Tone Projects Limiter Uni-L

[dastewart]

I haven't had much time to demo this over the past couple of days but I've managed a couple of sessions and I've already changed my mind twice.

For context, this isn't really meant for me. I'm not a mastering engineer, I master my own mixes (yeah, I know, get over it) and what that means is that if something doesn't sound right I have the ability to change it in the mix. So I only really use a limiter to get it to a certain loudness level and (along with other tools) to change the overall feel and energy of the mix.

So, of relevance, I have standardclip, Pro L2 and Loudmax on my master bus and I don't really spend a lot of time playing with the settings beyond the big ones of thresholds and gain.

Now what I was hoping for with Uni-L was that it would be like Unisum. Endlessly tweakable but, in default mode, it sounds better on the master bus than every other compressor I've used. Every track sounds "more like a record" with Unisum. I love it.

Taking bmanic's comments above I threw on Uni-L's Dutch preset (he said it was the most like Pro L2) and compared it to Pro L2. And it was a double edged sword - on the one hand it did sound like Pro L2, but on the other hand.....it sounded like Pro L2. It didn't sound obviously better even though it was a bit different.

I then had a play with Uni-L controls (I've never really understood the controls in Pro L2 from a sonic point of view) and, well, didn't notice them doing all that much tbh. So I decided Uni-L probably wasn't for me. That was my hot take yesterday.

Well, today I've just spent a bit more time with it and discovered a couple of things. Firstly, for whatever reason I don't push my tracks very hard into the limiter. In fact, I'm really only catching the transients and that's after I've clipped it. I still get about iLUFS 7 on average because of all the clipping and compression I've done before the limiter but the limiter itself isn't working as hard as it should. How do I know that? Because I can tell on the Uni-L monitoring that the slow limiter is hardly troubled.

Pushing things harder into the limiter (iLUFS 5) and I immediately noticed Uni-L keeping things clean whereas Pro L2 was distorting horribly. And now the controls on Uni-L were changing things in a very obvious way. I still don't know how to drive this particular car but I do know the controls do something meaninful. Wow, I thought! Uni-L is so much better than Pro L2, where's that discount code again?!

But then I changed the Pro L2 algorithm from Transparent (my default) to Modern and that cleaned things up massively. And now I'm not noticing a huge quality difference between the two.

So am I done with Uni-L? No, not quite yet because there is something I want to dig into a bit deeper and that's whether or not being able to control the limiter is worth it to me. While I can totally see how that is hugely significant for a mastering engineer (mastering other people's stuff) I need to work out whether that actually means something for me and my workflow.

So, that's a lot of words to not reach any kind of meaningful conclusion but, at the very least, I'm discovering a different way of limiting which may, or may not, prove useful.

[BCollins]

tldr; - really impressive limiter, extremely complex, however most people probably won't need or benefit from this level complexity. Highly recommend shooting it out against your existing options to see if it actually brings additional value over the limiters you already own.

If people are no MEs and/or enjoy finetuning and even when trying the extremely good presets can´t hear a difference to the tools they have, then Uni-L is simply not for them, indeed .

For me personally, this thing is next level.

[billinder33]

I spent a little more time with this after my previous post. I've been trying to understand "what real-world problem are all these controls intended to solve?" and I think I've finally figured it out. It's to bring transient information forward or back when you don't have access to the underlying mix.

I spent some time swapping back and forth between Pro-L's 'Punchy' setting, which I use a lot. I was able to get it to boost the perceived volume of the kick as if I'd manually raised it at least 1db in the mix without it sounding weird, phasey, or unnatural. This is far beyond what the Pro-L can do. Very impressive! The downside was that it also changed the mix balance to be significantly brighter, and not sure if that can be addressed within the settings, or if it's just a consequence of the processing and requires going back to the mastering EQ to rebalance.

I also saw another use case where a Youtube mastering engineer raised the perceived volume of a sub info by focusing on the slow information below 80hz. So again, pretty useful when you don't have access to the mix.

Does this do a better job than something like SplitEQ? I never really liked the smeary/phasey sound of that one, so "probably?". With the caveat that it may affect overall mix balance.

I also ran into a some more helpful signal flow detail from the plugin's creator on that 'Spacey' forum. Short story: Use the Fast Above and Clip Above settings to determine what gets detected by each respective circuit. Setting the Clip Above below the frequency of the Fast Above will defeat the Fast circuit entirely and pass everything to the clipper. Transient Detection section defines 'what is a transient?' (this part could really use some visual metering). You can then blend in to taste with the Fast and Clip knobs.

I've shifted my opinion from punting to being on the fence. Not sure I really need this, but now that I better understand what it does and how to make it work in practice, I could see the potential where it would come in handy in the future. Main concern is that if it goes unused it for an extended period, I will totally forget how it actually works because it's not at all obvious just by looking at the front panel.

[mcbpete]

I'm keeping it on a safe shelf (along with DMG's Equilibrium) marked 'amazing VSTs that I might be clever enough one day to reap the rewards with ... but not today'

[chagzuki]

I've not been making music over the last several months, but I had to give a new Tone Projects plugin a spin.

I'm not sold so far.
I became a big fan of Unisum after around 2 months of trying/struggling to get Kotelnikov-like behaviour out of it, eventually it became apparent that the complex controls really did allow for precise control of behaviour. I then found I could get great results not just for mastering, but drum bus compression.

It's very early days, but so far I'm not having the same response with Uni-L. It seems to lend itself to bringing out detail in a manner which slightly fragments the source. It also seems to lend itself to making drums feel extremely solid, and somewhat boxy.

I'm tempted to buy it because there's some probability that I discover how to better tune its behaviour over time, plus it's quite relaxing to tinker with and I can see myself enjoying that for weeks. Plus, of course, it's discounted. However, I could pick it up during a sale in the future.
On the other hand it's a lot of money, and like others here I'm getting fine results from other limiters. I don't have any reason to aim for super-loud masters, so most do the job.
Unisum on the other hand allows for very deliberate and specific sweetening of the source material, and has become indispensable.

[bmanic]

I think some of you simply do not understand that this is THE tool to make it sound any way you want. Think of it as a modular synth in the synthesis world.. or like NI Reaktor. Almost all the options in UNI-L are the exact same tools I built for the algorithms I developed in Pro-L and Pro-L2 (almost, not all).

This is the first limiter plugin that completely exposes all the "black magic" stuff that is usually kept from the user and finely tuned by the developers.

For instance in Pro-L2, when you choose an algorithm, literally 100+ parameters change behind the scene. The main 'Gain' control in Pro-L2 pushes things past a built in threshold (0dBFS) which then triggers a cascade of things that start happening, program dependently (time and frequency dependent). Look-a-head, Attack and Release knobs are "macro" controls that control 100+ parameters under the hood, all carefully working in tandem with the program dependency mentioned before. A lot of these kinds of systems are now exposed for the user for the first time in Uni-L.

Thus, think of it like this:

A preset in Uni-L = an algorithm in Pro-L2. So it _is_ simple to use. Select a preset (an "algorithm"), push the gain and fine tune only if you know what you are doing. Otherwise try a different preset. If you can not find a preset that performs better than 99% of other limiter plugins out there then you are either extremely unlucky or you just have very different ideas of what a "transparent" non-distorting limiter is supposed to do.. which is totally fine. Heck there are still people who absolutely swear by Waves L2 hardware/plugin, even if it is very easy to objectively show that it is very much inferior to more advanced and more modern solutions.

When it comes to sound aesthetics, it's of course 100% subjective, as always. That hasn't changed. But you _can_ show in many cases, objectively, that UNI-L is more capable of transparent results on difficult material than most of the competition. There are 3 things to keep in mind when discussing transparency.

1) Perceived transient response compared to original incoming audio
2) Perceived tonality preservation of the original audio source (meaning, how much does the tonality change due to harmonic and inharmonic distortion)
3) Perceived absolute loudness while sacrificing none of the above

Points 1 and 2 is usually where the compromise lies. That's where physics and psychoacustics come into play. UNI-L gives you absolutely ALL the tools to choose that compromise.. and then some.

People who just want something that "sounds good" and vibes with the track are never after a truly transparent limiter. They just treat the limiting stage as yet another bus processor. If you fall into this category, then yeah, doesn't matter what limiter you use. Just choose the one you vibe with or the one you are already happy with.

But if you are willing to dig deep then UNI-L actually gives you ALL the colors in the whole range. You can make it gooey and smeary, like Waves L2. You can make it ultra transparent. You can make it hectic and nervous. You can make it a pure clipper with awesomely implemented 32x oversampling. You can make it fully automatic with all major controls being controlled by the underlying systems (check the "Automatic" preset category). You can make it 100% ultra safe with zero chance of distortion (like Pro-L2's "safe" algorithm). There are really no limits to what it can do. That's the beauty of it. Just keep in mind that learning this tool will take time, like any complex system. If you think you know what it does and how it operates, let me just flat out say: You are delusional. I've used this thing now for ages and I can confidently say that I have not yet discovered all the possibilities and combinations. This will take time.

[UltraByte]

For a mixing or mastering engineer staring down a deadline, comparing a master bus limiter to a modular synth feels rather like a threat, not necessary a feature.
FabFilter is popular specifically because they hide those parameters and understand that users are also paying for DSP expertise, not "only" for a box of screwdrivers.
I feel the pitch regarding some of the current concerns (in both forums, complexity) should also underilne the usability of the starting presets and macro slider rather than going for more complexity.

But i value the post as an engineering information and had purchased it after the initial test. I do find the starting presets and the macro slider very usable even under time pressure.

[dastewart]

Thanks bmanic for that thoughtful post. A lot of that resonates with me as I try and work out whether I should jump ship from Pro-L2 to Uni-L. It almost feels not so much whether Uni-L is the right limiter for me but whether I'm the right person for Uni-L.

Am I worthy?

Like I said right at the beginning of this thread, Uni-L seems to be solving a problem that I don't have. Or didn't have. I guess what I'm trying to work out is whether there actually was a problem that I just didn't recognise. I'll be honest and say that there was a time that I got more and more into Pro-L2 controls and tweaking (with thanks to people like Nicholas Di Lorenzo who explained some stuff that FF don't) but ultimately I ended up reversing back up that road and just using presets for pretty much everything.

(As an aside, I have huge respect for FF but I find it incredibly annoying that there's no proper explanation of the algorithms in things like Pro C and Pro L.)

Now, back to Uni-L and I have to say that I absolutely love the design philosophy. Like a lot of Rune's stuff, you can drive it at any level of detail that you want but what I've learnt over the years is that I'm probably going to spend most of my time at the top levels with the "broad" controls. And what I'm trying to get my head round is whether, at that level, it gives me something that Pro-L2 doesn't

As I keep saying, Unisum just sounds "better" than anything else I own as a compressor on the master bus without any tweaking. It just makes everything sound more polished, more finished, more "like a record". If Uni-L can give me that same feeling (i.e. it just sounds better than Pro-L with the "same" preset) then that's what I kind of need as an entry point.

I really want to ask bmanic whether he thinks that Uni-L sounds inherently better than Pro-L2 but I suspect he'll just ask me to make my own mind up which is fair enough.

[Vortifex]

I think some of you simply do not understand that this is THE tool to make it sound any way you want. Think of it as a modular synth in the synthesis world.. or like NI Reaktor. Almost all the options in UNI-L are the exact same tools I built for the algorithms I developed in Pro-L and Pro-L2 (almost, not all).

You wrote the DSP algorithms for Pro-L and Pro-L2?

[billinder33]

On the technical side, I'm really impressed with what's been done here. If I were a mastering engineer who lived inside a limiter all day, I'd be all over this. On the practical side, I've spent the last decade working to minimize the need for limiting in my overall process, so I'm not overly reliant on limiting in the first place.

My personal concerns with this is that it ends up collecting dust like Michelangelo. My main issue with Michelangelo (and Uni-L) is that despite TP undoubtedly building a better mousetrap, it's just not all that fast to work with due to the lack of visual feedback. Having to listen with rabbit ears to determine the impact of 20-40 knobs is a very slow way of operating. Same issue here - all these knobs to affect transient curves and the passing of one curve to another, but you can't actually visualize the curves. "Just use your ears" is fine if you have all day or you live inside the plugin, but in a workflow full of so many other things, it just eats the clock. I survive Unisum because I can just watch the GR meters dance and have a decent sense of what's happening. Here not so much.

I could probably set up a preset or two and keep a mental note of the handful of knobs I'll reach for regularly, but I wish users had access to assign parameters in their saved presets to the macro slider - that would help speed workflow a lot.

Still on the fence with this one. If this was a slow money month, I'd probably jump on the intro price because I know at some point down the road I may have a case where I want the versatility it provides. I still reach for Michelangelo on rare occasion. But I've been leaking money like a sieve lately, and given my current workflow this one is very much a luxury purchase. Maybe next month I'll change my mind. Gotta stew on it, at least the generous intro window is open for a while.

[Aiynzahev]

I loaded a few presets and pushed it about 6dB of limiting on some EDM stuff and it was very impressive, certainly beats the one I was using for preserving the spectrum.

The fact that you can change presets but maintain the input amount is really helpful

[whassup]

There are really no limits to what it can do. That's the beauty of it. Just keep in mind that learning this tool will take time, like any complex system. If you think you know what it does and how it operates, let me just flat out say: You are delusional.

Great post, as expected. Tons of insight, thank you!

If the "easy" mode would have convinced me that it sounds better than what I am happy with then this would have been game changing.
Sometimes all I want is a simple MiniMoog.
And it doesn't have to live inside of VCV Rack.
I will keep this plugin on the shelf in case that I might run into future situations where I am not satisfied with my limiters.
And then I would "have" to learn how to ride this spaceship with all the options available.
Good to know that this option is there.

[chagzuki]

I think some of you simply do not understand that this is THE tool to make it sound any way you want. Think of it as a modular synth in the synthesis world.. or like NI Reaktor. Almost all the options in UNI-L are the exact same tools I built for the algorithms I developed in Pro-L and Pro-L2 (almost, not all).

Weird, to me going through the range of limiting styles with Uni-L they sound more similar to themselves than they do other limiters. I know nothing about algorithms or what differences might be going on under the hood.

[bmanic]

I think some of you simply do not understand that this is THE tool to make it sound any way you want. Think of it as a modular synth in the synthesis world.. or like NI Reaktor. Almost all the options in UNI-L are the exact same tools I built for the algorithms I developed in Pro-L and Pro-L2 (almost, not all).

You wrote the DSP algorithms for Pro-L and Pro-L2?

Not all of them. Transparent, Modern and Dynamic are my algorithms. All of the genius and tools I used to create them is 100% pure FabFilter awesomeness. I could NOT have made those without the actual meat and potatoes (aka the actual code part of things!).

[bmanic]

On the technical side, I'm really impressed with what's been done here. If I were a mastering engineer who lived inside a limiter all day, I'd be all over this. On the practical side, I've spent the last decade working to minimize the need for limiting in my overall process, so I'm not overly reliant on limiting in the first place.

My personal concerns with this is that it ends up collecting dust like Michelangelo. My main issue with Michelangelo (and Uni-L) is that despite TP undoubtedly building a better mousetrap, it's just not all that fast to work with due to the lack of visual feedback. Having to listen with rabbit ears to determine the impact of 20-40 knobs is a very slow way of operating. Same issue here - all these knobs to affect transient curves and the passing of one curve to another, but you can't actually visualize the curves. "Just use your ears" is fine if you have all day or you live inside the plugin, but in a workflow full of so many other things, it just eats the clock. I survive Unisum because I can just watch the GR meters dance and have a decent sense of what's happening. Here not so much.

I could probably set up a preset or two and keep a mental note of the handful of knobs I'll reach for regularly, but I wish users had access to assign parameters in their saved presets to the macro slider - that would help speed workflow a lot.

Still on the fence with this one. If this was a slow money month, I'd probably jump on the intro price because I know at some point down the road I may have a case where I want the versatility it provides. I still reach for Michelangelo on rare occasion. But I've been leaking money like a sieve lately, and given my current workflow this one is very much a luxury purchase. Maybe next month I'll change my mind. Gotta stew on it, at least the generous intro window is open for a while.

I totally hear you and 100% agree with you. This is NOT the tool for everybody. Heck, I actually suggested to Rune during the beta if maybe a cut down, very much simplified version, might be a good idea in the future. Maybe even in such a way that it could load presets from the big brother version but only has the absolute simplest of things available. For instance just the big Gain knob + stereo linking + a single look-a-head control. Then slap a 79€ price on that and sell millions of copies.

Having said that, you truly can treat UNI-L as a "one knob" plugin, using the presets. Set your gain, flick through the presets (and save your favorites to the user folder) and you are done. The only other control you may want to tweak little bit is the Transient Threshold knob as it depends on the incoming audio.