To me, there has been no rule broken. You realized that there is a possible problem with your mix. You don't use a limiter on the sum to "master" in this case, you took care of rogue peaks by just "clipping them away" with a safety limiter. This has barely any audible impact considering the dynamic range of your production. Plus, you will address this with your chance to go into Mix Round 2.Jerze wrote: ↑Thu Dec 24, 2020 19:44 CETSo, this is where the limiter came in by having the SSl make set at( 1.7) and where Mr. fox came up with is numbers and correct assessment and my mistake not paying attention to details.
16.8 Lufs
2.0 tpm
I hope this clears some things up and will plan on putting my R-2 mix in ,but If Mr fox or any of you fellow mixers feel I broke any of the rules (which I can see by not documenting the limiter in my post) let me know
TomImmon wrote: ↑Thu Dec 24, 2020 11:13 CETI'll post a screenshot (https://www.dropbox.com/s/atx9t1a6u54rc ... 1.png?dl=0) here that shows the version with and without the inflator in Expose (here I check whether I keep the specified levels). As you can see, there is hardly any difference in the envelope curve, but you can also see how the dbTP changes. Expose is therefore not suitable for visual assessment. From the listening impression I have to, however, the version without inflator even sounds much better and is not much quieter. I have therefore linked this mix here (https://www.dropbox.com/s/i6bhd07slogxl ... f.wav?dl=0). So there is really no pros for the inflator at this point. Mr. Fox hit the nail on the head with his audiophile interpretation. My mix doesn't sound like it is because of clipping, but because the drums are already very compressed (and that's just a matter of taste, it has nothing to do with the benefit of volume)
Now it is safe to debate whether a mix that uses a mastering tool like Vitalizer, VitaminX, VSM-3, Ozone, Gullfoss, etc. should be disqualified even though it is still within the limits. I couldn't decide that question, but the fact is that the jury here are often musicians. So not everyone hears the mixes with the ears of a mastering engineer. I have made the experience that it is important for me to mix with a basic setting in the masterbus (glue, basic Eq) so that I can judge how it can sound later in the master. But I give the musicians a HIFI-optimized and somewhat louder mix to listen to at home, while the mastering gets two normal versions ( without Mixbus Fx/dyn and one with).
This will be a topic for me throughout January (aka: refining the Rule Books a bit or writing a new/overhauling an Addendum), as this is a recurring topic.White Punk OD wrote: ↑Thu Dec 24, 2020 18:08 CET...
So that's about the graphics only, they look like a brick, now we know it is the sum of a number of your techniques you applied,
and I did not intend to bring in any isssue on guilt or bad motivation, sorry again.
It is rather that the fact happened, and my motivation is to talk about the next step in a production,
and I believe that a mastering engineer might find this an issue to talk about (and recognize the Inflator by its influence), whatever the reason was, and probably ask for a version without the Inflator.
Though it sounds very good, and you found your great way to get it loud enough without sounding squashed (which Mister Fox honored, and decided it was a legit entry),
my question is, do I see this correctly, this is a case where we would likely have another round trip sending out the files, or at least an exchange of messages about this.
To be fair... "limiters" are not just made for "mastering". Take the Teletronix LA2A for instance, technically that is an opto-element compressor (aka "Opto" compressor) and can both run in "compression" and "limiter" mode. The difference here, is a shifted threshold and compression ratio. But it's not "brick-walling" an instantaneous compressor with a ratio of inf:1 would do, or a straight up signal clipper. It is a signal limiter which was originally made to handle voices. Same goes for the even older Telefunken U73b.
Sonnox Inflator for example is not a compressor/limiter, but it can act like one if pushed (it's basically a multi-band harmonic distortion device). I've actually used Inflator myself a couple of times on acoustic guitars, to make them more "compact" and prominent. Not many tools around that actually do it this way (as in, this very simply form). Sure is a handy tool, but handle with care.
But to clear the question "am I allowed to use mastering tools"?
Then the answer is a "depends on how you use them in your mix"There have been names brought up like Sonnox Inflator, SPL Vitalizer MK2-T, SoundTheory Gullfoss, Vertigo VSM-3, VOS ThrillseekerXTC or TDL NOVA, etc. Heck, even T-Racks ONE. the These are all strangely declared "mastering tools", but what holds you off using them for general sound design purposes as well? Like, why should we only be allowed to use transient designers and sub-frequency creators for drums, but we're not allowed to use vintage "limiters" or the Dolby A Encoder trick (which is basically just the a multi-band compression array of this device, but not the "decoder"/Expander array as well) on vocals - or whatever sound comes to mind where you think "this might need an uplift"? This doesn't make sense, right?
You're still focusing on the mix, on individual channels or instrument groups, and here the sky is the limit.
Within reason, of course.
Summing Bus processing on the other hand, is a bit of a tricky topic. Does a summing bus compressor and/or a tape machine to "glue" things together already sound as what people call "mastering"? What about a chain of mix console > compressor > tape (a typical summing array back in the days)? This is why the Rule Addendum on Summing Bus Treatment exists, and to go full circle: also needs a drastic overhaul at this point...
My personal stance on the whole topic is:Whatever gets the job done per individual channels/instrument groups, while the summed mix shall be mostly treated "musically" (glueing). The focus of the Mix(ing) Challenge is exactly that - create a mix that can stand on it's own already, while the mastering process really only is checking for integrity (phase, bass frequency response), "fairy dust" and setting the material up for final distribution (loudness increase/decrease, proper limiting, DDP and/or MP3/AAC export)
Whether or not you overdid it during mixing, that is a different topic altogether.
I hope this is a bit more clear and puts your mind off of things
