Hi, Following on from my thread a week or so ago about making my mix louder, I've been experimenting with my limiter (W1,Clone of L1 Ultramaximizer) trying to get the best sound and I've discovered if I take the limiter off and just let the mix clip I can push the volume further before getting noticable distortion and don't get any pumping (the limiters set with 5ms release time) I've bounced the files to MP3 and they seem O.K., does anyone else do this or know of any reason I shouldn't?
Is it O.K. to Clip instead of Limit?
- Thread starter benage
- Start date
LogicDeLuxe
www.abmischung.de
If your target format for distribution is in fact mp3, than the customer can fix the clipping by just using mp3gain. MP3 math is float and the clipping occurs during quantization when played back, not in the file. Given, the mp3 file was encoded directly from float, ie. no quantization inbetween.
I once spotted a mp3 file mastered that way. Many peaks at about +7 dB! Easy to fix.
If it's for CD audio, it's a compromise you choose. But, I thought, you decided to have quality over white noise.
I once spotted a mp3 file mastered that way. Many peaks at about +7 dB! Easy to fix.
If it's for CD audio, it's a compromise you choose. But, I thought, you decided to have quality over white noise.
thanks Logic, to be honest I understood next to none of that but thanks anyway! You're right I have decided to go for quality rather than loudness and whan I do the final mix I'm only going to limit modest amounts, and at that level I can't really tell the difference between limiting and letting it clip, I suppose what i'm trying to find out is is clipping distortion 'worse' than limiting distortion and if not whats the point of buying an ultramaximizer?
SouthSIDE Glen
independentrecording.net
If you skip the limiter and do not push the peaks into clipping, does it sound worse than if you skip the limiter and do clip?
If it does not sound worse if you don't clip (and I'll bet my life it doesn't), that means it does not sound better if you do.
If it does not sound better if you do, then there is no reason to do it.
If there is no reason to do it, then all further questions about it become academic.
As far as whether crushing or clipping sounds worse, think of it this way: which is more uncomfortable, being too hot or too cold?
If extensive clipping sounds better than crushing to you that means either the crushing is also too extensive and you need to back off a bit, or it means that you're trying to slam the mix too hard against the limiter without prepping it properly first.
The best crushed mixes (ugh, that's like saying, "the best strains of ebola"
) are crushed in stages and not just thrown as-is into the wall in one go. If you're limiting by more than a few dB, you're probably limiting too early.
Wouldn't just be easier to automate the playback volume in your MP3 player?
It sure would sound better.
G.
If it does not sound worse if you don't clip (and I'll bet my life it doesn't), that means it does not sound better if you do.
If it does not sound better if you do, then there is no reason to do it.
If there is no reason to do it, then all further questions about it become academic.
As far as whether crushing or clipping sounds worse, think of it this way: which is more uncomfortable, being too hot or too cold?
If extensive clipping sounds better than crushing to you that means either the crushing is also too extensive and you need to back off a bit, or it means that you're trying to slam the mix too hard against the limiter without prepping it properly first.
The best crushed mixes (ugh, that's like saying, "the best strains of ebola"
) are crushed in stages and not just thrown as-is into the wall in one go. If you're limiting by more than a few dB, you're probably limiting too early.Wouldn't just be easier to automate the playback volume in your MP3 player?
It sure would sound better.
G.
Thanks Glen, you're right, when I was getting the clipping sounding better than limiting I was slamming against the wall as an experiment. I,ve put it back to how I want it just limiting about 4db and its loud enough, but at that level I can't really hear any difference between turning the limiter on or off, I understand as soon as you go over 0db you're adding distortion even if you can't really hear it and I'm just trying to decide whether to leave it in or let it clip, i.e which will annoy the final listener less subconciously so they wont want to turn it off?
Massive Master
www.massivemastering.com
Sigh... (10 characters)
chamelious
www.thesunexplodes.com
I've noticed a lot of people seem to be hostile towards people trying to get maximum volume out of their mixes on this forum. Isn't that what proffesional recording/mastering studios will do on nearly all records released? If so, whats wrong with people persuing this? I totally understand the argument for the preservation of dynamics, but for a lot of musical styles this isn't so relevent, metal, pop, dance, some rock, etc.
LogicDeLuxe
www.abmischung.de
If we are talking just about like 2 dB or so, even a general compressor with attack set to 0, read ahead at about 6 ms and release at about 100 ms will do, as long the level is detected from peaks and not rms. (Done that years ago.)
And any up to date mastering software provide better tools than that on their own, like a special peak limiter.
If there are sections sticking out dynamically, some slight multiband compression can prevent distortion as well, ie. bass doesn't modulate the high frequencies during limiting. I wouldn't apply multiband compression on the entire song, though, as it quickly tends to sound like overprocessed radio.
And in case you want to try phase rotators, you should be aware that hearings differ a lot with this effect. I did a test myself. Some heard more bass, some heard less bass, some a "cleaner" punch, some don't hear a difference at all. But most noticed fatigue with this effect, which is the major reason I don't use it. I even try to not alter any phase relation at all, and most people can feel the difference.
It sure is. Dynamics makes one big difference of saying Metallica - "Metallica", Mike Oldfield - "Tubular Bells", Any Pink Floyd or Beatles CD in comparison to most recent recordings.
Also dance tracks frequently have resonating synthesizers, resulting in high peaks. Compressed, it doesn't sound the same. Gigi D'agostino might be an exception, as there are virtually no resonances.
Different mastering sure is the reason, why Santana's "Abraxas" sound so much better than "Supernatural" (the studio album, not the live video). And Red Hot Chili Peppers' "Blood Sugar Sex Magik" sounds so much better than "Californication" and "By the way".
Besides this, as said, you gain nothing on radio nor on juke boxes. Thus, compressing, limiting, clipping a song to death is just plain stupid.
SouthSIDE Glen
independentrecording.net
Most of the loudest voices against it on this forum and elsewhere *are* the professional engineers you're talking about. It's not the engineers that want to do it, it's their mistaken clients (artists and producers) who are insisting upon it...in most cases because they simply just don't know any better. The pro engineers don't have the intestinal fortitude to stand up for the truth in front of the client because they are too afraid of biting the hand that feeds them, so they come on these forums and vent.
And, BTW, since when what is what the commercial industry does a valid litmus test of what should be done? Look at movies and TV and the current overuse of shaky hand-held cameras, overly-contrasted film exposures and use of film stock that unnecessarily tints the entire production. Why? Because that's what everybody else is doing. Most people don't make their decisions based upon whether it is intrinsically a good idea or not, they do it solely because that's what everybody else is doing. What makes you think the audio industry is all that different?
G.
chamelious
www.thesunexplodes.com
Well i wasn't sure, so i asked, and now i know! I see what you're saying. The only reason i find it annoying is having to turn my music up a few notches above the other metal tracks.
Yea, I know what you mean.
Last time I had to turn a volume knob up, I damn near injured my hand.
chamelious
www.thesunexplodes.com
Ok then scratch that. The annoying thing is remembering to turn it back down again afterwards and not get your face blown off by the next loudenized mega volume arse shaking track.
Massive Master
www.massivemastering.com
Just reiterating Glenn (etc.) -- We *do* it, yes. Usually "under protest" - The "Volume War" that you're experiencing is a pissing contest between artists and labels. The listeners never asked for this -- And if they could all hear what I hear (that is, these same recordings before they're all wrecked), there'd be an uproar. Even the whole "Oooh... I'm in a noisy environment" argument is out the window and invalid IMO/E...
This loudness debate rages on I see, and I am willing to bet it always will. People have been trying to get their records louder than everyone else's for a least the last 50 years. Back in the days of vinyl, Mastering Engineers were the guys literally cutting the master discs after the mixing was done. Sometime they would need to reduce the amount of bass, or make a similar adjustment because at the louder volumes the needle would jump. Bass = a lot of energy, generally speaking. So the goal was, "as loud as possible with out making the needle jump out of the groove"
Now, with a variety of formats to consider for every release the loudness war has become ever complicated. For that reason, I am trying to forget about it. I just don't want to deal with it. But, in considering the question for myself (is louder better?) I did a little listening study.
Black Sabbath - War Pigs.
Considered by many at the time to be radical in regards to mixing, mastering and loudness. Compared with todays records, its soft. ( it hurts me to put soft and War Pigs in the same thought)
Aretha Franklin - Think
Probably one of the best sounding tracks ever, in my opinion.
Why?
These recording share something that becomes a casualty of the loudness war. Dynamic Range.
compare these to just about any similar record today.
As you push the fader up, and things start clipping, or your compressor gets going, and softer sounds get louder the vertical space between the soft and loud diminishes. Of course, thats your compressors job most of the time.
Dynamic rage is the key to a punchy exciting sound. When you listen to either of these examples be sure to turn it up real loud, they just kick your teeth in, and to be quite honest, sometime, that sound will make me cry, just a little, where as something that has been over compressed just hurts at the same level.
Check it out for yourself and don't just take my word for it.
Bob Katz, one the best in the business of mastering, was recently featured in Electronic Musician on this very subject.
Check it out. He convinced me.
http://emusician.com/interviews/emusic_keeping_dynamic/index.html
P.S - Blood Sugar Sex Magic, as stated above, is an excellent record, dynamically and otherwise. Its a good study for every engineer.
Now, with a variety of formats to consider for every release the loudness war has become ever complicated. For that reason, I am trying to forget about it. I just don't want to deal with it. But, in considering the question for myself (is louder better?) I did a little listening study.
Black Sabbath - War Pigs.
Considered by many at the time to be radical in regards to mixing, mastering and loudness. Compared with todays records, its soft. ( it hurts me to put soft and War Pigs in the same thought)
Aretha Franklin - Think
Probably one of the best sounding tracks ever, in my opinion.
Why?
These recording share something that becomes a casualty of the loudness war. Dynamic Range.
compare these to just about any similar record today.
As you push the fader up, and things start clipping, or your compressor gets going, and softer sounds get louder the vertical space between the soft and loud diminishes. Of course, thats your compressors job most of the time.
Dynamic rage is the key to a punchy exciting sound. When you listen to either of these examples be sure to turn it up real loud, they just kick your teeth in, and to be quite honest, sometime, that sound will make me cry, just a little, where as something that has been over compressed just hurts at the same level.
Check it out for yourself and don't just take my word for it.
Bob Katz, one the best in the business of mastering, was recently featured in Electronic Musician on this very subject.
Check it out. He convinced me.
http://emusician.com/interviews/emusic_keeping_dynamic/index.html
P.S - Blood Sugar Sex Magic, as stated above, is an excellent record, dynamically and otherwise. Its a good study for every engineer.
SouthSIDE Glen
independentrecording.net
As far as the "having to adjust the volume whenever I one of my songs into a playlist", most of you guys that use proggys like iTunes, Traktor and the like do realize you have the ability to automate your DJ duties by pre-assigning the playback volume to your MP3s, right? No need to go for the volume control or to precue like a DJ.
Because you do know that the DJ in the club or on the radio is doing the same thing, right?
G.
Because you do know that the DJ in the club or on the radio is doing the same thing, right?
G.
LogicDeLuxe
www.abmischung.de
Indeed. I mastered dance tracks at -14 dBFS rms sine while those average compilation CDs were at -8 dB already. Someone putting the CD in a car stereo immediately noticed how good it sounded. A good enough reaction to keep it that way, ihmo.
Btw. a nicely written article, which should be in the link list of http://www.turnmeup.org/, I suggest.
jcmastering
New member
A good article on this is DISTORTION TO THE PEOPLE by Thomas Lund.
It seems to me that with new technologies people start using it timidly then they go to the other extreme and overdo it , then back , and so on. Kind of like a pendulum effect. We test the boundaries before finding center.
It seems to me that with new technologies people start using it timidly then they go to the other extreme and overdo it , then back , and so on. Kind of like a pendulum effect. We test the boundaries before finding center.
masteringhouse
www.masteringhouse.com
It's done quite a bit actually with both clipping and limiting. Sometimes with even more than one limiter. The overall level is then brought down to somewhere around -.2 to -.5 ceiling.
And no, I'm not kidding.
Thats interesting, I read somewhere people in the 80's wouldn't let the peaks touch the 0.0 celing as some CD players back then would read it as an error, is this still necessary now? I have in the past loaded bought mp3's into logic and they all seemed to hit 0.0.