The DBX 166 'peak stop' is basically independent or you could set the compression sections ratio to 1:1.. no gain reduction.

There are lots of cheap (free) and easy limiters and and volume maximizer plug-ins available, For instance, the free 'LoudMax Look-Ahead Brickwall Loudness Maximizer' is highly regarded, with only two parameters to set, threshold and output. The Waves OneKnob Louder is currently on-sale for $29 (usd) which uses "a combination of peak limiting and low-level compression with automatic makeup, Louder effectively makes tracks louder, increasing RMS by up to 24 dB." Though IMO, Wave Audio's product licensing authorization system is a pain, especially if you work on more than one computer. Then there's the venerable 'WaveHammer' included with Sound Forge Pro, which has a separate limiter/maximizer which is independent of the 1st stage comp which can be bypassed or set to 1:1.

You should be recording to an audio recorder, preferably multitrack, and use time code to sync the audio with the video.

I thought about doing that, but with a lot of starting and stopping it would seem like a big nightmare to try and sync up all those videos.

Since you don't have a problem with clipping, have you considered using a Soft Limiter to attenuate just the unwanted peaks?

Thanks, that doesn't look too bad. If I use the soft limiter present like you show in your video, would I then use the Normalize switch?

Yes. You can use any number of tools at event, track or media level. This particular limiter was used on hand clapping in the audience near the camera. I used a nested project because I was already doing video crops and I found it simpler to do them outside the main project.

I usually work with audio in Sound Forge. 

Won't the normalize switch look at the peaks in the waveform and still normalize for the peak rather than the compressed file? I would think you would have to prerender the compressed version and then normalize, but I may be wrong.

I've downloaded and installed the LoudMax and see that there are just two controls, but cannot find any instructions on the procedure to actually use the plugin, or how to determine where to set each slider?

Also, @john_dennis, I don't think it's possible to use the soft limiter or any other FX, and then the normalize in a chain like one first, then the other, because the normalize isn't an "FX," it's a "switch." Maybe it will work if there's a VST Normalize FX that I could place after the soft limiter. I am not sure.

I thought about doing that, but with a lot of starting and stopping it would seem like a big nightmare to try and sync up all those videos.

Not if you use timecode. Timecode used to be quite an expensive and complicated proposition but with things like the Tentacle Sync E it has become a breeze.

$520?? I'm not even going to begin to try and understand what that thing does!

$520 for two of them is a lot better than $2500 for one such device, which is not unusual. Do you want high quality sound or not? The $520 pails in comparison with what a decent professional quality sound recorder costs anyway. How much did you pay for Vegas Pro? And that’s just software, which, once developed, can be duplicated for virtually nothing. Any hardware will cost more because every single piece of it has to be made from physical components.

At any rate, the Tentacle company makes the lowest cost of timecode devices.

"Also, @john_dennis, I don't think it's possible to use the soft limiter or any other FX, and then the normalize in a chain like one first, then the other, because the normalize isn't an "FX," it's a "switch."

Nesting works.

Media fX does not work.

Track fX does not work.

Stacked filters on the same event does not work.

Adding the limiter in Sound Forge and saving as a take works.

Red Prince - you may be leading the OP down an audio rabbit hole here... Whilst you're spot on in everything you're saying, an externally recorded SMPTE-synced audio track(s) may be a tad overkill depending on the final use of the OP's videos.

MikeLV - I'm not sure if you've mentioned this (so apologies if you have and I missed it), but what are you recording the videos for? Is this commercial work for TV, tutorials for a DVD, personal YouTube/Vimeo etc? It's going to have a big impact on how much you'll want to spend to get good audio!

You should be able to get more than adequate audio for YouTube or Vimeo (or other streaming providers) through your camera's XLRs, but as Red Prince has rightly said the audio part of a video camera is (usually) a secondary concern and an external field recorder / PC/Mac Audio Interface into a DAW will provide a far more flexible and higher-performance option.

If the work is not commercial, with significant QA processes attached, you can get a good audio sync by manually lining up externally recorded audio tracks with an audio track recorded from the camera's in-built mic (just as a reference) - it helps to have a sharp snap/click before the actual part of the video you want as this is much easier to align. I believe there is also the option to automatically align by audio hidden away somewhere in Vegas Pro 15 (not very well documented), and there is definitely that option in Final Cut Pro X and in Da Vinci Resolve 15, so you could always sync up audio in one of those and render an intermediate to bring back into VP15 for further editing.

If it is commercial work, then yep Red Prince is definitely right in saying you want SMPTE-synced external audio of a high-quality field recorder for an absolutely perfect frame-synced solution - and that costs money...

BUT, I think we've digressed somewhat from the original point of asking about peak-limiting your audio 😂. Kudos to john_dennis for all his excellent suggestions and advice on compressors and limiters - they're the tools you want!

Sorry for not tagging people correctly in this post - the PC I'm using doesn't seem to want to let me!  

jrb101, the videos are going to be for DVD sale as well as streaming video sale and are musical instrument instruction content.

Syncing up audio is out of the question. Yes, I've done it before with two cameras, the hand clap and dragging the waveforms to line up and have it be in sync. But these videos are going to include a lot of starting and stopping which means that I'd have to do that process a lot of times. And it just adds another piece of gear (an audio recorder) that I don't have the time to learn about.

So would you concur that I can order one of those used DBX 166 units and prevent the audio spikes from happening before the audio is sent to the camcorder? (My camcorder is the Canon XA10, it seems to do a fine job with audio, I don't get what's bad about it?) And then Normalization will work properly in Vegas? That's all I really want to happen. When I normalize, the audio sounds so much better, but like I said up above, it only works if the volume is consistent throughout the recording.

The normalization in VP is 'peak', so if an event has a peak that is close to peak setting, very little change would be made. SF pro has an RMS normalize option, but I prefer compression and peak limiting. After a program is recorded I go though the files with Sound Forge to manually reduce the peaks, this gives a event a lot more overall volume back in Vegas, as the audio events are normalized.

Setting the LoudMax is easy. The output level (target) should be set the around 1.5 to 2.0 dBFS, (this 'usually' works out to around -14 LUFS to -18 LUFS, the 'recommended' loudness for on-line audio and DVD/BU.) Then lower the LoudMax threshold fader to obtain as little gain reduction as possible, whilst still getting the job done. As you lower the threshold you will hear the overall level of the program audio rise. Basically the same settings apply to WaveHammer's second-stage maximizer section.

Setting the LoudMax is easy. The output level (target) should be set the around 1.5 to 2.0 dBFS, (this 'usually' works out to around -14 LUFS to -18 LUFS, the 'recommended' loudness for on-line audio and DVD/BU.) Then lower the LoudMax threshold fader to obtain as little gain reduction as possible, whilst still getting the job done. As you lower the threshold you will hear the overall level of the program audio rise. Basically the same settings apply to WaveHammer's second-stage maximizer section.

I'm using the LoudMax, by following your instruction. Do I understand this correctly? The Output setting appears to be the upper volume limit. I'm guessing this because I set it to -1.5 and when I play a part of the video that has the highest audio peak, it shows at -1.5 on the meter. Next, for Thresh, does this setting increase the volume by the number of dB? It doesn't seem to be exactly that. I isolated a spoken word that comes up as -13dB with LoudMax disabled. Then when I enable it, and set Thresh to -9.0dB, that same word comes up as -5.5. So what exactly does Thresh do and how do I know when I've achieved a correct setting for it?

EDIT: After messing around with LoudMax for the last 20 mins or so, I discovered a problem, if I'm using it on two different tracks, one for a guitar, and one for a backing track, I notice clipping now happening on the master level fader. Plus, using the normalizing switch still sounds far better than what is achieved with the LoudMax plugin.

Not Normalized:

Normalized:

So it seems if I go the plugin route, then after configuring the plugin, I then have to configure it more so that clipping does not occur. It still seems that being able to catch audio peaks while filming would be the best, most time efficient solution which brings me all the way back to my original post. :(

I would say I agree. Get the best recording that you can that meets your needs and then minimize your post production fixes.

I would say I agree. Get the best recording that you can that meets your needs and then minimize your post production fixes.

So with that in mind, should I get one of those DBX rack units and input into it from the mixer, and output to the camcorder?

I really don't know but I found this.

https://reverb.com/p/dbx-266xl-stereo-compressor-slash-limiter?gclid=EAIaIQobChMIlJL6sLP13AIVVrnACh0i8gYdEAQYDiABEgIR5_D_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds&hfid=12680830

I was told that the 166 is better quality than the 266. Plenty of available units. Just want to be sure it will accomplish my original goal.

jrb101, the videos are going to be for DVD sale as well as streaming video sale and are musical instrument instruction content.

Syncing up audio is out of the question. Yes, I've done it before with two cameras, the hand clap and dragging the waveforms to line up and have it be in sync. But these videos are going to include a lot of starting and stopping which means that I'd have to do that process a lot of times. And it just adds another piece of gear (an audio recorder) that I don't have the time to learn about.

So would you concur that I can order one of those used DBX 166 units and prevent the audio spikes from happening before the audio is sent to the camcorder? (My camcorder is the Canon XA10, it seems to do a fine job with audio, I don't get what's bad about it?) And then Normalization will work properly in Vegas? That's all I really want to happen. When I normalize, the audio sounds so much better, but like I said up above, it only works if the volume is consistent throughout the recording.

Yep! I agree - for your workflow a hardware limiter followed by normalisation should work fine ☺.

I don't think there is much wrong with the XA10's audio - if it works for your use then use it... I think the options people have suggested (including myself) just allow for more overall control of bit-depth, frequency, codec/format etc. But, as is common to say in the music world - "if it sounds good (to you), it IS good" so carry on using the XA10 ☺.

The DBX should do exactly what you're after and give you a nice easy workflow!

Good luck with the DVDs - let me know when the content is available and I'll look it up (I'm a multi-instrumentalist so I'm always interested in techniques and tuition!) 😀

Thanks jrb101! I grabbed a DBX 166A unit off eBay so hopefully that will arrive this week. I'm going to connect the main outs from the mixer to the DBX, and then go from the DBX straight into the Canon XA10. Get the limiter working and then I should be good to go!

As I was curating my Youtube channel, I was reminded that a hardware limiter on the front-end can be very useful.

😂