L3 - ultramaximizer - multimaximizer

Discussion in 'Mastering' started by TanTan, Dec 26, 2004.

  1. TanTan

    TanTan Distinguished Member

    Hi ,

    Did you try them ?

    What do you think ? :wink:
     
  2. beachhunt

    beachhunt Guest

    Yes, and I have mixed feelings toward it...

    When the 'press releases' or whatever came out for it, my first thought was "oh great, something to smash the guts out of music even MORE :roll: "... Then it came out and I dowlnoaded the trial from Waves, to actually check it out =P

    Yes, it can smash things to hell, but then so can most other compressors/limiters if they're (mis)used that way. One benefit is that at extreme settings, the ultramaximizer is not as distorted as the L2. The multimaximizer still gets very distorted at extreme settings, but at more reasonable settings it does its job well. Sorta a LinMB with character.

    My vote: Better than I expected =)

    HB
     
  3. Massive Mastering

    Massive Mastering Well-Known Member

    When used PROPERLY, which is becomming SO rare as to find it shocking, it sounds fine.

    When used in a "typical" modern fashion, the sound is similar to a canine relieving itself directly into your ear.

    The brickwall limiter that handles the abuse in the most style? UAD's Precision Limiter. Still, easy to abuse, and depressing when it is.
     
  4. TotalSonic

    TotalSonic Guest

    I ended up actually purchasing the L3 soon after it came out after comparing it to the software version of the L2 - I found you could get slightly more transparent results from the L3 (read: less artifacts) when getting the same average levels than you could with the L2.

    In multiband mode Waves definitely gives you enough rope to figuratively hang yourself with as far as all the various different parameter controls go - you really need to be careful as you tweak as it's capable of doing some radical transformations that might not be what you truly desire to happen if you're not cautious and experienced in working with it.

    Anyway - the linear phase crossover points for the multiband are done really nicely so if you do find yourself needing a multiband limiter or "dynamic eq" it can certainly work well for this too - just do lots of level matched a/b's with the thing off to make sure you're really liking the end result and just not getting dazzled by extra sparks or digital hash.

    Haven't heard the UAD Precision thingy yet so can't comment on how the L3 compares. I tend to use the RML Labs Levelizer for the more subtly limited stuff as this tends to be extremely transparent when not pushed far - but if I need a "little extra push off the cliff" the L3 seems to function nicely.

    Lot of buzz going on about the TC6000's new MD4 algorithm - definitely an option to consider if you have the cash.

    As far as a limiter being a bad thing - if you want to get more average level and there's a few transients poking out of the mix a well wriiten digitial brickwall limiter algorithm is the most transparent way I've heard to do this. As far as crushing the heck out of stuff until you achieve clipping, flutter distortion and general sonic crappitude - well - any limiter can be made to destroy the audio if it is set incorrectly - just because this is most commonly done with L2's doesn't make them bad per se - it's a problem with the operator and not the tool as far as I'm concerned. Main key is to have great monitoring that reveals the threshold point where artifacts really start to intrude so that good decisions can be made as to how far to push these things.

    Best regards,
    Steve Berson
     
  5. iznogood

    iznogood Member

    tried the l3 as a one-band limiter...

    far more colored than the L2... and not less distorted

    and i never use multiband anyway so....

    tried some of the presets..... sounded a bit like tc master x.... awful

    i will never own the L3
     
  6. lowland

    lowland Guest

    Within a few days of hearing the L3 as a demo I'd bought it and was arranging to sell my L2 hardware box. L3 is the most transparent digital limiter I know (haven't heard the UAD one or MD4 and don't want to take those hardware routes at least for now) and at sensible gain reduction works very well, in my case mostly in single band form. I should also say that much of the loudness I derive doesn't come from the limiter, which is only used as judiciously placed icing on the cake.

    There's no doubt that as is probably the case with any limiter you can do really horrible things to the sound, but as a neat L2 hardware replacement (the way I'm set I didn't need the various hardware options anyway, and L2 was always too grungy for my taste) moderately used it works fine for me.
     
  7. lucidwaves

    lucidwaves Guest


    Just wondering why you never use multiband.

    I am at the point where I am starting to feel comfortable charging for my mastering services now, and since in this field there is a constant learning and tweaking of perspective, views like this from people with more experience than me are very interesting to me.
     
  8. David French

    David French Well-Known Member

  9. Ammitsboel

    Ammitsboel Member

    Sounds like you are pulling a lot gain with your Limiter?
     
  10. iznogood

    iznogood Member

    "Just wondering why you never use multiband."

    singleband pulls my mixes together....multiband tears them apart!!!

    or

    it simply sounds better!!

    there can be cases that call for multiband compression however... (rarely) eg. difficult basslines of drum'n'bass tracks... i would then use 2-band compression (bass/rest)
    or simply compress less
     
  11. lucidwaves

    lucidwaves Guest

    Interesting. Alot of manufacturers seem to push multiband processing as being absolutely essential for mastering as if it is a cure all.

    Maybe a few other seasoned MEs could voice their opinions as well?

    Sorry for the slight change of topic, not sure if this would be more appropriate as a new thread though.
     
  12. Ammitsboel

    Ammitsboel Member

    I can't think of any well known ME that uses MBC.
     
  13. TotalSonic

    TotalSonic Guest

    ;)

    Hi David -
    I have demoed the TLS thingy and hate to say it but I was pretty unimpressed. In the stuff I tried with it I ended up with a lot more artifacts from it than the other limiters I have gave.
    obviously ommv.

    Best regards,
    Steve Berson
     
  14. David French

    David French Well-Known Member

    Cool TotaSonic. Thanks for the opinion. That's the first negative i've heard for it yet. Perhaps we can get the MEs around here to try it out and post their opinions?
     
  15. TotalSonic

    TotalSonic Guest

    ;)

    Hi David -
    I have demoed the TLS thingy and hate to say it but I was pretty unimpressed. In the stuff I tried with it I ended up with a lot more artifacts from it than what I got from the other limiters I have.
    obviously ommv.

    Best regards,
    Steve Berson
     
  16. mixandmaster

    mixandmaster Active Member

  17. mixandmaster

    mixandmaster Active Member

  18. mixandmaster

    mixandmaster Active Member

    I'm far from well known, but I use frequency-dependent compression often when mastering, usually serving two purposes. First is along the lines that iznogood does for bass (I do a LOT of hip hop)...and second for de-essing. But that's about it. I RARELY use more than two bands.

    True multiband doesn't do much of anything for a good mix, but it can be useful for "reclamation" projects, but it's a sure fire way to piss a producer off, too, so be careful. It also will make any clipping in the original track (I get my share of overloaded mixes, too) come WAY up.
     
  19. Ammitsboel

    Ammitsboel Member

    Total multipost in a multiband discussion!
     
  20. TrilliumSound

    TrilliumSound Active Member

    He should have done some 3:1 compression in this case :lol:
     

Share This Page