RMS Metering

Yes with a testtone the result is the same but with variable material it’s not. For example I have to send my sound with a peak of -12 dBfs and RMS -17,5. When I peak on the Digicheck meter at -17,5 Nuendo will only show -18,5 and it’s also slower in respons all the way.

I’ll make some screenshots next week if you need it.

There is too a +3dB option in DigiCheck…

I know, but there’s not any in Nuendo, at least that I can see. :wink:

Yes there is. Activate the AES17 option.


Ok, I have and the result is what I wrote in the first post. :wink:

I’ll see if I can make a short video later today to show you.

I’ll start with a pic first, spot the difference? Have I got some settings wrong? Seems to me changing the settings only affect peak times, not RMS.

Yeah, I see.
But as said before, you simply can’t compare RMS Max (which is the maximum reading encountered “somewhere” in the playback and real time RMS, “at this specific moment”.


Well, yes, because the Nuendo meter never reaches that maximum, and so if I rely on that I get a smack on the fingers from the broadcasters,

I almost made another thread about this. I found the RME meters have ‘visually’ seperated peak and RMS levels more clearly than N6’s master meter section. The horizontal black line in the master meter compares closely to the RMS value of my DigiCheck meters when they are aligned. Albeit with slightly slower response times. The broadcasters here in North America have been happy with all the mixes coming out of our facilities using RME meters. I can’t find a setting for response time in the manual. Any insight is appreciated.

Since there’s no change in 6.5 I’m pulling this up again, hope it’s on the radar.

As jvamos says the Nuendo meters have a slower RMS response time, and as Fredo says the Nuendo meters are showing the RMS Max and not an average historical RMS. AFAIK the Digicheck meters are not showing an RMS Max. So you’re not going to get the same result from both meters.

It might be better if the Nuendo meters had the option to show an average historical RMS value rather than the RMS Max, but if it’s of any use to you you can get the average figure in Nuendo by using the Statistics function.

You’d get a more accurate result if you used the loudness meter instead. You could try to encourage your TV station to give you their delivery requirements for a loudness meter rather than an RMS meter.

Hi, no one delivers directly to the TV stations any more, everything is going through online automated services, so all you have to do is meet their requirements and they take care of the rest. Example: http://www.adtoox.com/

Problem is, their requirements are very strict and accurate, so that’s why my metering has to be as well. If not I get the sound in return saying “you’re 0,1 dB over our limit, please change or we will do it for you by reducing 3 dB all over”. Not an option wouldn’t you agree?

So here’s a chance for Steinberg to actually be ahead of the trend, because this is the future of commercial deliverance, instead of spending all this time explaining why they won’t bother.

The RME meter is pin point accurate to the one used by AdToox, so they obviously follow the same standard, which standard is Nuendo using?

Nuendo is using the EBU-R128 standard, which has become the one and only broadcast standard in most parts of the world.


Where on that site are the delivery requirements?

Odd that they would attenuate a file by 3dB if it is only 0.1dB over the limit! Why would they not simply attenuate the file by 0.1dB? You mention above that you have to deliver at a peak of -12 dBfs and RMS -17.5. How do you set up the RME meters to measure a ‘strict’ -17.5 RMS value?

As hinted by Fredo, EBU-R128 is the future of commercial delivery, not RMS meters. But if you would like to encourage Steinberg to change the RMS value display you could perhaps try making a feature request. AFAIK nobody here is suggesting that Steinberg won’t bother. They may well be interested if you present a feature request in the right way.

They are all using IEC 61606:1997. The differences are in the use of the statistics and the ballistics, not the standard (as mentioned above). By default the RME RMS value display is an instantaneous real-time RMS value and the Nuendo value display is an RMS Max value.

P.S. You mentioned above:

That’s not true. The Nuendo meter does reach the quoted RMS max at some point in the audio you have played. The same RMS max figure is confirmed if you use Statistics.

And while we wait for that… some of us still has do live with all the other standards, including Leq for Cinema.

But of course, in 5-6 years it may have happened, and then you can say “I told you so.”

Just out of curiosity, where do you live.
(AFAIK, Europe and the US are 100% EBU-R128 and/or CALM, so there is not much left out there …)

That is indeed on the request list.



If you don’t yet use the R128 metering, which you should.

Why not use the Nordic scale for the Nuendo meter. Then you can match it to the PPM requirements of the TV station!?

Sadly not all broadcasters in Norway are R128 compliant yet. NRK the national broadcaster is, TV2 is close, but the two last, TV3 and TVN, is still working on the spec.


Hi, sorry for late reply. Yes as Pål mentioned Norway is lagging behind, all the channels except the state channel are still broadcasting analogue stereo so a transition to R128 is a long way ahead I fear. But NRK have silently started to sneak it in without anyone noticing, even internally.

True quote:

Me: "Do you want me to deliver this in R128 spec?
NRK: “Hmm… yeah, why not, do that”

@Pål, the problem is only for commercials, where as you know it has to be as loud as possible, that means bouncing on the limit, that’s why I need it to be accurate. For normal broadcast material I use the K12 og PPM meter without problems.

Well, we deliver several commercials in R128 now.

R128 is the standard at NRK now, and other content are stopped at QC.

Nrk R128 deliv. spec.: http://fido.nrk.no/ddadd2ed41c530bf577bb760e56cb88c0e9be8508402f561517ed8447a95c0ec/nrk_technical_delivery_standards_v4%200_2014.pdf

Suggestion: Start using the loudness meter even though you do not deliver R128 compliant mixes.
Limit at -3dBTP, use the new Brickwall Limiter and always check “detect intersample clipping”

Screen Shot 2014-09-26 at 10.47.18.png
Next, use the RME Digichk meter to check where you are on the “Momentary Max” reading.
Then you can use the loudness meter even for non R128 mixes.
At the same time learn how your 30s, 20s and 60s commercials turn out on the “Integraded” scale in LUFS.
When done learning, create a preset for the loudness meter which applies to what you learned.
Then suddenly you get a preset that will warn you if you are way over your standards also!

Voila! Two problems solved. And you learn how to work with the meter at the same time.


Thx, I’ll check it out. :wink: