If you want to use clipping to "ease" limiter, don't use brickwall limiter.

Use "regular" limiter with "not so aggressive" attack
It is going to let some transients pass through (not on a brickwall one)

And put clipping AFTER, set around -0.3dB -0.6dB threshold (because there will be harmonics generated) and set input level (from the limiter) to your taste

Your "brickwall" will be the clipper itself.
And saturation/clipping will be FAR more controlled than pushing a brickwall limiter.

I wish my explanation is clear.

This technic was used on Finalizer rack by some mastering engs : they pushed the OUTPUT of the rack to clip the final transients
No brickwall before output, of course.
They used the analog saturation from DA output converter to "Finalize" transients

Kind of subtle "spice it up" approach.

PS : read this about Elephant limiter. It seems it is a blend between brickwall/regular limiter. May be why i love it on SOME material. And why it add some "mojo" (like i wrote before)
https://gearspace.com/board/showpost.php?p=15050203&postcount=180

And the FGX confirm what i heard since day one : it is just MESSING the sound
https://gearspace.com/board/showpost.php?p=15043596&postcount=176

 

I wonder what kind of artifacts these may be. 32bit FP is essentially 24bit fixed point.
Yes, a 24bit plugin will make the signal 24bit - as long as there's no other plugin with 32bit after that or you move the fader away from 0dB.

 

This is fun, BC the setting i liked the most on elephant was compact, that, according to this post sounds like L2 in some way

 

Side note about Protools : thousands albums where made with their first sound engine ... it was 24bits linear even on master bus
As long as you know the limitations, you know how to deal with it

 

I made good albums on ADAT mixed through a freakin Behringer Eurodesk. Whatever ya got, roll with it.

 

It remembers me when The Beatles pushed Abbey Road recording hardware to the limit.

Or simply a guitar tube amp with one tube slanted/ half disconnected to create the first distortion ... on a clean amp.
Yes, that's how the first disto amp was created. After came fuzz pedals and disto amps.

Cassette 4 tracks forever !


PS : sorry about subject deviation

 

I thought it was some dude who assaulted his amp's speaker with a razor blade.
Or maybe that was the transsexual sex worker I tried to scam in the woods, can't remember.

Aphex Twin's Selected Ambient Works 85-92 was probably recorded on a GameBoy or something. Still one of the best albums ever.

 

why are so many people comparing a maximizer with limiters? doesn't make any sense

good one, haha, it was released through a worn out DAT tape

 

A logical continuation of the L2 was the Waves MaxxBCL processor, which, in addition to L2, included Renaissanse Compressor and MaxxBass, but it does not have separate channels adjustments - they are always linked. ADC the same.

I bought L2 )

 

Cause in the beginning they were considered Mastering Limiters,
and besides the extra bells/whistles that's what they are..

Proof on that SOS article linked before

 

TBH I don't understand your question. What kind of problem are you talking about?
It is a limiter. It works. Where do you see a problem?

 

Why not? The only difference between a maximizer and a limiter is level compensation.

 

@Djord Emer
"Maximizer" is also called "brickwall limiter".
Witch mean you set a fixed level (like 0dB or -0.3dB for intermodulation) and NOTHING will pass this threshold.

Whatever ppl think or method used, it is a "special" limiter.
Like said by Cosmic, they were created for digital mastering only.
Before, digital mastering was using "regular'" limiters and normalisation afterward (to avoir digital clipping).

I know a digital time when you searched for the loudest track on a album (witch was normalized) and set all other tracks level according to this track. To maximize dynamic on the whole album.
It was CD time, early years.

After that time there was the "loudness war" (still today) : you "maximize" all tracks to the loudest level possible
This is closely related to "maximizer" usage. It was NOT a "dynamic search" like previous method, but THE OPPOSITE : squash all the dynamic to get the LOUDEST level on ALL tracks.

So they can be called "maximizer" (because you can push them to 0dB without digital clipping), brickwall limiter or whatever.
They are limiters.

Same with compressors : opto, FET,tube ... it is still a compressor.

Back to the subject : there is no "problem" with L2. It is just dated, and already replaced by L3 by Waves themselves.
This maximizer/brickwall limiter was used on thousand albums ... like Protools with 24bits linear sound engine
No problem ... just DATED and OBSOLETE as "mastering limiter".

 

Official name - Waves L2 Ultra Maximizer
Not only limiter, IDR also, dithering ...
ADC also. Convenient device all in one, analog at the input, digital "brick" at out for DAW, or master.
But everything can always be replaced, and L2 is no exception.

 

Last edited: Feb 21, 2023

or even better, get TDR Limiter 6 which is its successor: https://www.tokyodawn.net/tdr-limiter6-ge/

 

Ok, after you've rattled off buzz word after buzz word, I was half expecting to get information on MSRP, $29 sales, and a link to sign up for an email newsletter. Well... Now I'm kind of disappointed...

WTF does all this have to do with my comment?

 

L2=The snare killer. Use it as snare reduction alternative in overheads as in the video below.

 

As far as I know, thats not only what a maximizer is supposed to do. My experience with maximizers are vastly different from regular limiters. Comparing something like Ozone's "Maximizer" or UrsaDSP's "Boost" with Pro-L or Limitless like they were the same thing, in this context, sounds beyond the point. You won't get the same workflow and the same results so, again, why are people readily comparing maximizers with limiters like they were the same thing? At least have L2 compared with its own class of contemporary DSP tools. That would be fair enough.

 

Last edited: Feb 21, 2023

Alk maximizers are limiters, but not all limiters are maximizers.