Best multiband compressor / limiter

[Carmichael]

Har-bal is the greatest thing I've ever seen. I can't believe I didn't hear about it until now. Topic of best multiband compressor has been skirted in these forums. Some advice is T-racks all the way, others say linMB (and it is even an integral part of har-bal's mastering guide). Paavo even says why use a compressor at all. So, which is it. What's the best use of $600:

1. Just use voxengo elephant limiter (+ or - Waves rcomp) (free b/c I already own them).
2. T-racks (vintage compressor with multiband limiter) ($300 rtas and vst).
3. Waves linMB ($600 native)

Don't tell me it's a matter of taste and I need to listen b/c I have no taste and I gave up listening once I found Har-bal (anyone need some monitors?). I suspect many other people may benefit from honest opinions on this topic (best compressor not whether I have taste).

[Carmichael]

ok. Option #4 Ozone 64 bit linear multiband compressor and limiter / dither
(that ought to stir the pot!)

[HarBal]

Carmichael,

I guess your comment was tongue in cheek but I'd recommend not giving up listening. If not only for the fact that if music isn't for listening to then what's the point of it all?

I can't give you an opinion on the relative merits of the products you mentioned as I have no real experience with them. If you're mastering for a living then I'd say what counts is what the client is after, so maybe any of these will apply depending on the clients needs. To that end you really want to have a good idea of what they are after before you attempt adding EQ, compression and limiting. Since most people can't describe what they want very the best way to get a handle on this is to ask them to give examples of recordings that have the sound that they want and take it from there.

My personal opinion is not to use compression at all, be it multiband or otherwise, because I like to hear as much of the dynamics as possible. I don't take the purist line to extremes though, cos I do think that a moderate use of limiting is a good thing. Some people just take it to extremes though, and kill the music entirely.

Case in point:

I have a couple of commercial CD's that have "unproduced" outracks and in both cases I think the outracks are sonically head and shoulders above the other tracks on the album. It's just a nagging dissappointment to me cos I have the "proof" that they could have done a better job if they didn't process the recordings so much.

That's my point of view anyway. I'm sure Earle will add his opinions on the equipment you mentioned.

Paavo.

[har-bal]

Har-bal is the greatest thing I've ever seen. I can't believe I didn't hear about it until now. Topic of best multiband compressor has been skirted in these forums. Some advice is T-racks all the way, others say linMB (and it is even an integral part of har-bal's mastering guide). Paavo even says why use a compressor at all. So, which is it. What's the best use of $600:

1. Just use voxengo elephant limiter (+ or - Waves rcomp) (free b/c I already own them).
2. T-racks (vintage compressor with multiband limiter) ($300 rtas and vst).
3. Waves linMB ($600 native)

Don't tell me it's a matter of taste and I need to listen b/c I have no taste and I gave up listening once I found Har-bal (anyone need some monitors?). I suspect many other people may benefit from honest opinions on this topic (best compressor not whether I have taste).

Carmichael

Please don't give up listening

Let's put things in perspective for a moment, so take a ride with me.

There are quite a few products out there and quite a few of them sound good to a lot of folks. The reason engineers gravitate towards certain products is because I believe it gives them the sound they are looking for. If you are in the business of mastering you have to have different products because everybody wants a certain sound and if you are unable to provide it you're finished.
I have a large number of clients and all of them have different needs. It is more than just mastering their song.

The techno crowd want it in their face - Compression
The rap crowd want the bass - Diirty and hard compression
The accoustic musicians prefer airy - No compression
The jazz folks want real cohesiveness - minimum compression
Classical music needs to be dynamic - No compression
The rock crowd turns the heat up inside of you - Compression (control those guitars)

Do you see where I am going.?

The uniqueness of Har-Bal is that it allows you to immediately insure that your music will sound equally well on any system, and that my friend is the challenge facing most mastering engineers. Since this part of the equation is now solved you can now reach into your bag of tracks and pull out what you need "based on the client's needs". Heck for a lot of songs I still use Steinberg's Magneto.

This is why it is always important to sit down with your client and find out what sound they are looking for....or you can even create a sound that could even become your signature that attracts clients. The possibilities are limitless. Your knowledge of the tools and their unique sound only makes you valuable to your client. Remember this: There are no rules except the music should sound good everywhere and if you are mastering music that is very competive ....Rap....Techno.....Rock, etc, the volume level should be comparable to what the market is dictating. It would be pretty hard convincing a client that their rock album sounds great and you have mastered it to -17rms. It won't be long before you close up shop

We have great respect for the other products we mention, Wavelab, Waves, T-Racks, Voxengo and others., but our main goal here at Har-Bal is to first help the engineer get their track spectrally correct so they add their favorite plugins and not worry about the......this sounds too tinny.....too bassy...too midrangy.....something's missing...etc...syndrome.

One thing I can tell you is that no matter which tool you use after Har-Bal you should definately use a limiter and the outceiling should be set to -0.1

If the music you are mastering is yours then you may not need a million different tools because your style is going to be pretty much the same all the time.

I will say it again. "The sound has to be balanced first". Then you can use what you want.

Hope this helps

Earle

[Carmichael]

Wow. I feel honored to get such a quick reply from both Paavo and Earle and I am sure this thread could help a lot of other people. For myself, I feel content to hold onto my $600 for now since I do a very low number of projects and they are primarily acoustic and my clients are easy to please and I am more likely to screw up the compression than do it right. After donating countless tens of thousands to the likes of digidesign, waves, focusrite, steinburg, rhode, etc -- it feels good to finally not feel the need to buy something else. Your $100 program has made me content for the first time and I would trade 75% of the other audio stuff I own in order to keep har-bal. For those who are searching, don't waste your time with CurveEq or Ozone.

[brian770295]

I picked up PSP's VintageWarmer. A hybrid between a Tube Warmer and a MB compressor that has given me some awesome results for only $149.
Try the demo and send me the $450.00 difference if you like it....

Thanks B5

[Carmichael]

Thanks for the input. That is interesting that Vintage Warmer has multiband compression. People seem to like that one and I will try the demo (but there are a lot of people trying to grab that $450 so you better be quick to beat out Digidesign, waves, and the others who think my money is theirs). The number of choices for mastering effects is a bit overwhelming -- I am curious about tube simulators like PSP, voxengo (they have 3 including one that is a free download), T-racks, or with convolution impulses (ie SIRS) you can simulate about anything ever made -- (ie lexicon reverb, vintage pre-amp such as Neve 1272 or SSL or Manley) etc. I don't really know where to start. I ran a thread on noisevault.com re: the best mastering reverb impulses, but really didn't get any concrete answers. It does seem that the better my mixes sound (due to har-bal) the less interest I have in mastering effects.

[jammer]

Thanks for the input. That is interesting that Vintage Warmer has multiband compression. People seem to like that one and I will try the demo (but there are a lot of people trying to grab that $450 so you better be quick to beat out Digidesign, waves, and the others who think my money is theirs). The number of choices for mastering effects is a bit overwhelming -- I am curious about tube simulators like PSP, voxengo (they have 3 including one that is a free download), T-racks, or with convolution impulses (ie SIRS) you can simulate about anything ever made -- (ie lexicon reverb, vintage pre-amp such as Neve 1272 or SSL or Manley) etc. I don't really know where to start. I ran a thread on noisevault.com re: the best mastering reverb impulses, but really didn't get any concrete answers. It does seem that the better my mixes sound (due to har-bal) the less interest I have in mastering effects.

also remember that emulations are exactly that ...

[dbmasters]

That is interesting that Vintage Warmer has multiband compression.

Vintage Warmer is an awesome plug. I never look at emulations in whether or not it sounds like the thing it's emulating or not, I just listen to if it sounds good or not. Exact same way I look at amp modellers, it's about the sound quality, not the modelling or emulation accuracy.

[tcatzere]

Earle,

As a followup to your post on March 3 regarding the general parameters for using compression and limiting . . . do you (personally) use limiting on all projects regardless if they're acoustic or otherwise? What about compression?

I'm currently working on a project that has a little synth and a very limited number of loops, but is probably 75%-80% orchestral/acoustic. Based on this information alone, what would be your general inclination as to the use of compression and/or limiting? Thanks.

Tom

[har-bal]

Earle,

As a followup to your post on March 3 regarding the general parameters for using compression and limiting . . . do you (personally) use limiting on all projects regardless if they're acoustic or otherwise? What about compression?

I'm currently working on a project that has a little synth and a very limited number of loops, but is probably 75%-80% orchestral/acoustic. Based on this information alone, what would be your general inclination as to the use of compression and/or limiting? Thanks.

Tom

Tom

I always use limiting and have it set at -0.1 to insure no clipping occurs. I don't normally use compression on accoustic instruments (classical, folk guitar...wind instruments, etc.... They really sound much more natural when artificial processing is left out. I will use compression, however on music that is harsh and super dynamic . Most of the time I just listen to the song a few times and can pretty much determine what needs to be done. There is no specific process but there are specific tools.

Cheers

Earle

[tcatzere]

Thanks for your input, Earle. -Tom

[Carmichael]

Vintage Warmer is an awesome plug. I never look at emulations in whether or not it sounds like the thing it's emulating or not, I just listen to if it sounds good or not. Exact same way I look at amp modellers, it's about the sound quality, not the modelling or emulation accuracy.

I bought Vintage Warmer and am still learning to use it. Do you have any advice on how it is best used for mastering (ie do you use the mastering first aid preset, how much gain reduction, etc)? I am now working on a simple acoustic project (acoustic guitar, strings, vocal). I am also grateful for Earle's input on avoiding compression for acoustics.

[dbmasters]

no real advice other than play with the knobs and listen. You can get some crazy stuff outta there...the best thing to do with saturators like that and Magneto is to not over use it...

[Carmichael]

Thanks -- I used it on gigapiano 2 and really liked it -- still getting used to mastering with it.