What is the Loudest Limiter on the market?

[ere2learn]

That doesn't add up at all.

I could very well be wrong on the quote,but lets says its 500 7"

https://www.digitalmusicnews.com/2018/0 ... -pay-2018/

Million streams on apple music gives you 7000$.

Using the biggest player in the market gives you gives you closer to 57% of that at $3,970

Even if label gave you 200 7" singles for free (which they wouldn't) and you sold them all for pure profit, one costs what, 8$? netting 1600$

In reality, you'd either need to pay for pressing, or label would take a chunk from mechanical + copyright royalties.

No label involved,self pressed & published

Also the number of streams are enormous compared to selling physical copies.

Ok so lets say 500 copies of the record we need to sell,to be on par with spotify.Streaming is 10x that amount?

So we need 200 plays on spotify from 5,000 people on average

The plus side to streaming is its there forever,so the revenue stream can be there in the future

[Ploki]

Not sure if you agree with me or not (or only partially)

Self-pressed costs money. Selling everything properly costs a lot of time too. Streaming costs much less.

I don't think streaming is ideal, just don't think it's as bad as people make it out to be

[ere2learn]

Partially,I think streaming needs to pay more

Its hard out here for a pimp artists

[Ploki]

Agreed...

or some for of communism needs to be implemented . (0.5€ per stream up to 10000 streams, 0.2 up to 10000 etc)

[dreamvoid]

I don't think streaming is ideal, just don't think it's as bad as people make it out to be

There is nothing wrong technically with streaming but it is a big wrecking ball for music development and sustainability in income for most musicians, composers etc. This came after ruining everything with illegal downloads for the benefit of the companies like Google and FaceBook. Authors, musicians etc. were all expropriated and the politics did nearly nothing, they are all in a network of a neoliberal coup d'état. Streaming is a business but the goal was to take away the money from the producers into other pockets. That is the fundamental goal of disruptive industries: destroy traditional markets and take over them. Let others bleed for your business.

[Ploki]

Well said.
wish i could just like posts i agree with

[jochicago]

The streaming side is not the only reason for the decline of individual profits. There's way, way, way more music now than before. Anyone with a laptop can download a solid set of free DAW, plugs and instruments and make music. So no need for a studio, artistic dexterity, real instruments or even a band of any kind. And releasing online is far easier than on physical media.

Back to the limiting thing:

Why not use multiple GR stages? Here's a recipe:
1. Start with an LA2A, something musical but with a firm grip. 2-3dbs
2. Digital opto-like for another round of gentle compression but with a faster attack. 2db
3. Single-band limiter, to shave off the top spikes left behind by the optos. 2db
4. Multi-band limiter, to really round off the top in a sensible way. 4-5db
5. One more pass of the single-band limiter, to punish any persistent spikes. 2db

That will give you 12-15 db of deep compression in the most musical way. The song will be very loud but still kinda sound like the original mix.

Also, I agree, this is not the way if you are releasing to a streaming site. The LUFS measuring system will lower your volume anyway, and you'll end up with a squashed song. It would only get loud if people raise the volume on their device in response to the streaming platform lowering it on your song, but even then they would only raise to comfort level, not mega loud like you intended when you mangled the song.

[dreamvoid]

The streaming side is not the only reason for the decline of individual profits. There's way, way, way more music now than before. Anyone with a laptop can download a solid set of free DAW, plugs and instruments and make music. So no need for a studio, artistic dexterity, real instruments or even a band of any kind. And releasing online is far easier than on physical media.

Nobody said "only reason" but one of the 'main reasons'. The point you describe is the amateurs clogging professional channels and are used to slash down prices for music (books, films etc.). In comparison there was always amateurism but nowadays it is used as a price breaker and diminishing quality requirements. Therefore we got something like 'amteurising' of many professional areas. In the end nobody has any criteria, except price, anymore.

[jochicago]

Therefore we got something like 'amteurising' of many professional areas. In the end nobody has any criteria, except price, anymore.

Yeah, technology makes pro tools more accessible, so anyone can get on board. Doesn't mean they are any good, but they get to work with good tools. Same for instance in photography, a pro friend complains that amateurs can get a pro-quality DSLR at entry level costs and they think they are as good as a pro that's been working for 20 years. The real problem is not that a newbie can get a pro tool, the problem is that when it comes to artistic things the audience can't tell much of a difference between a 6.5/10 quality product and a 8.5/10 quality product. So yeah, the masses will buy 6.5/10 quality from amateurs and think they got something good.

But on the other end that's not everyone. there's still money in the range of people that appreciate and work only with quality. As an example, I was a watching a youtube video of a composer making a piece for a movie. He was using nice orchestral libraries to write his piece in the DAW, some fine mod wheel work,etc, and the piece turned out really nice. I'm finicky with realistic sounds and this guy really nailed it. Then he printed the sheets and took it to an orchestral chamber to get the song recorded by real musicians. Came back with a final recording that sounded 10% better at 100 times the cost. But that's how he makes good music, and that's what the movie studio pays for.

[v1o]

I settled on Limiter No 6 GE. Only because I was familiar with the freeware version so learning curve was nonexistent when upgrading to GE. It’s not the most transparent limiter but it can be pushed quite hard while still sounding good. I like it a lot more than the Ozone IRC limiter modes on the master. I also have Waves L1, its low latency and great everywhere except maybe the master buss.

[v1o]

Also, too: 'transparent' is not a subjective sort of a term. It means not adding color (distortion). Clippers are not transparent, they soften the clipping, ie., provide a distorting effect.

Transparent also means not adding an easily perceivable colour. For example dithering.

[Ploki]

Also, too: 'transparent' is not a subjective sort of a term. It means not adding color (distortion). Clippers are not transparent, they soften the clipping, ie., provide a distorting effect.

Transparent also means not adding an easily perceivable colour. For example dithering.

how is dithering easily perceivable color? at 24 bits it's below thermal noise of any analogue path on the planet.

[bitman]

K-Clip followed by any old limiter (ok, the L2) is so loud you have to run.

[v1o]

Also, too: 'transparent' is not a subjective sort of a term. It means not adding color (distortion). Clippers are not transparent, they soften the clipping, ie., provide a distorting effect.

Transparent also means not adding an easily perceivable colour. For example dithering.

how is dithering easily perceivable color? at 24 bits it's below thermal noise of any analogue path on the planet.

That is what I said the process of dithering is not perceivable to human ears. It's fairly transparent to us even though it is making changes to the source.

[Ploki]

Also, too: 'transparent' is not a subjective sort of a term. It means not adding color (distortion). Clippers are not transparent, they soften the clipping, ie., provide a distorting effect.

Transparent also means not adding an easily perceivable colour. For example dithering.

how is dithering easily perceivable color? at 24 bits it's below thermal noise of any analogue path on the planet.

That is what I said the process of dithering is not perceivable to human ears. It's fairly transparent to us even though it is making changes to the source.

oopsy, misread