MeldaProduction

MeldaProduction · Post by **MeldaProduction** » Thu Feb 12, 2009 4:02 pm

Hey guys,

we have just released one more plugin - (not only) mastering dynamic processor MDynamics.

This time not free though, but for pretty affordable introductory price...

eduardo_b · Post by **eduardo_b** » Thu Feb 12, 2009 4:13 pm

For mastering, but zero latency?

MeldaProduction · Post by **MeldaProduction** » Thu Feb 12, 2009 4:18 pm

There is no look-ahead, however I think that does not exclude it from mastering purposes, right?

eduardo_b · Post by **eduardo_b** » Thu Feb 12, 2009 5:12 pm

MeldaProduction wrote:There is no look-ahead, however I think that does not exclude it from mastering purposes, right?

Depends on how much one wants to retain transients, does it not? Look-ahead allows slow gain without losing transients, so trading that for zero latency may not be a benefit in the long run.

MeldaProduction · Post by **MeldaProduction** » Thu Feb 12, 2009 5:14 pm

You're definitely right, we are already planning some upgrade - secondary MDynamics version (both will be available in single purchase), that will have some additional features like this

.

Vitaly · Post by **Vitaly** » Thu Feb 12, 2009 8:38 pm

eduardo_b wrote:Look-ahead allows slow gain without losing transients

What do mean by 'slow gain'? Small dynamic of an incoming signal? Long Attack/Release times in a compressor?

eduardo_b · Post by **eduardo_b** » Thu Feb 12, 2009 9:49 pm

Vitaly wrote:
eduardo_b wrote:Look-ahead allows slow gain without losing transients
What do mean by 'slow gain'? Small dynamic of an incoming signal? Long Attack/Release times in a compressor?

Sorry, I was referring to attack time. Even at very short attack times transients can get through, with possible resulting distortion (the audibility of which is open to some question). Look-ahead delays the actual triggering of the compressor long enough to detect the transients earlier, but the introduced latency may be an issue for mixing, whereas a true mastering compressor can exhibit latency without any negative consequences while controlling transients more completely.

Vitaly · Post by **Vitaly** » Fri Feb 13, 2009 6:30 am

I see. Sounds to me like you are referring to mastering limiters, not compressors. Anyway, what do think about how this plug-in manages transients (pay attention to 'RMS length' controller)?

Thanks,
Vitaly.

eduardo_b · Post by **eduardo_b** » Fri Feb 13, 2009 3:39 pm

Vitaly wrote:I see. Sounds to me like you are referring to mastering limiters, not compressors. Anyway, what do think about how this plug-in manages transients (pay attention to 'RMS length' controller)?

Thanks,
Vitaly.

That is incorrect. I was referring to mastering compressors and limiters. Limiters, as you probably know, are basically compressors with rather extreme settings. In either case, mastering plug-ins have latency that tracking/mixing plugs do not have because of the need to be able to deal with transients in the mastering process, which is quite different than the mixing process. A "mastering" plug-in without latency is therefore not really a mastering plug-in.

I don't know what RMS length controller is supposed to mean. Sounds like a marketing phrase to me.

MeldaProduction · Post by **MeldaProduction** » Fri Feb 13, 2009 3:50 pm

Hi there,
I think RMS length is pretty obvious - time interval actual dynamic value is measured from. When RMS = 0, then only one sample is used, therefore is used and becomes "peak" processor. It is definitely not a marketing phrase, but a feature you can use or leave. That's up to you. Besides this one it has several others like peak-hold...

To the look-ahead - MDynamics does not have look-ahead feature (yet). However I definitely think this does not exclude it from the category. Maybe this is not working for you, but many engineers use compressor without it, decrease the attack and put saturator after that. Moreover if you use minimal attack and RMS length 0, then the teoretical latency the plug should use is 0 anyway.

But as I said, I'd like MDynamics to have at least all of the features competition has, so it will be!

eduardo_b · Post by **eduardo_b** » Fri Feb 13, 2009 4:05 pm

MeldaProduction wrote:but many engineers use compressor without it, decrease the attack and put saturator after that.

So you're saying mastering engineers use saturators on finished mixes that are being prepared for CD and other formats? I don't think I've ever seen this noted in any mastering references.

eduardo_b · Post by **eduardo_b** » Fri Feb 13, 2009 4:09 pm

MeldaProduction wrote:You're definitely right, we are already planning some upgrade - secondary MDynamics version (both will be available in single purchase), that will have some additional features like this .

So you're saying that for the introductory price of the current version we can have both versions of this compressor?

MeldaProduction · Post by **MeldaProduction** » Fri Feb 13, 2009 8:32 pm

Sure! When it is done!

Vitaly · Post by **Vitaly** » Fri Feb 13, 2009 9:22 pm

eduardo_b wrote:So you're saying mastering engineers use saturators on finished mixes that are being prepared for CD and other formats? I don't think I've ever seen this noted in any mastering references.

According to Bob Katz's book, it's called 'shred'. Let's not argue if it's good or bad, but it does exist.

eduardo_b · Post by **eduardo_b** » Fri Feb 13, 2009 9:31 pm

Vitaly wrote:
eduardo_b wrote:So you're saying mastering engineers use saturators on finished mixes that are being prepared for CD and other formats? I don't think I've ever seen this noted in any mastering references.
According to Bob Katz's book, it's called 'shred'. Let's not argue if it's good or bad, but it does exist.

No argument. It's not good. To quote Katz (2nd Ed.), "...produces very fatiguing (and potentially boringly similar) recordings."