Login / Register
 
Vocal Limiter Suggestions??
New Reply
Subscribe
lordmiguel
Thread Starter
#1
18th March 2005
Old 18th March 2005
  #1
Lives for gear
 
lordmiguel's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Location: NYC
Posts: 656

Thread Starter
lordmiguel is offline
Vocal Limiter Suggestions??

I'm about to pick up a GR MP-2NV as I really like the way it sounds with my manley gold. However, now I will also need a limiter to take care of the occasional overshoots in tracking, primarily vocals and some ac. guitar. I was using the Langevin DVC for a minute, but the limiter wasn't really doing it for me nor did the pre turn me on, but it wasn't a permanent solution anyways.

I don't like to compress anything when tracking, but I want to print as hot as possible (don't we all) but honestly i just want to suppress the occasional spike.

I'm doing pop/R&B and i like everything really clean. I'm wondering if anyone can provide input as to a transparent brick wall limiter (is that an oxymoron?) that might be a good match for my setup. Budget would be $1-2k, if thats unrealistic i'd also like that feedback as well. As a side note, I'm seriously thinking about getting a vari-mu for mixdowns, but would this even be an option to use as a tracking limiter? I know the manley folks say you can "track away", but limiting starts at 4:1 and i'm not sure if that will get me there and i have no idea if a sliding knee will really affect what i am after.

Thanks, i look foward to hearing from all the informed slutz.
#2
18th March 2005
Old 18th March 2005
  #2
Lives for gear
 
bassmac's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 682

bassmac is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by lordmiguel
...I want to print as hot as possible (don't we all)...
No.
lordmiguel
Thread Starter
#3
18th March 2005
Old 18th March 2005
  #3
Lives for gear
 
lordmiguel's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Location: NYC
Posts: 656

Thread Starter
lordmiguel is offline
well, maybe i watched too much "price is right" game show growing up and i feel the need to get as close to the actual retail price without going over. but i have 24 bits and i'd like to use as many as i can, is that so wrooong?
#4
18th March 2005
Old 18th March 2005
  #4
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Location: akron
Posts: 646

gabler is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by lordmiguel
well, maybe i watched too much "price is right" game show growing up and i feel the need to get as close to the actual retail price without going over. but i have 24 bits and i'd like to use as many as i can, is that so wrooong?
That is funny! I was just wondering why you need to track at the hottest level.
I didnt think it made a difference in tone. Analog yes but in Digital? Or is there something I dont understand?
__________________
gabler
#5
18th March 2005
Old 18th March 2005
  #5
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Location: MO USA
Posts: 2,158

squeegybug is offline
I don't use limiters on tracking, so I can't comment on that. Very occasionally I'll use a compressor, I prefer really clear also. The Drawmer 1968 and the RNC are both good for this.

I don't know how you would "print as hot as possible" without using a compressor...

Here's Greg Gualtieri's discussion from the Quartet II operating manual:

Quote:
A Few General Comments About Peak Limiting

· All peak limiters add distortion when limiting. By their very nature, they change the shape of the waveform, which is, by definition, distortion. However, some peak limiters begin distorting well below threshold. The active devices doing the peak limiting in the JFET/MOSFET Peak Limiter are entirely out of the circuit until the threshold for limiting is achieved, and switched out again after limiting. This keeps distortion negligible when no limiting is occurring.

· The amount of distortion depends on how the peak limiting is accomplished. The trick is to do it in a way that sounds inaudible. In the JFET/MOSFET Peak Limiter, a certain amount of 'compliance' is built-in to the limiting action. This means that instead of chopping off the peaks and losing all dynamic information, some 'wiggle' is left at the top. This makes the limiting more inaudible. The JFET and MOSFET devices have differing amounts of compliance, which results in differences in the character of limiting. The JFET tends to produce 'harder' limiting, with less compliance, while the MOSFET produces 'softer' limiting, or more compliance.

· Peak limiting should be used to avoid a worse-sounding alternative. For example, clipping distortion from digital 'overs' will always sound worse than a good peak limiter.

· Peak limiting does not take the place of a compressor. Use the Delta-Mu compressor to raise the average program level, and the peak limiter to catch transients. Any peak limiter will be audible when trying to act on steady-state program material (e.g. bass guitar). The LED display can serve as a guide to how audible the peak limiting might be. If the leds are lit continuously, you can be certain that significant distortion is occurring.

· Ignore all of the above when using the peak limiter as an effect. Heavy limiting of an acoustic guitar might sound nasty, but heavy limiting of distorted tracks, like electric guitar, can be a beautiful thing. Same goes for percussion tracks.
His machine sounds great, I know that.

Steve
lordmiguel
Thread Starter
#6
18th March 2005
Old 18th March 2005
  #6
Lives for gear
 
lordmiguel's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Location: NYC
Posts: 656

Thread Starter
lordmiguel is offline
Good call squeegybug, i guess i should qualify my desire to print as hot as possible to digital without using compressor (comparatively speaking would appear not so hot). I do just want to chop off those daddy longleg transients that seem to ruin the party and keep me printing at such a low average resolution. This purist approach may be a bit harsh on compressors, i haven't found one that sounds transparent enough for my taste, though my experience is probabaly more limited than others in this forum (and i cant afford the atomic squeezebox)

The CS STC-8 is out of my price range unless i dump my plans to buy the vari-mu. I haven't actually found anyone who uses the manley ELOP, i could probabaly afford that. Do you use the drawmer 1968 for tracking as well as across the bus? How transparent is it and what settings do you like for vocals/guitars? As you can see, i have an open mind as long as the sound is there and it fits my budget.
#7
19th March 2005
Old 19th March 2005
  #7
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Location: akron
Posts: 646

gabler is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by lordmiguel
Good call squeegybug, i guess i should qualify my desire to print as hot as possible to digital without using compressor (comparatively speaking would appear not so hot). I do just want to chop off those daddy longleg transients that seem to ruin the party and keep me printing at such a low average resolution. This purist approach may be a bit harsh on compressors, i haven't found one that sounds transparent enough for my taste, though my experience is probabaly more limited than others in this forum (and i cant afford the atomic squeezebox)

The CS STC-8 is out of my price range unless i dump my plans to buy the vari-mu. I haven't actually found anyone who uses the manley ELOP, i could probabaly afford that. Do you use the drawmer 1968 for tracking as well as across the bus? How transparent is it and what settings do you like for vocals/guitars? As you can see, i have an open mind as long as the sound is there and it fits my budget.
I had a Manley Vari-mu and sold it. I would highly recommend the STC-8 for peak limiting and light compression while tracking and perfect for the 2 buss during mixdown. Maybe something was wrong with my Vari-mu. Im going to try a friend
of mines unit just to be sure. Call Craig at Calistro Music he will get you the best deal and service on Manley or Cranesong if you decide on one!
#8
19th March 2005
Old 19th March 2005
  #8
Gear addict
 
ixnys's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 324

ixnys is offline
I found if you track too hot, when you go to mixdown, a lot of your tracks have to be lowered a lot in volume and it becomes very easy to start clipping within your plugins.
#9
19th March 2005
Old 19th March 2005
  #9
Lives for gear
 
Darius van H's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 1,742

Darius van H is offline
Maybe try these:

http://www.prismsound.com/psok.htm

Of course they'll add atouch of distortion if you hit 'em too hard, but that's the same with any brickwall analog limiter...the advantage is they'll be more transparent when not working then ,say, an Aphex Dominator , which would also be an option.

I've heard you can also make the overkillers yourself for a couple of euros if you're handy with the techy stuff.
__________________
www.amsterdammastering.com
#10
19th March 2005
Old 19th March 2005
  #10
Lives for gear
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Location: MO USA
Posts: 2,158

squeegybug is offline
Quote:
Do you use the drawmer 1968 for tracking as well as across the bus? How transparent is it and what settings do you like for vocals/guitars?
Yes I occasionally use the 1968 on input, I usually use attack at 5 (30 ms) and release at 4 (auto 200 ms to 2 s), with very little GR. I think it is amazingly transparent, I made a few sample recordings of RNC vs 1968 before I bought the Drawmer, since the RNC is a good reference for not adding compression effects. With both compressors set to have similar response I preferred the 1968 as producing a "fuller" sound than the RNC. And on 2-track there is not much comparison, 1968 sounds very musical there.

Steve
#11
19th March 2005
Old 19th March 2005
  #11
3 + infractions, forum membership suspended.
 
Zarathustra's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 367

Zarathustra is offline
Here goes the broken record again.

Distressor! distressor! distressor! (with brit-mod of course).

Clean or Dirty, Naughty or Nice. It's extremely good at fast grabs and quick exits. There's no reason to spend a fortune on a tracking comp/limiter, unless you're a gearslut or something....

Z
Guest
#12
19th March 2005
Old 19th March 2005
  #12
Guest
Guest
 
Posts: n/a

"I haven't actually found anyone who uses the manley ELOP"

I use the Elop.
I think it is a great limiter for Voxs.
When tracking with it, it usually requires something a little faster if your worried about overs. It is fast but, not Distressor fast.
In mixing, I think I have not found a better comp for Backing Vox sub mix. It can reallly get the Vox to glue together and always be appearent in the mix.

I have not been able to put this on any other mix buss with success.



D
#13
19th March 2005
Old 19th March 2005
  #13
There is only one
 
alphajerk's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Location: asheville NC
Posts: 5,259

alphajerk is offline
you are so absolutely wrong in this case it isnt funny. you arent gaining a damn thing [pun intended] by printing as "hot" as possible... and by putting a limiter in line you are only serving to raise the noise floor higher with your signal and adding distortion.

you only need to peak about -12db which gives you plenty of headroom for those super loud passages from singers.

it would probably be a good idea to read up on digital theory before you go about getting a limiter to get more "resolution" of which is totally wrong. just to give you an idea, hitting peaks at 0db in 24 bit vs 16 bit for the same quantization steps would be peaking -48db recording @ 24 bits to equal 16bits at full scale.
__________________
"i must invent my own systems or else be enslaved by other men's'"
william blake
__________________________
email: barrett [at] alphajerk [dot] com
#14
19th March 2005
Old 19th March 2005
  #14
Gear Guru
 
thethrillfactor's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Location: New York City
Posts: 14,175

thethrillfactor is offline
Vocal limiter for pop/R&B-

Tubetech CL1B...and change the tubes of course.
#15
19th March 2005
Old 19th March 2005
  #15
Lives for gear
 
De chromium cob's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Location: Western North Carolina
Posts: 3,674

De chromium cob is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by lordmiguel
I haven't actually found anyone who uses the manley ELOP, i could probabaly afford that. .


I use the ELOP....Love it, but dont track with it- only on a mix.
__________________
"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen, and philosophers and divines." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson
lordmiguel
Thread Starter
#16
19th March 2005
Old 19th March 2005
  #16
Lives for gear
 
lordmiguel's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Location: NYC
Posts: 656

Thread Starter
lordmiguel is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphajerk
you are so absolutely wrong in this case it isnt funny. you arent gaining a damn thing [pun intended] by printing as "hot" as possible... and by putting a limiter in line you are only serving to raise the noise floor higher with your signal and adding distortion.

you only need to peak about -12db which gives you plenty of headroom for those super loud passages from singers.

it would probably be a good idea to read up on digital theory before you go about getting a limiter to get more "resolution" of which is totally wrong. just to give you an idea, hitting peaks at 0db in 24 bit vs 16 bit for the same quantization steps would be peaking -48db recording @ 24 bits to equal 16bits at full scale.
I can understand your preference for keeping noise low and be against anything in the signal chain when recording, but the 24/16 bit comparison comment assumes that 16 bit is always the final listening format, which is not always the case. But even though it usually is, with all the plug ins many of us do use today and the calculations involved, i do prefer higher digital resolution to start with, of course unless compromising the quality of getting there outweighs it, and then I might agree if I thought that were the case. But why would one care how 24 bit compares to 16 bit....even if we do a final step down after mix/master, all those millions of calculations would still have been performed at a significatly higher bit with more quant steps...don't you think that's pretty important to the sound?
lordmiguel
Thread Starter
#17
19th March 2005
Old 19th March 2005
  #17
Lives for gear
 
lordmiguel's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Location: NYC
Posts: 656

Thread Starter
lordmiguel is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphajerk
it would probably be a good idea to read up on digital theory before you go about getting a limiter to get more "resolution" of which is totally wrong. just to give you an idea, hitting peaks at 0db in 24 bit vs 16 bit for the same quantization steps would be peaking -48db recording @ 24 bits to equal 16bits at full scale.
by the way alphajerk, i have read bob katz' "mastering audio", page 64, thankyouverymuch for paraphrasing it. guess i must be pretty silly if i don't necessarily agree with everything i read.
#18
19th March 2005
Old 19th March 2005
  #18
Gear maniac
 
Joined: Dec 2004
Location: CA Bay Area
Posts: 200

BrianBrian is offline
When tracking you could try using a LA-2A in limit mode, but only take 1 or 2 db off.
__________________
-Brian
#19
20th March 2005
Old 20th March 2005
  #19
There is only one
 
alphajerk's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Location: asheville NC
Posts: 5,259

alphajerk is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by lordmiguel
by the way alphajerk, i have read bob katz' "mastering audio", page 64, thankyouverymuch for paraphrasing it. guess i must be pretty silly if i don't necessarily agree with everything i read.

hmmm, i didnt read it... so i had no idea i was paraphrasing it. and im certainly not against anything in the signal chain. im just stating that the belief of printing "hot" digitally to gain "resolution" is a flawed belief, and regardless whether you dont believe that or not, youre wrong about it.

if you look at my comparison to 16bits its simply stating that the comparison between the two is a VAST difference in loudness to equal quantization steps, but printing a signal @ 24bit with peaks @ 12db give you PLENTY of your "resolution" you are seeking.... without raising the noise floor by limiting and adding distortion on the way in when it is fully not needed. now if that is the effect you are going for in order to even out the vocal phrasing levels, then by all means do it but dont do it to print "hot".

a] you are pushing the analog section of your ADC's and the preamp, b ]you move the signal into either the 8bit floating points or truncation in fixed when mixing c] you also lose headroom into the signal chain within the mixer and d] ultimately have to drop your faders in the mix which is where you would of been naturally to begin with recording proper levels.

so since you are ignoring the simple facts of digital recording, have you not wondered why 0DBvu is -12 to -18DBfs for music and as low as -20dbFS for film/video?
lordmiguel
Thread Starter
#20
21st March 2005
Old 21st March 2005
  #20
Lives for gear
 
lordmiguel's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Location: NYC
Posts: 656

Thread Starter
lordmiguel is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darius van H
Maybe try these:

http://www.prismsound.com/psok.htm

Of course they'll add atouch of distortion if you hit 'em too hard, but that's the same with any brickwall analog limiter...the advantage is they'll be more transparent when not working then ,say, an Aphex Dominator , which would also be an option.

I've heard you can also make the overkillers yourself for a couple of euros if you're handy with the techy stuff.
Darius,
Thanks a lot for the suggestion. I honestly didn't consider the prism's, it might be just what i need since i will probabaly only be peaking at -2 or 3db for the vox. I've read other posts here on them...given the transparency you mentioned and the price range, it looks like something definitely to consider even if overpriced for what it is. It definitely doens't have that slutty look to it, but it could open my budget up to some really raunchy pieces of gear! Its funny that you mentioned the 720, its actually high on my list for reasons other than vox, but i could just be soon batting 1000 with your suggestions. So, to squash my insecurities about these "radio shack" little pieces, can they pass if you go just a little over? I've tracked with some R&B cats who when you go through 30mins of warm up and tell em to give you their best stuff, and then 2,3,4,5 hours later every take still keeps gets louder and louder. I get nervous they're gonna break the glass in the booth cause it doesn't stop. As long as they're predictable i can ride the input gain as the session goes, but somewhere in there might be an oops. And sometimes there will be that monster take wayyyyy above anything else they've reached and i have to tell them its f***ed. Usually have the compressor out after that but i'd rather try to fly naked with just a limiter and comp later. So do you think they would sound good enough to keep a take if it went over by 0.5 to 0.8db over or so? Not that i'm planning on it, but iu guess that's the whole point. Just an insurance policy.
lordmiguel
Thread Starter
#21
21st March 2005
Old 21st March 2005
  #21
Lives for gear
 
lordmiguel's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Location: NYC
Posts: 656

Thread Starter
lordmiguel is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphajerk

a] you are pushing the analog section of your ADC's and the preamp, b ]you move the signal into either the 8bit floating points or truncation in fixed when mixing c] you also lose headroom into the signal chain within the mixer and d] ultimately have to drop your faders in the mix which is where you would of been naturally to begin with recording proper levels.

so since you are ignoring the simple facts of digital recording, have you not wondered why 0DBvu is -12 to -18DBfs for music and as low as -20dbFS for film/video?
AJ,

Its all good, i'm just busting your nut. I don't usually like to get into too many theory side discussions, but this was kinda relevant. I do totally agree with most of what you said. Actually I don't track too far off how you were suggesting earlier, but i there are key tracks i like to print louder than others - those that will get more plug in usage or comping after printing. For me these are usually the lead vox and kick or snare. The rest of the tracks I pretty much let them lay back a little when they print. Because I am almost always cutting when I eq then comp them, i don't think i have clipping issues within the plugs, but i should probabally pay more attention than i addmittedly do. By the end of all that the level is reduced pretty good on kick and lead vox. If I were using 100% outboard I probabaly wouldn't care as much, but i'm probabaly acting more on feeling about plugs rather than thinking like an engineer (I'm a producer first...what can i say). The state of most plugs is better but still kinda weak so i want to feed them the most precise curve numerically i can to get the most out of them. And because i'm usually cutting gain in the path i was letting that other side of the brain rationize that it was ok. In actuality i shoot for -2 or -3db on the peak passages at most, but i run into so many vocalists that keep getting louder in the session or just capable of being too unpredictably dynamic sometimes, so i'll obviously need some protection.

So let me ask....do you think that for my philosophy of trying to print lead vox and kick or snare hotter (lead vox maybe -2 peak after limiting transient spikes that go over that, probabaly same for kick or snare) will overall compromise my sound more than i think i'm gaining by feeding a more precise curve for my plugs? For lead vox its probabaly only 3 or 4 tracks max and one or two for ad libs. Interestingly i haven't tried an A/B in a session to see if there's any obvious audible difference but maybe now i will. I don't know if i could hear it where i track because i'm only using 1031's but i should probabaly give it a go and see what the ears have a say.

thanks dude. btw, i checked out your website, but i didn't see any sound clips. any plans?
#22
21st March 2005
Old 21st March 2005
  #22
Gear maniac
 
roughly's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2004
Location: Chi-town, a BlueState
Posts: 215

roughly is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by gabler
That is funny! I was just wondering why you need to track at the hottest level.
I didnt think it made a difference in tone. Analog yes but in Digital? Or is there something I dont understand?

Yeah man, there is a bit to this logic - checkout Michael Stavrou's book (www.mixingwithyourmind.com) for a great discussion on recording levels in Analog vs Digital. Mind blowing stuff - really.

And he has a compelling arguement on the the question of compressing during recording and where in the chain.


Hope this helps a bit. i know i didn't answer the question, but it is a long process to explain and the book is well worth the coin. thumbsup

jeffrey
__________________
www.callthecow.com

GO! ---- IL HB 311 -- US HR 676 -----
universal single payer healthcare for all!
lordmiguel
Thread Starter
#23
21st March 2005
Old 21st March 2005
  #23
Lives for gear
 
lordmiguel's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Location: NYC
Posts: 656

Thread Starter
lordmiguel is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by dpasch
"I haven't actually found anyone who uses the manley ELOP"

I use the Elop.
I think it is a great limiter for Voxs.
When tracking with it, it usually requires something a little faster if your worried about overs. It is fast but, not Distressor fast.
In mixing, I think I have not found a better comp for Backing Vox sub mix. It can reallly get the Vox to glue together and always be appearent in the mix.

I have not been able to put this on any other mix buss with success.
D
thanks for that. i thought it would be a good limiter, i actually thought it might come close to distressor speed. do you have an opinion as to the transpacency of it when tracking and below threshold? i really am looking for transparency because my grand plan is to comp later which may or may not include color) with stc-8 or 1968 or manley vari-mu. good tip on the BV sub mix, though. i'll have to remember to remember that.
lordmiguel
Thread Starter
#24
21st March 2005
Old 21st March 2005
  #24
Lives for gear
 
lordmiguel's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Location: NYC
Posts: 656

Thread Starter
lordmiguel is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zarathustra
Here goes the broken record again.

Distressor! distressor! distressor! (with brit-mod of course).

Clean or Dirty, Naughty or Nice. It's extremely good at fast grabs and quick exits. There's no reason to spend a fortune on a tracking comp/limiter, unless you're a gearslut or something....

Z
Hey Z
I meant to get back to you on this one. I've read so many posts about distressors, but there seems to be so many mixed ideas about vocals. But lots of opinions, and I like to hear 'em. I feel like i'm the last one in the world to get one, but its gonna happen real soon because I want it for drums and the like. But so many people i hear think it adds too much color or harshness, some vox it works, some it doesn't...not that i'm going to push it or anything but i want something that is transparent when its not engaged. I guess i'll find out anyways, at this point though i'm just not sure if i'm willing to commit as a vocal tracking limiter.
lordmiguel
Thread Starter
#25
21st March 2005
Old 21st March 2005
  #25
Lives for gear
 
lordmiguel's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Location: NYC
Posts: 656

Thread Starter
lordmiguel is offline
Jeffery,
off-topic, sorry, love that backwards bush thing! word to western burbs, i grew up close to you out there before i moved to the seriously the big red red red apple. like going from the snowbank to the hottub!

on-topic - that book looks interesting. have a used one you wanna sell?
#26
21st March 2005
Old 21st March 2005
  #26
There is only one
 
alphajerk's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Location: asheville NC
Posts: 5,259

alphajerk is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by lordmiguel
So let me ask....do you think that for my philosophy of trying to print lead vox and kick or snare hotter (lead vox maybe -2 peak after limiting transient spikes that go over that, probabaly same for kick or snare) will overall compromise my sound more than i think i'm gaining by feeding a more precise curve for my plugs? For lead vox its probabaly only 3 or 4 tracks max and one or two for ad libs. Interestingly i haven't tried an A/B in a session to see if there's any obvious audible difference but maybe now i will. I don't know if i could hear it where i track because i'm only using 1031's but i should probabaly give it a go and see what the ears have a say.

thanks dude. btw, i checked out your website, but i didn't see any sound clips. any plans?

well, that was a good explaination of what you are trying to do... you know, everything we do because we like it. im not trying to rain on your parade of how you work, but if you feel the need to A/B the two or try a session backing off more... or dont at all if what you have going for you works. i just like getting tracks to mix that average within their window instead of pushing their window to full scale... works easier for me in the long run and i end up fighting louder recorded tracks more. but you might work the opposite.


yeah, that site is horribly old and in need of a full redo. soon when i get a break sometime, im gonna redo the thing and add a bnuch of stuff more than just a bunch of bullshit like there is now on it.
#27
21st March 2005
Old 21st March 2005
  #27
Lives for gear
 
Darius van H's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 1,742

Darius van H is offline
Lord-M,

I wouldn't recommend the overkillers for anything other then catching the odd transient spike...(it could also be handy in mixing BTW)

For loud rappers, i think you just want a normal compressor with a knee, not a brickwall type limiter.......just about every rap i ever heard has had the dogs knot compressed out of it, so i think you could safely track with a comp (providing you have a clue how to set up it up)

You really should try AJ's suggestion of dropping your record level down........modern gear has such a low noise floor there's really no need for you to be pushing the red-zone anyway!
lordmiguel
Thread Starter
#28
21st March 2005
Old 21st March 2005
  #28
Lives for gear
 
lordmiguel's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Location: NYC
Posts: 656

Thread Starter
lordmiguel is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darius van H
Lord-M,

I wouldn't recommend the overkillers for anything other then catching the odd transient spike...(it could also be handy in mixing BTW)

For loud rappers, i think you just want a normal compressor with a knee, not a brickwall type limiter.......just about every rap i ever heard has had the dogs knot compressed out of it, so i think you could safely track with a comp (providing you have a clue how to set up it up)

You really should try AJ's suggestion of dropping your record level down........modern gear has such a low noise floor there's really no need for you to be pushing the red-zone anyway!
DvH - ok, so it sounds like if i can hold myself back and ease off a bit more the overkillers could be what i'm looking for. I'm not producing rap (unless the rent gets a little tight, then thugs away) but mostly R&B and pop. I know a lot of people do compress when tracking, i think i might give it a go when i am a dirtier gear*****, but for now I don't want to print with RNC when I go in for mixdown. I've got my top 3 or 5 comps in sight, but that's for another thread in the near distant future. I just hate the idea of committing to something when I might possibly botch it up and ruin a good track. I really do HATE tracking vocals, i'd much rather produce them but for now i'm doing it about 50% of the time, which is roughly say, oh, about 50% more than I want. need....artists.....bigger.....budgets...someone.....help....can't.....breathe....
i'd just rather give the fellas at mixdown an ultra clean track that i don't mess up so they don't have to make lemonade.

so thanks for that, i think i'm going to go with the barrels right now, and focus on the stc-8, or is it the 1968...or is it the vari-mu...the 8900? and i guess i'll be one more of those people with an opinion on distressors for vox soon after i give it a test....

Thanks for all your help guys!!!!!!!!!!!!
Guest
#29
21st March 2005
Old 21st March 2005
  #29
Guest
Guest
 
Posts: n/a

Quote:
thanks for that. i thought it would be a good limiter, i actually thought it might come close to distressor speed. do you have an opinion as to the transpacency of it when tracking and below threshold? i really am looking for transparency because my grand plan is to comp later which may or may not include color) with stc-8 or 1968 or manley vari-mu. good tip on the BV sub mix, though. i'll have to remember to remember that.

The Elop is a great limiter.
I have bought and sold 2 La2a's (one vintage/ one not) since owning it.

As fast as the Distressor? I am not sure such an animal exist.
When I use the Elop cutting Vox, I tend to place the Distressor after it and set it on Nuke to protect the take ONLY. No compression under normal signal.
The Elop will let transients through.

Transparent? I think it is very transparent.


Personally, I also like to make it work.
I think an Elop sounds much better working.



David
#30
21st March 2005
Old 21st March 2005
  #30
Gear addict
 
barforama's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2002
Location: Denmark
Posts: 474

barforama is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by lordmiguel
I haven't actually found anyone who uses the manley ELOP, i could probabaly afford that.
I use ELOP all the time. Especially when tracking guitars (acoustic and electric). It is also quite cool for bassguitars and vocals. That is if you wan't smooth limiting.
__________________
Torsten
Dual Mono Lab

"...when they tell me I could have bought a new car for that amount I tell them that no one has ever made a record in a Toyota!" - quote AllBread
New Reply Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook  Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter  Submit Thread to LinkedIn LinkedIn  Submit Thread to Google+ Google+ 
 
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
wakkus / Remote Possibilities in Acoustic Music & Location Recording
12
hellogrant / Low End Theory
6
impact studios / So much gear, so little time!
0
Mongo / So much gear, so little time!
8

Forum Jump

SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.