weird waveform

Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 8:43 am

hackenslash wrote:

No, I don't think that was DC Offset. Something like that could only happen with DC Offset

No, I don't think that makes sense.

And from previous, removing noise>rumble _IS_ an High Pass Filter.

Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 11:38 am

Greener wrote:

hackenslash wrote:

No, I don't think that was DC Offset. Something like that could only happen with DC Offset

No, I don't think that makes sense.

And from previous, removing noise>rumble _IS_ an High Pass Filter.

Linguistically, or technically?

Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 11:43 am

You said "I don't think that was DC Offset" then you said "Something like that could only happen with DC Offset".

Which one is it?

Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 9:37 pm

MarkG wrote:

but I did sleep at a Holiday Inn last night, so it might work.

Good luck

;) It didn't go unnoticed....

Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 4:35 am

Greener wrote:

You said "I don't think that was DC Offset" then you said "Something like that could only happen with DC Offset".

Which one is it?

Read my post again. I said, Something like that could only happen with DC Offset if. It does make sense if you read the whole sentence.

Something like that could only happen with DC offset if each constituent track were offset by a different amount. I'm still not sure that this is technically possible, but my statement did make linguistic sense.

Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 12:41 pm

When in doubt, HPF everything at 5Hz.

Posted: Fri Jul 18, 2008 4:12 am

Posted: Tue Jul 22, 2008 7:26 am

Hacken', sorry. I was confused.

I'm still confused, but you are right, linguistically it makes sense.

Posted: Tue Jul 22, 2008 8:04 am

Still not convinced that it would cause a waveform like that, though. Just the only thing I could think of.

Posted: Thu Aug 07, 2008 9:27 am

Hello all..

I am sort of experiencing the same situation however let me explain the setup:

I am experimenting with a PreSonus 2 channel BlueTube pre-amp. So my chain goes; Condenser Mic > BlueTube Pre > MOTU 896HD > Mac w/Cubase Studio 4.

When I record with just the phantom power, I get the previously descried "melting" wave form. When I press the Polarity Reversal switch, and re-record, it fixes the problem. Can someone explain this?

The second issue I am having is, the wave form shown in CS4 is really really tiny. The sound that comes from playback is crystal clear and sound good in terms of volume, however there is very little recognizable wave form. Any thoughts?

Posted: Fri Aug 15, 2008 8:56 am

You've recorded it very quiet. If you are working in 24 bit, this isn't much of an issue. You can simply turn it up.

Posted: Fri Aug 15, 2008 3:45 pm

It reads like you have collapsed the pane view, ya know? Grab a border with your mouse and resize it.

I don't have much ass to boast about my engineering chops but I have recorded in 16 and 24 bit and apparent loudness didn't matter to which one Wink

Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:53 am

Space wrote:

It reads like you have collapsed the pane view, ya know? Grab a border with your mouse and resize it.

I don't have much ass to boast about my engineering chops but I have recorded in 16 and 24 bit and apparent loudness didn't matter to which one Wink

It matters a deal more in 16 bit, as it has less footroom than a 24 bit system, which is to say that the noisefloor is much higher (by 6 dB per bit, loosely speaking). What this means is that if you record very quietly in a 16 bit system and then raise the level on that track, you're bringing the noisefloor up to somewhere that it will be audible. In a 24 bit system, the noisefloor is so much lower that it is still at an inaudible level for much much longer when the level of the track is increased.

Posted: Mon Aug 18, 2008 10:23 pm

...but the noisefloor of the gear itself could be above or below the 16bit line.

Technically this means you could have a noise free recording if your 16dB converters have a noise floor of less than 96dB?

I've made "adequate" recordings that noone complained about using a pair of computer inputs. 44.1, 16 bit, 60dB of footroom from the computer and badly configured gear.
Lo and behold, they worked.

Posted: Tue Aug 19, 2008 4:17 am

Absolutely, same here. In fact I used to do all my recordings at 16/44.1 when disc space cost more. At lower bit depths, there is milage in getting hotter signals to keep the noise floor as low as possible, while in higher bit depths, it's less critical.

This topic sponsored by: