kHs Limiter vs M-Class - sound issues?

[Benedict]

Hi All

Has anyone noticed, or done any measured comparisons, between the kHs Limiter and the M-CLass units?

Reason I ask is that I have had them in an A/B situation in my Master rig for an album and a bit now and I have really started to notice that things don't sound quite the same when I switch from one to the other. I noticed something similar between the M-Class and Onyx but that seemed to be expected as Onyx claims to munge the signal. Also I had some setting that explained differences.

What I seem to be hearing as a difference in the stereo-ness of the track. Sometimes the kHs unit sounds nicer (last record "Spaceship : Continuum"), but increasingly, with more subtle material, I am thinking that M-Class has a more natural spread.

Any ideas (Selig or kHs perhaps)?

[dioxide]

Maybe just to use each device for its strengths? MClass was designed as a mastering device so the transparent sound makes sense. I'm not sure if the KHS Limiter was designer as a general limiter maybe?

[selig]

I've only ever compared MClass to Onyx, and have chosen Onyx and never looked back. I like that I can switch between some of the settings in Onyx depending on the track, something not possible with MClass.

All limiters will destroy the sound eventually, so for me the question is "how much clean gain reduction can I get before things start to break up too much". MClass could only give me a few dB of clean GR, but Onyx was able to give me a few dB more.

One comparison which is not often done with brick wall limiters, is to 'gain compensate' for the increased gain that the limiter gives you so you can actually compare SOUND QUALITY and not just LEVEL.

Should be stated that your source material and your expectations will greatly affect which product you prefer IMO, and that I have not yet had a chance to compare some of the newer options such as Kratos.

BTW, what do you mean by "Onyx claims to mange the signal"?

And what is a more natural stereo spread - wider, more narrow (are there other qualities of the stereo signal you're listening to when comparing?)?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Re8et]

I use Khs Limiter in place of the Onyx, as brickwall, without applying any gain compensation, just limiter. I never made any comparison between the two. I imagine you are referring to the Mclass compressor? Or Mastering utilities which comprise more Mclass units?

[Benedict]

Comparing M-Class Maximizer straight to kHs Limiter using a Combi button to switch units in and out of bypass. I never deliberately drive my Masters hard.

I will admit that in my last album the kHs seemed to give a wider stereo and sound a bit nicer (god knows how) but yesterday kHs definitely sounded narrower and M-Class sounded nicer.

I was using Onyx for everything but then I felt I was getting some distortion that didn't seem to be from the mix as it was not there if switched to M-Class. Onyx deliberately alters the sound of the signal so I didn't wonder over A/B comparisons as I expected it to be different.

It isn't a great concern as I have all three units and can choose at will, just interested to know if anyone had noticed similar and worked out what was up.

[lowpryo]

I definitely notice kHs and MClass limiters have a much different character. I don't know what's going on under the hood to cause this, but in most cases I seem to prefer kHs as I feel it preserves the "punch" a little more. definitely depends on the material though. I'd choose on a case-by-case basis.

[selig]

…Onyx deliberately alters the sound of the signal…

I need to listen again I guess - I've never heard that Onyx deliberately alters the signal, and have always felt MClass distorts more and Onyx was cleaner when comparing.

But more importantly, I compare differently - I see how much gain reduction each limiter can get before I "hear" it working (negatively).

I also haven't had the chance to do these tests with the newer limiters on the market, just between MClass and Onyx, so definitely take my comments with a large grain of salt!

As for the stereo thing, I don't choose any device over another because it sounds "wider" (seems to be a popular quality to look for), I choose the device that sounds the most true to the original. I've never once been impressed by the wideness of a record, so I guess that's why it's a less important feature (unless it's collapsing the stereo image, of course). Plus, any device that would actually add wideness would be "suspect" in my book - WHY is it sounding wider, what's happening to the more important center image when adding this wideness, etc.

But if nothing else, you've inspired me to re-check my tests and compare some of the other options out there, and for that I thank you!



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[ejanuska]

[quote="selig"

But if nothing else, you've inspired me to re-check my tests and compare some of the other options out there, and for that I thank you!



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk[/quote]

Could you give a general description of your test setup?

[Data_Shrine]

I suggest making the songs wider in the mix, not in mastering. I've always felt widening in mastering, even if a small amount, makes the middle thinner and really kills the kicks. My opinion is that you should only widen tracks individually (and preferably leave the kicks, even entire drums alone).
That being said I never used the MClass Limiter much :X

[selig]

[quote="selig"

But if nothing else, you've inspired me to re-check my tests and compare some of the other options out there, and for that I thank you!



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Could you give a general description of your test setup?[/quote]

The main goal is to remove the loudness increase when comparing before/after, either when comparing dry vs wet or when comparing compressor A vs compressor B.

I tend to prefer comparing wet vs dry because my goal is to see how much GR a device can achieve before hurting the original mix. Once I get an idea of how each devices works that level, I can then compare two compressors side by side to see which one sounds better, since each may affect a different aspect/quality of the original.

Something else I do, and I've heard others (Normen) mention it too, is to do one more test after I decide which one I prefer - make the "better" one softer. If I STILL love it, even when it's SOFTER than the other one, then I'm more certain I'm not being fooled by loudness alone.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[selig]

I suggest making the songs wider in the mix, not in mastering. I've always felt widening in mastering, even if a small amount, makes the middle thinner and really kills the kicks. My opinion is that you should only widen tracks individually (and preferably leave the kicks, even entire drums alone).
That being said I never used the MClass Limiter much :X

Couldn't agree more - again, listen to the center image when adding ANY "wideness" effect. It's the first thing to "go" (there is no free lunch) in many cases, and the LAST thing you want to loose in return for a touch if wideness that no one else in the world probably cares about, let alone notices!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk