The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Limiter comparisons (with sound) Dynamics Plugins
Old 20th September 2007
  #61
Gear Maniac
 
chrisma's Avatar
 

If you guys have a moment check out this new limiter call Event Horizom. I think it's pretty good and seems leave the snare alone like the TimeWorks Master Compressor does. I'd be curious to know your thoughts on it.

I currently use 2 instances of Elephant. The first in Clip Mode and the second just a brickwall and have gotten great results. With Event Horizon I'm getting done with one plugin what took two and can push it a little further before the program content starts to break.

Here's the documentation for the site:

"Event Horizon is a “Peak-Eating Limiter”…huh? Well, maybe a better description is that it’s a clipper with an optional soft-clip circuit. By truncating waveforms short of where the DAC would go into clipping, you can get VERY transparent loudness increases; unlike most limiters, Event Horizon does this with ZERO pumping, ZERO transient or frequency artifacts, and with ZERO latency. Now, it may not let you be louder than the latest “flavor of the month” “mastering” limiter, but within its range of operation, you WILL get an unsurpassed natural sound. Its output is what comes into it…only louder. If you push it too hard, it will tell you in no uncertain terms that this is no longer the right tool for the job. Give it a try…it’s fantastically easy to use, and it sounds great!"

Stillwell Audio - It’s About The Sound » Home
Old 21st September 2007
  #62
Lives for gear
 
blackcom's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by MattGray View Post
With the RTAS or TDM version in ProTools the Waves LinMB can only handle 24bit in & out even though the internal headroom is raised to double precision for it's DSP calculations. What you would be hearing when raising the gain on the plugin before it is digital clipping on the input side of the Waves LinMB.

Most 32bit floating point plugins can accept levels higher then 0.0dbfs without audible clipping because they have a floating 8 bit mantissa which shifts the bits to allow for roughly 54db of additional headroom above a 24bit fixed signal on input & output. A small minority of 32bit floating point plug-ins have a 24bit fixed ceiling on input & output so they will clip if the signal entering or exiting the plugin exceeds 0.0dbfs. Waves LinMB is one of those minority plug-ins that have a 24bit fixed input & output ceiling.

As for the sound of this clipping being any different to or better then other digital clippers is highly unlikely.

Matt
Oh, ok....any other 32-bit plugins you know of that also has 24-bit fixed celing on input and output... examples?

Other Waves plugs?
Old 21st September 2007
  #63
Lives for gear
 
blaugruen7's Avatar
lagerfeldt,
have you tested the finalplug from wavearts?
in my own testings some time ago i prefered it to the ozone plugin, because it did not so much change the sound...
Old 21st September 2007
  #64
Audio Alchemist
 
Lagerfeldt's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackcom View Post
Oh, ok....any other 32-bit plugins you know of that also has 24-bit fixed celing on input and output... examples?

Other Waves plugs?
Yup.
Old 21st September 2007
  #65
Lives for gear
 
Coyoteous's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by blaugruen7 View Post
lagerfeldt,
have you tested the finalplug from wavearts?
in my own testings some time ago i prefered it to the ozone plugin, because it did not so much change the sound...
This is what I use, since I went Waves-free. I could do the sample here, but I really don't understand the RMS measuring part of the procedure - are we talking about a statistical value for the whole file? Why not just compare with equal amounts of limiting?
Old 22nd September 2007
  #66
Gear Addict
 

hmmm, just to be sure

the Ozone sample on can download - is it the MattGray or the other one (Under ..... - do not remember and seems not to be here.....)

thanks
best
Old 22nd September 2007
  #67
Lives for gear
 
MattGray's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackcom View Post
Oh, ok....any other 32-bit plugins you know of that also has 24-bit fixed celing on input and output... examples?

Other Waves plugs?
Basically any of the Waves plugs that have an attenuator but no way to increase gain, these include Waves Lin EQ, LinMB & Q-Clone. Interestingly the Renaissance plugs & the Q series can accept levels over 0.0dbfs without clipping. McDSP's plugs are also limited...

Matt
Old 22nd September 2007
  #68
Lives for gear
 
wildpark's Avatar
 

over all iam not that friend of trance music since beginn of 94

but if iam sometimes in technoclubs cuz customers go there

i would be hear more quality like you lavry (you discriped us overcolored !freak)

sound the only way too accept techno music

pab
Old 23rd September 2007
  #69
Lives for gear
 
blackcom's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by MattGray View Post
Basically any of the Waves plugs that have an attenuator but no way to increase gain, these include Waves Lin EQ, LinMB & Q-Clone. Interestingly the Renaissance plugs & the Q series can accept levels over 0.0dbfs without clipping. McDSP's plugs are also limited...

Matt
Would Voxengo Elephant in "Clip" mode work just like pushing a Waves 32-bit plugin with 24-bit fixed celing on input and output or is there a difference?
Old 24th September 2007
  #70
Lives for gear
 
MattGray's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackcom View Post
Would Voxengo Elephant in "Clip" mode work just like pushing a Waves 32-bit plugin with 24-bit fixed celing on input and output or is there a difference?
I'm not familiar with Voxengo's Elephant but if it's oversampled then the distortion may not sound as aliased as clipping at 44.1kHz or 96kHz SR's with the Waves. Also if you clip through Waves then you should really lower the output slightly under 0.0dbfs & check for intersample peaks as these can cause problems in cheaper DAC's. Generally speaking pure digital clipping at 1xFS can sound too harsh & unacceptable on most material.

Matt
Old 24th September 2007
  #71
Deleted User
Guest
So how do these versions come out on the Panasonic Micro boombox?


Best Regards
Patrik
Old 28th September 2007
  #72
Lives for gear
 
Coyoteous's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coyoteous View Post
This is what I use, since I went Waves-free. I could do the sample here, but I really don't understand the RMS measuring part of the procedure - are we talking about a statistical value for the whole file? Why not just compare with equal amounts of limiting?
- may have time to try this now, what are you guys using to measure RMS with (just curious).
Old 28th September 2007
  #73
Lives for gear
 
dcollins's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coyoteous View Post
- may have time to try this now, what are you guys using to measure RMS with (just curious).
Speakers.

Oh, and the ear. I almost forgot that one.

RMS should be the last thing on your mind.

DC
Old 28th September 2007
  #74
Lives for gear
 
Coyoteous's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by dcollins View Post
Speakers.

Oh, and the ear. I almost forgot that one.

RMS should be the last thing on your mind.

DC
Hi Dave - well it is, the last thing on my mind, that is. I meant measuring RMS for the test, but I think you knew that...

I think this thread died anyway, or maybe I killed another one. Sometimes I can do that just by reading them, without even posting. heh

- guess I'll use this: http://www.channld.com/audle.html

though I think Wave Editor and Peak can too. Being the last thing on my mind, I couldn't remember. BTW, which ear do you prefer?
Old 28th September 2007
  #75
Both the Sonnox and Lavry clipping sound best to me ears, with the Sonnox pipping the Lavry, receiving bonus points for keeping the wave intact.

But, may I ask how you compressed the file prior to limiting? The original's pretty loud anyway, never mind limiting - what did you use?
Old 29th September 2007
  #76
Quote:
Originally Posted by yareck View Post
UAD Limiter is not for this kind of music.
Would you say the UAD is more geared to Rock?
Old 29th September 2007
  #77
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by blayz2002 View Post
Would you say the UAD is more geared to Rock?
Bass is nice and the limiting technique seems to be refined but the sound is softer after all. It's good when track is asking for that. If you want to make it more aggressive, something else could be used instead... but it's only my opinion, it may work differently for you.
Old 4th October 2007
  #78
Lives for gear
 
Alécio Costa's Avatar
 

Verified Member
I would like to make a suggestion: Would you please include TC´s MD3 TDM Limiter in this test? YOu could also use the MD4 (M6000 only) or the limiter section of TC MAster X (3+5).

I just did a quick check with OZone Lite here and it really surprised me.
Old 6th October 2007
  #79
Lives for gear
 
Alécio Costa's Avatar
 

Verified Member
MAssey Limiter could be tested too...
Old 6th October 2007
  #80
Here for the gear
 
Marcus S.'s Avatar
 

Please add
Wave Arts

and massey limiter
http://www.masseyplugins.com/index_v2.html?page=l2007
Old 16th October 2007
  #81
Lives for gear
 
Arksun's Avatar
Ozone does give a nice sense of solid fast transients in the mix indeed, though one can't really call it 'preserving the original transients' as the transients, lovely though they sound don't sound like they did in the original mix.

But then with all heavy limiting its some kind of tradeoff, the different 'flavours' of distortion as it were.

I feel the elephant could have sounded better, what settings were used?. I ran the original mix using 2x oversampling, 80% stereo link, EL2 type with Fast setting and felt it sounded better than the posted clip.

Something about that elephant has made it my limiter of choice, I can't explain it. Yes it smears a bit but if the mix sounds a little too precise and clinical, it works well. Listening with a technical mind, the likes of Oxford and Ozone sound the best, but musically.... something about that elephant that just does it for me.

When I use Voxengo's other plug R8Brain Pro for sample rate converting. The linear phase mode sounds more solid, but i prefer the way it sounds in minimal phase mode.

But now I'm seriously going to have to consider using the Ozone limiter instead on some tracks. Dependant on the source material I'd say.

Certainly the Ozone beats the Sony Oxford Limiter for me, much more stable dynamics.

Horses for courses
Old 17th October 2007
  #82
Audio Alchemist
 
Lagerfeldt's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by csl View Post
But, may I ask how you compressed the file prior to limiting? The original's pretty loud anyway, never mind limiting - what did you use?
For this track I used a hardware G SSL Type 4000 with 80 Hz 6dB/Oct sidechain roll off and also an automated Waves RenComp (!) in opto mode. I think I also strapped on a multiband (1 band only) in the upper mids.

I didn't use the Gyraf Gyratec X on this track, I don't automatically use a piece of equipment but look at what suits the particular track in question.

As you probably know the original track has to be mixed okay and equalizing needs to remove and enhance in the right places before you can reach the maximum potential of the compression and limiting.
Old 19th October 2007
  #83
a long time ago i was ozone and voxengo elephant user.
now i am happy user of UAD Precision Maximizer. KILLLERRRRR!
Old 19th October 2007
  #84
Lives for gear
 
MattGray's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by andivax View Post
a long time ago i was ozone and voxengo elephant user.
now i am happy user of UAD Precision Maximizer. KILLLERRRRR!
That's funny I wouldn't think there would be a 'one-limiter-fits-all'? I wouldn't be so quick to throw away good tools. Just because the UAD may sound like the best option for one track, you may find it's not the best option for another track. Choose the best tool for the job not the same tool for every job. Just like EQ 'choice' is the key...

Matt
Old 19th October 2007
  #85
Matt, of course you are right about different limiters/maximizers for different tracks.
BUT! Try to use elephant, l2 or ozone with stress RMS value. about -8 - -9 dB RMS.
you will hear a different color. and you will here ATTACK EATING (espesially with waves l2).
UAD Precision Maximizer can color signal (with internal enhancer ON) or can not add spectral enhancement.
But main advantage of UAD Precision Maximizer for me is a remaining of attack untouched.
Or you can even ADD ATTACK to material.

Amazing job, UA. Now i use Precision for psy trance and for rock pre-master.
I don't made mastering by myself, 'cos i am a producer.
But when i need to made a good demo, UAD save the day. And save the sound.
Old 21st October 2007
  #86
Gear Head
 

This is a great thread. I am somewhat of a novice, climbing the curve.

Here is an interesting excersize that I love doing. Place the original and the mastered version into your editor of choice. Zoom in and time align the two tracks.

Hit the phase buttom on one of them, and bring the louder track down until you hear the null. The reduction amount is approx the difference in RMS volume, the remaining is the artifacts of the limiting or compression products. You can make out the transient alterations as well as the audible distortion that is occuring. High frequency clicks cut through more than 'warmer' clicks.

Take the original file, copy it into another track and do this while adjusting you limiter of choice. its an eye opener. ear opener...

Great forum!! I would love to see a hardware compressor limiter comparison like this... I will search up here I'm sure its hear somewhere..

Thanks!!

Michael
Old 21st October 2007
  #87
Mastering
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mgarrett View Post
This is a great thread. I am somewhat of a novice, climbing the curve.
I think you are being too modest. Your suggestion below to do a null test with a limiter:

Quote:

Take the original file, copy it into another track and do this while adjusting you limiter of choice. its an eye opener. ear opener...
is an excellent one. You're definitely thinking outside the box! Everyone should spend some time training their ears to recognize limiter and compressor artifacts.

I heard some problematic interaction between percussion and trumpet attacks through one song on the 2:1 SSL buss compressor on that recording I was mentioning in another thread. The Lipinskis are quite revealing speakers, especially for compression artifacts.
Old 21st October 2007
  #88
Lives for gear
 
Arksun's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by mgarrett View Post
This is a great thread. I am somewhat of a novice, climbing the curve.

Here is an interesting excersize that I love doing. Place the original and the mastered version into your editor of choice. Zoom in and time align the two tracks.

Hit the phase buttom on one of them, and bring the louder track down until you hear the null. The reduction amount is approx the difference in RMS volume, the remaining is the artifacts of the limiting or compression products. You can make out the transient alterations as well as the audible distortion that is occuring. High frequency clicks cut through more than 'warmer' clicks.

Take the original file, copy it into another track and do this while adjusting you limiter of choice. its an eye opener. ear opener...

Great forum!! I would love to see a hardware compressor limiter comparison like this... I will search up here I'm sure its hear somewhere..

Thanks!!

Michael
Really cool idea. Kinda interesting listening to just the artifacts on their own.

I just tried this out in Cubase, took a section of a track I did a while back. Copied it onto multiple tracks, inverse phased tracks 2-4 and put a limiter on each one, then adjusted for any shift in sync and also volume to ensure they're cancelling out as much as possible.

The section of music I chose is pretty heavy complex electronic with some distortiong sounds in there too.

You can hear the differences here:

Index of /limitercomp

One thing this highlighted which surprised me is, the difference between no oversampling and oversampling in elephant. When the oversampling is on, its like the higher frequencies go out of phase or something. At first I thought it was just an additional latency shift I had to adjust for but it isn't, and on 2x oversampling the level of those higher frequencies increases a bit. Also changing the speed setting seems to alter this level, with it dissapearing on Min. I might ask Aleksey about why this is, something to do with the resampling algorithms, perhaps he used minimum phase sample rate conversion in his oversampling?.
Old 22nd October 2007
  #89
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by bob katz View Post
I think you are being too modest.
New to Mixing / Mastering, the first thing I did was buy your book, Thank you by the way!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by arksun
One thing this highlighted which surprised me, is the difference between no oversampling and oversampling in elephant. When the oversampling is on, its like the higher frequencies go out of phase or something.
The results can be complex to interpret. I like to actually create a mix down, and look at the difference file compared to the two files. For instance, a longer decay time on the limiter will cause 'leakage' after the transient etc. If you look at the files, you can tell what generated the artifact.

Also, if ther is multiband action happening in the gain control circuit, strange things can happen, or a multiband limiter...

I am really intrigued with the UAD precision limiter. That thing raised the RMS level about 4.6 db and barely touched the file, no high freq smearing etc. Very interesting. It did generate some clicking, which for some tracks may be more audible, and are no doubt program dependant.. I have only looked at two of the files so far.

The sonox, generated a fairly complex difference file, although it did not seem to get as much volume increase (audibly, NOT taking into acount the sonic features, which may be the best. I'm on the geek train currently!).

I may create a probe file, to find out what my stuff is doing. I will post it, if it is of interest.

To be continued..
Old 22nd October 2007
  #90
Lives for gear
 
Arksun's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by mgarrett View Post
I am really intrigued with the UAD precision limiter. That thing raised the RMS level about 4.6 db and barely touched the file, no high freq smearing etc. Very interesting. It did generate some clicking, which for some tracks may be more audible, and are no doubt program dependant.. I have only looked at two of the files so far.
You might want to pm lagerfeldt with your UAD clip if its any better than the currently posted version. Personally I felt the UAD one was one of the weakest out of those examples, far from transparent.
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
bobmaus / So much gear, so little time
4
tadguitar / So many guitars, so little time
10
Matthew D / So much gear, so little time
1

Forum Jump
Forum Jump