Hi Lars,

if this is an issue for you then this indicates a level mismatch.
It should be possible to set the fader to 0dB without major issues.

Please check informations in this article: https://forum.rme-audio.de/viewtopic.php?id=25399

Hi Ramses, thanks, I will definitively checkout your suggestion.

But I think that even if it is an user error, I can't imagine I'm alone in experiencing this... and allowing another program to automatically reset the volume can't really be by design, can it?

Cheers,

Lars

"0 db" is not inherently "loud". The final volume depends on the output level and external equipment (e.g. the active monitors). If 0dB is so loud for you that it is harmful for ears and equipment, then the setup is not well configured / set up.

You also might not want to reduce the volume on your analog outputs of your recording interface too much, to keep a high SNR.

If setting a lower Reference Level for the outputs of your recording interface doesn't help, or if you are using active monitors without volume settings, then you need to solve this in another way: either using an analog attenuator or using a monitor controller or in combination.

My active monitors have a volume control, but are still loud enough. The rest volume I keep under control using an ADI-2 Pro. The device remembers the last volume settings reliably, one button is still remapped as "mute all".

If I wouldn't have the ADI-2 Pro then I would definitively invest into something like analog attenuator and/or monitor controller.

It's maybe not so fortune to compare a HiFi amplifier with a very simple defined task with something like a digital mixer on a PC, where you can have a lot of very different use cases that better start with inputs and outputs at 0dB by default.
But even with a HiFi amp, someone could easily set the volume to max after cleaning, or accidentally reach it, small children, etc.

Or some people might have a completely different setup with an interface that has only digital connections, which is a completely different setup/use case.  Some might have an interface with a lot of inputs and outputs, it could also easily become very annoying to have to undo all those protections.

What I'm saying is that a "one size fits all" solution is very likely to fail, as setups can be very different.

What may seem useful to one person may already be a hindrance to others, if you have to remove all those safety barriers first to be able to work without problems.

I think the only approach that would be promising here is a dialog option during the driver installation (which also installs TM FX) to use either the usual default settings that we have or to offer custom settings with a TM FX setup dialog for a good basic setup.

I have already made such a suggestion here, perhaps that would be helpful to you:
https://forum.rme-audio.de/viewtopic.php?id=33309

An additional advantage would be that TM FX beginners would get a much better basic setup right from the start, which usually would take much more time by  reading manual, watching tutorial videos and "learning by doing".

Quote: “I think that even if it is an user error, I can't imagine I'm alone in experiencing this...”

I'm sure you are not, everyone that has lacked professional guidance and training has made newbie mistakes. Regardless, it’s terrific to observe someone perspicaciously entertaining the notion that they themselves could be the cause of the issue they have experienced. I’m absolutely sure you are on the right track!

Quote: “I expect TotalMix to have a safety first approach by default. Should be doable with little effort, don't you think?”

Have you considered the converse proposition?

That with a little effort, learning how to set up and use your equipment optimally, should be not only doable, but undoubtedly will vastly improve the convenience and speed of workflow processes, as well as being utterly safe by default!

It is a normal practice for me (a studio protocol) that both the amplifier volume control (I have a passive monitoring system) and headphone volume control, are always within an arm’s reach, so easy to use.  This safety procedure, involves a learned skill, a strict discipline, a recording studio protocol, a standard operating procedure.

The turning of a knob.

Clearly, the lay out of your set up and working methodology are very far from ideal and improving them and learning how to use your equipment properly; utilising standard operating procedures and protocols, is the optimal approach, to putting safety first. Doing things in the optimal manner.

TotalMIx FX is brilliantly conceived. A methodically implemented, peerless intellection, consummated in an immensely powerful, unparalleled industry leading conceptualisation. Unrivalled for its creativity, flexibility, multitudinous routing options, reliability and ease of use.

It’s an unassailable, axiomatic truism, that when a system is running perfectly well to a very high percentage rate, it’s extremely difficult, in fact it almost takes a work of genius, to genuinely improve further.

Whereas, absolutely anyone at all, can make everything a whole lot worse very easily and quickly, as most ideas are wrong.

I normally have all the levels in TotalMix FX set at 0 dB and happily don’t have any such issues whatever. 

The problem lies in your set up, working methodology and level of experience.

There’s always a steep learning curve to genuine expertise.

Quote: “I have already made such a suggestion here, perhaps that would be helpful to you:
https://forum.rme-audio.de/viewtopic.php?id=33309

An additional advantage would be that TM FX beginners would get a much better basic setup right from the start, which usually would take much more time by reading manual, watching tutorial videos and "learning by doing".”

This takes time and diligence, the pursuit of knowledge for all the answers are there! Because I am a musician rather than an audio engineer, I read every single world of the user manuals of my RME equipment, downloading them prior to purchase and reading many parts multiple times. I watched the instructional videos again and again. I contacted Synthax UK (who are brilliantly knowledgeable and helpful) for answers to the tiny questions I was unsure about.

As a consequence, experienced zero problems throughout installation and also zero problems in use.

I monitor at a low level, a standard which is government, health and safety recommended.

The only "difficultly" I encountered was the desire to purchase more RME gear.

Turn the Knob!

TM FX 1.72: a total reset of the mixer sets already the levels this way in the TM FX control room:
- Phones 1 + 2 to -20dB
- Main Out        to -10dB

Yes and no.

I believe that TM FX should not be completely changed by hasty / draconian measures just because such problems occur in extremely rare cases.

Rather than that, one should promote doing it the "right way" ... as the RME forum sticky about "level mismatches" and CrispyChips' post point out. A setup that follows a certain "best practice" approach is also IMHO preferable to a "workaround" in my opinion.

My approach is basically more comprehensive, to offer an optional setup dialog for TM FX, so that even a TotalMix FX newbie can get a good / well thought out TM FX basic setup much faster and clap his hands and shout "hurray" after 20 minutes.

At the same time you could ask for the selected outputs of the control room, while you are already at a setup dialog, then also for the desired volumes. Best with test sound and a slider, "ok" button and ready.

Because even if you use passive attenuators, this won't bring the level down to an initial listening / power-on level.
For that a monitor controller would offer much more flexibility.

I must say when you folks describe your setup/workflow (especially ChrispyChips) what I hear is the description of a humongeus work-around. But if it works for you that's absolutely fine with me!

There's nothing wrong with Cubase or TotalMix. But they are complex products and software will always have bugs and also room for improvement.

Cheers!

Ah Mac only. That’s why I haven’t seen this on windows

Quote: “Thanks Matthias”

I’m sure a great many hereabouts could heartily echo a BIG THANK YOU to Mattias, Daniel and the many other fine RME Moderators, who faithfully provide an unparalleled quality of product support!

“Quote: “what I hear is the description of a humongeus work-around.”

I fully appreciate and completely empathise with your politely expressed, negative viewpoint.

However, far from being workarounds, such carefully considered, disciplined methodologies have proven over decades of use to be invaluable facilitating devices, helpfully preventing many undesirable issues, including the type of issue you have sadly been recently bedevilled by.

They were created as a direct result of previous importunate experience. By design, prevent any further similar occurrence, and are advantageously applicable during potentially, catastrophically disastrous “one shot deal” professional recording situations, where such manifestations can ruin both recording and reputation alike.

For example: in my experience, recordings monitored and carefully mixed at a low level still remain acceptably well balanced when the level is significantly raised; but recordings monitored and mixed at a high level, often fall apart in balance, when the level is significantly lowered. Thus normally, I can speak freely across a recording console with an engineer, without raising my voice at all. The hardware controlled level, is that low!

This methodology prevents the issues that have concerned you in this thread from ever causing one’s ears, to ever be harmed at all. That simply can’t happen, as by design and method it’s prevented from ever happening. Far better to have a safety-first approach, hardware governed, totally independent from the vagrancies of third-party software. Safety for your ears is what this thread is all about, according to its title. This methodology guarantees it!

If you were a producer:  Recording a string section for an important artist. Would you get your junior engineers to sit in each and every chair, lean back into them as violin players are wont to do in action bowing and replace any chairs that have the slightest creak? That methodology guarantees the creak can’t ever happen.

If you were a producer: Would you get the pedals on the grand piano carefully checked to see if the mechanism above them squeaks at all, when the pedals are pressed and the actuating rods move vertically?

(I actually have a recording of Leonard Bernstein at the Piano in my collection, where every time his foot touches the pedals, the systems the vertical rods actuate, creak noisily). This methodology guarantees the creak can’t happen.

If you were a producer: Would you check the fittings on the drum kit in case anything was loose anywhere, that could cause unwanted rattles that a sensitive mic placed locally would pick up? This methodology guarantees such rattles can’t happen.

If you were a producer: Would you get your engineers to check the cables and signal from every mic, replacing anything that it seemed prudent to change as daily preproduction routine? This methodology guarantees everything works.

The people I learnt from, did these things, as simple routine.

They cleaned tape heads with alcohol and checked the azimuth of the recording machines at the start of every major recording session. It was all routine, a discipline, a guarantee of complete professional preparedness, prior to an important recording session.

I remember conducting at a prestigious concert hall on one occasion, and seeing one of my guitarists with a screwdriver in his hand and a small tool box besides him.  As I have clear demarcation lines (Union practice) regarding each person’s responsibilities “I asked him what he was doing?” He said, “I noticed that one of the 13 amp plugs had a large crack in its top on this A C Mains Board." (A Contractors Box, the Royal Albert Hall has only a couple of three amp sockets either side of the stage). "I was concerned that there might be a mains leakage or sudden loud crackle because of it, so changed it for safety.”

I like that kind of person, one that foresees and anticipates potential issues and eliminates the possibly of the problem ever occurring.

I have a friend who early in his career developed a reputation for always going the extra mile. He anticipated everything that could possibly go wrong, and always had a solution prepared for everything.

People couldn't help noticing his outstanding dedication to work. For decades now he has worked in the world’s top recording studios as recording engineer to a legendary Canadian producer, responsible for recording many of the world’s top artists.

For sure, to many, the effort involved might seem “humongous”.

I think of it as “professional”.

I’m delighted you have the answers to your thread title issue and genuinely wish you well, with a speedy resolution to the further discombobulating difficulties you appear to be experiencing with your computer.

Hello again Lars, I’m sorry if you gained the impression I was offended, I assure you at no time was that the case. I am truly delighted that Mattias has come through with the perfect solution for you.

As you may be aware, the words we asseverate embody only a relatively small proportion of what we actually mean. The majority of our intended meaning being communicated by subtle nuances in vocal tone and facial expression.  That’s leaves us all disadvantaged for sure, but we do our best.

Recently, I have observed a growing number of deplorable incidents on this forum where both Mattias, Daniel and other Moderators have been wrongly accused of rudeness, or been the recipients of rudeness by individuals seeking solutions. Whereas such individuals ought to be respectfully grateful, that extremely busy, high level executives and highly skilled specialists are actively supporting products and customers on a daily basis!

Many years ago, a mastering engineer warned “never turn your back on digital”, and so I always have overall physical analogue control of the playback system; because as you have experienced, things can go awry very suddenly, without warning and leave one clueless as to what is going on.

How cool would you be if that happened while you are paying for an 88-piece orchestra to be present, along with major studio time? That has happened, sometimes repeatedly during a session. Happily, not so much these days.

The salient point being, almost all such problems as you experienced, are easily avoidable, and dependant on the system set up can be entirely mitigated.

Quote: “Even I always use a low volume”

I’m glad to read that. A relative of mine (a professor) led the team which developed the model of the human ear all scientists, medical professionals, audiologists, and audio equipment designers and manufacturers use, reference and adhere to. Thus, you will appreciate that caring for one’s precious ears, is something very important for me, close to my heart, and why your thread aroused my interest.

Lots and lots of testing of individuals with excellent hearing had to be done in order to determine what good hearing actually was. EMI Haynes in Middlesex designed uniquely special one-off custom speakers, which were fabricated by KEF to do the testing.
 
The mastering engineer I quoted was once a musician, and if clients want to hear a playback loud that’s ok, but he always leaves the room!

You only get one set of ears to last your whole life through.

Quote: “I had questions and suggestions, and mostly got lesson I did not ask for for in return.”

Personally, I am extremely indebted to the overwhelming generosity to the older composers, musicians, producers, audio engineers and tonmeisters who shared so much of their appreciation, understanding and knowledge of music and its production with me, right from the time I started out.

Regrettably, many of them are now getting elderly or have sadly passed away. Recently the late Al Schmitt was a tremendous loss I’m sure many felt deeply as I did (He enjoyed the old black and white films like me) and so feel, a duty of care, regarding knowledge imparted from people, I genuinely admired.

That’s why I tend to write using generalised solutions that could be applied very widely, thus providing potential to solve a wide variety of disparate issues by one straightforward method. Disciplines, methodologies, protocols are vital.

One thing I learned from Archibald T Davidson of Harvard University, was that whilst conducting, don’t address issues that arise, as if they were singularly individual incidents. Otherwise, that’s how they will be viewed by singers and musicians and the rehearsal will keep stopping and starting with inestimable time wasted.

Always share broad principals if possible, points that can be applied in a wide variety of situations, so that everyone understands that every time a similar incident arises, it should always be addressed in precisely an identical manner. The huge amount of precious rehearsal time this simple approach can save, aggregates continuously.

Time is hugely important. (Have you met any musicians that thought TIME was a magazine? I have) I attended a rehearsal a short time ago conducted by another (as an observer) who rehearsed his musicians with a single number, during a 3 hour time period. Time in which I would typically expect to rehearse 14 numbers and include a 15 minute coffee break. Never talk (talking wastes time), sing, thus demonstrating musically, what is required.

All these and more, have enabled efficiency. Something I often feel has been completely lost with modern generations, whereas the best of the people I worked with when I started out would cut two sides of an Album in a single day. Mainly through good arrangements, good musicianship and most important and often neglected, preproduction meetings with the artist. I apologise if these anecdotes are boring to you, but honesty believe that besides adding verisimilitude, many today, would benefit greatly, from what was imparted by dearly loved friends of the past.

I wish you well in your recording endeavours.