Is L2 standard for everyone?

[ho-fi]

i usually use a jünger d01 hardware box or the roger nichols finis plug. those are both very versatile and clean sounding

[bob katz]

Originally Posted by inlinenl

How do you guys audit/listen to you're processing including the "limiting" when you're having a software limit ..... or do you guys capture without limiting and adding if needed limiting ....

I like the L2 hardware and/or the weiss ds1 as a hardware limiter box because I can process into the limiter and hearing the "final" result/capture ....

the L2 will be a classic one day ... on ebay they're asking € 1500,- for a 3 years old one ...

How do we audit/listen to processing if using a software limit? Like any plugin, if it's in line you can hear it. So I'm not sure I understand your question...

Well, my classic L2 hardware is about to go up for sale...

BK

[inlinenl]

Hello Bob, limiter would be last in line ... now when limiting with the ds1 or l2 is all in/on my croockwood ....
sending that signal to my DAW ... the software limiter in my case would be on the capture DAW ...

don't see how I can monitor that signal ... in my setup ... but I'm thinking how I could setup ... to do that .... I would like to expiriment ....
if I have the time :-)

no problems using plug-ins on the sending-daw ... but on the capture DAW and monitor it, while using the croockwood .... ????? without any extra hardware ......

[UnderTow]

Originally Posted by inlinenl

Hello Bob, limiter would be last in line ... now when limiting with the ds1 or l2 is all in/on my croockwood ....
sending that signal to my DAW ... the software limiter in my case would be on the capture DAW ...

don't see how I can monitor that signal ... in my setup ... but I'm thinking how I could setup ... to do that .... I would like to expiriment ....
if I have the time :-)

no problems using plug-ins on the sending-daw ... but on the capture DAW and monitor it, while using the croockwood .... ????? without any extra hardware ......

Can you route the output of the capture DAW back to your Croockwood? Surely you must monitor any limting you do in the capture DAW? If so, it should be easy. (Assuming there is enough I/O on your Croockwood of course).

Alistair

[bob katz]

Originally Posted by UnderTow

Can you route the output of the capture DAW back to your Croockwood? Surely you must monitor any limting you do in the capture DAW? If so, it should be easy. (Assuming there is enough I/O on your Croockwood of course).

Alistair

Here's a scenario. Sending DAW can run plugins.

Source material out outputs 3/4 with some plugins to AES/EBU and/or analog gear


Loop back into Sending DAW inputs 3/4 and insert limiter plugin

Out Sending DAW ouputs 5/6 and to receiving DAW through SRC if desired.

Crookwood monitors receiving DAW

That's a very simple summary of how we do it here when using a limiter plugin at the end of the chain and some intermediate outboard gear in the middle of the chain.

BK

[Andy Krehm]

I still think you guys are throwing out the baby with the bathwater!

As a former die-hard L2 fan, I have finally added some other limiters to my arsenal. I use the TC Brickwall and the Xenon PSP. I am really enjoying the latter for aggressive, loud masters.

But the L2 hardware is just sitting there in line, unlinked, waiting to be auditioned. And it still works great for some things. For instance the very reason it doesn't work as well for some tracks is the very reason to use it on others!

Also, if you have a plug-in limiter set-up and ready to go, it is easy to hear the difference by pressing the bypass on the L2 hardware along with a mouse click on the bypass of the software, much easier than try to audition 2 plug-ins.

Right now, I'm running about 70% Zenon to 30% L2 but that changes from album to album. If you haven't tried it, the unlinked mode makes a difference.

[robot gigante]

I don't like the L2 at all. If I have to limit I use the Massey.

[Andy Krehm]

Originally Posted by robot gigante

I don't like the L2 at all. If I have to limit I use the Massey.

I actually bought the Massey b/c the guy's demo was impossible to a/b with anything else, at least quickly. So far, I haven't used it on one master.

The L2 is still still being used on many, many albums by many well-known me's so I wouldn't be so quick to write it off. Of course you wouldn't want to use it with much more than 1.5 gr.

[yeloocproducer]

Sonnox... if you test drive it for more than a week, I can't see you going back. I run it in dual mono sometimes and it sounds great like that too.

[djwaudio]

Originally Posted by Andy Krehm

. Of course you wouldn't want to use it with much more than 1.5 gr.

1.5 dB only? How do you get that other 7dB of peak reduction? Seems hardly worth putting in the chain for that little GR... Must be for the "sound"... <tongue in cheek>

I've got no beef with the L2. It was the least offensive loudness maker out there for a long time. All the ME's will probably keel over at this, but I think the quality of mastering since it's introduction has improved. A lot of those 90's hot level CDs are just painful with all the clipping. The L2 got us level with less artifact, and that's a good thing in my book.

Now the absent minded slapping an L2 on the bus for loudness is just sad. It takes a village of mastering gear to raise levels for this child...

[robot gigante]

Originally Posted by Andy Krehm

I actually bought the Massey b/c the guy's demo was impossible to a/b with anything else, at least quickly. So far, I haven't used it on one master.

The L2 is still still being used on many, many albums by many well-known me's so I wouldn't be so quick to write it off. Of course you wouldn't want to use it with much more than 1.5 gr.

I've used the L2 for years. It sounds like breaking glass to my ears. I don't use the Massey on every master, but it seems to do less damage even when taking off a db and a half. It's certainly not transparent however. And fwiw I do take the time to A/B them most of the time, on the off chance that the L2 would win, although lately I've not been as motivated to do so.

[squeegybug]

I like the MaxxBCL version of L2 for my needs. Simple, hands on hardware, fast and easy to use. No software in my setup, so that works for me.

But then, I don't crush audio until it cries for mercy... -12 RMS is about as far as I would usually go. For some basic limiting like this at the end of the chain the BCL/L2 works fine.

Interesting how folks here can sometimes get pretty intense about tools that can squeeze yet another .01 dB of gain out of a recording, yet then turn around and bemoan the loss of dynamic range and poor state of the art in the very next thread to come along.



Steve

[UnderTow]

Allot of the people using the L2 say that it sounds OK because they only do very light limiting with it. I don't quite follow this argument. Surely, the end result would sound even better if they did very light limiting with a cleaner limiter?

(I don't want to argue about the sound of the L2 itself. Everyone has their opinion. I just don't get the argument given by people).

Alistair

[Bob Olhsson]

One nice thing about the L2 is that the distortion comes on gradually rather than suddenly which happens with almost everything else.

Yes, there's more overall distortion but this can be less of a distraction. I listen to every single master with headphones and have had to redo several with just a bit of L2 in addition because of sudden distortion on a few peaks with other limiters.

[UnderTow]

Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson

One nice thing about the L2 is that the distortion comes on gradually rather than suddenly which happens with almost everything else.

Yes, there's more overall distortion but this can be less of a distraction. I listen to every single master with headphones and have had to redo several with just a bit of L2 in addition because of sudden distortion on a few peaks with other limiters.

Ah that makes sense. So you are saying that at these levels of gain reduction, there are no issues with the L2's sound and that it is only at higher gain reduction that other limiters might sound (noticeably) better?

Alistair

[Relicrecordings]

I like sonnox, however I have to be careful with that thing- its an over-inflater sometimes and totally kills my dynamics.

Surprised no one has mentioned the mcdsp ML1 (of the ML4000's) I use it on a lot of stuff, from tracks, to stems to the master sometimes...

[DSMrehearsal]

I have the hardware version in MAXX bcl, loved it for a long time. Tried soft version of L3 - gone back to the L2. I have done many tracks that have up to 10db reduction that still sound VERY analog and soft.

[Andy Krehm]

Originally Posted by UnderTow

Allot of the people using the L2 say that it sounds OK because they only do very light limiting with it. I don't quite follow this argument. Surely, the end result would sound even better if they did very light limiting with a cleaner limiter?

(I don't want to argue about the sound of the L2 itself. Everyone has their opinion. I just don't get the argument given by people).

Alistair

Because every piece of gear and plug-in affects the music differently. You don't use the same equalizer or even the same settings on everything so why not treat limiters the same way.

Just my opinion but with very light limiting there is hardly any difference in sound between them. But just in case there is, I'll quickly try 2 or even 3 of my limiters and see if I notice any differences. Since I master almost everyday, I have a pretty good idea in advance what will work so it doesn't take much time.

The audition process is far more important with loud, agressive music b/c limiters can sound really different on the same music and one brand will be just the right sound for a particular track. When I only had the L2, I made it work on thousands of masters but now I'm very happy to have discovered other brands and will be continuing my limiter acquistions when I have time.

[timbreman]

Has anybody tried WaveArts Final Plug 5 or am I the only one? Just curious what you guys think of that one.

[finetuner]

Originally Posted by djwaudio

1.5 dB only? How do you get that other 7dB of peak reduction? Seems hardly worth putting in the chain for that little GR...

By spreading your dynamic reduction using different methods (compression, AD clipping and limiting) and different equipment;

Every step will react differently to transients.

So instead of having one unit (e.g. the L2) do all the dirty work, each unit will contribute modestly it's own merit.
This will take your peak reduction further and with less an obvious 'fingerprint' of just one unit.

Cheers,
Peter van't Riet
FineTune Mastering

[Igotsoul4u]

I won't touch the L2 unless its the only one there. The McDsp ML4000 is the best IMO with the massey L20007 in 2nd followed by Sonnox.

[Boomshanka]

It also tends to depend very much on whether you're getting (broad band) gain reduction from bass (longer wavelengths) vs top end transients.

[Sunbreak Music]

Don't own it...........

[Tube World]

First off, music just sucks when you remove all the dynamics. I don't care what hardware or software plug in you use....it just sucks.

With that being said, the L2 does a great job if used in moderation. It sounds more natural compared to the UAD prec limiter which adds a color to the signal. I have been trying the Samplitude Ammunition plug in and like it a little better than the L2. But the L2 is still a good choice.

[Bob Olhsson]

Originally Posted by UnderTow

...you are saying that at these levels of gain reduction, there are no issues with the L2's sound and that it is only at higher gain reduction that other limiters might sound (noticeably) better?

No. I'm saying that other limiters are more transparent up to a certain point and then become real obvious and distracting. The L2 has a bit higher level of overall distortion however the way it increases is less sudden and obvious than the cleaner ones. It also tends to eat the low-end more than the others so you need to compensate for that.

[Franz]

I still havn´t been able to find a good replacement for the L2.
I have the L1, but that unit sounds too dull.
I have the UAD-1 Limtier. Too rock n´roll for me, but good for punk...
I have the Sonnox Limiter, but I can´t get it to work. It just doesn´t
limit the sound! I get dBfs overshooting no matter how I set it up!

[Jerry Tubb]

Originally Posted by nickynicknick

Hey guys just curious if everyone is using the L2 now...

I use my L2 Hardware all day, every day... usually set to 1dB of limiting.

Was a big improvement over the L1... ancient history.

Tried some of the other newer software limiters, they're fine, just different flavors.

Forum friends have suggested the PSP limiter... might give it a test one day.

I don't get real excited about every new software toy.

Stick to the tried and true method that's beeen working for years...

new and different are not necessarily better.

JT

[fradoca]

Psp Xenon here
better and less "colored" than L2

cheers

[Riccardo]

Originally Posted by Jerry Tubb

I use my L2 Hardware all day, every day... usually set to 1dB of limiting.

Was a big improvement over the L1... ancient history.

Tried some of the other newer software limiters, they're fine, just different flavors.

Forum friends have suggested the PSP limiter... might give it a test one day.

I don't get real excited about every new software toy.

Stick to the tried and true method that's beeen working for years...

new and different are not necessarily better.

JT

Same here but mine goes as far as 1.5 dBs

Considering the number of mastering toys coming to the market or "being marketed for mastering if you prefer...) it amuses me that nobody has come up with an alternative to the L2 Hardware apart from TC.

[lucey]

I'm still, and quite happily on the L2 hardware bandwagon ... unlinked, fast release. I don't rely on it for level however. Like anything else, it has virtues and it can be abused if pushed too far. I find it works in a perfect balance with the artifacts of the Alpha's Soft Limit (fat bottom), and a little clipping.

The PL2 is a very cool analog device, but not right for my chain.