Should I Continue Using Limiters? (Making Rap Beats/FL STUDIO)

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ginsingh
  • Start date Start date
G

Ginsingh

Guest
What up everyone

Just a quick question.

I've been using a limiter on my master channel when I make beats on FL Studio for maximum loudness. I know loudness isn't everything but when I use only a compressor it doesn't get the job done. Whenever I add the limiter it really adds the power to the instrumental.

I've been told to not use limiters but as long as my beat does not reach over 0db should I be good? It does make my beats louder and with a compressor on the master channel it helps me fix the lows mids and highs and adjust them to my liking.

Any thoughts? I've tried using just a compressor to give my instrumentals a new approach but I'm not getting the real bump and power from my older beats. The main reason I am trying to stop using limiters is because I'm trying to learn better ways of mixing my vocals over my beats and if the beat is already at 0db, adding my vocals on top and mixing can be a hassle and make the final product sound not nearly as I intended. :4theloveofgod:

So basically, what am I missing in terms of getting a CLEAN AND LOUD mix on my beat and even final track after adding my vocals on top? Or should I just continue to keep using limiters in this situation?
 
Your beats SHOULD NOT be mixed nor should you be using a limiter on them before any recording of vocals takes place because you are doing things out of the proper order of production. The vocals should by ALL means be mixed together with the individual tracks of the beat and not a mixed down version of the beat. Work in this order: 1. create your beat, and if necessary make a rough mix of the beat ie. If you are selling it. 2. write and record your vocals 3. Edit and mix everything together without trying to make the mix loud. 4. Get it mastered or at worse case learn to do it yourself but its not as simple as just slapping a limiter on the mix to make it loud so attempt mastering at your own risk. I suggest learning how to mix your music the right way and you can learn a lot of what people pay a lot of money for from the University of Youtube:)) Warning!!!* Any other way of working will result in the all too common amateur sounding digitally warped boo boo heard all over the web these days*

3 more cents - Loudness comes absolutely last and should only be addressed during the mastering stage of production when all of the recording, editing and mixing has been completed within a song or group of songs.
 
Limiting on master should be the very last thing you put in your master bus. After all the sounds have been made and mixed. Don't add any limiters on master or anything else for that matter until rthe mix is complete. It should be the final step and the limiter is used to squeeze out extra db's from your master output that the compressor doesn't reach. So if after your mix is done and you have a master output of maximum-6db you should have plenty of headroom for compressing and limiting and whatever effects you want to put on your master. Hopefully this cleared it up for you
 
I appreciate the quick replies.

Just a few follow-up questions

1) Does this mean I should NOT use COMPRESSION on my MASTER CHANNEL before I start making my beat?
2) When you say the final mix should be -6db to leave room for limiting and compression, are you talking about just the beat alone or the whole track with the vocals?
3) The main reason I use limiters/compression as presets on my master channel is so I can already have the loudness I need. In a sense I have a more deductive approach in the sense that I start loud and bring levels down to mix instead of starting quiet then trying to make it louder. How can I make my beat and work on it and arrange it and have an idea of how it's going to sound without using these presets on my master channel and not having to turn my monitors up really loud? lol

I grew up in an era of just driving around blasting loud music so loudness is a factor for me but clarity and crispness is what I'm lacking in my mixes. I'd like to have both.
 
Yes that's what it means. The final mix should be at MOST -6db, preferably even a bit lower, and I'm talking about the whole finished mix, including everything that a song would contain. It's tonnes harder to master a track when your're already bouncing around on the 0db line. YOU SHOULD COMPRESS AND LIMIT TRACKS INDIVIDUALLY if needed and get a nice balance in volumes in your mix. You will be able to know how the final product will sound even if you don't use compressor and limiters on your master while mixing. It's just going to sound more and if you can make your mix sound great without it on the master, a compressor and such is just going to enhance what you're already hearing, if used with some degree of moderation of course. And by all means, turn your monitors up really loud, it's what you're going to have to do. Effects like compressors and such have a much much greater impact on your master if you leave plenty of space for it. And the way to do this is keep your volume in your DAW down. I usually have the kick and bass as the loudest parts of my mix, and they peak at around -12db.

Like the post before me said, the loudness comes last! It's not going to sound much different, just more compressed and loud. So you don't necessarily need to use a compressor and limiter as a reference to know what your final product is going to sound like. Crispness and clarity is much easier achieved with this approach.
 
Last edited:
Wether using mixbus processing or not is a personal decision.
Though you should wait with it until the whole track starts to take shape, and if you want to use it - use it gently. Use it like an experienced master engineer would use it.
The purpose of mixbus processing is to get a perception of the possible loudness indrease made in mastering later on, since compression can change the volumes of different sounds in the mix and then it can be good to know how the levels could sound in a loudness-increased product.
Further on, sending a version with mixbus processing on the mix alongside the original mix without any mixbus processing is a great to give the master engineer a hint of your vision of the loudness in the song (if you're planning to let someone else master it). This is pretty much the 2nd purpose of mixbus processing.

The SOS Guide To Mix Compression
 
Really appreciate all the replies, I definitely am understanding this a lot more.

So if I'm using Pro Tools and I bounce my .wav layers (kick, snare, hats, etc.) from my beat (mixed) to Pro Tools and record my vocals in Pro Tools, can I mix my vocals in Pro Tools with the beat and then bounce that whole .wav back to FL Studio for final mastering such as adding the final compression and limiting?
 
Sure, you can do that. The wav files will be mixed and there's no need to do that again if you export them in their finished stage. Exporting your beat to wavs and then recording your vocals is just another way of doing the same thing, mixing the beat first, and then the vocals. Which I am not really sure why you want to, but it is indeed very possible.
 
Last edited:
Well I was thinking I could now do either 2 things...

1) Save the whole mixed beat as a .wav to import into Pro Tools, rap over it, then save JUST my vocals instead of having a bunch of .wav layers in Pro Tools for each part of the instrumental, I can just go back to FL Studio and import my .wav vocals from Pro Tools and mix it with the beat and do the final compression and limiting.

OR

2) Import all my separate beat/instrumental layers as .wavs into Pro Tools, record my vocals, then mix the beat with my vocals to my liking how I want to adjust it, save that whole thing as a .wav then import it FL Studio for final compression and limiting.

Which one would be the better idea and not slow down my processing speed?
 
neither

you almost got it right in option 2 - you do not need to go back to fl to finish it off - protools is more than capable of providing you the desired end result; I think you are hung up on using what is familiar to you to achieve your final outcome rather than doing what is easiest
 
No I definitely understand what you mean. If I have Pro Tools I can make a master channel and do everything in that but when I use FL Studio I'm able to switch between my computer speakers and bigger monitors to hear how it sounds through each one.

Side question: What is the maximum level (in db) that vocals should be recorded at? I plan to compress them in Pro Tools using a plugin from Waves 7 so what level is best to leave room for EQing and compression?
 
why can't you do that with pro-tools - it should be the same setup (you might have to go in and set up the output audio channels as you have already done in fl but otherwise there is no impediment to doing the same thing in pt or any other daw for that matter)

as for recording vocals - a number is meaningless on its own - you are looking to capture the sound without distorting or clipping the sound - this means you either record
at a lower level or
with a compressor active during the recording phase

see the stickies on gain staging and compression to learn more
 
Okay so far, I've been able to understand everything about how I have been doing a backwards approach to my mixing/mastering. I opened Pro Tools last night and did a little test run and imported all the separate layers of my beat (808, kick, clap, hi hats, VST, sampled melody) as .wavs then recorded some test vocals and they peaked around -8db. My master channel did not go over -6db after playing the whole song with my vocals included and so on. I then added a compressor and limiter and it boosted my track and pushed it to the 0db. My vocals didn't seem like they needed much compression, they seemed to mix well as is but of course I'm still going to EQ/compress them slightly.

The problem with this approach is that is takes a lot of processing data by having so many layers of .wav files especially while recording, sometimes it freezes. I feel like if I just record the vocals in Pro Tools then send them back to FL Studio for mixing it would be easier and not slow down my computer so much. Are there any other methods I can use?
 
I'd say there are no substitutes for a bad computer. If processing failure is what you are experiencing, there is no solution short of getting a more powerful processing unit. (more powerful computer)

You could try one of the youtube miracle cures for minimizing cpu usage, but I doubt they'd be of any real use to you.
 
You will get various answers on using a limiter on you master bus or not. I understand why you would use one on an instrumental. My suggestion is if you plan to Sale you music as an MP3 then using a limiter on the master channel is fine. Since you will not send an MP3 to a mastering engineer then you have already created the final copy of the audio file. Also most artist or people that purchase an MP3 don't care about audio quality as much, the track will most likely be used as a reference track. If you are saleing a wave file then you do not want to have your levels near 0db and you do not what to have a limiter on the track. People that are willing to purchase a wave file want to have headroom in the mix. I practice -3db to -6db of headroom when I print a wave file. I also do not have a compressor or limiter on the master channel.

Now if you want to get a louder mix that has punch then you should try using parallel compression. This is a great method of making music louder and more aggressive, but still allowing you control on the master fader. You will also want to use submix's and sends while you are mixing your audio.
 
It really depends. As far as selling $20 mastered (limiter on master track) mp3's and recording over that, that's the absolute worst way to go about it,

but in order to sell, you have to show a "finished product". Not all artists have our ears. If you show them a quiet, unmixed, no FX track, they may not see potential.

I do believe that this phenomenon of hustling $20 mp3 beats is a major if not sole contributor to the lack of quality in independent music. The producers are starving, and the artists don't want to learn their craft.

That's why I only offer licenses that include track outs. If the artist doesn't know what track outs are and doesnt see why my prices are what they are: GOOD.

Don't want their non-quality caring ass on my beat anyway.
 
Woah woah woah slow down... Whoever said anything about selling beats? lol I make music for therapy and money is the last thing on my mind. I wouldn't sell my music or sell anything music-related until I learned all this and had a few years in the studio developing my ear for mixing/mastering.

I'm here to learn, not get judged and assume that I'm a run of the mill 'producer' who has no idea what they're doing but just trying to sell beats that aren't mixed properly etc. I treat this as an art.

Anyways, I'm glad you understand why I would want a limiter for an instrumental but I also now understand why I should NOT start working with one.

My final question is then, what is parallel compression and can you give me an article to read about it and how to use it in Pro Tools?

Thank you. Peace.
 
so Bandcoach, are you implying that in your opinion Pro Tools is superior to FL in terms of mastering capabilities. If so how? Are the stock differences that important considering you could be exporting external mastering VSTs into either DAW of you choosing?
 
I was not pushing a pro-tools vs fl argument - I was pushing the argument that moving from one daw to another to do a different phase of the project may not have produced the desired results - familiarity breeds contempt for other solutions in my experience (kind of like all I have is a hammer this is a screw but I am going to use a hammer to knock it in, or square pegs and round holes where diameter of hole equals side of square) and I was trying to get to whether the op was genuinely needing to make the move form one daw to another or was looking for a reason not to

I do not have pro-tools myself (my son does)and I have found that fl is a nightmare of inadequate interface design hiding the simple and showing the complex - that is a professional opinion as an HCI specialist in my undergraduate and graduate study days and long time user of audio and music software and designing said software) - I have a copy but do not use it often. I have also been using computer based software solutions since the days of the commodore 64 and steinbergs pro16

My arguments above are based on workflow choices and the understanding that for the most part all daws offer the same base features with different packaging and accessibility (I use: cubase, reason, reaper, finale notepad, fl, an old pc version of logic, pro 24 v3 and notator logic v3, on a variety of different systems: PC, mac, atari st)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top