Higher Gain without clipping / distortion or limiters

[pedrogoya]

Hi guys, this issue has been bugging me for a while now. When doing digital mastering jobs I simply use some api or ssl eqs to get my tonality, and then use the focusrite
liquid mix to emulate some compressions. I have to say i get really pleased and happy with the
result. My main complaint is all about the overall volume. It is not thaaat low, though I would like to gain a little more volume without clipping, using maximizers, limiters (that would mask all my master proprieties). Is there anything, any hint I should know to solve this issue? Have you experienced the same? Any help appreciated!

Thanks in advance















result

[oldeanalogueguy]

Originally Posted by pedrogoya

Hi guys, this issue has been bugging me for a while now. When doing digital mastering jobs I simply use some api or ssl eqs to get my tonality, and then use the focusrite
liquid mix to emulate some compressions. I have to say i get really pleased and happy with the
result. My main complaint is all about the overall volume. It is not thaaat low, though I would like to gain a little more volume without clipping, using maximizers, limiters (that would mask all my master proprieties). Is there anything, any hint I should know to solve this issue? Have you experienced the same? Any help appreciated!

Thanks in advance
result

read up on DR mastering compression and related topics

katz book woudl be a good start

[2pulse]

Originally Posted by pedrogoya

I would like to gain a little more volume without clipping, using maximizers, limiters

So would most mastering engineers, but last I checked, that's how they do it.

[Cheebs Goat]

Originally Posted by pedrogoya

I would like to gain a little more volume without clipping, using maximizers, limiters

The Rockadillo Loudness Harvester plugin gives 87 db of 100% transparent gain past digital zero without clipping, maximization, or limiting. The only problem is that the first time it was used, God himself came down to Earth to forbid man from further weilding the Rockadillo Loudness Harvester. He said something about such sounds being the sole domain of the angels in Heaven. Like we weren't supposed to have our eternal reward too early or something.

You can probably get it real cheap and then wait until God retires.

[Tubefreak]

Originally Posted by pedrogoya

Is there anything, any hint I should know to solve this issue?

EQ or when that's not helping, then try some EQ.

The only way to get a full sound out of a (good) mix is EQ! Compression, limiting, clipping, distortion, etc. are only secondary helpers. There are some nice software EQs, but best results come from good analog EQs.

Maarten

[mmarra]

Along with EQing I would try upward compression (parallel comp) and/or upward expansion as those would give you increased perceived loudness while not impacting dynamics alot.

[Virtalahde]

Cut everything below 200hz.

[Red Mastering]

Originally Posted by Cheebs Goat

The Rockadillo Loudness Harvester plugin gives 87 db of 100% transparent gain past digital zero without clipping, maximization, or limiting. The only problem is that the first time it was used, God himself came down to Earth to forbid man from further weilding the Rockadillo Loudness Harvester. He said something about such sounds being the sole domain of the angels in Heaven. Like we weren't supposed to have our eternal reward too early or something.

You can probably get it real cheap and then wait until God retires.

lol

[oldeanalogueguy]

Originally Posted by Cheebs Goat

The Rockadillo Loudness Harvester plugin gives 87 db of 100% transparent gain past digital zero without clipping, maximization, or limiting. The only problem is that the first time it was used, God himself came down to Earth to forbid man from further weilding the Rockadillo Loudness Harvester. He said something about such sounds being the sole domain of the angels in Heaven. Like we weren't supposed to have our eternal reward too early or something.

You can probably get it real cheap and then wait until God retires.

past digital zero with no clipping

now that is aaaamazing

[Dene]

I don't understand the question. For more gain you'll need a gain stage, to prevent it from clipping you will need a limiter...Assuming the mixes are balanced, and the EQ curve is clean, how else can it be done?
...honestly I think you are asking the wrong question. Once you know what question to ask...search the board and you'll find the answer

[Cellotron]

The old school way - circa 1992 for those of us who only had Sound Designer II and nothing else trying to get close to what the big houses were doing - and a technique that still happens often now for things like "purist" classical or jazz mastering - is just to automate quick fades down on the higher peaks in the track and use a digital gain stage to bring up the body of the track. It takes a while to do and can't get you anywhere near as much gain in comparison to just putting a brickwall limiter on - but in some cases can afford you more control and more transparency. I just mastered a cello/piano duo album using this technique in fact.

As noted before in this thread equalization with bringing the mids and upper mids slightly forward is also an easy way of increasing perceived volume without changing the dynamics.

Best regards,
Steve Berson

[Dene]

...and if you combine Cellotron's technique with a brickwall you won't hit the brickwall as hard...

[polybonk]

Originally Posted by Cheebs Goat

The Rockadillo Loudness Harvester plugin gives 87 db of 100% transparent gain past digital zero without clipping, maximization, or limiting. The only problem is that the first time it was used, God himself came down to Earth to forbid man from further weilding the Rockadillo Loudness Harvester. He said something about such sounds being the sole domain of the angels in Heaven. Like we weren't supposed to have our eternal reward too early or something.

You can probably get it real cheap and then wait until God retires.

Aren't there cheap knockoffs of the Loudness Harvester kicking around? Slate? They do a non limiter which I think might have been based on the design that God forbids.

Its such a shame for all us volume farmers that the coveted bounty of audio sausage's remain good old fashioned hard work!

[wado1942]

I want to make every room in my house four feet taller but don't want to use a saw or insert any more construction materials.
Even the quick manual peak fade technique Cellotron mentioned will technically be limiting/distorting the sound. Taking down the hottest six peaks on a song by 1.5dB manually isn't really any different from using a hard limiter to do the same thing. All the limiter does is reduce the level of peaks before they reach maximum level.

You can't change the laws of physics Jim!

[Kayo]

Gain stage it, using the cleanest hardware device you have..
If digital, subdue maximized peaks slightly to lift the overall track slightly.

Also, as previously suggested, manually addressing the peaks is one way and Yes, cutting the lows helps considerably etc..

Sonnox inflator is one plug that could help in sorts or address this for you.
The event Horizon plug, is another wild west way of attaining much required gain.
Staggering and balancing limiters is another...


KAyo

[Adam Dempsey]

Originally Posted by wado1942

You can't change the laws of physics Jim!

Originally Posted by Kayo

The event Horizon plug, is another wild west way of attaining much required gain.

Ah.. well the laws of physics & a singularity - that's another thing altogether. (*enters the machine room & wheels out the Hawking Device*).

[Cellotron]

Originally Posted by wado1942

I want to make every room in my house four feet taller but don't want to use a saw or insert any more construction materials.
Even the quick manual peak fade technique Cellotron mentioned will technically be limiting/distorting the sound.

Well, technically it wouldn't be distorting the sound at all - because "distortion" would mean that you changed the harmonic content, transient shape, frequency content, or introducing some amount of noise (or wow, flutter, or channel cross talk) that was not present previous to the processing. Where as with gain staging briefly you are just changing the amplitude of that section as long as the gain stage is in fact a "transparent" one.

Taking down the hottest six peaks on a song by 1.5dB manually isn't really any different from using a hard limiter to do the same thing.

Not necessarily a major difference - but limiters do in fact distort the peak area by at least some small degree. Of course the distortions during the points where the limiter is doing gain reduction can in fact sometimes (i.e. often) be less objectionable sounding than automating a gain reduction!

You can't change the laws of physics Jim!

Agreed!

Best regards,
Steve Berson

[wado1942]

I see your point, but changing the level of a peak vs. say, soft clipping it means the distortion happens at the zero crossing rather than at the peak. No less audible, just different. Now if you do a more gradual "ducking" action, there's still a very brief distortion, mainly in the low frequencies. It'd be about the same as a hard limiter with a touch of hold time, which might actually be a good idea. Even if you could avoid changing the frequency content, dynamic distortion is still distortion. It may not be audible, but limiters & clipping aren't always audible either.

BTW, I used to use that technique you're describing HEAVILY before I came up with a digital soft clipper, then later, hard limiter. I STILL use the manual ducking for some stuff. So I'm not trying to discount your statement, but they all have their issues.

[Joelistics]

If the program material allows, saturation can be a way to add some perceived level..
You could also experiment with lookahead compression. Can be the ticket on some songs..

It´s never just ONE thing that makes a track loud..