1. Register NOW and become part of this fantastic knowledge base forum! This message will go away once you have registered.

L2 or Tc Finalizer?

Discussion in 'Pro Audio Equipment' started by vagelis, Jan 25, 2002.

  1. vagelis

    vagelis Guest

    Which Box is the better one?
     
  2. RandomGuest

    RandomGuest Guest

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2001
    Apples and oranges. Or in this case, maybe it's more like comparing a bayonet to a swiss army knife.

    The L2 does brickwall limiting and conversion. The Finalizer has EQ, multiband compression, expansion, normalization, phase metering, tone generation, stereo width adjustment, digital "radiance", auto fades, bunches of style presets, and probably will wash your car if can figure out how.

    That being said, if what you need is limiting and/or conversion, the L2 is really good for that. But if you need all that other stuff, maybe the Finalizer is what you need. I bought a Finalizer when it first came out back when I was using ADATs, but the past few years I hardly ever touch it. Probably because I send all my stuff out for mastering these days, and mastering engineers tend to hate it if you throw too much stuff across the whole mix. But if I was doing in-house mastering, I'd rather use the L2 and get the other stuff from different sources.
     
  3. vagelis

    vagelis Guest

    I got the finalizer too.I just wanted to know if the L2 as limiter is the better one.I used the L1 for the homemastering but I loose the bassdrum(kick) on high Levels.I got sometimes the same Problem with the finalizer too.Any sugestions?
     
  4. brad

    brad Guest

    ....
     
  5. vagelis

    vagelis Guest

    For what do you wann use it then?(Sorry I never worked with this thing before)
     
  6. brad

    brad Guest

    ....
     
  7. RandomGuest

    RandomGuest Guest

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2001
    Probably just a language barrier thing, Brad. He probably wasn't familiar with the idiom "has no peer" and misinterpreted it to mean the opposite.
    Vagelis - what Brad was saying is that the L2 is the best of all the available limiters at what it does.
     
  8. i cannot conceive of a time it would not be detrimental to use it for tracking or mixing.


    Brad,
    All I've heard from other users of the L2 hardware is that it is one of the best front ends to ProTools. A/D was co-developed with Manley Labs. Why would it be detrimental to use it for tracking? I was assuming that the original poster meant hardware when he stated "best box". Maybe that is where the confusion started.
    Thanks.
    Allen :)
     
  9. vagelis

    vagelis Guest

    Ok Guys!Thanks a lot.I got ro refresh my English for a better understanding.(Greek)
     
  10. RandomGuest

    RandomGuest Guest

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2001
    "Why would it be detrimental to use it for tracking"?

    Using the process on everything would probably be wreckless or unwise, just as a converter would be fine..

    Hmmm,

    I want one!

    :)
     
  11. brad

    brad Guest

    ....
     
  12. The L2 is indeed a nice front end for PT, as is the HEDD. (I just wish Dave could upgrade our original to the new version...) Most everything tracked here goes through one or the other.

    I normally do no processing on the L2 (other than setting the output ceiling at -.1dB to avoid any possibility of overs with unusually dynamic sources) on the way in, but I have on occasion squashed something purely as an effect... Usually, a kick or bass. It can be a very 'distinctive' sound.
    I would recommend *extreme* caution, however, as it is possible to remove most or all of the transient from the signal. And a drum with no transient equals zero "punch."

    And Jules, you mean you don't have an L2 yet?
    Geez, that was last year's "Must Have" accessory... And you call yourself a gear slut...

    Sincerely,
     
  13. vagelis

    vagelis Guest

    I've heard that they use it sometimes for Guitar-bass etc. Is that true?
     
  14. brad

    brad Guest

    ....
     
  15. Brad,
    Thank you for clearing that up. Do you know what it is like to be on the verge of pushing the buy button and then you see something that totally goes against what you were believing in the product? Whew. That is alot of cha ching for a purchasing mistake. Actually I don't see much about the HEDD on the web so it must be out of reach for alot of people. I've heard alot of praise for Crane Song though. So have you actually A/B'd the L2 A/D and the HEDD or was that a subjective comment?
    And Jules I was surprised too. Now take one of those Apogees off the shelf and get yourself one of those L2s and one HEDD. I would love to hear from someone that has A/B'd the Lucid 24/96, Apogee AD8000, Digi 888, Crane Song HEDD, Waves L2, and RME 2496. Thanks everyone.
    Allen :)
     
  16. brad

    brad Guest

    ....
     
  17. Thanks Brad,
    I appreciate your honesty and unbiased opinion here. At least I know that you aren't a sales rep for Crane Song or Apogee. Since I already have the L2 software I think I'll hold off and see how the PTHD 192K compares to the HEDD 192. We could only wish that it were the same unit or better. Let me know what you find out. Thanks and keep up the great posts.
    Allen

    ahallada@aol.com
     
  18. brad

    brad Guest

    ....
     
  19. Jon Atack

    Jon Atack Guest

    I'll second Brad's posts about the L2.

    Like most gear I like, the L2 is pretty much a one-trick pony that does its one trick well. I do not use the L2 for anything other than mastering, getting the last few dBs just before UV22HRing down to 16 bits. The L2 does a darn good job at limiting as long as you don't overdo it...though the sound still takes a slight hit when compared at equal levels. If it wasn't necessary to use the L2, I'd be much happier.

    Brad, FWIW I set the L2's out ceiling at -0.3 dB. Do you go higher than that?

    Jon
     
  20. brad

    brad Guest

    ....
     

Share This Page