Still using L2

[T.H.Reid]

Any of you mastering people still use the waves hardware l2 at all? A lot? Not much? Just curious, if it's still a part of your arsenal. Thanks, Thomas

[djwaudio]

Hardware indeed. It's a great limiter. It will change balances and timbres if used heavily, so beware.

[pmx]

got it, but use it rarely. last song i did with it needed a bit more grit in the last chorus, so i punched it in without doing any g/r. don't really like it as a 'working horse' limiter though.

[aivoryuk]

Not really, tried to use it yesterday on a master that just needed slightly tame taming. It wasn't the amount reduction used (only .5 dB reduction) it was more just the overall sound seemed closed in. Switched over to Elephant 3 and it just sounded more open.

Maybe one time it will be the right one to use. there is no one limter fits all.

[lucey]

It's terrible, it's old, it's a shredder over 2db of limiting ... why would anyone bother?













(use it everyday)

[mildav]

i prefer izotope ozone and massey L 2007

[rodreb]

I still prefer the L2 and L3 over the others that I currently have. (Sonnox, Izotope, PSP, etc.) It just sounds like a record should sound to me.

Just personal opinion, not trying to sell anyone else on it. It just works for me.

[T.H.Reid]

Thank you guys for taking the time to answer. I was asking because I have owned and used it almost daily for 6 years, mostly for subtle .5db or so limiting, but sometimes to destroy things as well, and was thinking it's sound (it does have one, yes) was maybe passed it's used-by date (or maybe I am). Thanks for your time. Thomas

[JPeters86]

I've used it a lot on a rock album recently. About 2db reduction after slamming an opto compressor in. Just what the tracks needed.

[greggybud]

Still use it and love it, but never push it very far. Therefore I never think of one limiter that works best for all situations. It's just another good tool among many available. You need to know its strengths and limitations, and when and how to apply it to achieve your desired audio objectives.

I use the software however I'm told software and hardware should null.

[winrar]

Originally Posted by aivoryuk

Not really, tried to use it yesterday on a master that just needed slightly tame taming. It wasn't the amount reduction used (only .5 dB reduction) it was more just the overall sound seemed closed in. Switched over to Elephant 3 and it just sounded more open.
.

never new Elephant had hardware version

[winrar]

Originally Posted by greggybud

I use the software however I'm told software and hardware should null.

L1 and L2 nulls 100%, that i know, ( on out celling value at -0.1 or smaller )

i wouldnt be so surprised if they did too

but some reason, L2 sounds better than L1, that what they say ,

[cooker]

Originally Posted by greggybud

Still use it and love it, but never push it very far. Therefore I never think of one limiter that works best for all situations. It's just another good tool among many available. You need to know its strengths and limitations, and when and how to apply it to achieve your desired audio objectives.

I use the software however I'm told software and hardware should null.

If I remember right, the hardware version is unlinked and it uses converters so I'm not sure on what degree they can null.

[winrar]

Originally Posted by cooker

If I remember right, the hardware version is unlinked and it uses converters so I'm not sure on what degree they can null.

in the case of using digital in / out he meant....

[Benmrx]

Originally Posted by lucey

It's terrible, it's old, it's a shredder over 2db of limiting ... why would anyone bother?













(use it everyday)

Because Brian, unfortunately, for alot of guys, even 2db of limiting isn't enough.........

[lucey]

Originally Posted by winrar

in the case of using digital in / out he meant....

The unlink feature (left and right) is a cool element of using the hardware. Plus it allows an analog chain to work in real time without going back through the DAW.

Originally Posted by Benmrx

Because Brian, unfortunately, for alot of guys, 2db of limiting isn't enough.........

Hey I resemble that remark ... (clipping the AD)

[winrar]

Originally Posted by lucey

The unlink feature (left and right) is a cool element of using the hardware. Plus it allows an analog chain to work in real time without going back through the DAW.



Hey I resemble that remark ... (clipping the AD)

you can kind a do that by adjusting the L-R input levels on L1 ultra_maximizer+
which NULL to L2

[lucey]

Originally Posted by winrar

you can kind a do that by adjusting the L-R input levels on L1 ultra_maximizer+

I don't follow you, does the software run unlinked? That's the question ...

thanks,

[winrar]

Originally Posted by lucey

I don't follow you, does the software run unlinked? That's the question ...

thanks,

on "L1 ultra maximizer +" input levels are unlinked, to be honest,
you cant even link hem

by adjusting the input level, (you would know better than me)
you can kind a simulate, un_linked threshold level.

but the celling, is linked... i dont see any reason for un-inking the celling, anyway...

and
L1 ultra maximizer + NULLs 100% with L2 software...

[Benmrx]

Originally Posted by lucey

Hey I resemble that remark ... (clipping the AD)

resemble? The next record I'll be sending you will definatly need to be more "extreme" than this last one. If you need/want to clip the AD, go for it...

[Andy Krehm]

Originally Posted by lucey

I don't follow you, does the software run unlinked? That's the question ...

thanks,

Yes, the latest version of the L2 can be used unlinked.

I've had the hardware version for years and it has needed repairs several times. That means shipping it to the service depot and lots of money. It just broke again a couple of weeks ago!!!

I'm just about ready to give up on it as the software, now that it is finally can be used unlinked, is very, very close in sound. Tests I did several years ago did not null, but there were only slight indications (on a timeline) that there wasn't a true null.

As far as I am concerned, the only advantage of the hardware is that you can have a different software limiter up and A/B quickly with one finger on the mouse and one on the hardware bypass rather than turn one sofware limiter off and the other one on.

Which brings me to the next point. I'm also using the PSP Xenon and the Massey 2007 Limiter. After using the L2 on thousands of projects, I have discovered that other limiters can be better/different on certain material. I often check all three on each track I am mastering as they all have different charactaristics and often one is a clear winner.

The PSP Zenon has the most controls that can be changed favourably and the L2 has the least. The Massey has quite a few controls but I don't find changing them to be of much use (other than the limiting and the output control).

[lucey]

Originally Posted by Benmrx

resemble? The next record I'll be sending you will definatly need to be more "extreme" than this last one. If you need/want to clip the AD, go for it...

I used to be so opposed to clipping on principle, then I woke up by accident one day and was clipping the hell out of the Pacific AD ... and it was good. I spent a lot of time studying the masters of loud mastering, and am very confident today about it.

Back on the L2, it has a forward thing that's a great sound in small doses, and can shred the drums, so don't go there!

[Waltz Mastering]

Originally Posted by lucey

I used to be so opposed to clipping on principle, then I woke up by accident one day and was clipping the hell out of the Pacific AD ... and it was good.

The day you went to the dark side...; ) .....distant heavy low breathing.