I made a similar video a few months ago. I discovered this over a decade ago when I heard the legendary mastering engineer bob Kats say the best mixes don't need mastering. I've been 'not mastering' my tracks for 10 years. Hundreds of millions of streams, never had an issue, All released with nothing on the Master channel, And no limiters or clippers on tracks or buses, And in fact, usually no compression either as I'm making dance music.
Bob Katz is great - and I absolutely agree. Properly controlling dynamics during tracking and mixing can be all that's needed to create an amazing sound. I appreciate you taking the time to watch the video
The truth is the truth...when the late 90s was mad with loudness...he held a banner of truth (my comments above and Im just going back to K12/14 now :-)
This technique works well with jazz rather than mainstream music. If you get a jazz or classical mix it’s worth a try. The loudness wars have made us addicted to compressors and limiters.
Hmm...I think the playback devices being listened on have dumbed down a lot of interpretation. I have playback system that is so many miles better than I had 20yrs ago... it highlights the devolution pretty clearly...not many peeps sit down with the lights dimmed and just listen/get lost in the space/journey of a masterpiece...look at eg Monet or Van Gogh...the experience takes time. Low dynamic range is inverse to the inner space of music (which needs physical dynamic range to manifest)
@@iam-musicyeah, what you're saying manifests on me all the time. I will make and mix a project and love it in every sound quality aspect. But, when i hold it against a reference I suddenly go limp because I know I've got to ruin it to keep DJ's happy.
@@homebrewinstrumentals7700 Thats why I think some masters like Gabriel just do 2 mixes...1 for listeners and 1 smashed (and usually for those peeps who are smashed baha). DJs are the worst...because they live in a bubble of relativism where its all measured against each other rather than an absolute (and because peeps are often smashed, its a primal assertion rather than interpretation). You know the mess is all about insecurity right? lol The speakers Im on atm...seriously...never had anything like it and they are sooo sensitive to level. Im listening to 20 year old successful releases and never noticed how obvious the pushes on the chorus and on one song...the bridge must lift near 3db...invisible all this time. It is very funny with (respect) so many newb comments saying how it sounds so much better with a limiter and its so obviously a gain change...hehe...I suffered this for so many years...not making 100% its "loudness matched" not gain matched. ie grab both tracks, do an unmix and null test the vocals and see what you really get
You talk about the loudness wars like you fought in them. It's very likely you'll soon fight in a real war, and if you somehow survive, I think saving a listener having to turn up a dial a few db's to be the most trite thing you could have every thought about.
@@joemarta8221 The Kick and snare may lose some punch but for that type of song, I prefer getting more punch out of the kick by going to the kick and working on the eq or add harmonics, saturation. I also notice the one that isn't limited has much of the detail and top end coming unglued. Limiters can suck bottom end if pushed to hard, I push mine until the bottom end starts to change, then go to the kick and or bass tracks and adjust them to work with the limiter engaged, and call it a day.
Thanks for this! I find the idea behind this technique (preserving transients) very interesting. However, i must confess that i find the sound of the version using a limiter sounds better. To my ear it sounds more gluey and balanced.
I think this is a great thing to talk about. This is likely best used in conjunction with limiting, of course - but its a powerful concept that I have also realized the power of. There are some great plugins out there that will dramatically increase apparent volume while maintaining peak level, and not all of these saturators are created the same. I have saved a lot of my favorite ones, and use them more in the mixing stage. Btw - I would LOVE you to tackle the APU Loudness Compressor/Limiter plugins. They are extremely powerful and a bit unorthodox in their settings, but it can be an extremely powerful tool for loudness with its ARA integration
I was kind of already on this path with serial compression and saturation. When I use Ozone's Maximizer, I end up only doing around .6 db GR so I wasn't hitting it hard. Serial compression really does help it not sounding squashed at -8 LUFS. This was a great breakdown on how I could get better. I don't know if I could completely get away from limiters but it's a fun exercise.
The limiter sounds professional, the maximizing sounds like some "up and coming" artists. The reason everyone sounds undergound us probably due to videos like these no cap
Hmm...not sure what a lot of other peeps are listening on...I just revisited this and the limited versions are obviously louder hence so many are saying its better of course it is...until you match based on perceived loudness...not a meter. The snare especially is decapitated and kick attack as well. Try rematching on your own system...dont blame "glue" on the tracks...the master should be a polish, not surgery but definitely...you cant polish poo lol (moral of the story is...spend time making the mix sizzle). Also play a loud version of it on decent full range system...the limited version has much less space and is fatiguing super quickly. I guess live gigs now are just a fraction of what many grew up on so the reference is earbuds not line arrays This to me sounds not like up and coming artist...but someone tutored on the afterglow of the 90s.
IDK what it says about me, but I tended to prefer the sound of the Limiter in these comparisons. Nevertheless, I appreciate you taking the time to highlight alternative techniques to bring out loudness without crushing the transients! It's never a bad thing to have more tools in your toolbox, in spite of the thoroughly imagined arms race a lot of producers have about loudness.
it's all in the mix... a proper mix can take a decent amount of clipping, compression or limiting. i usually prefer other solutions over limiting, i mainly use a limiter to see from what point on my mix breaks up.
i wanted to hear the final maximized edm track with 2db of L2 so bad haha. 2-3db of L2 is like finishing salt, but I can't bear the sound of more than 5 db of GR in literally any processing stage on the master buss
Neat, I just finished up an album, and I'd like to properly learn how to master it because I'm quite proud of it. Thank you! May Jesus bless you in your work😊
I only use a limiter on my master track. You can drive the individual signals to a loud but still sonically pleasing level while keeping everything in tact
Thanks for the video! I suggest a video on hearing the air and creating ilusion of instruments blending in the air, i guess this is the hardest thing that old recordings had to
Bro I get the idea... upward compression instead of limiting to have crisp transients and high loudness, makes perfect sense. But you're joking talking about "maximization" as if it's something completely different from what "mastering limiters" do. The Weiss MM-1 is just a limiter with extra DSP... From the softube website: "Select any one of MM-1’s five limiting styles from Transparent to Deess... ". Also the parallel compression is a nice idea to get something like upward compression going, but why not just use an upward compressor? with parallel compression it's kinda dependent on attack and release what parts of the signal you're actually boosting - Beats Basteln made an interesting video about that.
It is absolutely fine to use a limiter when mastering. A more complex and technically "correct" chain doesn't guarantee a better sound. This increases the chances of messing up your mix. Always trust your ears
@@Arron_Mottram Yeah, I mean he slammed the limiter with the full amount as well, so there really is no comparison here. I just focused on what his maximized process was doing to retain transients, as was the goal of his processing.
This looks like a semantic slight of tongue. It is really better described as distributing the processing load across multiple plugins vs using the limiter as the one and only final step. Just because one is called a limiter and another a maximizer doesn't really change much other than the novel use of words.
Thanks for watching! They behave in very different ways, with one processing from the peaks down and the other using waveshaping to amplify from the noise floor up.
Dear Sage, it would be great if you MAYBE could make a video about Sountheory KRAFTUR. They keep updating it, they put a voluma match function in and minor tweaks. It works a great deal by increasing loudness, but is it aliasing-free enough to use it for mastering? I saw quiet a couple vids on it, but your way of explaining things is just pleasant to hear. Thanks in advance, take care brother
Hello! For anyone who sees this, what do you think of having audibly processed audio vs clean? It seems that listeners do enjoy music being louder nowadays, and in more modern genres aggressive clipping, limiting, and compression can be essential to the sound. In 100 years, do you think we will be enjoying processed audio that is more, less, or the same in its processing transparency? Where do you think we are currently trending? This might be too weird a question, my bad if so. Thanks for the video Sage!
very good question. I predict that with new technologies something like autogain will emerge. were everybody's device has the ability to auto gain the tracks the user is listening to. Maybe something like ultra headphones will emerge where they might amplify or deamplify the sound you're hearing in everyday life(just realized that's called hearing aids but still cool whatsoever")
getting volume with clipping is the way to go - will not loose the snap and punch of your drum tracks - (Flatline) is an awesome plugin to achieve this volume in conjunction with a bit of limiting in the signal chain the fabfilter limiter works great for about the final 1-2db and some coloring.
Just bought the Oxford Inflator and I'm kicking myself because I didn't realize their Limiter had the Enhance feature. Which one do you prefer in mastering? Great video btw. Love the examples and I will give mastering without limiters a try
Ok, I appreciate the concept, but if you are maximizing with as series of processors and comparing it to limiting, shouldn't the limiting be done over a series of limiters instead of slamming one? Just don't seem like a fair comparison, I would say the one slammed limiter isn't giving up much, and dare I say it probably takes the lead in a series of processes much like your maximizer route, with this material. The goal you stated was of preserving the transients, with the mind set that squashing or cutting them from top is worse for maintaining them, opposed to pulling the sound from the bottom. Problem is pulling up the rms from the bottom weakens them as well, just in a different manner. I have found the choice to be more material dependent, sometimes hacking them from the top or squashing them down just maintains the crack on that snare better. Imo, find out in the mix which is helping the transients for that material the best and master accordingly. Thx for the vid.. helping me to confirm some thoughts.
While this is an interesting topic, as per the previous video, I think this is more of a mix bus tool. I’m speaking more specifically to electronic music, but I could see this being used to bring up specific instrument groups to blend more effectively against loud drums or a loud bass instrument. At least from my experience, limiting imparts an amount of distortion that has become part of the genre (DnB / Dubstep, etc). If you’re not aiming to have the same punch or sound of leading tracks in the genre, then your track is likely not going to get selected for a mix in a club by other artists. Again, love the discussion because ultimately it’s another tool, but not sure if the end goal is suited to specifically heavier electronic genres…not to mention electronic genres using VERY nonstandard gain staging leading into the mastering chain. The standard ideas of headroom are thrown out the window. Keep the vids coming tho! Always down for new tools and approaches.
👌Good video. I think if you swap the plugins for the ones you use yourself, you can adjust it a bit to your needs and the sound you want. Or just experiment a little.
Very exited about this! I'm a music producer myself and I was always wondering if there's better way to make music without ruining it! I will dedicate next year to this concept. Thank you so much for the inspiration🙏
I prefer the limited master, it sounds coherent and "finished". The maximised version sounds rough, poky and harsh. The vocal is sticking out in an awkward way and the hihats are too cutting, while the rest of the elements lack cohesion. Personally I tend to use a mix of saturation, compression, clipping and limiting to achieve good masters.
Mastering chain pt1 1. Pro C2 2:24 - threshold below -30db soft knee , auto again off 2. Omnipressor 3:08 - 1.1 ratio, 0.5 db range . 3. Weiss MM1 3:53 set to 40% 4. PSP Vintage Warmer 3:53 knee soft function , over sample on 5. Ozone Exciter 5:38 6. Oxford inflator , then Oxford Limiter 5:54
It´s awesome to avoid limitting. By any chance could you suggest some free plugins instead or any other plugin from waves for these same tasks? Have a blessed 2025 and TYSM for such high quality content.
I prefer the maximized with more transients. Sounds way more musical and "older" in a very good way. Like the records we used to like. The limited sounds more modern; and I don't mean that in a complimentary way. Yes, it's a familiar sound because everything sounds like that today... but it's not superior, in my opinion. That applies even more so for me; because I deal in softer, more trad pop genres. Very good, Sage Audio. Now give us a different example track! I'm sick of that one! 😜
What's the difference between limiting my master and applying makeup gain vs. making the quiter sound louder while maintaining the levels of the loud sounds? Isn this essentially the same?
To me it sounds like the drums in the pop punk song and the kick in the EDM track don't have as much punch with this method compared to the limited versions. Just like excessive limiting, too much attenuation to lower levels of a track end up killing dynamics. I really like your Best Mastering Chain video from years ago. Introduced me to the Oxford Inflator.
Thanks for watching! I did the same or close to the same here - I believe the wet was slightly higher this time. The amount of compression is so significant that I added more to make the signal even noticeable.
" fat " hahah .Hey Sage Nice video. i Have a question about transient shaper after MSED only to SIDE mode to widen the instrument. When i dont have this same like you Transient Shaper what is free alternative? i Have transient shaper but only with option attack and sustain but You have more options "Adaptive Transient" and " Transient Emphasis". U know where i can find free alternative with this?
I just use multiple instances of subtlety increasing (by .5db or less) analog style saturation at 50% each instance. The limiter is only there at -1db just in case. Ideally there's no indication of the limiter doing anything at all.
@@monkmusic5994 TBH I never really used limiting or maximizing in my master till just a few weeks ago, because I mainly do electronic music and adding the limiting and maximization generally ruined the transients (I didn't know why at the point but now I know a bit more). But I generally use maximizing. To the question of how I see I: I would say exactly what you said. Each song/genre/instrumentation (electronic or acoustic) behaves differently and thus need different effects.
1:45 both limited loops have more bass, while the maximized almost same loud, but less low punch. 3:37 the Softube WEISS software is great. A 1:1 digital code from a 10k $-digital mastering unit. Maybe i`m tweaking, but by replacing the Ozone Maximizer with the Weiss DS1-MK3 i could squeeze out a clean -7.5LUFS instead of getting -8.5 with the Ozone Maximizer. Don`t know about the Weiss Maximizer tho, if it is just one module out of DS1-MK3. 10:30 the limited mix sounds more punchy on the lows and i prefer that. The maximized mix sounds good tho. But (at least to me) same loudness with more punch on lows is preferred. Examples with Rock music are little useful in today`s times. It`s a pity but rock is mostly dead. Thank you for the video anyway, i think we could learn something from it! The combination is the key i guess.
yep, I prefer the limited one (1:35). it is livelier, punchier, and spicier. the unlimited one, prior to that, is just "loudly audible," for the lack of a better description, and it isn't it for me.
hmm interesting only listening on my Bose BT speaker (mono) the limited sounded puncher, to be honest the non limited vr sounded like how records use to be finished(mostly) and the limited sounds way more modern
Thanks for sharing your thoughts, would definitely recommend you give it a listen on some stereo monitors or headphones as well so you can more accurately perceive the differences too!
I believe so! I haven't tired it but since upward compression is an option with it I'm sure it could. Could even work better with Hz. dependent settings
I feel like you can't get away from the limited sound for certain genres. I don't think using an emo/punk mix was the best example to use :P We're all already conditioned to expect to her over compression due to the loudness wars AND low fidelity downloads from limewire and napster haha It's now a cultural sound, but I would lay off or use minimal compression on classical mixes and live recordings (depending on how well it was tracked)
the weiss mm1 at aroung 5:00 added too much of the vocals in my opinion (i guess thats it works though). the psp really boosted everything thus sounds the best in my opinion
same story with the hiphop track. Just realized that its very prominent in the bass. The bass feels so weak and insignificant now. ( this is probably contributing to why on very specific artists and genres, I need to turn up the bass!! its always very specific which track need more bass too. My theory is that its the overuse of limiting/compression on the master
sorry I just dont agree with any of the loudness crap when there is -14 headroom now. WHY are we still worrying about the loudness wars? Its ridiculous. Ive been mixing for 40 years and the last 10 years have been heaven...are you worried that consumers dont know how to turn a volume knob up. I give you this comparison...start looking around for quality productions that dont give a @$%^& about loudness but have the sound as their prime moderator instead of insecurity. eg Take a recording like Jack Johnson/All at once. All done on tape (ie compressed without squash) mixed by a craftsmen who doesnt give a %^& about wave/crest and all the other BS touted on YT and then mastered with the instructions "Dont make it loud" (Bernie Grundmann) I demo omnispherical speakers and have a range of music from pop, edm etc that I put through and all equal loudness. When I play them it all sounds ok BUT when I put the JJ on...absolutely WOW...every single person is blown away...and I cant understate it enough. YOU CANNOT CHEAT PHYSICS Sure you can optimise etc but as soon as you compromise for the sake of loudness wars by peeps who just dont have a reference for what this really means, you compromise in an irreparable way Just use your ears and let every element do its thing unless you are doing it for an artistic purpose REBEL! Start making music...not product. Just think for yourself and test every claim until you are satisfied its valid and above drive with your ears not your eyes nor other peeps "expert" advice
I agree with you. most of the time putting a compressor on the master makes everything feel more stable but that stableness can also make it monotone and boring. I also commented how the EDM example with limiting feels less energetic and too stable as a song.
@@slikyviky yeah...everything is "smooth" with most plugs these days when the only thing you want to do is remove distractions. I guess its because the most listened to devices are earbuds...Im working on a project for release end of March. Im going to follow Peter Gabriel and do an "Audiophile" side B and "Contemporary" mix side A. This way any guys with subs that do below 40 (properly) can enjoy even 15hz and be happy. Music is like us...its the differences and the harmony/dissonance that brings humanity and resolve (joy :-) Ah thats right...they want us all left or right so we are distracted. Funny too how as you travel into -10 and lower, the fatigue and stress becomes so obvious...when you have the correct lens #divideandconquer
@@slikyviky lol just make sure you have speakers that can handle a large sound stage :-) Either omnispherical @> 2m spacing or normal directive speakers at @3m setting. Id really like to hear your critique as its a completely new paradigm for me...even using these Aurasphere translation speakers (think they will be at NAMM) ...some of the guys are from around the world, Egyptian flute (but track is acoustic/electro pop) stuff by a Floridian ( Im in Sydney :-) You got any tracks for show and tell as well RE: @Bthelick I totally agree and had numbers of chats with Bob K in mid 2000s. His K12 and K14 still stand the test of time...the track above will be K14(ish)
man dont get me wrong but every producer video i see is yapping about mastering. bruh just produce something creative that you like and apply a moderate mastering til your fine. My personal idea is getting lost in mastering section is nothing compare to producing some stuff. Dont let anyone affect your thoughts about mastering ''booo there is to much mud bruh'' ''there is no transients its just brickwall noooo''. imo use your time efficiently and get something creative. When you succeed and getting traffic you can worry about it later.
Definitely some good points here! I think finding a balance between quality and unhindered creativity is important, as with how saturated the music landscape is these days it'll be hard to get traffic without having at some standout quality in your mastering/mixing, so people can really hear your vision as an artist. That said, you definitely touched on important ideas of not getting bogged down by minutia in order to pursue your artist+creative truths!
@@sageaudiohey I’m here now, so your doing something right! Also, seems you some negativity from “producers” in your comments. Don’t feed the trolls. Keep it real and you’ll grow audience away from that riff raff.
Dawg that sucks 😂😂 just use a limiter. Sounds way better. Stop being weird and just master normal. Dang bruh it ain’t like that it’s okay to use what’s been proven to work well. Stop all this no limiting no clipping bull, sounds like crap. 😂😂😂
Ok, I get it your a newb based from that comment, but he stated the goal was to maintain transients, not just to do this cause its different. Now, problem is pulling the rms up from the bottom weakens the transients in a different manner, so it will always be material dependent on which is better. Sometimes hacking off the top or squashing down the top of a snare leaves the "crack" more intact. Sometimes as in the vid, pulling the rms up from the bottom maintains the crack better. This can be determined in the mix, then that will determine the best mastering path, IF maintaining transients is the goal.
I made a similar video a few months ago.
I discovered this over a decade ago when I heard the legendary mastering engineer bob Kats say the best mixes don't need mastering. I've been 'not mastering' my tracks for 10 years. Hundreds of millions of streams, never had an issue, All released with nothing on the Master channel, And no limiters or clippers on tracks or buses, And in fact, usually no compression either as I'm making dance music.
Bob Katz is great - and I absolutely agree. Properly controlling dynamics during tracking and mixing can be all that's needed to create an amazing sound. I appreciate you taking the time to watch the video
This is da way
The truth is the truth...when the late 90s was mad with loudness...he held a banner of truth (my comments above and Im just going back to K12/14 now :-)
@bthelick is a legenddddddd. Get itttt.
This technique works well with jazz rather than mainstream music. If you get a jazz or classical mix it’s worth a try. The loudness wars have made us addicted to compressors and limiters.
exactly this sounds best with real or natural instruments
Hmm...I think the playback devices being listened on have dumbed down a lot of interpretation. I have playback system that is so many miles better than I had 20yrs ago... it highlights the devolution pretty clearly...not many peeps sit down with the lights dimmed and just listen/get lost in the space/journey of a masterpiece...look at eg Monet or Van Gogh...the experience takes time. Low dynamic range is inverse to the inner space of music (which needs physical dynamic range to manifest)
@@iam-musicyeah, what you're saying manifests on me all the time. I will make and mix a project and love it in every sound quality aspect. But, when i hold it against a reference I suddenly go limp because I know I've got to ruin it to keep DJ's happy.
@@homebrewinstrumentals7700 Thats why I think some masters like Gabriel just do 2 mixes...1 for listeners and 1 smashed (and usually for those peeps who are smashed baha). DJs are the worst...because they live in a bubble of relativism where its all measured against each other rather than an absolute (and because peeps are often smashed, its a primal assertion rather than interpretation). You know the mess is all about insecurity right? lol
The speakers Im on atm...seriously...never had anything like it and they are sooo sensitive to level. Im listening to 20 year old successful releases and never noticed how obvious the pushes on the chorus and on one song...the bridge must lift near 3db...invisible all this time.
It is very funny with (respect) so many newb comments saying how it sounds so much better with a limiter and its so obviously a gain change...hehe...I suffered this for so many years...not making 100% its "loudness matched" not gain matched. ie grab both tracks, do an unmix and null test the vocals and see what you really get
You talk about the loudness wars like you fought in them. It's very likely you'll soon fight in a real war, and if you somehow survive, I think saving a listener having to turn up a dial a few db's to be the most trite thing you could have every thought about.
I can’t lie, the limited example at 1:40 sounds waayyyy better
I agree, i've even tried this with acoustic music and Limiters are magic IMO
AND its was slammed into one limiter only 7-8db !!!
Because it was waayyy louder.
Really? No way. The kick and snare lose tons of punch on the limiter settings
@@joemarta8221 The Kick and snare may lose some punch but for that type of song, I prefer getting more punch out of the kick by going to the kick and working on the eq or add harmonics, saturation. I also notice the one that isn't limited has much of the detail and top end coming unglued. Limiters can suck bottom end if pushed to hard, I push mine until the bottom end starts to change, then go to the kick and or bass tracks and adjust them to work with the limiter engaged, and call it a day.
Thanks for this! I find the idea behind this technique (preserving transients) very interesting. However, i must confess that i find the sound of the version using a limiter sounds better. To my ear it sounds more gluey and balanced.
I think this is a great thing to talk about. This is likely best used in conjunction with limiting, of course - but its a powerful concept that I have also realized the power of. There are some great plugins out there that will dramatically increase apparent volume while maintaining peak level, and not all of these saturators are created the same. I have saved a lot of my favorite ones, and use them more in the mixing stage.
Btw - I would LOVE you to tackle the APU Loudness Compressor/Limiter plugins. They are extremely powerful and a bit unorthodox in their settings, but it can be an extremely powerful tool for loudness with its ARA integration
Appreciate your comment and viewership! Will definitely take a look into those plugins!
I was kind of already on this path with serial compression and saturation. When I use Ozone's Maximizer, I end up only doing around .6 db GR so I wasn't hitting it hard. Serial compression really does help it not sounding squashed at -8 LUFS. This was a great breakdown on how I could get better. I don't know if I could completely get away from limiters but it's a fun exercise.
The limiter sounds professional, the maximizing sounds like some "up and coming" artists. The reason everyone sounds undergound us probably due to videos like these no cap
Hmm...not sure what a lot of other peeps are listening on...I just revisited this and the limited versions are obviously louder hence so many are saying its better of course it is...until you match based on perceived loudness...not a meter. The snare especially is decapitated and kick attack as well.
Try rematching on your own system...dont blame "glue" on the tracks...the master should be a polish, not surgery but definitely...you cant polish poo lol (moral of the story is...spend time making the mix sizzle). Also play a loud version of it on decent full range system...the limited version has much less space and is fatiguing super quickly.
I guess live gigs now are just a fraction of what many grew up on so the reference is earbuds not line arrays
This to me sounds not like up and coming artist...but someone tutored on the afterglow of the 90s.
1:26 IDK,.. honestly limited version sounds clear, wider and more airy., and I much prefer it over non-limited(maximized ver.)
IDK what it says about me, but I tended to prefer the sound of the Limiter in these comparisons. Nevertheless, I appreciate you taking the time to highlight alternative techniques to bring out loudness without crushing the transients! It's never a bad thing to have more tools in your toolbox, in spite of the thoroughly imagined arms race a lot of producers have about loudness.
it's all in the mix... a proper mix can take a decent amount of clipping, compression or limiting. i usually prefer other solutions over limiting, i mainly use a limiter to see from what point on my mix breaks up.
Just do both to make it double loud 👍
i wanted to hear the final maximized edm track with 2db of L2 so bad haha. 2-3db of L2 is like finishing salt, but I can't bear the sound of more than 5 db of GR in literally any processing stage on the master buss
Neat, I just finished up an album, and I'd like to properly learn how to master it because I'm quite proud of it. Thank you! May Jesus bless you in your work😊
Thanks for watching!
Wheyyy, just tuning into this and I’m on the tele! 🤣🙌🏻
Excellent explanations and demonstration. A lot to think about here. Thank you!
The ozone saturation kills the transients and punch to my ears. It overcooks the master.
I only use a limiter on my master track. You can drive the individual signals to a loud but still sonically pleasing level while keeping everything in tact
i haven't come across any issues while using a limiter on the Master, if not using more than 2 dB of limiting.
Thanks for the video! I suggest a video on hearing the air and creating ilusion of instruments blending in the air, i guess this is the hardest thing that old recordings had to
Bro I get the idea... upward compression instead of limiting to have crisp transients and high loudness, makes perfect sense. But you're joking talking about "maximization" as if it's something completely different from what "mastering limiters" do. The Weiss MM-1 is just a limiter with extra DSP... From the softube website: "Select any one of MM-1’s five limiting styles from Transparent to Deess... ".
Also the parallel compression is a nice idea to get something like upward compression going, but why not just use an upward compressor? with parallel compression it's kinda dependent on attack and release what parts of the signal you're actually boosting - Beats Basteln made an interesting video about that.
It is absolutely fine to use a limiter when mastering. A more complex and technically "correct" chain doesn't guarantee a better sound. This increases the chances of messing up your mix. Always trust your ears
Well its purpose was to retain transient better, I just don't hear that. I agree the less processors to achieve results is preferred.
I'd also like to see a processed and unprocessed comparison of the same song segments. I expect to see a significant phase rotation
@@Arron_Mottram Yeah, I mean he slammed the limiter with the full amount as well, so there really is no comparison here. I just focused on what his maximized process was doing to retain transients, as was the goal of his processing.
Hey mom, im on TV! (in Sage`s video)
This looks like a semantic slight of tongue. It is really better described as distributing the processing load across multiple plugins vs using the limiter as the one and only final step. Just because one is called a limiter and another a maximizer doesn't really change much other than the novel use of words.
Thanks for watching! They behave in very different ways, with one processing from the peaks down and the other using waveshaping to amplify from the noise floor up.
Great vid. Could you make a video with alternatives to the plugins you use? Like the omnipressor or the PSP. Just to save some bucks.
Dear Sage, it would be great if you MAYBE could make a video about Sountheory KRAFTUR. They keep updating it, they put a voluma match function in and minor tweaks. It works a great deal by increasing loudness, but is it aliasing-free enough to use it for mastering? I saw quiet a couple vids on it, but your way of explaining things is just pleasant to hear. Thanks in advance, take care brother
We will definitely look into this, thanks for watching!
@@sageaudio Thanx back, lessgo! =)
Hello! For anyone who sees this, what do you think of having audibly processed audio vs clean?
It seems that listeners do enjoy music being louder nowadays, and in more modern genres aggressive clipping, limiting, and compression can be essential to the sound. In 100 years, do you think we will be enjoying processed audio that is more, less, or the same in its processing transparency? Where do you think we are currently trending?
This might be too weird a question, my bad if so. Thanks for the video Sage!
very good question. I predict that with new technologies something like autogain will emerge. were everybody's device has the ability to auto gain the tracks the user is listening to.
Maybe something like ultra headphones will emerge where they might amplify or deamplify the sound you're hearing in everyday life(just realized that's called hearing aids but still cool whatsoever")
getting volume with clipping is the way to go - will not loose the snap and punch of your drum tracks - (Flatline) is an awesome plugin to achieve this volume in conjunction with a bit of limiting in the signal chain the fabfilter limiter works great for about the final 1-2db and some coloring.
Just bought the Oxford Inflator and I'm kicking myself because I didn't realize their Limiter had the Enhance feature. Which one do you prefer in mastering?
Great video btw. Love the examples and I will give mastering without limiters a try
Will you kick yourself again when i tell you that JS inflator is the exact same but free ...
Both are great options for mastering, just depends on the style/genre of the song. Thanks for watching :)!
Very informative video 📷📷
Ok, I appreciate the concept, but if you are maximizing with as series of processors and comparing it to limiting, shouldn't the limiting be done over a series of limiters instead of slamming one? Just don't seem like a fair comparison, I would say the one slammed limiter isn't giving up much, and dare I say it probably takes the lead in a series of processes much like your maximizer route, with this material. The goal you stated was of preserving the transients, with the mind set that squashing or cutting them from top is worse for maintaining them, opposed to pulling the sound from the bottom. Problem is pulling up the rms from the bottom weakens them as well, just in a different manner. I have found the choice to be more material dependent, sometimes hacking them from the top or squashing them down just maintains the crack on that snare better. Imo, find out in the mix which is helping the transients for that material the best and master accordingly. Thx for the vid.. helping me to confirm some thoughts.
Well said.
@@slikyviky Thx
@@sword-and-shield []~(￣▽￣)~*
Amazing sage, am i the only one who is scared to use reverb
While this is an interesting topic, as per the previous video, I think this is more of a mix bus tool.
I’m speaking more specifically to electronic music, but I could see this being used to bring up specific instrument groups to blend more effectively against loud drums or a loud bass instrument. At least from my experience, limiting imparts an amount of distortion that has become part of the genre (DnB / Dubstep, etc). If you’re not aiming to have the same punch or sound of leading tracks in the genre, then your track is likely not going to get selected for a mix in a club by other artists.
Again, love the discussion because ultimately it’s another tool, but not sure if the end goal is suited to specifically heavier electronic genres…not to mention electronic genres using VERY nonstandard gain staging leading into the mastering chain. The standard ideas of headroom are thrown out the window.
Keep the vids coming tho! Always down for new tools and approaches.
👌Good video. I think if you swap the plugins for the ones you use yourself,
you can adjust it a bit to your needs and the sound you want. Or just experiment a little.
Very exited about this! I'm a music producer myself and I was always wondering if there's better way to make music without ruining it! I will dedicate next year to this concept. Thank you so much for the inspiration🙏
But still waiting for the day when people finally stop chasing the loudness 😂😂😂
@@NEEDSHES this yes. people got used to compromising their mix. most masters i got back couldn't compete with the mixes once level matched.
Thanks for watching! Wishing you all the best in your journey!
@@george_nap 100%
I prefer the limited master, it sounds coherent and "finished". The maximised version sounds rough, poky and harsh. The vocal is sticking out in an awkward way and the hihats are too cutting, while the rest of the elements lack cohesion. Personally I tend to use a mix of saturation, compression, clipping and limiting to achieve good masters.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts, appreciate you!
@@sageaudio Likewise! I've learnt so much from your videos :)
I really liked it. Btw why not using a low level enhancer like mv2 on the chain? Or are you using one?
The vox is more up front in the limited version...Can you explain why that is?
Hey guys, do you think Arturia STA can do the same job than omnipressor ?
Thank you
Mastering chain pt1
1. Pro C2 2:24 - threshold below -30db soft knee , auto again off
2. Omnipressor 3:08 - 1.1 ratio, 0.5 db range .
3. Weiss MM1 3:53 set to 40%
4. PSP Vintage Warmer 3:53 knee soft function , over sample on
5. Ozone Exciter 5:38
6. Oxford inflator , then Oxford Limiter 5:54
It´s awesome to avoid limitting. By any chance could you suggest some free plugins instead or any other plugin from waves for these same tasks? Have a blessed 2025 and TYSM for such high quality content.
Here are some download links to PDFs of our favorite free plugin lists:
we.tl/t-ZzPcYWmf46
we.tl/t-68speUkpie
we.tl/t-POsdt2MYpw
we.tl/t-baony4db6c
@@sageaudio NICE!!
@@sageaudio dude you're awesome!!🤯🔥
Excuse me ? Which programme do you use to analyse dynamic processors ? ( Blue graph ) Thank you 🙏🏻
It's called Plugin Doctor, and it's very useful!
I prefer the maximized with more transients. Sounds way more musical and "older" in a very good way. Like the records we used to like.
The limited sounds more modern; and I don't mean that in a complimentary way. Yes, it's a familiar sound because everything sounds like that today... but it's not superior, in my opinion. That applies even more so for me; because I deal in softer, more trad pop genres.
Very good, Sage Audio.
Now give us a different example track! I'm sick of that one! 😜
Appreciate your comment, we will definitely thinking about getting on that for the next one haha!
he keeps the emotions. No limiters in 2025
What's the difference between limiting my master and applying makeup gain vs. making the quiter sound louder while maintaining the levels of the loud sounds? Isn this essentially the same?
Maximizing populates the mix with harmonics which definitively alter the tone. that's it. Use what you want to.
To me it sounds like the drums in the pop punk song and the kick in the EDM track don't have as much punch with this method compared to the limited versions. Just like excessive limiting, too much attenuation to lower levels of a track end up killing dynamics. I really like your Best Mastering Chain video from years ago. Introduced me to the Oxford Inflator.
In the previous vid, you mentioned using a 50/50 mix as parallel processing to preserve transients. why did you abandon that in this vid?
Thanks for watching! I did the same or close to the same here - I believe the wet was slightly higher this time. The amount of compression is so significant that I added more to make the signal even noticeable.
" fat " hahah .Hey Sage Nice video. i Have a question about transient shaper after MSED only to SIDE mode to widen the instrument. When i dont have this same like you Transient Shaper what is free alternative? i Have transient shaper but only with option attack and sustain but You have more options "Adaptive Transient" and " Transient Emphasis". U know where i can find free alternative with this?
I just use multiple instances of subtlety increasing (by .5db or less) analog style saturation at 50% each instance. The limiter is only there at -1db just in case. Ideally there's no indication of the limiter doing anything at all.
Guess each song behaves differently. In general, limiting sounds cleaner and thinner, maximizing the opposite. What effect do you need?
hhhmmm never actually thought about it like that
@slikyviky how do you see it?
@@monkmusic5994 TBH I never really used limiting or maximizing in my master till just a few weeks ago, because I mainly do electronic music and adding the limiting and maximization generally ruined the transients
(I didn't know why at the point but now I know a bit more).
But I generally use maximizing.
To the question of how I see I: I would say exactly what you said. Each song/genre/instrumentation (electronic or acoustic) behaves differently and thus need different effects.
this is brilliant the way your describing for maximisation sounds waaaaaay better than typical limiting
1:45 both limited loops have more bass, while the maximized almost same loud, but less low punch.
3:37 the Softube WEISS software is great. A 1:1 digital code from a 10k $-digital mastering unit. Maybe i`m tweaking, but by replacing the Ozone Maximizer with the Weiss DS1-MK3 i could squeeze out a clean -7.5LUFS instead of getting -8.5 with the Ozone Maximizer. Don`t know about the Weiss Maximizer tho, if it is just one module out of DS1-MK3.
10:30 the limited mix sounds more punchy on the lows and i prefer that. The maximized mix sounds good tho. But (at least to me) same loudness with more punch on lows is preferred.
Examples with Rock music are little useful in today`s times. It`s a pity but rock is mostly dead. Thank you for the video anyway, i think we could learn something from it! The combination is the key i guess.
Appreciate you sharing your thoughts! Not exactly sure if rock is mostly dead, but just depends where you live Thanks for watching!
yep, I prefer the limited one (1:35). it is livelier, punchier, and spicier. the unlimited one, prior to that, is just "loudly audible," for the lack of a better description, and it isn't it for me.
Not sure for better result ....
Awesome
Just Use Limiter like the whole world does😂
I think the limiter sounds so much better (Impartially)
Way more life and energy in the limited examples.
Let's make Pepsi cola without carbonated water:
what's the hip-hop song at 11:40?
thank you.
"Lit" by Elijah
app.soundstripe.com/songs/12806
hmm interesting only listening on my Bose BT speaker (mono) the limited sounded puncher, to be honest the non limited vr sounded like how records use to be finished(mostly) and the limited sounds way more modern
Thanks for sharing your thoughts, would definitely recommend you give it a listen on some stereo monitors or headphones as well so you can more accurately perceive the differences too!
Wouldn't it be better to use Pro-MB with upward compression instead of Pro-C2?
I believe so! I haven't tired it but since upward compression is an option with it I'm sure it could. Could even work better with Hz. dependent settings
Gain automation already in the process of mixing results in the best compromise between transient-preserving dynamics and perceived loudness.
Interesting 🎉
Thanks for watching!
The limited version sounds better bro
I feel like you can't get away from the limited sound for certain genres. I don't think using an emo/punk mix was the best example to use :P We're all already conditioned to expect to her over compression due to the loudness wars AND low fidelity downloads from limewire and napster haha It's now a cultural sound, but I would lay off or use minimal compression on classical mixes and live recordings (depending on how well it was tracked)
You should never be limiting more than -4dbs in mastering...
the weiss mm1 at aroung 5:00 added too much of the vocals in my opinion (i guess thats it works though).
the psp really boosted everything thus sounds the best in my opinion
The limited EDM to me at least feels less exciting and energetic. It feels too stable if I'm saying it right
same story with the hiphop track. Just realized that its very prominent in the bass. The bass feels so weak and insignificant now. ( this is probably contributing to why on very specific artists and genres, I need to turn up the bass!! its always very specific which track need more bass too. My theory is that its the overuse of limiting/compression on the master
FIRST !!!
sorry I just dont agree with any of the loudness crap when there is -14 headroom now. WHY are we still worrying about the loudness wars? Its ridiculous. Ive been mixing for 40 years and the last 10 years have been heaven...are you worried that consumers dont know how to turn a volume knob up. I give you this comparison...start looking around for quality productions that dont give a @$%^& about loudness but have the sound as their prime moderator instead of insecurity. eg Take a recording like Jack Johnson/All at once. All done on tape (ie compressed without squash) mixed by a craftsmen who doesnt give a %^& about wave/crest and all the other BS touted on YT and then mastered with the instructions "Dont make it loud" (Bernie Grundmann)
I demo omnispherical speakers and have a range of music from pop, edm etc that I put through and all equal loudness. When I play them it all sounds ok BUT when I put the JJ on...absolutely WOW...every single person is blown away...and I cant understate it enough.
YOU CANNOT CHEAT PHYSICS
Sure you can optimise etc but as soon as you compromise for the sake of loudness wars by peeps who just dont have a reference for what this really means, you compromise in an irreparable way
Just use your ears and let every element do its thing unless you are doing it for an artistic purpose
REBEL! Start making music...not product. Just think for yourself and test every claim until you are satisfied its valid and above drive with your ears not your eyes nor other peeps "expert" advice
I agree with you. most of the time putting a compressor on the master makes everything feel more stable but that stableness can also make it monotone and boring.
I also commented how the EDM example with limiting feels less energetic and too stable as a song.
@@slikyviky yeah...everything is "smooth" with most plugs these days when the only thing you want to do is remove distractions. I guess its because the most listened to devices are earbuds...Im working on a project for release end of March. Im going to follow Peter Gabriel and do an "Audiophile" side B and "Contemporary" mix side A. This way any guys with subs that do below 40 (properly) can enjoy even 15hz and be happy.
Music is like us...its the differences and the harmony/dissonance that brings humanity and resolve (joy :-)
Ah thats right...they want us all left or right so we are distracted. Funny too how as you travel into -10 and lower, the fatigue and stress becomes so obvious...when you have the correct lens
#divideandconquer
@@iam-music Very well said. I'l also be looking forward to upcoming music projects 👍👍 It better be good 😂😂
@@slikyviky lol just make sure you have speakers that can handle a large sound stage :-) Either omnispherical @> 2m spacing or normal directive speakers at @3m setting. Id really like to hear your critique as its a completely new paradigm for me...even using these Aurasphere translation speakers (think they will be at NAMM) ...some of the guys are from around the world, Egyptian flute (but track is acoustic/electro pop) stuff by a Floridian ( Im in Sydney :-) You got any tracks for show and tell as well
RE: @Bthelick I totally agree and had numbers of chats with Bob K in mid 2000s. His K12 and K14 still stand the test of time...the track above will be K14(ish)
man dont get me wrong but every producer video i see is yapping about mastering. bruh just produce something creative that you like and apply a moderate mastering til your fine. My personal idea is getting lost in mastering section is nothing compare to producing some stuff. Dont let anyone affect your thoughts about mastering ''booo there is to much mud bruh'' ''there is no transients its just brickwall noooo''. imo use your time efficiently and get something creative. When you succeed and getting traffic you can worry about it later.
Definitely some good points here! I think finding a balance between quality and unhindered creativity is important, as with how saturated the music landscape is these days it'll be hard to get traffic without having at some standout quality in your mastering/mixing, so people can really hear your vision as an artist. That said, you definitely touched on important ideas of not getting bogged down by minutia in order to pursue your artist+creative truths!
@@sageaudio thats exactly what im talking about! I will wait for your new contents. i've been watching you for last couple months
@@sageaudiohey I’m here now, so your doing something right! Also, seems you some negativity from “producers” in your comments. Don’t feed the trolls. Keep it real and you’ll grow audience away from that riff raff.
@@skubasan Hold up. Since when is arguing about a topic considered trolling? get out of here glazer
Dawg that sucks 😂😂 just use a limiter. Sounds way better. Stop being weird and just master normal. Dang bruh it ain’t like that it’s okay to use what’s been proven to work well. Stop all this no limiting no clipping bull, sounds like crap. 😂😂😂
Exactly. Why complicate life with maximizers? There has to be a reason both plugins co-exist to begin with, no?
Hey big DAWG. Where is your content?? Do you make educational content??? Any content? Would love to see it/hear it.
Ok, I get it your a newb based from that comment, but he stated the goal was to maintain transients, not just to do this cause its different. Now, problem is pulling the rms up from the bottom weakens the transients in a different manner, so it will always be material dependent on which is better. Sometimes hacking off the top or squashing down the top of a snare leaves the "crack" more intact. Sometimes as in the vid, pulling the rms up from the bottom maintains the crack better. This can be determined in the mix, then that will determine the best mastering path, IF maintaining transients is the goal.
If your mixing jazz or classical this is often the better option.
Even if you don’t want to stop limiting these are nice techniques to incorporate with basic limiting