Trance Forum \| Stats \| Register \| Search \| Parties \| Advertise \| Login

There are 0 trance users currently browsing this page and 1 guest

Trance Forum Л Л Forum Production & Music Making - L2 problems

← Prev Page	1 2
First Page	1 2	Last Page

Author

L2 problems

WAVELOGIX
Wavelogix

Started Topics : 136
Posts : 1214
Posted : Oct 12, 2004 10:45

of course spindrift i totally agree with wat u saay ....

but the thing is tht wat u and i know not many ppl not on the forum know ... so first better to talk abt things in a basic and simple manner !

respect .. boom !!

however , as surrender an d sms put it ....

i still dont understand .... how can a llimiter make a trk sound fat ???

Dimitri
Inactive User

Started Topics : 4
Posts : 229
Posted : Oct 12, 2004 11:28

Fat means in sample we play all frequencies that we hear , limiter compress in ugly form that we will hear most of mid ranges (it's level the sample frequency range aka flatten) , mid ranges most heard frequencies for our hearing system . So it can make sound fat if you use limiter on one or couple channels only . When you use limiter on main mix , there so much samples and channels there that limiter possible harm some of them by increasing unwanted and decreasing wanted . So you mix will sound like kick and bass playing in different volume all the way .

Think logicly , you have sample with three peaks in 0dB and rest of sample played at -4dB , when you limit these three peaks you can increase the main level of volume for sample , so it's played fatter , more heard . Sample will loose it form sometimes so we need to know when it wanted or not .

Mike A
Subra

Started Topics : 185
Posts : 3954
Posted : Oct 12, 2004 12:40

Quote:

On 2004-10-12 10:45, Global Trance Network wrote:
however , as surrender an d sms put it ....

i still dont understand .... how can a llimiter make a trk sound fat ???

Maybe they think that volume is fatness?
Dunno.. I usually work to make the track sound fat without any limiting on it, and leave that to the mastering engineers.

Dimitri
Inactive User

Started Topics : 4
Posts : 229
Posted : Oct 12, 2004 13:39

Not volume is fatness Mike , overall sample frequency response is , more flat sample means more fat .

Spindrift
Spindrift

Started Topics : 33
Posts : 1560
Posted : Oct 12, 2004 13:44

A limiter does not only bring up the amplitude.
It alters the signal to contain more information within the same amplitude range.
Remember that a limiter is really the same device as a compressor, only at a ratio above 1:20.
Distortion also act's very similar to a limiter in the way that it clips of the tops on the waveform.

Waves L2 wont sound fattening really, because it's designed to make the output sound as much as the original as possible, only with a higher percieved loudness.

If you try one of the classic and treasured teletronix leveling amplifiers, which is also limiters, the are very fattening, because they are designed to do just that.

Fat sound is really about having much information packed into the sound.
The more narrow or out of balance the frequency spectrum is, the thinner it will sound.
The more dynamic and transient the sound is the thinner it will sound.
So as always with mixing it's about frequency and amplitude. Thats the only basic components of sound, and thats what you need get right when both mixing and mastering.

And yes Mike, never put any FX on your master output, but don't expect the mastering guy to do to much either. Contol your levels as good as you can when mixing.
But it can be nice to make a version with a limiter on the track if you want to try it at a party before it's released.

(``З.И(``З.И(``З.ИИ.З`Д)И.З`Д)И.З`Д)
Ћ .....www.ResonantEarth.com..... Л
(И.З`Д(И.З`Д(И.З`Д``З.И)``З.И)``З.И)

http://www.myspace.com/spindriftsounds
http://www.myspace.com/resonantearth

Dimitri
Inactive User

Started Topics : 4
Posts : 229
Posted : Oct 12, 2004 14:10

I wish your English , Leo .

ThiagoNAKA
IsraTrance Full Member

Started Topics : 104
Posts : 1047
Posted : Oct 12, 2004 18:06

To GTN and Mike A:

For sure I donДt think that "volume increase"="more fat sound"...

The fact in most of cases here with my tracks is that I get better results when I use lower levels for "thereshold" on L2. I know the lower, more dynamic I can lose(thatДs what Dimitri is talking about I think, when u realise the track has some "frequencies modulation"). But I really canДt fell this lost! I read some articles talking about till the vaule 5 for attenuation, u canДt hear the losts. Well, I never reach this value for att, so I think IДm not losing a lot of freq.

So if I have a track on -0.5db I can use some value for "thereshold" without losing dynamics. If I use a track on -3.0db and use lower value, I get better sound, and no loses.

And Spindrift: I understood u well? Like "the more dynamic, less fat is the sound"? Cause my goal is a fat and dynamic sound!

Spindrift
Spindrift

Started Topics : 33
Posts : 1560
Posted : Oct 12, 2004 19:05

Dynamic in this context means the amplitude range.
As soon as you use compression, limiter or distortion you reduce that range.

Dynamic is normally associated with something good, but say you have a kick with a very sharp transient for example. Then the sound will be percived as fatter if you remove that transient to bring the rest of the sound up, thereby reducing the dynamic range.

In this context dynamic is not the most desirable feature in trance music. Most dance music and rock instead strives for a more dense sound, and therefore uses compressors and/or distortion quite much.
In classical music you try not to do any compression instead.

A 'dynamic' sounding track can also be a track that varies a lot, in intensity levels or otherwise.
So fat and dynamic don't have to be contradictory, it just depends on in what context you use the words.

Fearkiller
Fearkiller

Started Topics : 10
Posts : 189
Posted : Oct 12, 2004 20:59

Quote:

On 2004-10-12 10:45, Global Trance Network wrote:
of course spindrift i totally agree with wat u saay ....

but the thing is tht wat u and i know not many ppl not on the forum know ... so first better to talk abt things in a basic and simple manner !

respect .. boom !!

however , as surrender an d sms put it ....

i still dont understand .... how can a llimiter make a trk sound fat ???

I agree with you man, limiter is just for check the peaks...sure u can to increase your volume and sound will be more loudly with using limiter, but i think not fattest...
IMHO for fat sound need to use compressor and saturator together....

Spindrift
Spindrift

Started Topics : 33
Posts : 1560
Posted : Oct 13, 2004 12:10

Instead of futher description about the technical difference between a volume fader and a limiter I decided to make some samples to demonstrate.

And again, I'm not at all saying that the L2 is a good way of fattening a track if it sounds thin, just making clear that many limiters can be used for fattening a sound.
As you can see if you compare the waveform of the L2 and the compressorX in an editor, the L2 has something in it's processing that avoid clipping of the waveform.
Thats the reason it wont sound as fattening as the compressorX.
Basically what happens when you clip the waveform is that you get harmonic distortion. Your sinewaves start turning in to square waves. This is probably what most of us associate with fatness.

So here is the samples. I tried to set the gain to a similar perceptive loudness, and of course overdid the processing to make more obvious the difference in sound between the two limiters.
Files is ~300k each.

1 Unprocessed drum loop
http://resoearth.gotdns.com/lim/clean.wav

2 Processed using the L2
http://resoearth.gotdns.com/lim/L2.wav

3 Processed using the Sonic Timeworks Compressor X for pulsar
(compressor inactive, only using the brickwall limiter).
http://resoearth.gotdns.com/lim/compressorX.wav

And yes, the clean one sound better really, but like I said, I'm just trying to show clearly the difference between the different limiters.

I never use the L2 for neither fattening individual sounds or complete mixes. It's the worst limiter for that purpose. But it will still make both sounds and mixes somewhat fatter, like any limiter/compression/distortion/saturation would.
They are all very closely related processes, both in practice and theory.

Again...use the PSP vintage warmer on stuff in the mix if your sources sound thin. And ask yourelf what is wrong with your sounds in the first place. You can definatly make a fat sounding track without a single comp/lim/dist/sat in the mix as well. Most of it is dependent on eq and the amplitude generated by the envelopes.

Elad
Tsabeat/Sattel Battle

Started Topics : 158
Posts : 5306
Posted : Oct 14, 2004 14:50

hehe anyone note that l2 got little 24/20/16 bit opsion?
its like uv22 in wavelab.
when u change from 24 bits to 16 u better use this it adds some freqs to mentain quality

btw l3? multiband limiting i got to try

www.sattelbattle.com
http://yoavweinberg.weebly.com/

UIU
IsraTrance Full Member

Started Topics : 88
Posts : 238
Posted : Oct 14, 2004 16:00

Do you guyz think it is good thing to put 0 threshold and 0 ceiling in L2? Cause in some parts of a song I had some things I wanted to stand out, and I used arround +0.5 db. When I used anything less than 0 these parts disappeared. But with 0 it sounded very good. But that's on my crappy monitors. I don't know how it will sound elsewhere.

Spindrift
Spindrift

Started Topics : 33
Posts : 1560
Posted : Oct 14, 2004 16:39

tsabeat:
yes thats the dithering which basically adds a tiny amount of white noise to make the lowest bit's in the signal end up in place. Apogee claim to get 20bit performance using UV22. I think the waves algorithm is similar.
Just put it on the preset "hi-res CD master" to get the correct dithering settings for converting a 24bit file to 16.

UIU:
If you have both faders on 0 it wount do anything, except the dithering if active. +0.5 dont exist in digital, you must mean -0.5 dB.
The 0 dB in analogue signals is normally considered to be -12 dB in digital. In dance music though, with quite controlled and compressed you don't really need 12 dB headroom many times. I tend to have my kick and bass somewhere around -9 dB.
Sounds peaking to high above kick and bass is not really welcome, because if you want your track on a compilation they have to be reduced by EQ and/or limiting. Otherwise your track would have to sound lower in volume than other tracks.
I would say use some compression on that sound when mixing to make the sound sound prominent, but not peak to high.

Trance Forum Л Л Forum Production & Music Making - L2 problems

← Prev Page	1 2
First Page	1 2	Last Page