As I can see with limiter you can turn up the input so it is maximizing too, isn't it? RAMI Guest. I thought "Maximizer" was just a name some companies gave to their limiters to make them sound cool. Waves has "Multi-Maximizer". But I might be wrong. Maybe the only difference is that a Maximizer has automatic gain make up.
So, the more you limit, the louder it gets automatically. I'm just guessing. Massive Master www. The original or at least first famous Maximizer was the BBE unit, which was the bee's-knees c. So: Massive Master said:. Click to expand Generally speaking, a limiter is a compressor applied to a channel which has a high threshold and high ratio.
They are designed to compress peaks which already high level to stop them hitting 0 and clipping, as such they don't usually require much if any make-up gain. Maximizers tend to do the job of reducing the dynamic range more significantly. They also tend to have a 'look forward' option to assess the audio just before it actually needs to be processed, that way it can make the compression less noticeable.
A Maximizer is just a brickwall limiter that automatically pulls up the gain. It just makes life easier but is essentially the same thing. It depends on what you are doing. I use maximizers or brickwall limiters depending on how you want to call them all over my mixes on individual channels.
I want them to be pre-fader so that the fader adjusts the level of the entire channel, not the level going into the maximizer. Actually, I would love an option to turn all the the post-fader slots into pre-fader slots.
If anything, the whole post-fader slot system is a nuisance to me. Even nicer would be if it could be done on a channel by channel basis.
Oh, and more slots please. I did think of that afterwards, as they can of course be used anywhere, but since they can be quite CPU intensive maximisers, that is, not brickwalls , using them in too many places can crush a system.
I have never come across a situation that I remember where I used a post-fader slot on a non-output track. Would be interested to hear of a use case. I would suggest that all slots for all tracks, except the outputs, be pre-fader, but with the option, on a per-track basis, to progressively switch to post-fader, last one first. The default for the output tracks should remain post-fader on the last two, as I suspect that many would too easily forget to switch to post-fader when they insert maximisers and ditherers, since they MUST be post-fader.
It even has inter-sample clipping prevention. However, I just thought of a possible problem when using a separate maximiser or brickwall limiter and dithering plugins. Do ditherers include the micro-dynamics adjustments to prevent this, or do their basic algorithms, by their nature, prevent it?
I was under the impression dither only affects the least significant bits, never altering the more-significant bits. Sometimes this parameter is off-limits to the user. Within the last few years, true-peak technology has become de rigueur for any modern limiter to compete—and many limiters now offer it as a selectable option.
There is, of course, a more controversial point to make: yes, many mastering engineers use true-peak limiters—but plenty of engineers dislike ISP limiters, claiming their sound affects the material in a deleterious, adverse way.
Some would rather lower the output ceiling to ensure nothing got past 0 dBFS than submit a louder master with a true-peak limiter deployed.
Indeed, take your favorite tunes from the last five years and put them through iZotope RX. Click on Waveform Stats. I can guarantee that many of your favorite tunes easily clip past 0 dBTP. Personally, I go on a case-by-case basis, depending on the needs of the client and the needs of the song. Whether or not you want to use true-peak limiting is up to you or your mastering engineer. Limiters can come with attack and release controls, but not all of them do. As a matter of fact, their GUIs can appear vastly different, depending on the brand.
Some limiters have threshold sliders dictating the level at which gain reduction begins; these sliders also affect the corresponding output gain, and as such, the signal seems louder the more you pull these sliders down.
Other limiters ditch the threshold control altogether, showing you only input gain; these increase the level—and gain reduction—the more you push them up into the digital ceiling. Some limiters offer stereo linking controls, the manipulation of which can have an effect on the width of your mix. Left totally unlinked, both channels will be limited independently, causing each channel or the other to dip in level on its own. This can create an interesting sense of width, because each side of the stereo image is reacting differently to the limiter, drawing the ear in different directions.
When pushed too far, unlinked limiting can cause the stereo image to wander in distracting, unpleasant ways. Conversely, you can often opt to link the left and right channels, in which case the louder one, regardless of its stereo placement, will trigger gain reduction across the board. Often degrees of linking are provided, usually in percentages. Your ears will ultimately be the judge of what sounds best here.
These days, limiters often employ selectable algorithms to better suit your individual music, some of which deploy sophisticated multiband technology under the hood. Luckily, most companies offer manuals to explain their algorithms, and iZotope is no exception, providing a detailed explanation of IRC in their documentation.
Where does multiband come in? All of this is well and good, but how do you actually use a limiter to your advantage? After all, if set wrong, limiters can introduce their own distortion, as well as unpleasant side effects on the groove. I usually go through some iteration of this process every time I demo a newly-released limiter. Many limiters allow you to link the input gain or threshold control with the output ceiling, so that as you push one, the other comes down in level.
Ozone Pro has a linking feature that pairs the threshold slider to the ceiling. Turn that on as you pull the threshold down. Compare the limited signal with its bypassed variant, carefully noting the differences in timbre.
Does the track feel narrower with the limiter on? Are the transients pillowy, softer, or otherwise altered? Does the groove of the whole piece seem different? Note your generalized findings, and write them down if that helps you it helps me with internalization.
This is where things get fun—and depending on the limiter, a bit tricky. Isolating and soloing these artifacts will call attention to them. The same general principle underscores this exercise. Some limiters offer specific delta parameters, but not all do.
0コメント