it has nothing to do with creative decisions during mixing or mix balance. That's how tech people back in the day got to that +4dBu (0dB VU) mark, it's the place that still gives you enough headroom to accommodate transient heavy material without clipping and keeps you away from the noise floor. The +4dBu is still a standard professional line level in every studio in the world and it will not "make" your mix, but it can certainly "break' it. My 0.2c
Im gonna drop a gem for yall right here, this is the absolute foundation of the track your mixing
"all sounds are not the same, why would they be at the same volume"...yes. the problem im having is, Gain staging..and leveling are 2 different processes.
you need to keep signal flow in mind. if your recording a vocal..the signal flow is..the artist, the microphone, interface/preamp, then the DAW.and so on.
*if you dont gain at EACH stage of the signal flow, then by time you get to master youre going to get unwanted distortion.*
also these plugins are based off of analogue gear as you said, they work BEST with a certain amount of signal going into them..and everytime you make an adjustment within a plugin..theres a gain option built into, pretty much every plugin for a reason. if your signal is at -27db..and you make a change in a plugin that turns your sound up to -20...you then need to gain stage down within that plugin. gain staging is something you should have in the back of your mind through out an ENTIRE session. every change you make..gain stage.
after the initial gain staging of your sounds (before Processing with plugins) youd move onto leveling/panning on the mixer to set the appropriate levels for your elements of the track. because as you said..a shaker should not be at the same level as a snare..thats why its called leveling..and gain staging is called gain staging.
love the videos..
its all love. keep creating!
Joe, I've got a series of RND 511 preamps that have no output transformer. When I drive the input to get a little grit/character, the signal coming into Logic is so hot that I'll peg the main outs with only a piano and vocal recorded, let alone drums, bass, etc. So, I nudge down the gain on the tracks in post until they're at that -18 level. Then I feel I've got the tracks prepped for a static mix, and from there also primed them for whatever compression, etc. I feel is needed. I avoid normalizing the tracks, maybe that's just me. For me, gain-staging isn't about getting all the tracks to the same volume, per se (to your shaker point), it's more about controlling the levels and then going to the faders to get that static mix. Could be your message is for beginner engineers, but I recon one of the first mistakes they'll make is starting their mix process either pegging the main outs with no headroom left, or pulling faders way down and losing fidelity in subtle volume changes. I'm not saying I disagree with your point, but hoping to learn something if I'm approaching this wrong...