You are correct. This is the Real Paul who faked his death in 66 and was replaced by an impostor;-) The real Paul decided to come back after he got totally fed up with all the bad advice out there on gain staging...
I have the pleasure of owning a Live VU meter! No matter what rooms she is in she can tell it's too loud..she screams out an analog sound "turn that shit down", so this saves me a ton of money just on my power bill, and the risk of blowing up my speakers...I am blessed..
I love that you make these. Clearly to combat the slow erosion of fundamental knowledge that is happening as kids grow up having never seen an analog anything.
@@AudioMasterclass I run a hybrid studio in a remote river access only jungle in South America, fitted with 100% rupert neve designs analog equipment. From there, into an apollo x16. You are the only breath of fresh air i can find out there in the youtube spaces! @deltasoundloge
@@TheUnknownBassI mean how is it not fundamental? Digital recording couldn’t have existed without the advancement of computers/microchips. Recorded music wouldn’t exist without analog gear, it wasn’t just one way, it was the only way for a long while.
@@TheUnknownBass Any gear has its area where it is completely accurate, a wider area where it is inaccurate but this is either forgivable or delightful, and then an edge beyond which it turns to horrific mush, squeals or splats. If you understand the principles and have accurate measurements, you can choose what you get. If you don't understand or have no view into the process, your results will be randomly lucky at best.
The VU meter was definitely necessary for setting up analog tape: level, bias, EQ were important especially if you had 2" tape coming in from another studio and you're trying to overdub. The big secret weapon was the factory test tape that consisted of 1kHz, 100Hz, 10kHz etc tones to align the playback heads.
The -18db rule comes from the nominal alignement level of audio interface that embed preamp and ADC. The manual let you know this alignement. Example, for a RME fireface, in the manual you can read : input level For 0dbs at +4dbu = 13dbu. That means that 4dbu = 1.23 volt = 0Vu = -9dbfs. Each audio interface has his own alignment but, at times we mixed on large console plugged in adc/dac, it was pretty standard to align the max +22dbu of the analog console to 0dbfs and so having the 4dbu = -18dbfs...
Hit the nail. Just to make it completely explicit: dbfs is a relative measure without a reference point on the physical world by definition. It only says 0 dbfs is the maximum level in the dbfs range, nothing can be "louder". And everything below is in db relatively to 0 dbfs. Meaning -50 db is 50 db lower than 0 dbfs meaning the maximum output voltage. And there comes in the hardware, since in hardware we do need a reference for the 0 dbfs. According to the european broadcasting standard, +4 dBu is the maximum distortion free level which again should equal to 1.23 volts according to the standard. Now the ADC interfaces have to declare if they have an offset to this in their conversion. This offset one has to take into consideration. However: Some manufacturer just don't care while others do not calibrate and have quite some deviations withing a series. And of course, different manufacturer different offsets. Meaing: It's up to the user to find out what the offset actually is with his/her gear and setup.
Least nostalgic vintage gear discussions on RUclips! Everyone else: It's so old fashioned, crunchy and warm! Just like Mum and Dad's living room! Audio Masterclass: Toss out that old inaccurate junk, you nincompoops of all ages!
From EBU technical recommendation R68-2000: "The EBU recommends that ... Members should use coding levels for digital audio signals which correspond to an alignment level which is 18 dB below the maximum possible coding level of the digital system".
Nice video. In the day I spent many hours aligning tape decks and we certainly used VU meters as well as using them in our recordings and mixes. Today I will glance at my daws digital meters but really with the headroom in digital recording and relatively negligible noise floor I really on my ears. So a really good exercise that I recommend is to push several different signals like you had on you example up to where you can hear nasty digital distortion as well as see if when turned way down you can hear any noise. As your projects get more complex with many tracks do the same. Gain staging is still important and VU as well as other metering is visually helpful but nothing beats your ears……providing you can still hear!
Excellent short post! I use the Klanghelm VUMT for my master bus during rough mixing to ensure I have enough headroom for my final mix, and use it during my final mix to ensure the same for mastering. I also use it on the pre-mastering tack and post mastering tracks to compare levels. It's a gem of a plugin!
Our dBVU measurement system goes back to telephony, the 300ms rise time is the aural equivalent to image persistence that allows us to use a 25/30Hz frame rate in motion pictures. This 'slow' rise and fall time allows us to approximate the perceived volume level of a signal rather than the peak level, which is almost useless outside of the capture medium. The importance of VU metering is that it allows us to match perceived loudness on the short term, this is very difficult with peak metering and LUFS metering is too slow as it's purpose is different again. I would argue that the 'harsh' sound of digital is 50% due to peak metering not being a representation of how we hear and 50% opening the industry to people who don't understand the electronics behind their systems and not a product of the medium itself. The 'operating level' of audio equipment was based on dBm, 0dB = 1mW and with a 600ohm load this equates to 0.775V RMS or 0dBU. This is a measurement of power transfer between two devices and is related to voltage and impedance. We then see the term 'Line Level' which is defined as +4dBu, this is NOT operating level of our audio equipment, but the transmission level of the telephone lines. Engineering standards allowed for a maximum of 4dB drop in signal along the line, and as signal can always be easily terminated, signals were boosted by 4dB to account for potential loss as amplification at source is the least noisy way to amplify. BUT because the audio equipment being used in telephony was being sequestered for recording studios, their output meters were calibrated to 0VU = +4dBu and so that stuck for the studio. Now when we transfer to tape, we usually had 14dB headroom above this +4dBu level (remember the 0dBu operating level, this was to allow for 18dB headroom above that). And now transferring to digital, this 18dB headroom in tape set the standard of +4dBu = -18dBFS and most of our professional digital consoles still conform to this. To allow for a minimum of 18dB headroom above +4dBu we need a rail voltage that will allow for at least +22dBu, or 14V, but manufacturers attempted to maximise this headroom by increasing rail voltage and we saw consoles start using 18V rails which gives +24dBu max. This has given us the confusing competing standard of +4dBu = -20dBFS because the important part of the standard is having the same voltage leaving the console in the analogue domain after processing. Yamaha is an example of this, their supply rails are 0dBFS = +24dBu
Fantastic video. Really enjoyed it! I would love to hear more about managing gain staging and loudness during the mix vs during mastering. Also, a video about VU vs RMS vs dBfs vs LUFS vs K metering, etc. Thank you.
I always preferred peak (ppm) meters over vu meters wether on a console or tape machine. No need to adjust your level based on the type of signal ie: -10 to -7 for percs like tamborine and so on …. vocals can go to + 2 or 3 vu. With ppm just aim for 0. Great video Thanks
@@Madrrrrrrrrrrr I'm afraid you in err. For example one would never record a tambourine at 0vu. It will distort and cause cross-talk between the adjacent tracks. VU meters do not read transient info accurately. However you'd have no problems recording "in the red", +1-+3 if you're recording a vocal. Getting the right level to tape will increase the signal to noise ratio ... which is what you want. You definitely don't want to record a SMPTE time code a 0db LOL
@@RobertMatichak i'm still at 2 track level. I mostly record house and techno tracks and 0 vu works fine for that. Zero distortion, max dynamics. If you use a PPM meter at zero db you have less dynamics because you aim too low. Tape starts to get interesting just above 0db ;) And sure for spikey solo-ed instruments a vu meter may not be the best but every tape head listens to the play head while recording ;)
I can only speak for the U.S.A., but since you brought it up: Ampex created the standard of 185nWb/m, aligned to 0VU. By the time I was in school, in the 80's, most music multracks were using "elevated" alignments at 250nWb/m, so called "+3dB" (which is actually +2.6dB over 185nWb/m, but that's a whole other can of worms!). Film still stayed at 185nWb/m. Then came the newer tape formulations (Scotch 996, Ampex 499), and it settled at (most of the time) 355nWb/m or so-called "+6dB over 185nWb/m" (which is actually +5.5dB over 185Wb/m). There is your largely historical knowledge for the day from somebody who aligned way too many tape machines!
Thank you for your input. I have a document somewhere in my chaotic library that says the Ampex standard was measured at 700 Hz, so the level on tape at 1 kHz was around 180 nWb/m. But what's a quarter of a decibel between friends? DM
@@RocknRollkat Hovering at 0VU is not too bad - that's an average. Post 2000s pop and hip-hop hover at the equivalent of +6-12VU! Remember, 0dBfs digital peak is considered equivalent to +18VU in most engineering circles.
@@Zickcermacity In my world, '0' dBs is just that, ZERO dBs. I never bought into that '-18dB' nonsense. I build my own V.U.meter plugins, and 0 dBs is just as it was in 1961, '0' dBs. Old habits die hard, if at all. When I play down these modern tracks, they all sit at 0 dBs on my system, even though the youngsters think they're 'overdriving' by +18 dBs., just as you point out. Bill P.
Since the day I started taking sound staging seriously, everything started sounding magical. All plugins worked as i expected.. Bliss. Before that, I was dumb to treat digital as analog (Where I started), warming the sound as close to 0dBFS without clipping as possible. I just didn't get it. I did that for about 20 years. What a shame. I started working on bad converters like E-mu cards and "Soundblasters" in 1996-97. I never had the opportunity to work with DigiDesign Protools, or ADAT, or DAT! In the 90s, for me, it was all 1/4'' Tascam 32s, Portastudios, and such. I used to warm the tape. The transition to digital was extremely painful for me (still is). I long to go back to analog, but seeing tape machines literally disposed of, and now worth thousands, tens of thousands aches me. Plus maintenance. Nope. I'm so glad I learend soundstaging. Best of both worlds.
I saw myself in you comment. I did the same, but not for so much time. And when I realized about the digital realm gain stage, it changed everything. Also I have used soundblaster from 1998 until early 2000, when I got an E-MU card.
The physical size is also part of the VU meter spec. The little ones on Revox B77s and other gear are non-standard. The level that a tape machine is calibrated at depends on the tape being used. It used to be 185nWB/m2, but as tape improved it was raised and the meters were used to calibrate to the test tape at a different VU level to compensate. The meters were calibrated to a test tape being played and then the record level was adjusted to read 0VU with a line reference level. This is where +4dBu (pro) and -10dBV (domestic) come from which many people believe is the signal level, but the signal can easily be 10dB above this. VU meters on mixers were calibrated to match the recorder(s) even though they had over 20dB headroom.
Thank you for your input. Yes I do remember 185, but there was also 200. My memory fails me on the details, and then of course in jolly old Europe we had three hundred and something as well. And then Ampex invented 456 and we could push levels higher. Once again it's my memory but I seem to remember some studios would recalibrate for this while others would just know that they could get an extra 4 dB or so. DM
@@AudioMasterclass There was what a tape manufacturer recommended for their tape type, what the producer "preferred" and what reference tape you happened to have. This involved doing a log calculation to determine the dB difference on the VU. In practice there were 5 common flux densities in common use giving 25 combinations to set the VUs to. If you were lucky there was a little chart printed on the tape box. A commercial studio would have to recalibrate their multitracks to the tones tape a client brought in if the session was started in another studio, but 2T master machines would only need recalibrating if the tape type was changed as that tended to use a new tape each mixdown. The most important thing now is to match analogue clipping to digital clipping and the audio interface maximum levels need to be known. A lot of interfaces can take over 22dBu, but some can't. There is no need to observe SMPTE/EBU recommended 0VU levels if you are recording electronic sources that can't output more than +19dBu. When you are recording you can choose whatever headroom that is appropriate to maximise snr, when you are transferring media you should provide the levels required. The clue is in "SMPTE/EBU"--broadcasters don't want to have to change their levels for every track. The most difficult thing now is finding a source of +4dBu @ 1kHz to calibrate your meter levels. A computer is not a good source as you can't calibrate the interface. Your 0dBFS is not necessarily the same as anyone else's.
@@hintoninstruments2369 Thank you for your input. You're jogging my memory somewhat and a quick look at MRL's literature reminds me that they offered IEC calibration tapes in 200 nWb/m and 320 nWb/m versions, as well as 250 and 355 which I don't remember at all. 185 nWb/m I seem to remember having some connection with 'Ampex level' and also Dolby level was 185 nWb/m. It all seemed to make sense at the time but I think we are better off now with fewer things to worry about. Especially tapes that arrived encoded with Dolby but no tone. DM
I'm really glad that you mentioned the Klangham virtual VU meter. When I was using Studio One rather exclusively, that one is good too. But lately, I've really been getting into Live and though I think there is a way (I can't figure it out though) to use that VU in other hosts, the Klangham looked great and was cheap. So now almost every channel get the Klangham and it's really nice. (I like the "neon" skin best ;) )
Great vid! Others simply add, over time and from experience, what sounds good in their daw of choice. The VU is simply a, as you suggested, a slower signal device. Instead of fiddling with lowering or raising the calibration, I simply just add , or subtract to what I see on VU based on what sounds good and take note of the levels for future reference. I use the simple bar graph on the channel as references as you suggest because it is faster. The parameters I “see” are based on experience from using my daw of choice, and a daw, (which is assumed to be known, but wasn’t mentioned ?) as we know, has much more headroom then analog. Also, I don’t know about the other meters you suggest, but I use the TB pro audio which also has a peak meter. Going back and forth between the VU and peak in one meter is super handy, and, as you said, it’s free!
Zero dBm was originally 1mw across 600 ohms or .775v which was defined by Bell Telephone. A typical VU meter was calibrated for zero at Line Level which was equal to +4 dBm or 1.23v across 600 ohms. VU [Volume Units] meter was calibrated for optimum display of RMS levels with the ballistics of the meter defined and calibrated for broadcast use. I still like to use VU meters across my stereo buss to gage my mix density. I'm old school, guilty as charged. BTW: Ampex 456 standard bias reference level was 250 nW/m [nano Webbers per meter] with "Elevated" bias being 370 nW/m typically used for 30 IPS operation for Ampex 456. The higher fidelity of 30 IPS operation was better high frequency response and lower noise at the loss of a half octave of low frequency response. The 370 nW/m standard was pretty common in studios by the late 80's. 250 nW/m was used for 15 IPS in broadcast. 185 nW/m was the Ampex "original" standard for older tape formulations and 7.5 IPS. I really don't miss tape, I was the guy that had to maintain the tape machines in both broadcast and multitrack studios. And no, I don't think tape sounds better, it's a sound quality that we're used to. Early in my broadcast engineering career I was called into the Air studio by a DJ due to a "clicking sound" in his headphones when he had the microphone on-air. I quickly determined that he was running the mic so hot the RCA console VU meters were banging hard against the end stop making a loud click. Not so good for analog meters and in fact I noticed that the pointers were bent from repeated abuse. While the station processing prevented overmodulation of the transmitter, I found that the DJ actually liked the sound of the mic preamps being over driven. "Sounds more intense." he remarked. In those days a limiter for the mic channel would have been expensive and it would have involved a major rewiring of the console. No insert patch points on broadcast consoles. It was a Album Oriented Rock station. I've been a professional broadcast and studio engineering since the mid '70's. I currently run a live capture audio/video service and mixing/mastering/editing services.
Unfortunately, no. The Laudnes War era was already in place with Vinyl, especially in the Dance world. But cutting to vinyl has immediate consequences if something is wrong: the stylus can't follow the groove.
My career began firmly in the days of the VU meter. VUs were read musically and were often accompanied by a single-level peak indicator. Between that setup and just hearing the playback, we all came to know the dynamic performance of instruments we recorded. Would it have been easier with a peak reading meter? Of course it would!, and I soon learned to love the PPM standard meters that were so foreign to American engineers. Most Neve and SSL consoles had at least a couple of them if not all. It just took new interpretations to know how hot to track instruments with very high crest factors. This also revealed the source of the ‘magic’ tape yielded on every instrument. It turned out we were using tape’s complex frequency dependent compression to get our drum sounds. It also turned out once making the change to digital recording in the 80s that we no longer knew how to get that sound which came almost automatically to us not so long before. In my opinion, this is the source of most of the discontent over digital recording at the time, and understandably so. I always tracked toms and cymbals together, noting that it sounded way better than separately. We all know now why that was and it is hellishly difficult to reproduce that sound. Tape compresses and limits in a very complicated way, fiendishly difficult to emulate. The VU, in its own quirky way, was what told us when we were ‘there.’
Regarding the numbers... I loved the Ampex 456 that allowed +6bB above the standard 250nW or 320nW. And we could choose the 499, +9bB from 250nW or 520nW. That helped a lot with the analogue tape enemy, the NOISE... I personally was for the 456. I never liked the crunchy high end of the 499. And as soon I could get rid of the tape completely (in 1994, I sold my beloved Otari MTR90), I did.
In the digital age's infancy, Sony set their machines to -21dBFS as 0vu, considering that a highly dynamic percussion could have up to 26dB of peak-to-average difference. Soon that was considered too much in the 16bits digital world, and the new common point was -16dBFS for 0vu. But pioneers of standardization pushed for a standard -14dB as 0vu. That was good for a mixed master but not a valid DAW reference since it required too careful gain staging to avoid mistakes. So a good compromise was -18dBFS, and nearly all the DAWs complied to that. I analysed many of the best CD masters of the '90s and nearly all of them had a 0vu at -12dBFS. That was before the loudness war become tragic. I still head to that while mixing and then push to a CD "standard" -9dBFS when delivering listening passes. That helps reducing the request for revisions quite a lot. Still, I deliver a -12dBFS master to the mastering engineer, when I don't do the mastering myself (That is a budget matter, since I prefer to have a new pair of ears to master my mixes)
Huh... I didn't know any of this, and found that a typical "normalized" mix would be hard in the red at nominal -18dBFS. That being rather unhelpful, I settled on -12dBFS because it's enough margin that, if my mix is averaging around 0dB, it should have decent dynamic range without clipping, and without being so low that I run out of headphone amp gain on a laptop or phone when playing it back. I had no idea what fundamental rule of the ancients I was violating by deviating from the default (which I assumed was there for a reason), but it worked for me, so I risked my audio club reputation on it anyway.
I can't wait to hear your opinion on gain staging since you said that inside the DAW you should not go over 0dBFS'. It's necessary or not on today's workflow inside a DAW? Why I'm asking, because this subject continues to spark debates. From plugin developers, where some of them are stating in their user manuals that the signal entering the plugin should be -18dBFS (0 VU), to music producers who are stating that they don't care about what's going in, it matters not to go out above 0dBFS on individual tracks or buses.
Fantastic video, giving a good understanding of what a VU is and what it can do. Well done! I studied audio engineering in the 90ies so tape recording was almost over, I started out using PT HD on a large console. Using a lot of analogue gear like preamps, compressors, eq, multi FXs, Delays....but I never recorded analogue. Nevertheless I had to read VU meters all the time on that gear. And who don't like a jumping needle with a cool light on it??? With digital processing I turned to RME and used the K metering system a long time, and still use it happily. The readout of e.g. K-12 is very useful for me. BUT I will put the old PC to the trash, in a few days...(*crying tears*) and leave for my SSL setup. 🙂 That means I go for a VU meter again. BTW It's a good use to compress with a VU meter showing the gain reduction, too ;-)
The techs at our studio when aligning a sony digital with our analog consoles would have an oscillator that output a sine wave at 0 db rms not peak and the machine was aligned to -18 or -20 (engineer preference) and those meters in the machine were peak and the outputs coming back to the line in vu meters read 0 vu. As far as today is concerned I would think the whole “vu thing 0db rms thing” matters only if your plugin really models analog gear and its characteristics and idiosyncrasies. Other than that yeah maybe useless.
I'll see if I can find that reference. Regarding the video quality, that I think is down to the camera (Sony A6600) and the lights. I just sit there. DM
@@AudioMasterclass I thought it’s referenced by the AES, but I’m not sure. The Sony A6600 is an amazing camera. Oh btw, I’ve subscribed to your channel.
So I got the Klanghelm meter after watching this video (I always use mvmeter2). I put all the settings the same on both and the Klanghelm is off by 0.2db. Whats the deal?
Ultimately I don't know what your point is. In the description you list 2 questions: Does that make them useless? Or can the VU meter really help you to improve your recordings and mixes? But I didn’t hear you directly address them in the video. It was information about VUs but with no real final thoughts conclusion.
My final conclusion was that in digital recording it is vital not to exceed 0dBfs. When recording or bouncing we need peak meters with fast ballistics to see absolute peak levels because VU meters cannot do this due to the slow 300 ms ballistics. What VU meters can do is give you a visual indication of the loudness of a signal - the subjective loudness. This is a useful link between sight and sound. While our ears should be the ultimate reference point, what you see can be a very useful reinforcement. When using the DAW, to reap the benefits of both VU metering and peak metering, you can calibrate your VU meter plug-in so that the red light indicates clipping at a level lower than 0 dBfs. Now you can rely on your VU meters for subjective loudness, while at the same time you know that when the clipping indicator in the VU meter hits red you are still not hitting full-scale. This way you can reap the benefits of subjective loudness and protect your digital headroom.
great video. I like to calibrate my VU meters using a reference track. then can also split the frequencies to have total control on what i'm monitoring. then can make the adjust and keep control based on what know that is good.
One last thing. Many people that own the AX plugin from Waves already have a nice VU meter, just put the "process" to 0 and it's a very nice VU meter with almost perfect ballistics.
Very pleased to hear that the 0dBU = -18dBfs is not clearly defined on the internet, as I got tied up in all this a few months ago, and unsure which system I should be using. However, having sorted that, I now find I'm no nearer understanding all this stuff! I watched the middle part of the video several times, inc half-speed, partially because the examples precede the numbers. That the meter under-reads the perceived volume is not new to me. But what I don't get is that as the signal drops the number displayed becomes a smaller negative value, not larger - eg I was expecting a drop of 6dB to show as a value of -24dBfs...?
A mixing desk I learned on had a VU hold function so it would hold it peak so you hot a better idea of where your levels were at. Cant remember the brand of the desk though
I also use the this VU…but for me and for the style I’m Producing I only worry about gain staging the post processed Kick which is the hardest hitting element of each track, this way I get consistent mixes and can use hardware emulations care free, never clipping in digital ones as well…you can also get away with -12 and don’t clip the mixbuss..thx for the vid❤
Why was the analogue PPM not adopted, as it was throughout the UK Broadcast TV industry. It provides an absolute reference for recording and transmission.
VU Mewters -- what we used when we had nothing better. Today, we have better. But VU meters are like milled metal faceplates and solid metal knobs, audiophiles love eye candy. You can sell a 2000 dollar amplifier for 6995 if you add big blue VU meters. Ask McIntosh...
Interesting, I have a meter on my PC's audio out, (a physical one, no emulation) I kind of thought of it as a VU meter (it has a VU type scale) I zeroed it to your meter to see how it compares - no comparison, yours is way faster! I hooked it up in an attempt to balance the various audio track used for a church service, with very limited success. All your early samples were lucky to hit -4, however the extra, 'could get blocked' track went to +1! What was most surprising was an ad that popped up mid video, it held the needle to an almost constant 0 to +1, any less movement would be your test tone. Now if all my church hymns had that dynamic range, aligning them would be so much easier - although there would be a great pile of rumblings from the parishioners. In my chain is also a Behringer desk, it's bargraph meter had your 0dB as -10, and all your sample tracks tickling the -4 db LED, so obviously something is going on between your DAW and what's popping out of RUclips into the USB input on my Behringer DX2000USB mixer.
Hello. This -18 dB 'standard' is ridiculous. I build my own analog V.U. meter plugins and I subscribe to 0 V.U. being exactly that. As you well know, there is no 'soft clipping' in the digital domain. Therefore my overload LED comes on at 0 dBs. Period. If I see that LED blink, I crashed. Why record at -18 dBs and give up 3 bits of data and settle for 78 dBs of dynamic range ? No need to remind me that I'm a reactionary hardass who still records like it's 1961. I could go on for days about how these kids think that the -18 dB thing is for the benefit of 'soft clipping' plugins, etc. All I know is that if we went 'into the red' in the old days, there were 'consequences'.... Once again, a most enjoyable presentation, thank you ! Bill P.
I absolutely agree but with the one exception that -18 dBFS, when quoted, is usually meant to be a 'round about' level to aim for, not peak. But it does seem that it's widely regarded as peak which, as you say, wastes 3 bits. Coming from analogue myself, waste is just plain wrong. Shame we can't donate those unused bits in some way. DM
I Use One VU Meter on my Master channel. Set all channels to "0.db" No Plugins on any channel. Mute all but one channel at a time. slowly use the gain (not volume fader) and play the Instrument/vocal etc that's solo'd, until the meter needle hits "0.0" or close to it and stays that way. Do ^ this for every channel until finished. then go into Mixing (adding Compression, eq, reverb, delay, whathaveyou. Do NOTHING on the main master bus (yet) Once you've Mixed to your liking, then you can adjust fader volume to tracks that are clipping (or again, to your liking/satisfaction) *I Like to set my faders to where none of the tracks Go passed the green. Then, Move on to Finalizing *if it's for an Instrumental : Do "Buss compression/EQ,Loudness,Limiting etc.etc.etc" whatever you can do to keep your track sounding good even at the loudest volumes on All Equipment (Monitors, Headphones, consumer speakers, car)
LUFS are roughtly based on those old VUmeters. Before having digital audio with humongous headroom, they were absolutely manadatory. Nowadays you just need them in the A/D stage, as 64bit DAWs have plenty of headroom..... althought it's always a good practice just to ensure you are not overclipping your plugins (wich is teoricaly not impossible).
Very well made and very interesting!! I love it when you bring back magnetic field intensity in Webber/Sq m which brought me back to my electrical engineering studies many years ago. I dare say that 200 micro Webber/Sq m = 2 tesla For obvious reasons Tesla became much more popular lately😂
It's in alot off manuals to plugins. The signal hitting -18dbfs when going into most plugins is idea. Especially for the plugins simulating analog gear. That's the only place I've actually.seen it written🙂👍
Some mixers did only use VU meters to mix their projects on analog mixconsoles. Source: Sunset Sound Studios, LA, a minority of them of course. Btw, some should use more a VU instead PPM meters, because of making their mixes too loud.
Poor Checo - really wish he could get a bit closer to Max just so we could have a bit of competition. Tempted to get myself one of those lovely outboard Crookwood VUs now.
Why i the visual indication changes while I insert VU in the track vs The Master Bus. Eg; Solo Kick shows 0VU But then the Same solo kick in Master Bus VU shows more or else numbers.
Asked ChatGPT... something quite interesting regarding the connection: Q) where does 0VU = -18dbfs come from? A) The relationship between 0VU and -18dBFS (decibels relative to full scale) comes from the calibration standard for analog audio equipment, which was later adapted for digital audio. In analog audio equipment, 0VU (Volume Unit) is the reference level for audio signals. It represents the level at which the equipment is operating at its optimal performance, and is typically set to correspond to a certain voltage level in the equipment's circuitry. For example, in the United States, the standard reference level for 0VU is +4 dBu, which corresponds to a voltage of 1.23 volts. When digital audio was introduced, it became necessary to establish a reference level for digital signals that would be compatible with the existing analog equipment. The standard that was adopted was -18dBFS, which is equivalent to 0dBu in the analog domain. This level was chosen because it corresponds to the highest level that can be represented by a 16-bit digital signal, which was the standard for many years. So, in summary, 0VU corresponds to a certain voltage level in the analog domain, while -18dBFS corresponds to the highest level that can be represented by a 16-bit digital signal, which was the standard for many years. The two levels are related through the calibration standard for analog audio equipment.
As usual ChatGPT proclaims a mix of fact and word-salad fantasy as totally authoritative. A 16 bit digital signal without dithering can represent from 0 to -96 dB FS, not merely 18 dB. The highest level that can be represented by a 16 bit linear digital word is 0 dB Full Scale by definition.
Yeah but the question was where does 0vu Vs -18dbfs originate from. 16bit audio for sure has 96db of range, and can see now where chatgpt mangled the response. Good call
@@mattfreshalabone5062 ChatGPT must have had some training material that discussed 0 dB and also 18 dB, some that discussed 0 dB and also 16 bit audio, and some that discussed 0 dB and metering. Its copy and paste assembly mixed and matched and maybe paraphrased fragments that are similar in the word match analysis tree but refer to different concepts. Another example of how large model "AI" is not actually intelligent at all, a useful generator of fresh combinations but an unreliable guide to the truth.
Being a Broadcast Audio Engineer educated in Europe but working in the US, it took me about 30 seconds to find this..."that the European Broadcasting Union (EBU) Technical Recommendation R68-2000 and the Society for Motion Picture & Television Engineer (SMPTE) RP 155 - 2004 operating practices are based on two different audio reference levels, namely -18 dBFS1 and -20 dBFS respectively" -RECOMMENDATION ITU-R BS.1726-Signal level of digital audio accompanying television in international programme exchange - That translates to +4dBu (or whatever other analog reference level is being used with 0dBu being more common now) being the equivalent of those digital audio reference levels depending on where you work, and 18 or 20 dB of "headroom" respectively when it comes to broadcast audio. This assumes that your analog I/O has a maximum level of equal or greater than +22 or +24 dBu ( or +18 or +20 dBu if 0VU equals 0dBu) In music mixing there aren't any of those standards, only streaming platform loudness standards measured in LUFS, LKFS or some proprietary standard. If you work in those areas it makes perfect sense to set your digital reference level to -14 or -12 dBFS, resulting in louder mixes deflecting properly on your VU while having less "headroom". A VU set to -14 dBFS tracks nicely with a mix compliant with streaming loudness standards ( -14 to -16 LUKS/LKFS)
Defo this. Post audio people knew this. And that you had to goose your mix 2db if outputting to Pal from NTFS to compensate. Most indie plugin developers are Pal European background so they defaulted to -18. For the most part. Many tape emulation plugins use different, even for developers using -18 like Waves.
The VU meters on my Philips N4522 reel to reel (semi-pro) read noticeably higher on replay than they did on recording the same music on the tape. This does not seem to matter much on my usual new tape of RTM LPR35 which is very tolerant of over driving but I also have a lot of Ampex 406/7 tape which is much less tolerant. The machine has just been serviced with attendant elimination of various faults and improved sound quality, by TS Professional Audio in Burgess Hill, West Sussex.
You can correct this by inputting a 1khz tone at 0db Peak and recording, then monitor the tape and using the two presets labelled Rec Current located on the rear panel, adjust until source & tape read the same. Useful if you use the same tape stock all the time. I use SM468/911 on my N4520/22's.
@@AudioMasterclass yes, +4dBu/0VU. This was in the '80s and '90s, for some context, and clients ranged from full orchestras to rock, pop, R'n'B and hiphop artists.
We digitize old tapes, audio cassettes... and see these VU meters of these devices every day. But I'm glad I don't have to use any of these pointer instruments in my DAW.
Also, since you brought it up: origins of -20dBFS or -18dBFS. Sony went with -20dBFS = +4dBu, Matsushita (TAD, Pioneer, Panasonic) went with -18dBFS=+4dBu. I believe SMPTE codified -20 and EBU codified -18? You'd think they could have fought this out in Japan over 2dB, but nobody did.
Thank you for your input. Yes, the manual for the Sony 1630 gives -20 dBFS for +4 dBu. As for minus 18 - I'm still searching for the document that specifies this. DM
@@AudioMasterclass Dig through Matsushita Electric, now called the Panasonic Company. I would suspect the Sony 1630 would be the origin story of -20dB.
Nice expo! I use it a lot set to RMS as it's very close to LUFS for mastering - altogether a great Klanghelm plugin - don't think most people would need the Deluxe version though
Nice, I'm sick with the mentality of sticking to a number just because. The examples and the history behind the VU is great. Personally I gain stage with a bit of guitar chain mentality, reduced on the saturation level and more precise. Like when the instrument hits a pedal, that another one .... all that the preamp and then to the power amp... In that occasion you make your sound by gain staging between different characteristic devises wit ''color'' in mind.This happens with any non linear device that we find also in our world, from mic to preamp, to every non linear plugin in your chain even the first one etc. For example I use sometimes a Pultec plugin as the first non linear plugin in my master bus (after a stock reaeq for gain staging without moving all the faders). in this occasion I push the levels by how much I want to''saturate'' the specific mix I work .I still use visual indication thought cause psychoacoustics is a b;[ch
you have 3 different meters displayed on the screen at 4min 12 secs into your video. why is the 3dB point in different places above or below centre scale on these meters?
![Get VU meters in your system and in your life [Fosi Audio LC30]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/eKH0QT0FqvA/mqdefault.jpg)
Finally I leanr someting from Paul MacCartney
Shit I was just sat here thinking this guy looks like Mc Cartney.
No it's Eric Idle
You are correct. This is the Real Paul who faked his death in 66 and was replaced by an impostor;-) The real Paul decided to come back after he got totally fed up with all the bad advice out there on gain staging...
Thank you. I thought I was going insane. I clicked the video because I was like, Paul McCartney explains VU meters? Yes please.
Hahaha!
I have the pleasure of owning a Live VU meter! No matter what rooms she is in she can tell it's too loud..she screams out an analog sound "turn that shit down", so this saves me a ton of money just on my power bill, and the risk of blowing up my speakers...I am blessed..
Best comment of 2024
I love that you make these. Clearly to combat the slow erosion of fundamental knowledge that is happening as kids grow up having never seen an analog anything.
Analogue will come back and make great friends with digital. DM
@@AudioMasterclass I run a hybrid studio in a remote river access only jungle in South America, fitted with 100% rupert neve designs analog equipment. From there, into an apollo x16. You are the only breath of fresh air i can find out there in the youtube spaces! @deltasoundloge
Is it fundamental? Or was it just one way to handle the gear of yesteryear?
@@TheUnknownBassI mean how is it not fundamental? Digital recording couldn’t have existed without the advancement of computers/microchips. Recorded music wouldn’t exist without analog gear, it wasn’t just one way, it was the only way for a long while.
@@TheUnknownBass Any gear has its area where it is completely accurate, a wider area where it is inaccurate but this is either forgivable or delightful, and then an edge beyond which it turns to horrific mush, squeals or splats. If you understand the principles and have accurate measurements, you can choose what you get. If you don't understand or have no view into the process, your results will be randomly lucky at best.
The VU meter was definitely necessary for setting up analog tape: level, bias, EQ were important especially if you had 2" tape coming in from another studio and you're trying to overdub. The big secret weapon was the factory test tape that consisted of 1kHz, 100Hz, 10kHz etc tones to align the playback heads.
I still record to tape! LOL and your correct.
Yep. No other meter would do for lineup.
The -18db rule comes from the nominal alignement level of audio interface that embed preamp and ADC. The manual let you know this alignement. Example, for a RME fireface, in the manual you can read : input level For 0dbs at +4dbu = 13dbu. That means that 4dbu = 1.23 volt = 0Vu = -9dbfs.
Each audio interface has his own alignment but, at times we mixed on large console plugged in adc/dac, it was pretty standard to align the max +22dbu of the analog console to 0dbfs and so having the 4dbu = -18dbfs...
Interesting!
You had me at RME. :) I am still learning the ropes of TotalMix.
Hit the nail.
Just to make it completely explicit: dbfs is a relative measure without a reference point on the physical world by definition. It only says 0 dbfs is the maximum level in the dbfs range, nothing can be "louder". And everything below is in db relatively to 0 dbfs. Meaning -50 db is 50 db lower than 0 dbfs meaning the maximum output voltage. And there comes in the hardware, since in hardware we do need a reference for the 0 dbfs. According to the european broadcasting standard, +4 dBu is the maximum distortion free level which again should equal to 1.23 volts according to the standard. Now the ADC interfaces have to declare if they have an offset to this in their conversion. This offset one has to take into consideration.
However: Some manufacturer just don't care while others do not calibrate and have quite some deviations withing a series. And of course, different manufacturer different offsets. Meaing: It's up to the user to find out what the offset actually is with his/her gear and setup.
I love your investigative, objective attitude toward the subject. A lot of audio people on RUclips get lost in the "mojo" stuff.
Least nostalgic vintage gear discussions on RUclips!
Everyone else: It's so old fashioned, crunchy and warm! Just like Mum and Dad's living room!
Audio Masterclass: Toss out that old inaccurate junk, you nincompoops of all ages!
From EBU technical recommendation R68-2000: "The EBU recommends that ... Members should use coding levels for digital audio signals which correspond to an alignment level which is 18 dB below the maximum possible coding level of the digital system".
That's the one! DM
Sir, you present things in a very unique and professional way. Big like for your efforts even though you seem to do things effortlesly. Big like!
Nice video. In the day I spent many hours aligning tape decks and we certainly used VU meters as well as using them in our recordings and mixes. Today I will glance at my daws digital meters but really with the headroom in digital recording and relatively negligible noise floor I really on my ears. So a really good exercise that I recommend is to push several different signals like you had on you example up to where you can hear nasty digital distortion as well as see if when turned way down you can hear any noise. As your projects get more complex with many tracks do the same. Gain staging is still important and VU as well as other metering is visually helpful but nothing beats your ears……providing you can still hear!
Excellent short post! I use the Klanghelm VUMT for my master bus during rough mixing to ensure I have enough headroom for my final mix, and use it during my final mix to ensure the same for mastering. I also use it on the pre-mastering tack and post mastering tracks to compare levels. It's a gem of a plugin!
wow what serendipity, I am currently restoring a B77 and about to embark on a VU driver circuit for my latest saturation device. Great info!!
Great video. Someone who actually goes in depth and puts VU meters in context. Thanks.
I use the Klanghelm set to VU for most instruments aiming for 0dB average and to RMS for most drums aiming for -8 peak.
Our dBVU measurement system goes back to telephony, the 300ms rise time is the aural equivalent to image persistence that allows us to use a 25/30Hz frame rate in motion pictures. This 'slow' rise and fall time allows us to approximate the perceived volume level of a signal rather than the peak level, which is almost useless outside of the capture medium. The importance of VU metering is that it allows us to match perceived loudness on the short term, this is very difficult with peak metering and LUFS metering is too slow as it's purpose is different again.
I would argue that the 'harsh' sound of digital is 50% due to peak metering not being a representation of how we hear and 50% opening the industry to people who don't understand the electronics behind their systems and not a product of the medium itself.
The 'operating level' of audio equipment was based on dBm, 0dB = 1mW and with a 600ohm load this equates to 0.775V RMS or 0dBU. This is a measurement of power transfer between two devices and is related to voltage and impedance.
We then see the term 'Line Level' which is defined as +4dBu, this is NOT operating level of our audio equipment, but the transmission level of the telephone lines. Engineering standards allowed for a maximum of 4dB drop in signal along the line, and as signal can always be easily terminated, signals were boosted by 4dB to account for potential loss as amplification at source is the least noisy way to amplify.
BUT because the audio equipment being used in telephony was being sequestered for recording studios, their output meters were calibrated to 0VU = +4dBu and so that stuck for the studio.
Now when we transfer to tape, we usually had 14dB headroom above this +4dBu level (remember the 0dBu operating level, this was to allow for 18dB headroom above that).
And now transferring to digital, this 18dB headroom in tape set the standard of +4dBu = -18dBFS and most of our professional digital consoles still conform to this.
To allow for a minimum of 18dB headroom above +4dBu we need a rail voltage that will allow for at least +22dBu, or 14V, but manufacturers attempted to maximise this headroom by increasing rail voltage and we saw consoles start using 18V rails which gives +24dBu max.
This has given us the confusing competing standard of +4dBu = -20dBFS because the important part of the standard is having the same voltage leaving the console in the analogue domain after processing. Yamaha is an example of this, their supply rails are 0dBFS = +24dBu
Fantastic video. Really enjoyed it! I would love to hear more about managing gain staging and loudness during the mix vs during mastering. Also, a video about VU vs RMS vs dBfs vs LUFS vs K metering, etc. Thank you.
Thank you. I will have more to say on metering in the future. DM
I always preferred peak (ppm) meters over vu meters wether on a console or tape machine. No need to adjust your level based on the type of signal ie: -10 to -7 for percs like tamborine and so on ….
vocals can go to + 2 or 3 vu. With ppm just aim for 0.
Great video
Thanks
No need for peaklights or PPM meters with a simple tape vu. Just aim at 0db on the vu and you're fine.
@@Madrrrrrrrrrrr I'm afraid you in err. For example one would never record a tambourine at 0vu. It will distort and cause cross-talk between the adjacent tracks. VU meters do not read transient info accurately. However you'd have no problems recording "in the red", +1-+3 if you're recording a vocal. Getting the right level to tape will increase the signal to noise ratio ... which is what you want. You definitely don't want to record a SMPTE time code a 0db LOL
@@RobertMatichak i'm still at 2 track level. I mostly record house and techno tracks and 0 vu works fine for that. Zero distortion, max dynamics. If you use a PPM meter at zero db you have less dynamics because you aim too low. Tape starts to get interesting just above 0db ;) And sure for spikey solo-ed instruments a vu meter may not be the best but every tape head listens to the play head while recording ;)
I can only speak for the U.S.A., but since you brought it up: Ampex created the standard of 185nWb/m, aligned to 0VU. By the time I was in school, in the 80's, most music multracks were using "elevated" alignments at 250nWb/m, so called "+3dB" (which is actually +2.6dB over 185nWb/m, but that's a whole other can of worms!). Film still stayed at 185nWb/m. Then came the newer tape formulations (Scotch 996, Ampex 499), and it settled at (most of the time) 355nWb/m or so-called "+6dB over 185nWb/m" (which is actually +5.5dB over 185Wb/m).
There is your largely historical knowledge for the day from somebody who aligned way too many tape machines!
Thank you for your input. I have a document somewhere in my chaotic library that says the Ampex standard was measured at 700 Hz, so the level on tape at 1 kHz was around 180 nWb/m. But what's a quarter of a decibel between friends? DM
@@AudioMasterclass Yep, that's the other can of worms. Fun fact, Magnetic Reference Laboratories (MRL) was founded by guys from Ampex.
I’m new to this channel. Looks like Paul is back from the “dead”!
Sticking with VU meters might have helped prevent the digital era loudness war!
These kids have all discovered hard limiters, a V.U. meter would just sit at '0' dBs and not budge.
There's no accounting for bad taste.
Bill P.
@@RocknRollkat Hovering at 0VU is not too bad - that's an average. Post 2000s pop and hip-hop hover at the equivalent of +6-12VU! Remember, 0dBfs digital peak is considered equivalent to +18VU in most engineering circles.
@@Zickcermacity In my world, '0' dBs is just that, ZERO dBs.
I never bought into that '-18dB' nonsense.
I build my own V.U.meter plugins, and 0 dBs is just as it was in 1961, '0' dBs.
Old habits die hard, if at all.
When I play down these modern tracks, they all sit at 0 dBs on my system, even though the youngsters think they're 'overdriving' by +18 dBs., just as you point out.
Bill P.
Since the day I started taking sound staging seriously, everything started sounding magical. All plugins worked as i expected.. Bliss. Before that, I was dumb to treat digital as analog (Where I started), warming the sound as close to 0dBFS without clipping as possible. I just didn't get it. I did that for about 20 years. What a shame. I started working on bad converters like E-mu cards and "Soundblasters" in 1996-97. I never had the opportunity to work with DigiDesign Protools, or ADAT, or DAT! In the 90s, for me, it was all 1/4'' Tascam 32s, Portastudios, and such. I used to warm the tape. The transition to digital was extremely painful for me (still is). I long to go back to analog, but seeing tape machines literally disposed of, and now worth thousands, tens of thousands aches me. Plus maintenance. Nope. I'm so glad I learend soundstaging. Best of both worlds.
I saw myself in you comment. I did the same, but not for so much time. And when I realized about the digital realm gain stage, it changed everything. Also I have used soundblaster from 1998 until early 2000, when I got an E-MU card.
Thank you for your insight.
Love your content and the humour that goes along with it! Especially liked the F1 reference in this one 🙂
The physical size is also part of the VU meter spec. The little ones on Revox B77s and other gear are non-standard.
The level that a tape machine is calibrated at depends on the tape being used. It used to be 185nWB/m2, but as tape improved it was raised and the meters were used to calibrate to the test tape at a different VU level to compensate. The meters were calibrated to a test tape being played and then the record level was adjusted to read 0VU with a line reference level. This is where +4dBu (pro) and -10dBV (domestic) come from which many people believe is the signal level, but the signal can easily be 10dB above this. VU meters on mixers were calibrated to match the recorder(s) even though they had over 20dB headroom.
Thank you for your input. Yes I do remember 185, but there was also 200. My memory fails me on the details, and then of course in jolly old Europe we had three hundred and something as well. And then Ampex invented 456 and we could push levels higher. Once again it's my memory but I seem to remember some studios would recalibrate for this while others would just know that they could get an extra 4 dB or so. DM
@@AudioMasterclass There was what a tape manufacturer recommended for their tape type, what the producer "preferred" and what reference tape you happened to have. This involved doing a log calculation to determine the dB difference on the VU. In practice there were 5 common flux densities in common use giving 25 combinations to set the VUs to. If you were lucky there was a little chart printed on the tape box.
A commercial studio would have to recalibrate their multitracks to the tones tape a client brought in if the session was started in another studio, but 2T master machines would only need recalibrating if the tape type was changed as that tended to use a new tape each mixdown.
The most important thing now is to match analogue clipping to digital clipping and the audio interface maximum levels need to be known. A lot of interfaces can take over 22dBu, but some can't. There is no need to observe SMPTE/EBU recommended 0VU levels if you are recording electronic sources that can't output more than +19dBu. When you are recording you can choose whatever headroom that is appropriate to maximise snr, when you are transferring media you should provide the levels required. The clue is in "SMPTE/EBU"--broadcasters don't want to have to change their levels for every track.
The most difficult thing now is finding a source of +4dBu @ 1kHz to calibrate your meter levels. A computer is not a good source as you can't calibrate the interface. Your 0dBFS is not necessarily the same as anyone else's.
@@hintoninstruments2369 Thank you for your input. You're jogging my memory somewhat and a quick look at MRL's literature reminds me that they offered IEC calibration tapes in 200 nWb/m and 320 nWb/m versions, as well as 250 and 355 which I don't remember at all. 185 nWb/m I seem to remember having some connection with 'Ampex level' and also Dolby level was 185 nWb/m. It all seemed to make sense at the time but I think we are better off now with fewer things to worry about. Especially tapes that arrived encoded with Dolby but no tone. DM
@@hintoninstruments2369 Simple. If your audio interface is eg. +20dBu full scale then +4dBu is at -16dBFS.
@@zbyszekolko3998 Audio interfaces are not calibrated, they are just nominal +/- a few dB.
I'm really glad that you mentioned the Klangham virtual VU meter. When I was using Studio One rather exclusively, that one is good too. But lately, I've really been getting into Live and though I think there is a way (I can't figure it out though) to use that VU in other hosts, the Klangham looked great and was cheap. So now almost every channel get the Klangham and it's really nice. (I like the "neon" skin best ;) )
Same same here!
@@Ramt33n I also love the neon skin!!
Klanghelm, as in helmet ;)
@@KariKauree Meaning "sound helmet"?
@@miquelmarti6537 Yes
This was charming, wonderful and educational. Thanks!
Great vid! Others simply add, over time and from experience, what sounds good in their daw of choice. The VU is simply a, as you suggested, a slower signal device. Instead of fiddling with lowering or raising the calibration, I simply just add , or subtract to what I see on VU based on what sounds good and take note of the levels for future reference.
I use the simple bar graph on the channel as references as you suggest because it is faster. The parameters I “see” are based on experience from using my daw of choice, and a daw, (which is assumed to be known, but wasn’t mentioned ?) as we know, has much more headroom then analog. Also, I don’t know about the other meters you suggest, but I use the TB pro audio which also has a peak meter. Going back and forth between the VU and peak in one meter is super handy, and, as you said, it’s free!
Zero dBm was originally 1mw across 600 ohms or .775v which was defined by Bell Telephone. A typical VU meter was calibrated for zero at Line Level which was equal to +4 dBm or 1.23v across 600 ohms. VU [Volume Units] meter was calibrated for optimum display of RMS levels with the ballistics of the meter defined and calibrated for broadcast use. I still like to use VU meters across my stereo buss to gage my mix density. I'm old school, guilty as charged.
BTW: Ampex 456 standard bias reference level was 250 nW/m [nano Webbers per meter] with "Elevated" bias being 370 nW/m typically used for 30 IPS operation for Ampex 456. The higher fidelity of 30 IPS operation was better high frequency response and lower noise at the loss of a half octave of low frequency response. The 370 nW/m standard was pretty common in studios by the late 80's. 250 nW/m was used for 15 IPS in broadcast. 185 nW/m was the Ampex "original" standard for older tape formulations and 7.5 IPS. I really don't miss tape, I was the guy that had to maintain the tape machines in both broadcast and multitrack studios. And no, I don't think tape sounds better, it's a sound quality that we're used to.
Early in my broadcast engineering career I was called into the Air studio by a DJ due to a "clicking sound" in his headphones when he had the microphone on-air. I quickly determined that he was running the mic so hot the RCA console VU meters were banging hard against the end stop making a loud click. Not so good for analog meters and in fact I noticed that the pointers were bent from repeated abuse. While the station processing prevented overmodulation of the transmitter, I found that the DJ actually liked the sound of the mic preamps being over driven. "Sounds more intense." he remarked. In those days a limiter for the mic channel would have been expensive and it would have involved a major rewiring of the console. No insert patch points on broadcast consoles. It was a Album Oriented Rock station.
I've been a professional broadcast and studio engineering since the mid '70's. I currently run a live capture audio/video service and mixing/mastering/editing services.
Another great video. Thank you! ✨
It would also be great if you could tell us a bit more on how and why to use VU in a daw!
I'll have more to say on VU coming up soon(ish). DM
Unfortunately, no. The Laudnes War era was already in place with Vinyl, especially in the Dance world. But cutting to vinyl has immediate consequences if something is wrong: the stylus can't follow the groove.
@@jasoncruizer great explanation and so true! And "use your ears!" would be another admonition we can give to the digital generation.
My career began firmly in the days of the VU meter. VUs were read musically and were often accompanied by a single-level peak indicator. Between that setup and just hearing the playback, we all came to know the dynamic performance of instruments we recorded. Would it have been easier with a peak reading meter?
Of course it would!, and I soon learned to love the PPM standard meters that were so foreign to American engineers. Most Neve and SSL consoles had at least a couple of them if not all. It just took new interpretations to know how hot to track instruments with very high crest factors. This also revealed the source of the ‘magic’ tape yielded on every instrument. It turned out we were using tape’s complex frequency dependent compression to get our drum sounds.
It also turned out once making the change to digital recording in the 80s that we no longer knew how to get that sound which came almost automatically to us not so long before. In my opinion, this is the source of most of the discontent over digital recording at the time, and understandably so. I always tracked toms and cymbals together, noting that it sounded way better than separately. We all know now why that was and it is hellishly difficult to reproduce that sound. Tape compresses and limits in a very complicated way, fiendishly difficult to emulate.
The VU, in its own quirky way, was what told us when we were ‘there.’
Regarding the numbers... I loved the Ampex 456 that allowed +6bB above the standard 250nW or 320nW. And we could choose the 499, +9bB from 250nW or 520nW. That helped a lot with the analogue tape enemy, the NOISE... I personally was for the 456. I never liked the crunchy high end of the 499. And as soon I could get rid of the tape completely (in 1994, I sold my beloved Otari MTR90), I did.
In the digital age's infancy, Sony set their machines to -21dBFS as 0vu, considering that a highly dynamic percussion could have up to 26dB of peak-to-average difference. Soon that was considered too much in the 16bits digital world, and the new common point was -16dBFS for 0vu. But pioneers of standardization pushed for a standard -14dB as 0vu. That was good for a mixed master but not a valid DAW reference since it required too careful gain staging to avoid mistakes. So a good compromise was -18dBFS, and nearly all the DAWs complied to that. I analysed many of the best CD masters of the '90s and nearly all of them had a 0vu at -12dBFS. That was before the loudness war become tragic. I still head to that while mixing and then push to a CD "standard" -9dBFS when delivering listening passes. That helps reducing the request for revisions quite a lot. Still, I deliver a -12dBFS master to the mastering engineer, when I don't do the mastering myself (That is a budget matter, since I prefer to have a new pair of ears to master my mixes)
Huh... I didn't know any of this, and found that a typical "normalized" mix would be hard in the red at nominal -18dBFS. That being rather unhelpful, I settled on -12dBFS because it's enough margin that, if my mix is averaging around 0dB, it should have decent dynamic range without clipping, and without being so low that I run out of headphone amp gain on a laptop or phone when playing it back.
I had no idea what fundamental rule of the ancients I was violating by deviating from the default (which I assumed was there for a reason), but it worked for me, so I risked my audio club reputation on it anyway.
Fabulous explanations. Thank you from an old tape devotee.
Beautifull made video! Congrats and thank you!
I can't wait to hear your opinion on gain staging since you said that inside the DAW you should not go over 0dBFS'. It's necessary or not on today's workflow inside a DAW?
Why I'm asking, because this subject continues to spark debates.
From plugin developers, where some of them are stating in their user manuals that the signal entering the plugin should be -18dBFS (0 VU), to music producers who are stating that they don't care about what's going in, it matters not to go out above 0dBFS on individual tracks or buses.
Fantastic video, giving a good understanding of what a VU is and what it can do. Well done! I studied audio engineering in the 90ies so tape recording was almost over, I started out using PT HD on a large console. Using a lot of analogue gear like preamps, compressors, eq, multi FXs, Delays....but I never recorded analogue. Nevertheless I had to read VU meters all the time on that gear. And who don't like a jumping needle with a cool light on it???
With digital processing I turned to RME and used the K metering system a long time, and still use it happily. The readout of e.g. K-12 is very useful for me.
BUT I will put the old PC to the trash, in a few days...(*crying tears*) and leave for my SSL setup. 🙂 That means I go for a VU meter again.
BTW It's a good use to compress with a VU meter showing the gain reduction, too ;-)
is it possible to achieve 0VU and also -14lufs same time?
Thanks Paul.
This guy is brilliant! Love him!
So do I.
The techs at our studio when aligning a sony digital with our analog consoles would have an oscillator that output a sine wave at 0 db rms not peak and the machine was aligned to -18 or -20 (engineer preference) and those meters in the machine were peak and the outputs coming back to the line in vu meters read 0 vu. As far as today is concerned I would think the whole “vu thing 0db rms thing” matters only if your plugin really models analog gear and its characteristics and idiosyncrasies. Other than that yeah maybe useless.
Thanks for using the B77 image from my insta reel. 😉
Hi thank you. I believe I credited this correctly in the description but if anything needs changing please let me know. DM
AWESOME.... thanx for sharring your knowledge
You're welcome. DM
When are we getting a Q&A with Betty? What does she think of the vinyl revival?
Betty is very knowledgeable AND efficient
Isn’t it in the AES handbook? (-18dBFS=0dB VU). Great video. Besides the awesome knowledge, thumbs up for the excellent video quality.
I'll see if I can find that reference. Regarding the video quality, that I think is down to the camera (Sony A6600) and the lights. I just sit there. DM
@@AudioMasterclass I thought it’s referenced by the AES, but I’m not sure. The Sony A6600 is an amazing camera. Oh btw, I’ve subscribed to your channel.
So I got the Klanghelm meter after watching this video (I always use mvmeter2). I put all the settings the same on both and the Klanghelm is off by 0.2db. Whats the deal?
I always wanted to learn about VU meters from Sir Paul McCartney, thank you for making my dream come true.
In Penny Lane the studio meters show VU
of every signal that the tape will ever know
compatibility can come and go
at 4 dBU
Wouldn't a VU metre just be used on the master output as opposed the individual tracks?
Ultimately I don't know what your point is. In the description you list 2 questions: Does that make them useless? Or can the VU meter really help you to improve your recordings and mixes? But I didn’t hear you directly address them in the video. It was information about VUs but with no real final thoughts conclusion.
No. Maybe. DM
My final conclusion was that in digital recording it is vital not to exceed 0dBfs. When recording or bouncing we need peak meters with fast ballistics to see absolute peak levels because VU meters cannot do this due to the slow 300 ms ballistics. What VU meters can do is give you a visual indication of the loudness of a signal - the subjective loudness. This is a useful link between sight and sound. While our ears should be the ultimate reference point, what you see can be a very useful reinforcement. When using the DAW, to reap the benefits of both VU metering and peak metering, you can calibrate your VU meter plug-in so that the red light indicates clipping at a level lower than 0 dBfs. Now you can rely on your VU meters for subjective loudness, while at the same time you know that when the clipping indicator in the VU meter hits red you are still not hitting full-scale. This way you can reap the benefits of subjective loudness and protect your digital headroom.
Thanks! That makes good sense.
Well ,I've learned something - old school knowledge is the best - cheers! 👍👍👍
VU meters are really good for alignment. They sit still really well and very small changes can be made easily.
2:35 Why does too much level in a radio broadcast get the station shut down?
Excellent, very interesting. Thank you
great video. I like to calibrate my VU meters using a reference track. then can also split the frequencies to have total control on what i'm monitoring. then can make the adjust and keep control based on what know that is good.
The VU became popular to enjoy 80's discobeat music ;)
Great info, thanks much. I use those Klanghelm Vu meters in my DAW on every track, I only have 4 tracks now. It's my Livestream project.
Dad had one in his Corolla -69 50 years ago. Wondering why not a RPM meter?
One last thing. Many people that own the AX plugin from Waves already have a nice VU meter, just put the "process" to 0 and it's a very nice VU meter with almost perfect ballistics.
Very pleased to hear that the 0dBU = -18dBfs is not clearly defined on the internet, as I got tied up in all this a few months ago, and unsure which system I should be using. However, having sorted that, I now find I'm no nearer understanding all this stuff! I watched the middle part of the video several times, inc half-speed, partially because the examples precede the numbers. That the meter under-reads the perceived volume is not new to me. But what I don't get is that as the signal drops the number displayed becomes a smaller negative value, not larger - eg I was expecting a drop of 6dB to show as a value of -24dBfs...?
Exactly the same here. It was literally impossible to find that simple answer and this dude in the video laid out plainly.
very well done - quite interesting
VU still classic and important for the mixed. but I used for playback and visualization to digital music playback. I love look and feel
A mixing desk I learned on had a VU hold function so it would hold it peak so you hot a better idea of where your levels were at.
Cant remember the brand of the desk though
I also use the this VU…but for me and for the style I’m
Producing I only worry about gain staging the post processed Kick which is the hardest hitting element of each track, this way I get consistent mixes and can use hardware emulations care free, never clipping in digital ones as well…you can also get away with -12 and don’t clip the mixbuss..thx for the vid❤
Did you know that Bit rate on audio testing tone has a impact on stability of the test? What BIt rate did uou use and what bpm ?
Why was the analogue PPM not adopted, as it was throughout the UK Broadcast TV industry.
It provides an absolute reference for recording and transmission.
One of the eternal mysteries of audio.
Right on. Thanks for sharing.
VU Mewters -- what we used when we had nothing better. Today, we have better.
But VU meters are like milled metal faceplates and solid metal knobs, audiophiles love eye candy. You can sell a 2000 dollar amplifier for 6995 if you add big blue VU meters.
Ask McIntosh...
Interesting, I have a meter on my PC's audio out, (a physical one, no emulation) I kind of thought of it as a VU meter (it has a VU type scale) I zeroed it to your meter to see how it compares - no comparison, yours is way faster!
I hooked it up in an attempt to balance the various audio track used for a church service, with very limited success.
All your early samples were lucky to hit -4, however the extra, 'could get blocked' track went to +1!
What was most surprising was an ad that popped up mid video, it held the needle to an almost constant 0 to +1, any less movement would be your test tone. Now if all my church hymns had that dynamic range, aligning them would be so much easier - although there would be a great pile of rumblings from the parishioners.
In my chain is also a Behringer desk, it's bargraph meter had your 0dB as -10, and all your sample tracks tickling the -4 db LED, so obviously something is going on between your DAW and what's popping out of RUclips into the USB input on my Behringer DX2000USB mixer.
Yes real meters are much slower than that digital created image
VU meters are a useful gauge in getting pleasing levels without clipping or unwanted distortion.
Hello.
This -18 dB 'standard' is ridiculous. I build my own analog V.U. meter plugins and I subscribe to 0 V.U. being exactly that.
As you well know, there is no 'soft clipping' in the digital domain. Therefore my overload LED comes on at 0 dBs.
Period.
If I see that LED blink, I crashed.
Why record at -18 dBs and give up 3 bits of data and settle for 78 dBs of dynamic range ?
No need to remind me that I'm a reactionary hardass who still records like it's 1961.
I could go on for days about how these kids think that the -18 dB thing is for the benefit of 'soft clipping' plugins, etc.
All I know is that if we went 'into the red' in the old days, there were 'consequences'....
Once again, a most enjoyable presentation, thank you !
Bill P.
I absolutely agree but with the one exception that -18 dBFS, when quoted, is usually meant to be a 'round about' level to aim for, not peak. But it does seem that it's widely regarded as peak which, as you say, wastes 3 bits. Coming from analogue myself, waste is just plain wrong. Shame we can't donate those unused bits in some way. DM
@@AudioMasterclass All of those unused bits are following me into old age, I'm afraid !
B.P..
I Use One VU Meter on my Master channel.
Set all channels to "0.db"
No Plugins on any channel.
Mute all but one channel at a time.
slowly use the gain (not volume fader) and play the Instrument/vocal etc that's solo'd, until the meter needle hits "0.0" or close to it and stays that way.
Do ^ this for every channel until finished. then go into Mixing (adding Compression, eq, reverb, delay, whathaveyou. Do NOTHING on the main master bus (yet)
Once you've Mixed to your liking, then you can adjust fader volume to tracks that are clipping (or again, to your liking/satisfaction)
*I Like to set my faders to where none of the tracks Go passed the green.
Then, Move on to Finalizing
*if it's for an Instrumental : Do "Buss compression/EQ,Loudness,Limiting etc.etc.etc" whatever you can do to keep your track sounding good even at the loudest volumes on All Equipment (Monitors, Headphones, consumer speakers, car)
@dalesbadbug can u explain what u mean on the last part where u stated if it’s for an instrumental
LUFS are roughtly based on those old VUmeters. Before having digital audio with humongous headroom, they were absolutely manadatory. Nowadays you just need them in the A/D stage, as 64bit DAWs have plenty of headroom..... althought it's always a good practice just to ensure you are not overclipping your plugins (wich is teoricaly not impossible).
Great vid thanks - learned a lot
Very well made and very interesting!! I love it when you bring back magnetic field intensity in Webber/Sq m which brought me back to my electrical engineering studies many years ago.
I dare say that 200 micro Webber/Sq m = 2 tesla
For obvious reasons Tesla became much more popular lately😂
My memory tells me that it's nanowebers per metre, rather than square meter, but I'd have to look back at my old textbooks to be sure. DM
@@AudioMasterclass it skipped me, now I see it's nano and not micro so we are looking at 200 micro tesla
But who cares on the other hand?
It's in alot off manuals to plugins. The signal hitting -18dbfs when going into most plugins is idea. Especially for the plugins simulating analog gear. That's the only place I've actually.seen it written🙂👍
VU had their place in the analog world of audio! /ex radio presenter/audio engineer
Some mixers did only use VU meters to mix their projects on analog mixconsoles. Source: Sunset Sound Studios, LA, a minority of them of course. Btw, some should use more a VU instead PPM meters, because of making their mixes too loud.
Poor Checo - really wish he could get a bit closer to Max just so we could have a bit of competition. Tempted to get myself one of those lovely outboard Crookwood VUs now.
Why i the visual indication changes while I insert VU in the track vs The Master Bus. Eg; Solo Kick shows 0VU
But then the Same solo kick in Master Bus VU shows more or else numbers.
Pan law probably. If you pan a track centre, the level in the left and right meters will be 3 to 6 dB lower than in the channel. DM
Lol. Had me chuckling straight out of the box. Paradise Lost.
Asked ChatGPT... something quite interesting regarding the connection:
Q) where does 0VU = -18dbfs come from?
A) The relationship between 0VU and -18dBFS (decibels relative to full scale) comes from the calibration standard for analog audio equipment, which was later adapted for digital audio.
In analog audio equipment, 0VU (Volume Unit) is the reference level for audio signals. It represents the level at which the equipment is operating at its optimal performance, and is typically set to correspond to a certain voltage level in the equipment's circuitry. For example, in the United States, the standard reference level for 0VU is +4 dBu, which corresponds to a voltage of 1.23 volts.
When digital audio was introduced, it became necessary to establish a reference level for digital signals that would be compatible with the existing analog equipment. The standard that was adopted was -18dBFS, which is equivalent to 0dBu in the analog domain. This level was chosen because it corresponds to the highest level that can be represented by a 16-bit digital signal, which was the standard for many years.
So, in summary, 0VU corresponds to a certain voltage level in the analog domain, while -18dBFS corresponds to the highest level that can be represented by a 16-bit digital signal, which was the standard for many years. The two levels are related through the calibration standard for analog audio equipment.
Yes this is very interesting. Half of the paragraphs are correct. DM
As usual ChatGPT proclaims a mix of fact and word-salad fantasy as totally authoritative. A 16 bit digital signal without dithering can represent from 0 to -96 dB FS, not merely 18 dB. The highest level that can be represented by a 16 bit linear digital word is 0 dB Full Scale by definition.
Yeah but the question was where does 0vu Vs -18dbfs originate from. 16bit audio for sure has 96db of range, and can see now where chatgpt mangled the response. Good call
@@mattfreshalabone5062 ChatGPT must have had some training material that discussed 0 dB and also 18 dB, some that discussed 0 dB and also 16 bit audio, and some that discussed 0 dB and metering. Its copy and paste assembly mixed and matched and maybe paraphrased fragments that are similar in the word match analysis tree but refer to different concepts. Another example of how large model "AI" is not actually intelligent at all, a useful generator of fresh combinations but an unreliable guide to the truth.
Top notch content thank you
You're welcome.
Being a Broadcast Audio Engineer educated in Europe but working in the US, it took me about 30 seconds to find this..."that the European Broadcasting Union (EBU) Technical Recommendation R68-2000 and the Society for Motion Picture & Television Engineer (SMPTE) RP 155 - 2004 operating practices are based on two different audio reference levels, namely -18 dBFS1 and -20 dBFS respectively"
-RECOMMENDATION ITU-R BS.1726-Signal level of digital audio accompanying television in international programme exchange -
That translates to +4dBu (or whatever other analog reference level is being used with 0dBu being more common now) being the equivalent of those digital audio reference levels depending on where you work, and 18 or 20 dB of "headroom" respectively when it comes to broadcast audio. This assumes that your analog I/O has a maximum level of equal or greater than +22 or +24 dBu ( or +18 or +20 dBu if 0VU equals 0dBu)
In music mixing there aren't any of those standards, only streaming platform loudness standards measured in LUFS, LKFS or some proprietary standard. If you work in those areas it makes perfect sense to set your digital reference level to -14 or -12 dBFS, resulting in louder mixes deflecting properly on your VU while having less "headroom". A VU set to -14 dBFS tracks nicely with a mix compliant with streaming loudness standards ( -14 to -16 LUKS/LKFS)
Yes R68-2000 seems to be the one thank you. It doesn't mention VU but I guess that it's implied. DM
Defo this. Post audio people knew this. And that you had to goose your mix 2db if outputting to Pal from NTFS to compensate. Most indie plugin developers are Pal European background so they defaulted to -18. For the most part. Many tape emulation plugins use different, even for developers using -18 like Waves.
The question that remains (i hope still when the video is over) is: what V.U. means? Thanks!
Volume Units. I'll be making another video on this topic in due course.
Excellent, thanks!
it (digital 0 dbFs) was -12 db = 0 in 2008 when I was in college for audio engineering.
-18 dBFS now. Must be shrinkflation.
What mic are you using for the videos? 👀
Usually Sennheiser MKH 416. Sometimes AKG C414 EB but if I use that you'll see it in shot.
Great video, how did you do that girl AI please?
Betty would tell you herself, but she doesn't know. DM
The VU meters on my Philips N4522 reel to reel (semi-pro) read noticeably higher on replay than they did on recording the same music on the tape. This does not seem to matter much on my usual new tape of RTM LPR35 which is very tolerant of over driving but I also have a lot of Ampex 406/7 tape which is much less tolerant. The machine has just been serviced with attendant elimination of various faults and improved sound quality, by TS Professional Audio in Burgess Hill, West Sussex.
You can correct this by inputting a 1khz tone at 0db Peak and recording, then monitor the tape and using the two presets labelled Rec Current located on the rear panel, adjust until source & tape read the same. Useful if you use the same tape stock all the time. I use SM468/911 on my N4520/22's.
Our Studer 2" 24-track machines were at 240 nW/m back in the day, using Ampex 456 tapes, Zomba company policy for in-house studios
I'm presuming for +4 dBu / 0 VU? I'm always pleased to hear actual use cases. DM
@@AudioMasterclass yes, +4dBu/0VU. This was in the '80s and '90s, for some context, and clients ranged from full orchestras to rock, pop, R'n'B and hiphop artists.
SPOT ON!
I used to use them in the old days of analog. And their pretty cool….fun to ride them on the edge…..
We digitize old tapes, audio cassettes... and see these VU meters of these devices every day. But I'm glad I don't have to use any of these pointer instruments in my DAW.
Also, since you brought it up: origins of -20dBFS or -18dBFS. Sony went with -20dBFS = +4dBu, Matsushita (TAD, Pioneer, Panasonic) went with -18dBFS=+4dBu. I believe SMPTE codified -20 and EBU codified -18? You'd think they could have fought this out in Japan over 2dB, but nobody did.
Thank you for your input. Yes, the manual for the Sony 1630 gives -20 dBFS for +4 dBu. As for minus 18 - I'm still searching for the document that specifies this. DM
@@AudioMasterclass Dig through Matsushita Electric, now called Panasonic Industries.
@@AudioMasterclass Dig through Matsushita Electric, now called the Panasonic Company. I would suspect the Sony 1630 would be the origin story of -20dB.
Good stuff melody man.
Great discussion
Nice expo! I use it a lot set to RMS as it's very close to LUFS for mastering - altogether a great Klanghelm plugin - don't think most people would need the Deluxe version though
So, volume units are to audiologists as scale rules are to draftsmen? Have I followed well?
thanks for the great info!
You're welcome. DM
Nice, I'm sick with the mentality of sticking to a number just because. The examples and the history behind the VU is great. Personally I gain stage with a bit of guitar chain mentality, reduced on the saturation level and more precise. Like when the instrument hits a pedal, that another one .... all that the preamp and then to the power amp... In that occasion you make your sound by gain staging between different characteristic devises wit ''color'' in mind.This happens with any non linear device that we find also in our world, from mic to preamp, to every non linear plugin in your chain even the first one etc. For example I use sometimes a Pultec plugin as the first non linear plugin in my master bus (after a stock reaeq for gain staging without moving all the faders). in this occasion I push the levels by how much I want to''saturate'' the specific mix I work .I still use visual indication thought cause psychoacoustics is a b;[ch
What point if cont use your volume
you have 3 different meters displayed on the screen at 4min 12 secs into your video. why is the 3dB point in different places above or below centre scale on these meters?
I'm not understanding this. If the scale matches the input level everything's OK.