this is how a mixer should be

[electronic115]

This thread reminds me of this 'pro' who's convinced that you should always leave all your faders at 0 dB while mixing:

why don't you show your music? we want to hear how good it sounds

[Reefius]

why don't you show your music? we want to hear how good it sounds

I'm not the pro here, you are. So let's hear some of your pro mixes

[electronic115]

I'm not the pro here, you are. So let's hear some of your pro mixes

I'm not a pro, but I put mine after you
let's see which one sounds better

[antic604]

For example try to set up a compressor properly to a weak signal

In that case it's always better to fix the problem at the source. Don't try to make a bad source sound good, it is a waste of time.

Also, many 'analog modelled' plugins have a sweetspots at -12 to -18dB, so it's important to target that range to get the most out of them

That's why these kind of plugins usually have an input gain knob.

This thread reminds me of this 'pro' who's convinced that you should always leave all your faders at 0 dB while mixing:

Perhaps I misunderstood you, i.e. that you basically said gain staging doesn't matter anymore in times of digital plugins and practically infinite headroom.

You're right, of course.

[kelldammit]

Perhaps I misunderstood you, i.e. that you basically said gain staging doesn't matter anymore in times of digital plugins and practically infinite headroom.

You're right, of course.

Unless you're a hybrid type, inserting outboard analog processing in that chain somewhere. Then, it would matter a bit more.

A lot of that stuff is already do-able in most mixers, i'd agree. i rarely end up using input trim, because prior to mixing, any pitch correction or other editing gets done, and i just use clip gain to get the desired level prior to mixer input (or with a virtual instrument, its output knob). To meter that, i use the mixer's peak meters in pre-fader mode. That said, I certainly don't object to a trim being there.

For plugins, if i insert a compressor (or whatever other effect) and get it set up the way i like, i dial back it's output level till the apparent level is the same as that effect's inbound (unprocessed) signal. It makes for easier a/b comparisons, and you're already sending your desired level to the next plug, outboard, or the fader section.
So that second pre-fader knob is redundant, unless you only ever use 1 insert per channel and just refuse to use its output level knob (assuming it has one).

I mostly track mono, but for the occasional stereo stuff, i generally prefer dual pan to balance, for a little better width and placement control (like, say, 50% width, but skewed to the left a bit) without having to use a width plugin. I know some daws let you choose between dual pan and balance controls for panning (reaper being among them).

I'm no pro, but those are just some preferences or other things i've found to work well for me. I don't need an overhauled mixer to easily accomplish them, but best of luck to the OP!

cheers!

[kavin2134]

Sorry, mistake

[kavin2134]

What are you talking about? I never said I have any issue with gain at the top of the channel - that's very useful. I'm talking about the one that's before the fader.

ok let me explain,
the second meter is to make sure that the input and output of the effects are the same

when you add effects, they add decibels, those two meters are for gain stage

I can put two meters, but it is not the same as seeing it in the mixer, and not having to open meter plugin

Don't different effects plugins add different volume gains, so isn't it better to go into each effect and make sure they're gain staged rather than turning down after the whole fx chain?


Just realised, already been mentioned. Ignore and carry on

[bmanic]

gain staging has been done since the dawn of time without extra gain knobs and such.
learning gain staging is far more important than reinvented tech

by all means do as the pros do, but most of them (im assuming all really but have no proof) use mixers with one gain knob per channel and one meter?

most (again it's all, but i have no evidence to back it up beyond my actual experience) mixers i used in the studios i worked in, were all set up this way too.

The problem in today's digital environment is that there isn't a well established "standard" for optimum gain. Thus different analogue modeled plugins work with different optimum ranges. Where one plugin may expect a -18dB RMS level, another may expect a -6dB RMS signal.. or even go past 0dBFS internally and thus expect high signal levels. They then calibrate their internal noise levels to correspond to these signals (most plugins allow you to get rid of the emulated noise though, thankfully).

Also, if you would have an input gain trim/out trim knob for each plugin separately, you could very much abuse these plugins and get some potentially interesting results by going outside the norms. You can of course already do that but it requires two additional plugins per instance you want to control separately. Thus it would be handy to have this built in within the plugin framework or DAW.

[bmanic]

That's why these kind of plugins usually have an input gain knob.

If every singly analogue modeled plugin truly had one, and one with enough range, and one that wasn't part of the analogue model (aka a real floating point digital input+output trim) then this would be a complete non-issue. Unfortunately it's not the case at all.

[vurt]

gain staging has been done since the dawn of time without extra gain knobs and such.
learning gain staging is far more important than reinvented tech

by all means do as the pros do, but most of them (im assuming all really but have no proof) use mixers with one gain knob per channel and one meter?

most (again it's all, but i have no evidence to back it up beyond my actual experience) mixers i used in the studios i worked in, were all set up this way too.

The problem in today's digital environment is that there isn't a well established "standard" for optimum gain. Thus different analogue modeled plugins work with different optimum ranges. Where one plugin may expect a -18dB RMS level, another may expect a -6dB RMS signal.. or even go past 0dBFS internally and thus expect high signal levels. They then calibrate their internal noise levels to correspond to these signals (most plugins allow you to get rid of the emulated noise though, thankfully).

Also, if you would have an input gain trim/out trim knob for each plugin separately, you could very much abuse these plugins and get some potentially interesting results by going outside the norms. You can of course already do that but it requires two additional plugins per instance you want to control separately. Thus it would be handy to have this built in within the plugin framework or DAW.

in the plugins id understand, but a gain knob at the end of the chain won't help.
let's say effect 1 requires 3db trim on the pot.
then effect 2 requires a 3db gain.
how will that effect the 1st effect?

[bmanic]

..the fook is a "gaj"? You surfing the stratosphere again vurt?

EDIT: ah.. you hit reply to fast eh? Still, the question stands.

[bmanic]

in the plugins id understand, but a gain knob at the end of the chain won't help.
let's say effect 1 requires 3db trim on the pot.
then effect 2 requires a 3db gain.
how will that effect the 1st effect?

I always thought we were discussing a gain knob at the start of the chain! Obviously a gain at the end makes no sense.

[vurt]

..the fook is a "gaj"? You surfing the stratosphere again vurt?

EDIT: ah.. you hit reply to fast eh? Still, the question stands.

on my phone, screen jumps around while im typing grrr!

[vurt]

and yes im also high

[rod_zero]

In every DAW there is an utility effect to help with this, place it wherever in the chain you need it.

In Live there are actually meters between effects in the device view, they are not peak AFAIK, average it seems.