Best Brick Wall Limiters
Posted: Tue Mar 22, 2011 2:02 am
Hi ALl,
Just thought I would share my findings and may be hear from your own.
Some of you know that I am releasing a single (nothing too fantastic, but I try to do it right for the future). So yesterday , the guys who manage relationship with radios asked me if I wanted to boost my version as well as the dance versions they had been doing. My version comes from an expensive mastering studio in Paris (they have probably more than 100.000 euros of gear... like speakers at 22.000 euros (each!!) etc
..
But yes, it could be boosted , but it is hard to avoid distortion.
What i needed is just to cut a few peaks, more than what they could achieve in the mastering studios.
What they are asking for is a "re-master" (boost levels of the studio mastering).
1 - I began running my single through Optimaster: very good boost of volumes, but too slow compressors let micro peak pass through ( I didn't try the limiter, I have one DSP limiter that is better
...).
2 - Downloaded Izotope Ozone 4 Demo, and the plugin is pleasing, but a little bit behind Optimaster.... no improvement on compressors attacks. Optimaster does a better job in respecting the original shapes and volumes, but micro-peaks still pass through, forbiding a full normalization (you end up with more compressed dynamics, but a loss of volume, so it has to be re-worked a bit after an optimaster treatment). Izotope is exactly the same, but in my iopinion, it performs less than optimaster (look at the izotope shape below, which is nomalized at 0 dB... I don't have the optimaster pic, but it is much bbetter than izotope in this field. With Optimaster, all is more contained, there is not such big dropdowns in volumes, peaks are more rounded.)..
3 - Loaded Melda's Limiter..... which came free when I bought their compressor at 30 euros... and at last, it is what I wanted to get. Hard and fast clipping.
4 - I didn't try LimFat, but I know it would have done a good job in hard clipping, but not as well as Melda's plugins, which generate no distortion at such clipping levels, and also the thing is that I didn't want to go through Scope again due to the very tight schedule and no time to think too much (1 hour to do 4 tracks....) ... that's why I finally chose the vst way.
A picture speaks for itself, even though it is comparing different mix of lilmiting/compressing algorythm..
But in the same time, it is comparing two Mastering tools (Izotope and Optimaster) with an almost free limiter....
NB: There is a vinco too, but that was "pre-master-studio" (it is alsready in there).
ps: it is the mastering from the studio that is "re-mastered" (re-limited?), i don't think i would have reached such a rectangular wave without going to this mastering studio first (i've tested a couple of them, not all of them acheive good clipping/levelling, not without distortion at least).....
Good luck, and thanks to share experiences.
Just thought I would share my findings and may be hear from your own.
Some of you know that I am releasing a single (nothing too fantastic, but I try to do it right for the future). So yesterday , the guys who manage relationship with radios asked me if I wanted to boost my version as well as the dance versions they had been doing. My version comes from an expensive mastering studio in Paris (they have probably more than 100.000 euros of gear... like speakers at 22.000 euros (each!!) etc
.. But yes, it could be boosted , but it is hard to avoid distortion.
What i needed is just to cut a few peaks, more than what they could achieve in the mastering studios.
What they are asking for is a "re-master" (boost levels of the studio mastering).
1 - I began running my single through Optimaster: very good boost of volumes, but too slow compressors let micro peak pass through ( I didn't try the limiter, I have one DSP limiter that is better
...).2 - Downloaded Izotope Ozone 4 Demo, and the plugin is pleasing, but a little bit behind Optimaster.... no improvement on compressors attacks. Optimaster does a better job in respecting the original shapes and volumes, but micro-peaks still pass through, forbiding a full normalization (you end up with more compressed dynamics, but a loss of volume, so it has to be re-worked a bit after an optimaster treatment). Izotope is exactly the same, but in my iopinion, it performs less than optimaster (look at the izotope shape below, which is nomalized at 0 dB... I don't have the optimaster pic, but it is much bbetter than izotope in this field. With Optimaster, all is more contained, there is not such big dropdowns in volumes, peaks are more rounded.)..
3 - Loaded Melda's Limiter..... which came free when I bought their compressor at 30 euros... and at last, it is what I wanted to get. Hard and fast clipping.
4 - I didn't try LimFat, but I know it would have done a good job in hard clipping, but not as well as Melda's plugins, which generate no distortion at such clipping levels, and also the thing is that I didn't want to go through Scope again due to the very tight schedule and no time to think too much (1 hour to do 4 tracks....) ... that's why I finally chose the vst way.
A picture speaks for itself, even though it is comparing different mix of lilmiting/compressing algorythm..
But in the same time, it is comparing two Mastering tools (Izotope and Optimaster) with an almost free limiter....
NB: There is a vinco too, but that was "pre-master-studio" (it is alsready in there).
ps: it is the mastering from the studio that is "re-mastered" (re-limited?), i don't think i would have reached such a rectangular wave without going to this mastering studio first (i've tested a couple of them, not all of them acheive good clipping/levelling, not without distortion at least).....
Good luck, and thanks to share experiences.
i'd like to fatten up my stuff again, but not brick fat walling 
