Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[duckhunter]

I think this new product will revolutionize mastering.  If you think the L3-Multimaximizer with 6 bands is good, like I do, can you imagine this one with 16 independent bandwidths of limiting!!!!  Only availiable, I think, in Waves new Mercury bundle which includes a bunch of plugins I do not need.  The bundle costs $7000 and you cannot get the L3-16 Multimaximer alone for now, although I am trying to pull some strings to get it without the bundle.  Anyone have it yet?

[MASSIVE Mastering]

All the kiddies will have it as soon as it's cracked...  

[Bob Boyd]

dguidry wrote on Wed, 31 January 2007 00:50

If you think the L3-Multimaximizer with 6 bands is good,

If...

[Viitalahde]

I have maximizzd teh sound with Waves L3-16 Multimaxxximizzr!1

[Dave Davis]

It might revolutionize bedroom master(bation)ing, but hopefully it will have little impact on the world of "custom" mastering.  I doubt I'm alone when I say the L3 is the _worst_ sounding version of the Lx series.  The whole line is getting long in the tooth, but L2 sucks least.  Adding more bands to the multi-band section would seem to make everything that is wrong with L3 worse, to me (I don't like multiband limiting in general, but L3 isn't very good at it relative to other plugs).  I guess they might have fixed it up some... heck they'd have to if they expect people to actually USE 16 bands (!!!!) of limiting.  It might come in handy to make the Loudest-Ever-MP3.

Anyhoo... a new Waves multiband is a yawn for me, regardless.  Who needs it?  Guys in their bedrooms with a fist full of plugs may rejoice, but I don't see this as especially exciting news in the pro world. Looks more like a bad idea going even more wrong.

-d-

[bblackwood]

Bob Boyd wrote on Wed, 31 January 2007 01:21

dguidry wrote on Wed, 31 January 2007 00:50 If you think the L3-Multimaximizer with 6 bands is good, If...

My first thought exactly.

[Jerry Tubb]

dguidry wrote on Wed, 31 January 2007 00:50

I think, in Waves new Mercury bundle which includes a bunch of plugins I do not need.  The bundle costs $7000 and you cannot get the L3-16 Multimaximer alone for now,

I think the Waves guys have gone off the deep end, beyond the arrogant WUP thing.

Rather than updating and refining plugs they've already got, to support their user base (?), they keep coming up with more & more plugs, most of which I find unnecessary.

7k for the Mercury bundle is just absurd, I think they're just trying to Ultramaximize their cash flow.

JT

[TotalSonic]

Frankly, imho, the introduction of yet another digital brick wall peak limiter won't "revolutionize" mastering at all no matter how "transparent" it's claimed to be.

My honeymoon with the Waves L3 actually was pretty brief - it's very rare that I'll ever use it these days in preference to my other options.   In most cases I've found it simply is too finicky to set to get sounding right, and it just grains and smushes the transients too much for most tracks.

And I certainly don't think having yet more crossovers all across the spectrum will help audio quality at all - a lot of the time when using the L3 it sounds better to my ear when it is emulating a broadband response more than multiband - so I can't imagine this truly helping keep the integrity of the mix better or be less degrading to the audio by inserting crossover points everywhere.  There are very big reasons why speaker or multiband compressor designers don't use 16 or even 6 crossovers!

I see Waves has also now introduced a new plug for the Mercury bundles called
"Maxx Volume"  - http://www.waves.com/content.asp?id=2371


Anyway - I got really annoyed at Waves regarding their "WUP" policies which to me was essentially tacking on more fees for plugins we already paid premium prices for - so unless a plugin of theirs is truly compelling in sound and functionality from them and there are no adequate substitutes elsewhere I prefer to take my business elsewhere on future digital processor purchases.

Best regards,
Steve Berson

[cerberus]

in practice, the operation of L3-16 [pre-release version] is for me, more like L2 than like L3.  it's simpler to set up than L3.

and it is the most transparent sounding to the source brick-wall limiter that i've heard.

the way i am using L3-16 at the moment, it's hardly leaving any signature.  no matter what is happening earlier in the chain, it doesn't try to fight me.  

jeff dinces

[jazzius]

It always puzzles me when people describe a limiter as transparent.

For me, limiters are a choice between low distortion, lacking punch (L2 etc) and high distortion, more punch limters (clipping being the most extreme variant) - or somewhere in between

But transparent? - only if your monitoring isn't telling you the whole story.

Daz

[Viitalahde]

Speaking of punchy limiters, the free TLs Pocket Limiter has actually worked for me once or twice, when nothing else did the trick. http://www.kvraudio.com/get/1727.html

[cerberus]

there will be  some punchy presets for L-316.  but i use it in a way that works best  for me. which is not to ream it too hard near the end of the chain. although in testing, i've found that it doesn't get fettered easily, and it tends to recover  it's composure during the micro-time-span following serious abuse very gracefully.

so although L3-16 seems willing enough. in my work with it so far, it is like giving the music a better haircut, but not touching the "body" dynamics, which imo, is where you'll be finding the bulk of "punch".   for me, that area would be the province of other classes of tools than a brick-wall limiter.

as for my monitoring not being perfect, well duh. there will always be some expense i can't afford when it comes to monitoring. and since my ipod died, i've had no idea what the masses would really be hearing through their ear buds anyway.  

back to L3-16:  so far, i prefer to set it and forget it. and i find that it does it's intended job extroadinarily competently without needing interim attention; which  is a wonder unto itself.

jeff dinces

[compasspnt]

Waves will have to really work some extra special magic before I ever send them any more money.  The previous L3 version purchase finally did that for me.  Probably only really used it on 1, maybe 2 projects.  Now it sits very lonely and sad.

[duckhunter]

Look guys.  The L3-Multimaximizer made me happy.  If a manely slam and or weiss eq can do  much better in terms of overall pleasing mix and >+5.00 rms average on a K scale (-9db rms on linear) without graininess and loss of stereo image, then I'll spend the money. I'm an engineer/producer, former professional picker,  and entertainment attorney with 25 years of experience, and can buy just about anything I want to get a better product, but the L3 sounds pretty damned good already.  BTW I use the L3-Multimaximzer first in line with the IDR set to 24bits, type 1, normal, then the L3-Ultramaximier after and dither it to 16bit, type 2, ultra, to get that level.  You all know, and don't kid yourselves, the loundness war will never go away until playback manufacturers implement automatic volume adjustment.  Its up to you to figure out how to make a master loud, clean and  articulate, and dwell upon how to avoid it.  I think if I were working in a 96 or 196 environment on a TDM system (on which I use to work..48 channel procontrol with digi converters and preamps), with the L3, my masters would sound even better,but i'm mixing and mastering on an LE system at 24/44 clocked to an Apogee Big Ben and I'm willing to accept the difference in quality because the price threshold is so high.

I just can't imagine outboard gear would make that much difference given the same mix.  In fact, I've seen numerous complaints about the capabilities of the manely products to deliver loudness without artifacts.  I think the real difference between quality commerical masters is the skill of the recording engineer and mixer, the mix format bit depth, the D/A and A/D converters and/or clock source, in that order.  

Now, go ahead and kick my ass for saying so.

[bblackwood]

Hey, don't get mad, some of us just think it sounds like poo...