It's just a bit of bragging by Reaper. You can choose LUFS or RMS and it uses these m, s, and i times for RMS aswell.

 

Please don't listen to these other comments. -18dBFS is NOT where you should be aiming to level everything; the guy who made that video was incorrect (and yes, i know exactly which video you just came from). 0dBVU --- is not a "one-size fits all". Trial and error, find what works best for you. Understand what the VU meter is ACTUALLY trying to tell you, and it's all about ballistics. Learn the relationship between different types of metering calibrations, and you'll soon find for yourself when and where each type is appropriate.

An 808 hitting 0 on the VU meter is very very different from a cymbal hitting 0 on the VU meter. Hence why you should not ONLY rely on VU and peak meters. I highly recommend Klanghelm VUMTdeluxe.

EDIT: having said all this, it seems I lost track of the fact that OP was talking about gain staging SPECIFICALLY with regards to Nebula. Sorry Will, about this then you were correct haha; yes, in this case you DO want to use -18dBFS as your scale, as OPPOSED to 0dBVU. Because saying they are interchangeable is plain and simple wrong, as No Avenger pointed out.

 

Last edited: Nov 10, 2024

Yes, of course. It is ballpark of everything.

 

Of course it is ONLY a starting point (due to several tracks gain STACKING).
Stop being drama queens mates

No one here pretended you needed to glue that fader to -18dbfs AND / OR every signal was the same.
Of course a singer and a snare at -18dbfs is the not the same signal at all.

Some Nebula third party simply aimed that starting point to help ppl NOT pushing Nebula engine into over saturation.
Because when you push Nebula too far ... it is INTERNALLY digitally clipping ... and it sounds really bad trust me

I'm out this "running in circle" thread bye !

 

I think the brag is lil bit too much if its rms meter can't read my track 0 vu calibration as -18 dbfs.

 

I don't know about you but i have a hard time to make it hover around 0VU with Hornet, even after clip gain. I calibrate using mvMeter instead. Pretty tedious.

 

Wot? 0VU only equals -18dBFS peak for a sine wave, for music this dBFS value will never appear again. I thought this is clear by now...
And BTW, RMS ≠ VU.

 

But RMS AES-17 can read it accurately. I tested using VUMT. Reaper's RMS is none of that.

 

Correct, I've never used RMS for this measurement before, so I didn't recognize its mistake straight away.

= RMS +3, not RMS. VU and RMS are calculated differently but both show an average level. So yes, it is possible that both show very similar numbers (for RMS +3). Here you can see that the peak for both would be almost the same but the real times differ

 

No Avenger has hit the nail on the head here. Listen to what this guy says. This is a complicated topic until it isn't anymore. Similar to lots of things audio engineering in my opinion, such as M/S processing, pan law, etc...

Will, re-read my original comment. I added an edit to it that I think will please you

 

Last edited: Nov 10, 2024

All I know about this engineering is the analog needs to be converted into the digital world and RMS reads the average signal for that matter. I don't really want to deep dive in since I more lean to the artistic side. But I got told many times by these so called experts on the internet about the magic number. It absolutely can't be 0 VU = 0 dbfs. So I don't know where it came from. I also have no idea why these plugins attach -18 as a reference number. I don't see that on the meter, so I figured out myself maybe the AES-17 is its variation. It seems working, so I guess I can continue making music.

 

Last edited: Nov 11, 2024

Also the needle on RMS +3 looks consistent to me.

 

Last edited: Nov 11, 2024