VU meters, are they more useful than LED meters and why.

[Ryan Silva]

I think I have spent most of my time only using LED meters because of $ limitations on my gear. But I really find them to be easier at a glance to know where my peaks are. Is this just visual candy for consumers or is there some advantage to monitoring with VU's. Anybody???

[kayagum]

VU meters give you an idea of the RMS levels, vs. peak levels using LED meters.

Search the site on RMS, and you can see some applications of this.

[atdunlap]

VUs, if nothing else are better for giving you an "average" reading, simply because they can't move as quickly as LEDs and so - may "skip over" quick transient spikes in level... They're also usually calibrated to different levels than LED meters.

Andrew

[nipsy]

you use meters?

[hulahalau]

The best compromise in my view is a VU meter with an adjustable "peak" LED. VUs correlate very well with perceived loudness. But, they do not pick up short transients and therefore are not good for avoiding digital overs and spikes that could induce momentary instability in electroncis - usually manifested as a bit of roughness or loss of transparency.

Unfortunately, I can't afford equipment with real VUs.

There is a company that makes LED meters that simultaneously show both averge (VU) and peak responses simultaneously: http://www.dorrough.com/dorrough/. They are not cheap.

[leigh]

For DAW heads, make sure to check out the free PSP VintageMeter, at www.pspaudioware.com.

Leigh

[joel hamilton]

The VU's on the Studer A827 have peak LED's and VU's.

I like VU's because I dont like meters.... I listen a lot.

[Mark Alan Miller]

LED meters can be designed to read RMS or Peak. SOme even do both. Most, especially on less expensive gear, read Peak only. It should say somewhere what the meters are designed to do. (Either on the unit or in the manual...)
Some 'needle-style' meters can be made to ready peaks as opposed to RMS, but they're uncommon.

Meters are good. Ears are better. Both together are best.

[hulahalau]

Some 'needle-style' meters can be made to ready peaks as opposed to RMS, but they're uncommon.

My college radio station had off-the-air modulation meters that were huge - lke 6" - by Gates (as I recall) that read peak modulation (the FCC is very unhappy with any overmodulation of the carrier). The meters had special servo movements driven by servo amps so that they read instantaneous peak modulation. That means that if modulation dropped down, the meters had to drop down instantly to the correct level. The needles would sweep at an incredible pace. I used to love playing Aerosmith's "Sweet Emotion" and watching the meters move. The mod meters were $3000+ in 1973 dollars. I do not believe I've ever seen powered meters other than those.

Around the ame time I also had a cassette deck (brand fogotten_ that had peak-reading meters - bu they would only zip to the peak, but decay relatively slowly. These meters really were the worst of all worlds: not quick enough to truly track the peaks, but not well-correlated to percieved loudness either. I always ended up recording by listening to the output - which is ultimately what we should be doing.

[Tim Farrant]

VU meters were designed to measure line and modulation levels in the days of broadcast and then found their way onto tape machines (analog tape really is the same as broadcast in terms of modulation). 0VU was always set to "reference level", +4dBm, or sometimes in the Europe I think, +8dBm or 0dBm. Within digital recording, modulation means nothing, where as peak level does, so the VU is a bit bloody useless for recording digital IMHO. On the other hand, VU meters can be useful when mixing, again, another modulation process.
Tim.

[hulahalau]

Within digital recording, modulation means nothing, where as peak level does, so the VU is a bit bloody useless for recording digital IMHO.
Tim.

Perhaps, if all you are concerned about in digital recording is avoiding digital "overs." Some may say that monitoring average level is also useful, and I would not disagree.

[joel hamilton]

Modulation never meant anything to anyone but radio guys, but that doesnt mean the modulation percentages were not printed as the bottom row of numbers on every VU on earth.

Use your ears, verify with eyes,justify with sounds.

[Tim Farrant]

Recording onto analog tape IS modulation, you have a carrier (bias) and you modulate it in the exact same way as AM radio.

Tim

[Mark Alan Miller]

I've always been instructed that bias tones are in addition to the audio, not modulated by the audio (except, in some degree by Dolby HX Pro, to change the saturation characteristic of cassette tape to be able to record high freqeuncies, and thus signal in general, hotter before audible distortion sets in...)
So, in that regard, it isn't really like AM radio...

I think. Correct me if needed.

[Tim Farrant]

The modulation is generally not as deep as AM radio, but if you hang a scope across the record head of a tape machine you will see the audio modulating the bias tone. The HX Pro system worked by varying the bias level relative to the spectrum of the audio signal, as opposed to the normal "fixed" bias.

Tim.