There’s nothing to iron out on the subject of record levels on the Prime 4.
If we want to talk actual digital processing issues, then I’m all ears… pardon the pun. However, the SC6000 isn’t going to magically not have the same firmware audio quality problems just because they’ve made cosmetic changes… though I wouldn’t be surprised if hoping that’s what people think will happen is one of the motivations for coming out with them.
So the moral the story here is to just record my set like I described above and then auto-amplify it in Audacity afterwards? Is this a proper workflow?
EDIT: Sorry I’m not an audio engineer I just want to know whatever the solution is.
EDIT 2: Also as others have mentioned this is not the way Pioneer and Serato behaves. I don’t think this is intuitive or obvious at all. They should make a note of this right there in the interface somehow.
Pioneer is often even quieter if you use the SPDIF from the DJMs since they are often a further -5.5dB down.
Basically. If you put every track at 0dBVU on the meters then the most dynamic tracks will sound quieter than less dynamic ones and it’s not optimal overall both in regards to consistent loudness and in getting the most from the gear, but you won’t break anything.
If you want the recording way louder and want to DJ with headroom, you must do post work to the recording like in Audacity. Anyone who tells you different is wrong.
I guess I’ll just play around with it. Thanks for the info, it helps a lot, even if I don’t understand half of it. I do feel this aught to be somewhere more prominent and more intuitive/obvious for non-experts like myself.
I did a couple test runs since my post earlier today. Here are some observations in case anyone else stumbles on this:
Recording a single track by itself, then bringing it back into Audacity, auto-amplify told me it was nearly 14db lower than the original track. So this would be +14db to bring it back to original level without the “head room” previously discussed.
I then recorded a short mix with a few tracks and then brought that into Audacity, this time it suggested a 9db increase — a 5db difference from before. I can see in Audacity the waveform bumps up a bit during my transitions. It never occurred to me that this happens as I don’t hear this in real time. So I’m guessing this is what the extra space or “head room” is needed for.
So, in conclusion… record your sets normally, then auto-amplify in Audacity before sharing 
Before auto-amplify:
After auto-amplify:
All people have to do minimally is not go into the top meter LEDs, which is already self-explanatory. 0dBFS is hard clip, and if your final recording after post alteration is greater than -3dBFS you risk something called ‘inter sample peak clipping’ when sites start processing the bejebus out of it themselves. If people want to play live with no headroom, feel free to crush into clip like a crazy person while you’re DJing. No skin off my back, but I’d never let them onto my sound systems. That’s a great way to cook woofer coils.
fo sho word 
I should also mention that InMusic is not entirely blameless on the issue of confusion on metering levels. Their meters seem to be getting strangely small over 0dBVU ‘nominal’, with decreasing numbers of LEDs over the zero. There’s also no reason for them to be allowing +10dB over unity on the master volume control, but that’s something both Pioneer and old Denon DJ did… though at one time Pioneer had an excuse with the way they’ve done levels between cues, faders, and master and the fact they used to have rotary kits. Denon DJ, old or new, has really never had a good excuse for that available boost.
If I can give you some advice from somebody with the same frustration, I turn up my channel level dial +2 dots and make that my new “0 dB”. You can always turn down the master volume because that doesn’t have an effect on your recording level! This has guaranteed my audio is recorded to my USB in a much higher volume and if I want to audio engineer virtually raise the volume after recording then is doesn’t sound as distorted. Hope this helps! But I feel your pain and am hoping for a digital “dial up” when it comes to recording to match the volume output of the speakers.
I do not concur with any of that.
What’s your solution?
There’s more you can read above if you scroll up.
I can say with high confidence based on the prior posts and evidence presented that there is nothing wrong with the record levels on the Prime 4, and the digital gain structure and digital recording appears to entirely conform to usual digital audio standards.
Put the master volume control at its ‘unity’ zero mark. Putting it higher will compel running the channel trim-gain knobs too low. Putting it lower will compel running the channel trim-gain knobs too high. Putting the master volume control at its unity will also show you the exact levels the recording will be at on the master meter.
Adjust the channel trim-gain knobs for each track to achieve whatever volume is necessary so that the densest, most complex music (or noise) peaks at the 0dBVU nominal level point on the channel meters. The most dynamic and sparse music should peak higher than this but definitely not go into the top meter LEDs (Overload/Clip), preferably also trying to keep out of the second-to-top LED that you treat as safety headroom for accidents.
Unity on the faders is max. When a song is playing out by itself, the fader needs to be all the way up to send the full volume to the master. Also be aware of the consequences of crossfader curve and use of effects on master volume.
If you want your internal Prime 4 wav recording louder than where it’s going to end up, with many of the peaks when the music was in full swing ranging from about just above -8dB below clip to -18dB below clip, assuming you tried to stay out of those second-to-top LEDs, then you take your recording and adjust its volume later in a sound editor or DAW program in the post stage. Here you can also EQ it, trim it, etc, too.
After reading lots of responses here, you seem to be saying that everyone is somehow recording incorrectly. I decided to test this for myself, and I also find the recorded level very low. No matter how I tried, I was not able to get my recoded track (just recorded one track, from start to finish - over & over) anywhere near the level of the original (or source if you want to call it that). If I record a track playing at 0 on that channels vu with all eq’s flat & gain pot in the middle. I want my recording to play back at that same level with that exact same gain structure - simple. The original is not distorted to start with, no matter how much technical jargon you throw at us, the fact is if I’m unable to reproduce the level of a track I recorded on the P4, the recording level is too low. Rather give us more level & let us decide whether to turn it down or not. If we distort our recordings, we’ll soon realise that we need to turn it down. If I record my set, I want to be able to play it in the car on my way home, without having turn the car’s radio all the way up just to hear it nicely.
You clearly didn’t read much above.
IT WILL NEVER BE AT EXACTLY THE SAME LEVEL OF THE SOURCE TRACK WITH EQS FLAT AND GAIN POT IN THE MIDDLE AND SHOULD NOT BE.
Go back and read more. It’s all there.
Why the hell not?
That’s just one of the times in this thread I explained this.
And here’s another time I explained what you should do:
If the levels are padded, then it just makes a stronger case to give us some form of level adjustment. I haven’t read a full years worth of posts above, but did read quite a lot. I understand the whole concept of headroom & having a nice, clean undistorted recording thats ready for editing in a daw. But based on how most people (including myself) use the mixer on the P4 (keeping channel gains middle & eq’s flat-ish), the recordings come out very low. There are many times where I can’t be bothered with editing the mix, I’m not sharing it with anyone. It’s for myself - to hear my mistakes - a new mix to listen to on my way home etc… The level it records at in normal use is too low. We need some form of adjustment, guys who are happy with the way it is, don’t change anything. The rest of us can bump the levels up a bit - we all win!!
No it doesn’t. You need somewhere to go. You need headroom. You need space between what you’re doing and hard clip. You think other digital audio recordings are made in real-time right up to clip? You think when people record vocalists or instruments they’re recording that hot? Ludicrous. You need to master your recording later. If you want your recording unreasonably hot, then crank your trim-gains up and otherwise have your master at the unity point for it so you can see the record levels. It’s your gear. Do with it what you want. If InMusic wants to add an optional “normalize” function after the recording is made you have to wait a minute for, that’s up to them, but the recording feature is not defective and the digital gain structure of the P4’s mixer and record sections is completely normal.
Im not making a “master recording”, so why even compare it? If that was my plan, I would just record it lower. You seem to think that everyone here doesn’t know how to record or use their gear. As I said earlier, use all the technical jargon you want, it doesn’t change the fact that many P4 owners feel the same way about the rec levels. Under normal circumstances I don’t crank the gains all the way up, but I do record my sets - for me, personally, to listen to in the car. Within a week I delete it & record a new one. I’ve never had such low levels with Pioneer gear. I also never had problems with distortion back then either. This is not just in my head, the recording IS low. Is Pioneer, Serato & everyone else wrong? Are they allowing me to record my mixes “unreasonably hot”? - That’s Ludicrous!! How will having a rec level adjustment negatively affect you? Do you even own a P4? And by the way, the recording level is nowhere near the master levels I recorded at with it set at unity.
You want a recording file with commercial levels on it. That requires either risking crushing into the brick wall hard limit somehow while recording or manual post alteration of the recording’s volume.
They’re all wrong.
What Pioneer gear do you use and where are your recordings demonstrating this? I can demonstrate to you that Pioneer’s digital out from a DJM is normally -5.5dB LOWER than the X1800’s.
All DJ software has horrible gain structure. They’re abysmal, which is one of the reasons (there are several) why when people go to clubs and use the installed Pioneer system (assuming it’s set up right) they often mention how much better it sounds than their software. You can see entire threads on that topic on the Serato forums. In order to keep from clipping or compressing DJ software you have to run your levels either quite low when you’re DJing or set a lot of extra headroom in their preferences.
When the master volume control knob is properly set it its ‘unity’ (the zero marking), the master meter will show you exactly what the record levels are – the top LED on the master meter is -1dB below the hard brick wall. So if you want your P4 internal recordings to be as hot as possible, are too lazy to do any post alteration to your recording, and don’t mind a hard knee compression/limiter, turn the limiter on and run your trim-gains higher. What you see is what you get.
@crazycraig: please read my explanation. It’s a simple version of Reti’s.
You need to know this: Mixers display levels as dBu. Recordings display levels as dBFS. Those are not the same!
Between the two there is about 18dB difference. That’s precisely the headroom you have when mixing tracks and have a non-distorted recording.
In essence, the recording level is correct on Prime4. However, mixing two tracks together at 0dBu, the sum shall not pass the +3 or +6dBu. Leaving you still more than 12dB to boost/normalize/maximize your mix post recording…
If you’d want a near 0dBFS recording when playing two tracks together, you should play them per channel at +15.
