Calibrating Input Level for Plugins

[MirrorProfiles]

made a video demonstrating Softube at 1V=0dBFS. Pretty sure 99% of people are undergaining these amp sims, which is a shame as the modelling is pretty solid. If you record at 12dBu of headroom, Amp Room doesn't have enough range on the input slider to get to the correct level.

 

[Orvillain]

I’m pleased this is getting more discussion now.

I had the pleasure of playing a Diezel Schmidt today expecting to enjoy some amazing crunch tones (which I did), but there was actually lots more gain available in the real amp than I was expecting after playing a Tonex profile in advance. So much so in fact that I can’t actually get the Tonex profile up to those levels of gain even if I drive it to the max using the input knob all the way up (with my interface level at zero - where I always leave it).

I was hoping the amp wouldn’t give me as much gain actually as it has got me seriously considering purchasing it…which I wasn’t expecting as a result of playing the Tonex profile! It could be amp specific I guess.

It would really help if IK could figure out a way of helping users understand the input gain levels, but appreciate it won’t be easy for all the existing profiles made by everyone.

Buy it.

 

[hernandezLLL]

No, just use the spreadsheet in this thread and adjust to the dBu levels that are provided.

Can you tell me which page? Thanks

 

[MirrorProfiles]

Can you tell me which page? Thanks

Calibrating Input Level for Plugins

Perfect, just what I was looking for! Thank you so much! So I've basically been on the money anyways. I've been running +4 at 0 added gain. So the Neural stuff has been sounding pretty much as it should for me this whole time. Thats good to know, I've always been happy anyways. Just wondered if...

thegearforum.com

 

[hernandezLLL]

Calibrating Input Level for Plugins

Perfect, just what I was looking for! Thank you so much! So I've basically been on the money anyways. I've been running +4 at 0 added gain. So the Neural stuff has been sounding pretty much as it should for me this whole time. Thats good to know, I've always been happy anyways. Just wondered if...

thegearforum.com

Nice!

 

[theimageofall]

Buy it.

It is getting harder to resist!

 

[Iwastemoney]

Getting a little lost here.

I got the first part down I need -14.39 level for the sine wave 1000hz to come back as 500mv. (the level adjustment in the free VST)

The next part is where I'm getting lost at I plug in the output into the input and what adjustments do I need to do?

When I strum with Hi-Z I'm barley at 1/4 of the bar on Motu m4

 

[MirrorProfiles]

Getting a little lost here.

I got the first part down I need -14.39 level for the sine wave 1000hz to come back as 500mv. (the level adjustment in the free VST)

The next part is where I'm getting lost at I plug in the output into the input and what adjustments do I need to do?

When I strum with Hi-Z I'm barley at 1/4 of the bar on Motu m4

What are you trying to work out? The max input headroom?

If you have your 500mV 1000hz sine wave ready, now plug that into your instrument input of choice and look at your input metering to see what dBFS level it is.

You can have that interface gain anywhere you like, but at 0 is easy for recall and should provide a reasonable input level. From memory, the MOTU inputs are 16dBu

 

[Iwastemoney]

What are you trying to work out? The max input headroom?

If you have your 500mV 1000hz sine wave ready, now plug that into your instrument input of choice and look at your input metering to see what dBFS level it is.

You can have that interface gain anywhere you like, but at 0 is easy for recall and should provide a reasonable input level. From memory, the MOTU inputs are 16dBu

edit:


Sine is generated at -14.37 peak DAW volume

input when I loop output -23.8 peak DAW volume

 

[Wasbeer]

Getting a little lost here.

I got the first part down I need -14.39 level for the sine wave 1000hz to come back as 500mv. (the level adjustment in the free VST)

The next part is where I'm getting lost at I plug in the output into the input and what adjustments do I need to do?

When I strum with Hi-Z I'm barley at 1/4 of the bar on Motu m4

The M4 has 16dBu input headroom on it's instrument input, at 0 gain on the interface. Knowing that, adjust input in the plugins accordingly, see spec sheet from mirror profiles. Don't mind the input meter bar on the interface as you compensate for input gain on the plugin.

 

[Dame_Ningen]

it’s all in the thread. NDSP=1Vp=0.707V RMS=-13dBFS=12.2dBu

Helix Native = 11.5dBu

If anyone could add the M-Audio M-Track Solo to that list, that would be a life saver!

 

[Sascha Franck]

Fwiw, just leveled in my HX Native channel preset within Logic, using my Motu M2. Turned out that I needed to add a boost of 5.2dB to pretty much exactly match the level the HX Stomp is throwing out (been using both the M2 and the Stomp teamed up in an aggregate device and sent a looped and split signal into them).
Interestingly enough: When I don't add any gain, it's reducing the level by pretty much exactly the same amount (difference of 0.1dB) as the Stomp's Input Pad. So that'll come in quite handy as I can now simulate the Stomp's Input Pad by simply switching the gain plugin on/off. Neat!

And btw: Thanks for this thread! If I hadn't read all of this, I'd likely adjusted my M2's input by taste (or by traditional "a little less than as hot as possible" wisdom), now I just keep it all the way down and adjust the channel strips accordingly. Way better and consistent. And I pretty much can't tell the difference between the M2 + HXN and the HX Stomp, which is absolutely great.

 

[dronerstone]

Fwiw, just leveled in my HX Native channel preset within Logic, using my Motu M2. Turned out that I needed to add a boost of 5.2dB to pretty much exactly match the level the HX Stomp is throwing out (been using both the M2 and the Stomp teamed up in an aggregate device and sent a looped and split signal into them).
Interestingly enough: When I don't add any gain, it's reducing the level by pretty much exactly the same amount (difference of 0.1dB) as the Stomp's Input Pad. So that'll come in quite handy as I can now simulate the Stomp's Input Pad by simply switching the gain plugin on/off. Neat!

And btw: Thanks for this thread! If I hadn't read all of this, I'd likely adjusted my M2's input by taste (or by traditional "a little less than as hot as possible" wisdom), now I just keep it all the way down and adjust the channel strips accordingly. Way better and consistent. And I pretty much can't tell the difference between the M2 + HXN and the HX Stomp, which is absolutely great.

100% agree.

After I got my Scarlett and HXN levelled correctly, certain fuzz models (that are sensitive to impedance) sounded much better in HXN than using the HX FX.

All thanks to this thread!

EDIT: Also, the sounds of my Helix Floor presets translate pretty smoothly to HXN.

 

[Sedaxel]

100% agree.

After I got my Scarlett and HXN levelled correctly, certain fuzz models (that are sensitive to impedance) sounded much better in HXN than using the HX FX.

All thanks to this thread!

EDIT: Also, the sounds of my Helix Floor presets translate pretty smoothly to HXN.

But does that mean that HX FX has its effects badly staged with respect to its own input gain?

I mean, the effects (that fuzz you talk about, for instance) in HX FX should be in accordance to the hardware own input gain... Otherwise it's a bad thing. Isn't it? Am I understanding correctly?

 

[dronerstone]

But does that mean that HX FX has its effects badly staged with respect to its own input gain?

I mean, the effects (that fuzz you talk about, for instance) in HX FX should be in accordance to the hardware own input gain... Otherwise it's a bad thing. Isn't it? Am I understanding correctly?

Difficult topic...

The HX FX omits the (hardware) impedance switching circuit, iirc it's a cost-cutting decision that was made to achieve the proper MSRP.

Mainly affects certain fuzzes, also the Space Echo (if I'm not mistaken) and wah pedals.

They don't sound inherently bad though, just kinda "off" and not too realistic.

All other models are fine.

 

[Sedaxel]

Difficult topic...

The HX FX omits the (hardware) impedance switching circuit, iirc it's a cost-cutting decision that was made to achieve the proper MSRP.

Mainly affects certain fuzzes, also the Space Echo (if I'm not mistaken) and wah pedals.

They don't sound inherently bad though, just kinda "off" and not too realistic.

All other models are fine.

Didn't know it. Thank you for the info.

 

[Sascha Franck]

Ok, I think I may have to change leveling tactics a bit, at least when at home. Thing is, I just recorded some guitars where I dialed down the volume pot and picked quite lightly. The resuklt being that there's hardly any properly visible waveform. Yes, you can graphically "boost" it in Logic, but all "standard leveled" tracks look like big fat bricks then (that feature is always only working for all regions in a project). And even with maximum "display boost" and zooming in as much as I could, the waveforms still looked extremely weak (mind you, sound was absolutely fine).

So, as I am using 5.2dB of a boost pre-HXN anyway, I may just switch that off and do the boost on the Motus input. I might even go a bit higher and apply some gain reduction pre-HXN.
Caveat: The Motu offers no readout for it's input gain stages. That's really bad because remembering the gain boost by knob position isn't exactly a precise affair. My old Zoom UAC-2 has nice gain readouts withing their utility mixer software, but for the Motu, no such things exist. So to get this 100% right I'd have to recalibrate the inputs all the time by sending a constant signal into it, set gain to zero, then analyse the peak and then turn up gain so the peak is 5.2dBs higher. Sucks. But those low level waveforms are absolutely horrible to deal with once you need to cut some stuff precisely.

 

[MirrorProfiles]

you could also clip gain by 5.2dB to get the waveforms bigger and to the right level. Not ideal with how logic handles comping etc, but Logic is a bit of a turd for accurate waveforms and sample accurate editing in general (which is why I moved away from using it after 10+ years).

 

[Sascha Franck]

you could also clip gain by 5.2dB to get the waveforms bigger and to the right level.

Yeah, but that's quite more clickety to do. I want something to "just work" all the time.

but Logic is a bit of a turd for accurate waveforms and sample accurate editing in general

Don't tell me. And let's not even start talking about the sample editor, which has seen the last noteworthy update prior to y2k.

 

[MirrorProfiles]

Don't tell me. And let's not even start talking about the sample editor, which has seen the last noteworthy update prior to y2k.

seeing old GUI elements from the old environment window=sick in mouth. Logic has its strengths for sure, and most people I work with use it (and love it). But switching to Pro Tools was the best think I ever did, Logic simply isn't reliable enough to do any kind of serious editing in. The random file lengths when you consolidate, clicks appearing in fades, poor waveform visibility (why does it just shade over the faded area rather than updating the waveform with the fade?!). Loads of stuff that even pre-dataes the "Garageband Pro" era of it. and don't get me started on Flextime, or their implementation of ARA.

Yeah, but that's quite more clickety to do. I want something to "just work" all the time.

yeah in your position I'd probably just dedicate a channel to the "Helix" level if its something I used regularly. Especially if I was using single coils, with humbuckers I clip 11.5dBu pretty easily so something closer to 14 or 15dBu is ideal.