IK Multimedia TR6 Metering

[KIMCHRISTOPHER]

Hi!
I just updated to the TRacks 6 package. I thought the metering device would be fixed, but it keeps the same behavior as TRacks 5.

The VU meter with the reference at -18dBFS should conventionally mark 0.

However, it marks something like -4dB.

In order for the VU to show 0dB, I need to adjust the reference to -22dBFS. This absolutely turns it into a useless VU.

Please could someone explain to me if this is a bug or if I am not using the metering correctly?

[ozonepaul]

It's not a bug, it's gear/region specific in the "hardware/console world". It's pretty much a choice of the equipment manufacturer, as far as I know it has never been standardized. So VU meter reference at -18dBFS does not always mark/read 0dB in real gear. + If I'm correct, the reference level -18 dBFS at 0 VU is calibrated with a 1 kHz sine wave, it's not done with pink or white noise or any filtered noise etc.

E.g. read this SoundOnSound discussion:
https://www.soundonsound.com/forum/view ... hp?t=88380

"The 0VU level on the VU meter should always equate to whatever the audio system alignment level is deemed to be. In the analogue world that's usually either 0dBu (0.775Vrms) or +4dBu (1.228Vrms) in professional gear, or -10dBV (0.316Vrms) in semi-pro gear. In the digital world it's normally either -18dBFS in Europe, or -20dBFS in America."

+ This article:
https://www.soundonsound.com/sound-advi ... ery-useful

Contrary to the conclusion of the above article ("VU meters are much easier and less stressful than focusing on a loudness meter") my take on this subject is this: what's the benefit of using VU meters in the digital realm? It's an old analogue non standardized metering. In the digital domain there are much better (meaning more informative) tools. So I'm much more used to working with some sort of a loudness meter (e.g Sonible's true:level and true:balance is great as is the Youlean LoudnessMeter, ADPTR's Metric AB, Izotope's Insight, Melda's MMultiAnalyzer or even it's free MLoudnessAnalyzer). I would even rather pick a "Dorrough" type (like the Waves Dorrough or PA's free bx_meter) to work with than a VU meter.
But that's just me, I'm sure there are great engineers using digital VU meters either because they come from analogue gear and they're used to it, or there are some workflow/ ease of use/ comfort etc. benefits I never noticed.

[Teksonik]

On the subject of metering and not wanting to start another thread but am I missing something or are the metering read out options far less in the TRacks 6 "rack" plugin than in the TR 5 "Suite" plugin?

The Metering plugin itself is not available in either one (odd choice) but at least in the TR 5 Suite plugin it shows far more read outs than just In and Out.

Seems to me that TR 6 is a step backwards in that regard unless I'm missing something......

[KIMCHRISTOPHER]

It's not a bug, it's gear/region specific in the "hardware/console world". It's pretty much a choice of the equipment manufacturer, as far as I know it has never been standardized. So VU meter reference at -18dBFS does not always mark/read 0dB in real gear. + If I'm correct, the reference level -18 dBFS at 0 VU is calibrated with a 1 kHz sine wave, it's not done with pink or white noise or any filtered noise etc.

E.g. read this SoundOnSound discussion:
https://www.soundonsound.com/forum/view ... hp?t=88380

"The 0VU level on the VU meter should always equate to whatever the audio system alignment level is deemed to be. In the analogue world that's usually either 0dBu (0.775Vrms) or +4dBu (1.228Vrms) in professional gear, or -10dBV (0.316Vrms) in semi-pro gear. In the digital world it's normally either -18dBFS in Europe, or -20dBFS in America."

+ This article:
https://www.soundonsound.com/sound-advi ... ery-useful

Contrary to the conclusion of the above article ("VU meters are much easier and less stressful than focusing on a loudness meter") my take on this subject is this: what's the benefit of using VU meters in the digital realm? It's an old analogue non standardized metering. In the digital domain there are much better (meaning more informative) tools. So I'm much more used to working with some sort of a loudness meter (e.g Sonible's true:level and true:balance is great as is the Youlean LoudnessMeter, ADPTR's Metric AB, Izotope's Insight, Melda's MMultiAnalyzer or even it's free MLoudnessAnalyzer). I would even rather pick a "Dorrough" type (like the Waves Dorrough or PA's free bx_meter) to work with than a VU meter.
But that's just me, I'm sure there are great engineers using digital VU meters either because they come from analogue gear and they're used to it, or there are some workflow/ ease of use/ comfort etc. benefits I never noticed.

VU, like any other meter, is just a visual aid. In my case, I use it to keep my mix at a point where I can get a better sweet spot when I use emulator plugins. The Waves plugins (emulators) in their manuals say they work best when the input is around -18dBFS, which would be the equipment's 0dB VU.

All the VU meter plugins I've used have the ability to set -18dBFS as the 0dB VU.

I miss this in TR6 Metering, because the other meters are very useful.

The SOS article talks about different standards and mentions some, but TR6 Metering doesn't seem to take any of them into consideration.

And yes, you're right, we have other good tools, but it would be nice if I could use it, since it already came in the package.

[ozonepaul]

VU, like any other meter, is just a visual aid.

No way I want to start an argument, but my point was that there are better, more informative tools (if you wish better visual aids) than a VU meter. And I tried to be pretty clear that that's just my opinion, it's far from being an objective observation.

In my case, I use it to keep my mix at a point where I can get a better sweet spot when I use emulator plugins. The Waves plugins (emulators) in their manuals say they work best when the input is around -18dBFS, which would be the equipment's 0dB VU.
All the VU meter plugins I've used have the ability to set -18dBFS as the 0dB VU.
I miss this in TR6 Metering, because the other meters are very useful.
The SOS article talks about different standards and mentions some, but TR6 Metering doesn't seem to take any of them into consideration.
And yes, you're right, we have other good tools, but it would be nice if I could use it, since it already came in the package.

You said in your first post that the VU meter with the reference at -18dBFS is at -4dB.
I'm not sure why can't you just remember that -18dBFS on the IK T-RackS VU meter is at -4dB and offset it in your head accordingly?

+ I'm just thinking out loud here, but what if all the IK Multimedia T-RackS emulations were optimized not like the Waves ones (at around -18dBFS) but at around -14 dBFS? In that case having their VU meter calibrated so that it shows 0dB at -14 dBFS makes total sense.

+ Optimizing plugin emulations at -18dBFS is not standardized across developers, and if I'm honest I don't find -18dBFS the best or most logical choice neither, for multiple reasons (in most cases) I would push it a bit further up. I know that Softube often does that. E.g. there is their Softube Drawmer S73 or their Passive EQ. Someone asked Softube about the "sweet spot" of their vintage gear plugin emulations, whether it's at around -18dBFS or somewhere else.
Niklas from Softube responded:
"We always start off by gain staging the units so that they match the levels when we connect them to a +4dBu interface -- just to make it easy for us to A/B-test. But when the A/B tests are done we often change the gain staging so that the plugin works better in a DAW. That can sometimes mean that we want to bring forth characteristics in the unit, the FET Compressor is for example known to sound good when driven hard, so we gain stage that a little bit harder than the Tube-Tech CL 1B, which works best for slightly lower levels.
However, we have a rule-of-thumb that 0 VU on a plugin should be somewhere between -9 and -15 dBFS, and we take extreme care to make sure that the VU behaves just like the real hardware. So if you know that your Tube Tech CL 1B hardware sounds a particular way when the needle hits 0 VU, the plugin will sound the same with the needle at 0 VU.
Regarding the S73 and Passive EQ in particular: The S73 is based on the 1973 plugin, which has been gain staged with 0 VU somewhere around -12 dBFS (can’t remember exactly). But the “Amount” knob effectively let you set the gain staging so that you get the right amount of gain reduction. I can’t remember how we did with the Passive EQ, but much of the distortion in that comes from the chokes used in the low frequency bell filters, and it will probably have a sweet spot at “normal” DAW levels, say -18 dB RMS and occasional peaks reaching all the way up to (and above) 0 dBFS."

I hope this helps to clarify that treating -18dBFS=0dB on a VU meter as the sweet spot for emulations is not necessarily a good idea. Perhaps it's close to the ideal range for waves plugins, but definitively not for emulations from other developers. I would also argue that in case of these emulations the optimized level is not really their "sweet spot" but more like their "safe spot".

Anyway,
All the best

[KIMCHRISTOPHER]

Well, let's go. I think I didn't make myself clear.

My complaint about TR6 Metering is that it becomes very confusing when I can't relate its VU to a signal in dBFS.

Example:
All the VUs I have, if I calibrate it to -18 (or any other measurement I want) it will show the pointer at 0, if a signal at -18dbFS comes in.
If I calibrate it to -12, it will show the pointer at 0, when a -12dBFS signal comes in. Right?
I'm not exactly setting the value of -18 as the default, just saying that if I calibrate a VU to -10, the pointer should show "0" when a -10 signal is coming in, that to me is the most logical.

However, the IK meter doesn't work that way.

If I set the value to -18 in "reference" and input a signal of -18dBFS, the pointer shows -4 and not 0.
This is confusing to me.
Why in the name of God do you allow the VU to be calibrated and it shows a different value than the one you calibrated?
If I wanted to make a discount of -4dBs, I would do it manually, choosing another value as the reference. I don't want to have to guess what value is supposedly being input, I just want to be sure that the "0" is marked with the value I calibrated.

I would really like someone from IK to explain this to me. Even though I understand that the default values ​​can vary, this seems like a bug to me.

PS: And there will be no discussions, they are just thoughts, and that is very cool.

[ozonepaul]

...All the VUs I have, if I calibrate it to -18...
However, the IK meter doesn't work that way.
If I set the value to -18 in "reference" and input a signal of -18dBFS, the pointer shows -4 and not 0. This is confusing to me...

OK, I misunderstood you, sorry. I never tried the T-RackS meter but if what you wrote is correct than it"s a very strange VU behaviour, it"s likely a bug. Or they wanted to reference not +4dBu/dBm but 0dBu/dBm at 0 VU meter ( which is as confusing and wrong as it gets ).

[TMaudio]

This signifies that IK decided to make their "0" or reference point, -22 dBFS. That is fairly bizarre, especially if you are not going to offer the option to adjust the "0" point.

[KIMCHRISTOPHER]

This signifies that IK decided to make their "0" or reference point, -22 dBFS. That is fairly bizarre, especially if you are not going to offer the option to adjust the "0" point.

That's the point. It doesn't seem like desired behavior to me. I want to believe it's a bug and should be fixed at some point.

[TMaudio]

This signifies that IK decided to make their "0" or reference point, -22 dBFS. That is fairly bizarre, especially if you are not going to offer the option to adjust the "0" point.

That's the point. It doesn't seem like desired behavior to me. I want to believe it's a bug and should be fixed at some point.

Yes they should fix that. Although, I wouldn't call it a bug per se as that implies unintended behavior/outcome. It is more so, a sort of a narrow and absent-minded implementation. I say that in the most polite way lol. My recommendation to them would be, if they want to stick to one static value, make it -18. My better recommendation to IK would be to allow the option to adjust the 0 point for the user.