So its like this, when we record sound onto a computer its adjustable and
set to be correct, but when we play it back it is quieter, even though its
actually the right level according to Goldwave or any other editor or
recorder.
The real issue is the mix level it seems when recording. Monitor levels
internally in the card/sound interface seem always to be pre set too high
compared with the max playback level.
To some extent turning on monitor input in the card setup can alleviate
this, but then you introduce some latency and the delay when listening to
the monitor is far too great, so you have to use the direct method which is
set too loud.
There seems to me to be no way out of this. I bought a Brhringer sound box
with phonos on it and this again is exactly the same in this respect,
although the quality is better than the internal sound.
However many years ago I used to use Soundblaster cards with xp machines
and I'm almost certain this direct mixing level was controllable on those.
Did I dream this and is there any other solution to this than putting a
volume control in the system to allow the volume to be turned up when
listening to decide where to edit and down again when recording.
Obviously if you turn the recording down to the same level the recordings
are all too quiet.

Did this make sense?
Its a Windows 7 64 bit machine.
I'm sure we never had this latency delay on Soundblasters but people are
telling me that on 7 and up the sound recording and playback are handled
totally differently than on xp.
Brian

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!

On Fri, 3 Feb 2017 08:57:39 -0000, "Brian Gaff"
wrote:

So its like this, when we record sound onto a computer its adjustable and
set to be correct, but when we play it back it is quieter, even though its
actually the right level according to Goldwave or any other editor or
recorder.
The real issue is the mix level it seems when recording. Monitor levels
internally in the card/sound interface seem always to be pre set too high
compared with the max playback level.
To some extent turning on monitor input in the card setup can alleviate
this, but then you introduce some latency and the delay when listening to
the monitor is far too great, so you have to use the direct method which is
set too loud.
There seems to me to be no way out of this. I bought a Brhringer sound box
with phonos on it and this again is exactly the same in this respect,
although the quality is better than the internal sound.
However many years ago I used to use Soundblaster cards with xp machines
and I'm almost certain this direct mixing level was controllable on those.
Did I dream this and is there any other solution to this than putting a
volume control in the system to allow the volume to be turned up when
listening to decide where to edit and down again when recording.
Obviously if you turn the recording down to the same level the recordings
are all too quiet.

Did this make sense?
Its a Windows 7 64 bit machine.
I'm sure we never had this latency delay on Soundblasters but people are
telling me that on 7 and up the sound recording and playback are handled
totally differently than on xp.
Brian

Are you falling victim to the professional/consumer levels problem?
Professional gear is set at +4dBu nominal, while consumer stuff uses
-10dBV. Some sound cards allow you to select which level equals 0dB.

The actual level difference between them is 11.8dB.

d

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

In article , Don Pearce
wrote:
On Fri, 3 Feb 2017 08:57:39 -0000, "Brian Gaff"
wrote:

So its like this, when we record sound onto a computer its adjustable
and set to be correct, but when we play it back it is quieter, even
though its actually the right level according to Goldwave or any other
editor or recorder. The real issue is the mix level it seems when
recording.

If the actual recorded data is at the "right level" that implies that the
change happens later along the chain, perhaps on replay, not recording.



Did this make sense? Its a Windows 7 64 bit machine. I'm sure we never
had this latency delay on Soundblasters but people are telling me that
on 7 and up the sound recording and playback are handled totally
differently than on xp. Brian

As you're using Windows I can't make any specific comments. With the OSs I
use I always select 'direct' routes for record and replay. *No* 'mixers' at
all involved. They have a habit of fiddling with the sound on the
assumption someone else can 'nanny' you and 'knows best' what you 'want' -
when in fact they're wrong. So you need to bypass any such nannying.
However someone who uses Windows would need to tell you how.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

In article ,
Brian Gaff wrote:
However many years ago I used to use Soundblaster cards with xp
machines and I'm almost certain this direct mixing level was
controllable on those. Did I dream this and is there any other solution
to this than putting a volume control in the system to allow the volume
to be turned up when listening to decide where to edit and down again
when recording.

I have two computers on this system - a RISC OS one and a PC, sharing
things like the monitor, keyboard etc via a KVM switch. But switching the
sound too meant I'd no longer get an alarm, etc, from the one not in use.
So I made up a mixer, with pots for both. Means I can adjust the speaker
level to either easily. Much easier than diving into the software.

--
*Procrastinate now

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 03/02/17 08:57, Brian Gaff wrote:
So its like this, when we record sound onto a computer its adjustable and
set to be correct, but when we play it back it is quieter, even though its
actually the right level according to Goldwave or any other editor or
recorder.
The real issue is the mix level it seems when recording.

Setting recording level by listening to the volume of a monitor isn't
the way to do it, if all what you are actually doing is changing the
input volume of the monitor!

There should be a level control for the individual source which should
be variable by the recording application, or failing that, by windows 7
itself (buried in Audio Devices, Recording Tab, select device,
properties, Levels Tab).

Noting, in Windows XP, the built-in audio mixer was flippable between
recording and playback modes, showing different slider controls for
each. Windows 7 has hidden these recording settings somewhat.

You might be interested in the following.

Someone has written a comprehensive set of audio level meter controls
for Windows, and the last one (BBC PPM) on this page has audio
description features. Needs technical installation though.

http://www.darkwooddesigns.co.uk/pc2/meters.html

--
Adrian C

This seems totally daft then. We are a talking newspaper, and one would have
thought the monitor levels would be adjustable to compensate at least as
much as you suggest. Why would they not do this, it cannot be very expensive
to add a digital attenuator in the mix line in the card, or usb box.
Brian

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!
"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 3 Feb 2017 08:57:39 -0000, "Brian Gaff"
wrote:

So its like this, when we record sound onto a computer its adjustable and
set to be correct, but when we play it back it is quieter, even though its
actually the right level according to Goldwave or any other editor or
recorder.
The real issue is the mix level it seems when recording. Monitor levels
internally in the card/sound interface seem always to be pre set too high
compared with the max playback level.
To some extent turning on monitor input in the card setup can alleviate
this, but then you introduce some latency and the delay when listening to
the monitor is far too great, so you have to use the direct method which
is
set too loud.
There seems to me to be no way out of this. I bought a Brhringer sound
box
with phonos on it and this again is exactly the same in this respect,
although the quality is better than the internal sound.
However many years ago I used to use Soundblaster cards with xp machines
and I'm almost certain this direct mixing level was controllable on those.
Did I dream this and is there any other solution to this than putting a
volume control in the system to allow the volume to be turned up when
listening to decide where to edit and down again when recording.
Obviously if you turn the recording down to the same level the recordings
are all too quiet.

Did this make sense?
Its a Windows 7 64 bit machine.
I'm sure we never had this latency delay on Soundblasters but people are
telling me that on 7 and up the sound recording and playback are handled
totally differently than on xp.
Brian

Are you falling victim to the professional/consumer levels problem?
Professional gear is set at +4dBu nominal, while consumer stuff uses
-10dBV. Some sound cards allow you to select which level equals 0dB.

The actual level difference between them is 11.8dB.

d

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Our software which is a special suite for sound recording for idiots and it
also has to be operatable by myself using a screenreader, I suspect it will
always need to be windows.
I look at it this way, you could say that the input has to be higher to
make the recording loud enough without post editing level adjustment on the
saved wav files, which we do not have the time for as its hand to mouth on
publication day. Then the act7ual effect is that at 100 percent the
playback is too quiet in most instances.
On the internal card which glitches no matter what drivers we use and also
has noise from inside the computer, it is maybe a bit more eqalable, if that
is a word, but on the sound box its not adjustable at all. Neither is very
helpful.
It kind of makes you wonder exactly why its this way. Seems to be no
logical reason for it at all.

Brian

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!
"Jim Lesurf" wrote in message
...
In article , Don Pearce
wrote:
On Fri, 3 Feb 2017 08:57:39 -0000, "Brian Gaff"
wrote:

So its like this, when we record sound onto a computer its adjustable
and set to be correct, but when we play it back it is quieter, even
though its actually the right level according to Goldwave or any other
editor or recorder. The real issue is the mix level it seems when
recording.

If the actual recorded data is at the "right level" that implies that the
change happens later along the chain, perhaps on replay, not recording.



Did this make sense? Its a Windows 7 64 bit machine. I'm sure we never
had this latency delay on Soundblasters but people are telling me that
on 7 and up the sound recording and playback are handled totally
differently than on xp. Brian

As you're using Windows I can't make any specific comments. With the OSs I
use I always select 'direct' routes for record and replay. *No* 'mixers'
at
all involved. They have a habit of fiddling with the sound on the
assumption someone else can 'nanny' you and 'knows best' what you 'want' -
when in fact they're wrong. So you need to bypass any such nannying.
However someone who uses Windows would need to tell you how.

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics
http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

Well yes but that is able to be done now, but my non tech editors are
moaning when they used cassettes none of this messing about used to happen.
I can see the point so I was wondering quite why strange decisions on
levels were chosen, or is it just that everyone is expected to under record
then normalise it at a later time which seems stupid when we already have a
limiter and a mixer in front of the computer to stop digital overload
nasties.
Brian

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!
"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Brian Gaff wrote:
However many years ago I used to use Soundblaster cards with xp
machines and I'm almost certain this direct mixing level was
controllable on those. Did I dream this and is there any other solution
to this than putting a volume control in the system to allow the volume
to be turned up when listening to decide where to edit and down again
when recording.

I have two computers on this system - a RISC OS one and a PC, sharing
things like the monitor, keyboard etc via a KVM switch. But switching the
sound too meant I'd no longer get an alarm, etc, from the one not in use.
So I made up a mixer, with pots for both. Means I can adjust the speaker
level to either easily. Much easier than diving into the software.

--
*Procrastinate now

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

No no ther are on screen meters and a limiter. Its all been aligned. It is
the discrepancy between the monitor level when recordings ar at to the
correct level and the playback level at max that is the issue. You can bias
it any way you like, but the end result is always that if you could
separately adjust the monitor level separate from the record level it
could be aligned, but it seems inbuilt sound cards and this usb box do not
have such controls.
Brian

--
----- -
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...

Blind user, so no pictures please!
"Adrian Caspersz" wrote in message
...
On 03/02/17 08:57, Brian Gaff wrote:
So its like this, when we record sound onto a computer its adjustable and
set to be correct, but when we play it back it is quieter, even though
its
actually the right level according to Goldwave or any other editor or
recorder.
The real issue is the mix level it seems when recording.

Setting recording level by listening to the volume of a monitor isn't the
way to do it, if all what you are actually doing is changing the input
volume of the monitor!

There should be a level control for the individual source which should be
variable by the recording application, or failing that, by windows 7
itself (buried in Audio Devices, Recording Tab, select device, properties,
Levels Tab).

Noting, in Windows XP, the built-in audio mixer was flippable between
recording and playback modes, showing different slider controls for each.
Windows 7 has hidden these recording settings somewhat.

You might be interested in the following.

Someone has written a comprehensive set of audio level meter controls for
Windows, and the last one (BBC PPM) on this page has audio description
features. Needs technical installation though.

http://www.darkwooddesigns.co.uk/pc2/meters.html

--
Adrian C

On 03/02/17 15:31, Brian Gaff wrote:
No no ther are on screen meters and a limiter. Its all been aligned.

Ah, Oops.

It is
the discrepancy between the monitor level when recordings ar at to the
correct level and the playback level at max that is the issue. You can bias
it any way you like, but the end result is always that if you could
separately adjust the monitor level separate from the record level it
could be aligned, but it seems inbuilt sound cards and this usb box do not
have such controls.

That does sound wrong, and is not my experience.

For recording, all input devices in Windows 7 have their own level
adjustments, which your recording application should also be in control of.

"Line In input volume control in Windows 7 - Microsoft Community"
https://tinyurl.com/zq48j84

--
Adrian C