Limiting vs Clipping
Stumbled upon a discussion on KVR about this and beside lots of good or bad opinions I found this:
“Many mixers do use softclips actually.
You shouldn’t do it by default, but by need.
I use it for 3 reasons.
1. To emulate the peak clip forgiveness of tape. Tracking/mixing to tape can easily give you about +10 db of pleasant sounding clip flexibility. You just don’t have to worry about the initial 3-20ms peak transients that slip by from standard track compressors. The tape or softclip emulator catches these & does it in an pleasant way. With digital medium this is something you have to consciously deal with.
2. digital D/A clip Protection. raw digital clipping is harsh. I use many analog inserts & mix externally. I use softclips before all D/A exit points.
3. Less need for limiting a master. Sounds better then brickwall limiting.
If you take 2 finished mixes, one that has unrestrained peak spikes & one that has limited these spikes with softclips during the mixing process. The softclip limited mix will have a much higher average volume without unnatural brickwall master limiting.
It’s better to control a peak during the mix on that track/bus only, rather then have it effect the whole mix from a mastering limter.
You have to remember that soft-clipping isn’t to compress or color a track, it’s to catch a peak that would otherwise be limited harshly by a brickwall limiter during mastering.
This can create a much more natural mix dynamically than only limiting at the end.
I don’t do it per track but per bus or need. I know very well what my tracks are doing dynamically so it’s not done blindly.”
Another interesting read on the subject Kim Lajoie’s Blog – Limiting vs Clipping
Request processing...