|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Jun 26, 2014 18:31:36 GMT -6
Yep, Waves L2 will do in a pinch, but the A.O.M. is better, and not expensive, I think $39 for a year, and $49 more at the end of that year if you want to keep it permanently.
They had a great demo at A.O.M.'s site with almost every mastering compressor using the same track to compare. They used a hard core metal song to demo, but if you bear with it, you could really hear that the AOM at 16X oversampling is cleaner than the Slate and the Waves. Unfortunately, the shootout's not there now.
|
|
|
|
Post by indiehouse on Jun 26, 2014 20:19:44 GMT -6
So after some searching and reading, I think I'm finding that A.O.M.'s limiter and the FabFilter Pro-L get pretty consistent praise. I'm thinking it's going to be between these two. Anyone ever compared the two? FabFilter stuff is just so cool. Never really heard of A.O.M. till I started looking into mastering compressors.
|
|
|
|
Post by littlesicily on Jun 26, 2014 20:25:34 GMT -6
I compared Waves L1, L2, L3, FG-X and McDSP's ML4000… been using the ML4000 with very good results.
|
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Jun 26, 2014 20:42:47 GMT -6
I've only ever heard good things about Fab Filter products, but haven't used them. A.O.M was new to me too, but man, they clearly know something about algorithm's some companies don't, as their Limiter was clearly a little better than the dozen they used in the shootout, and the test was a real professional, balanced, no nonsense comparison, the best I've ever seen in fact.
Their site said something about their rights to using the song they used for the comparison ran out. Hopefully they'll put something else up, but I think they're a small outfit. I bought their stereo widener too, it's the easiest thing to use and sounded better than the UAD plugs I demoed.
d.
|
|
|
|
Post by littlesicily on Jun 26, 2014 20:44:42 GMT -6
I just downloaded the demo of OAM's Limiter… anyone w/ experience have any good starting settings for:
ch mode
shape
over sampling
overshoot
In a quick listen, my stereo mix was a bit wider with same db of limiting when using Channel Mode: L/R than the ML4000.
Also, seemed to have more low end.
|
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Jun 26, 2014 20:50:14 GMT -6
Cool littlesicily, I keep it simple between 2 and 5 db of Limiting and almost equal make up gain, just be sure to use the 16X oversampling, it sounds better. It's just clearer than the other limiters I've tried, like the difference between an upgraded word clock. Keep us posted on your impressions.
|
|
|
|
Post by cowboycoalminer on Jun 26, 2014 20:57:14 GMT -6
FG-X is still only 32 bits. A.O.M's Limiter/Compressor sounds better than FG-X, I have both. Look here: They offer a cheap one year license that allows you to pay the difference at the end of the year if you'd like to keep it. Slate's promised a new FG-X II for 1 1/2 years now, so don't count on them anytime soon. I've only used the demo of the Shadow Hills and to me, it was brittle, not like the real thing. I have to agree. The A.O.M is awfully good. 16x oversampling and it's clean as can be. I use it on every mix. Use to use FG-x but went 64 bit so it's a no go now. |
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Jun 26, 2014 21:58:30 GMT -6
Somehow the AOM doesn't mess up the low end. FG-X II better be a big improvement or I'll begin to think Slate is more hype than reality. Their VBC is a wonderful tool, so hopefully they'll get the FG-X together. I spent $ 200 on that sucker because it seemed like the best at that time. Only after a while did I begin to notice how edgy the FG-X was, and eventually, I couldn't stand to listen to it at all. The AOM still sounds the same to me, very very good. I think the 16X oversampling moves distortion to frequencies we don't hear, so it actually cleans things up, much like Sony's SSD high res SACD format did.
|
|
|
|
Post by littlesicily on Jun 26, 2014 21:59:00 GMT -6
Cool littlesicily, I keep it simple between 2 and 5 db of Limiting and almost equal make up gain, just be sure to use the 16X oversampling, it sounds better. It's just clearer than the other limiters I've tried, like the difference between an upgraded word clock. Keep us posted on your impressions. Thanks Martin John Butler ! |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Jun 26, 2014 22:05:03 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by littlesicily on Jun 26, 2014 22:12:43 GMT -6
Holy Moses… this Invisible Limiter is freaking insane! I'm just pulling up mix after mix and replacing ML4000 w/ it and I'm hearing so much more clearly, wider, way more depth into the mix. Even when no limiting happening… crazy good. I'm sold.
|
|
|
|
Post by levon on Jun 26, 2014 23:46:17 GMT -6
Never heard of AOM, I'll try the demo. This looks very interesting. I bought FG-X mainly for listening and simulating a mastered track, I never use it on the final mix, I leave that to the mastering guy.
|
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Jun 27, 2014 0:57:54 GMT -6
FG-X is still only 32 bits. A.O.M's Limiter/Compressor sounds better than FG-X, I have both. Look here: They offer a cheap one year license that allows you to pay the difference at the end of the year if you'd like to keep it. Slate's promised a new FG-X II for 1 1/2 years now, so don't count on them anytime soon. I've only used the demo of the Shadow Hills and to me, it was brittle, not like the real thing. Wow.... good find MJB.... that limiter rocks. |
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Jun 27, 2014 1:31:48 GMT -6
Anyone compared the AOM to the FabFilter ProL?
As I recall you can't demo the AOM, other than buying the 1 year license?
Big fan of ProL here.
|
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Jun 27, 2014 2:47:52 GMT -6
Let me just say this, I have never in my life heard a limiter like this. There is no comparison, it's truly unique and this sucker beats anything out there hands down. I've never heard anything like it, or got as excited about a damn plugin as I am over this.
I invited the DEV to come over here, maybe we can ask him some questions on somethings and talk to him about his other products, clearly this guy is a genius.
|
|
|
|
Post by levon on Jun 27, 2014 3:00:04 GMT -6
Anyone compared the AOM to the FabFilter ProL? As I recall you can't demo the AOM, other than buying the 1 year license? Big fan of ProL here. You can download a AOM demo. I did just that. |
|
|
|
Post by littlesicily on Jun 27, 2014 7:43:25 GMT -6
Anyone compared the AOM to the FabFilter ProL? As I recall you can't demo the AOM, other than buying the 1 year license? Big fan of ProL here. I tried the Pro-L a few months ago, and while good I didn't get all the excitement over it… at least compared to what I already had. But… the AOM blew my mind immediately. Bought it 30 minutes after getting the demo. I also love the purchase 1yr/forever structure. No-brainer to get at least the 1 yr… so if you change ur mind or something better comes out, you're only out $30. |
|
|
|
Post by matt on Jun 27, 2014 8:39:42 GMT -6
Holy Moses… this Invisible Limiter is freaking insane! I'm just pulling up mix after mix and replacing ML4000 w/ it and I'm hearing so much more clearly, wider, way more depth into the mix. Even when no limiting happening… crazy good. I'm sold. Great, gotta have it - how can I resist! I've been using the Fab Pro-L, which seems to do the job just fine. But I'm always up for something new. Man, that grass over there sure is green . . . . |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Jun 27, 2014 8:59:01 GMT -6
If it could only make my songs better...
|
|
|
|
Post by ragan on Jun 27, 2014 10:05:04 GMT -6
...sucker beats anything out there hands down... So you have put it head to head with ProL then? I'm only pushing on that because in order to use it, I'd have to upgrade my Pro Tools (AAX only, no RTAS). Which is something I was going to do anyway. If it's that far superior to ProL, I'll probably just upgrade now (doing some mastering...) Anyone else really put these two head to head? |
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Jun 27, 2014 10:23:58 GMT -6
I'm so glad I could finally turn some of the folks here who've turned me on to so many good things onto something groovy. The A.O.M really is that one notch higher quality that gives you a sigh of relief when you hear it. Use 16X oversampling.
I'm sure there will be some competition soon. Slate's due for the mk II FG-X, but he thought his FG-X was better than the A.O.M. and their test was skewed, so who knows. I tell you, that test was amazing, professional, and fairly done, and the result was plain as day, and the A.O.M. clearly won the horse race by a length or two. Enjoy fellas.
* don't overlook their Stereo Widener, it's like the final dusting of a polished car in the showroom, and it's easy to use. (it kills UAD's Precision)
|
|
|
|
Post by cowboycoalminer on Jun 27, 2014 11:17:19 GMT -6
Wow. Feeding frenzy. Maybe we should have said something a year ago MJB.  |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Jun 27, 2014 11:28:07 GMT -6
We were waiting for Sal to say it... |
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Jun 27, 2014 12:03:33 GMT -6
You can't keep a good plug down I guess.
That free Eventude channel EQ/compressor's pretty cool too.
|
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Jun 27, 2014 13:06:03 GMT -6
Wow. Feeding frenzy. Maybe we should have said something a year ago MJB. Dude, you two get docked some points for not saying something about this darn thing. And I'm talking about bro points too... serious offense here. |
|
