Audacity Limiter or Compression?

[hardlock]

Interesting observation today. I finished a song and usually want to get the most out of the final raw mix beyond just normalizing at minus .05 which I always do last. I tried both limiting and compression defaults on two separate mixes to see (and maybe hear) any difference. The tracks both fill in nicely w/o clipping after the final normalizing but I can't find any difference in the final results? Any tips?



Top track is the raw final with both the limited and compressed takes at the bottom.

I'm not big on a bunch of post processing tricks but like to learn none-the-less. Thanks!

UPDATE: played with frequency analysis views and using the same section of both tracks compared, at first I didn't see any difference but then noticed about -1db change in the peaks on the graphs? The compressed is at about -9 with the limited about -8. Is that just the same as changing the gain however?

[Farrell Jackson]

When using the compressor, which box do you check at the bottom of the settings: Make up gain to 0 dB after compression or Compress based on peaks? I always use Compress based on peaks but change the threshold from the default setting of -12dB to -8dB, which gets good results without squashing the song too much. I use the Limiter sparingly, to just knock off the peaks, then bring the volume up a dB or two, if needed. I've used both but prefer the results I get with the compressor.

[hardlock]

I checked and it's set for compress based on peaks and -12. Will try setting to -8 and compare. Thanks much!

[StephenM]

I notice Audacity is now offering compression into variable frequency ranges... that sounds like something to make me crazy too.

[Ted]

I always use Compress based on peaks but change the threshold from the default setting of -12dB to -8dB, which gets good results without squashing the song too much.

I'll try this!

Y'all are talking about post-mastering, right? i.e. After you've mastered the song to a WAV/MP3 when you prepare the MP3 that you are going to share?

When I'm at that point in the process, I normalize (defaults) and then do a high-pass filter (I find that my mastered songs out of the MBR have a lot of infrasonic frequencies). But I never do compression, because I assume that the MBR mastering process (preset) already did that. What's going on here? Does it help to add compression again, or should I not use a lot of compression in the MBR mastering, and instead add compression in Audacity.

[Farrell Jackson]

I always use Compress based on peaks but change the threshold from the default setting of -12dB to -8dB, which gets good results without squashing the song too much.

I'll try this!

Y'all are talking about post-mastering, right? i.e. After you've mastered the song to a WAV/MP3 when you prepare the MP3 that you are going to share?

Yes, when I use it, it's post-mastering. It's the last step before I post a song up.

[Zoltan]

Does it help to add compression again, or should I not use a lot of compression in the MBR mastering, and instead add compression in Audacity.

I have nothing to add here... But Here I Go Again (A Whitesnake song ).

I would imagine the MBR mastering is quite heavy-handed. So i'd skip the compression on MBR and do it in Audacity.

There's nothing wrong with using compression more than once. It's actually a common thing to use more than one compressor. Ex. One for character and the other more for compression.

In Audacity you'll be able to see the waveforms. That and your ears should dictate the best plan of action.

[Ted]

I would imagine the MBR mastering is quite heavy-handed.

Blasphemer!

The MBR Mastering Toolkit has a number of mastering presets, and the compression can be tweaked or turned off, and you can create your own preset. The compressor has 12 parameters: Threshold, Ratio, Attack, and Release; one each for Low, Mid, and Hi (4 x 3 = 12)

I rarely (never?) tweak the presets, and if I ever did, I didn't touch the compression.

There's nothing wrong with using compression more than once.

Alright. Maybe next time I play around with it.

I've gotten pretty lazy. Once the file has been generated by the MBR, I'm ready to call it done. The steps I take in Audacity are practically formalities. I'm so tired of hearing the song. So maybe I'll add Farrell's process to the formalities:

Compress based on peaks but change the threshold from the default setting of -12dB to -8dB,

[StephenM]

I always use Compress based on peaks but change the threshold from the default setting of -12dB to -8dB, which gets good results without squashing the song too much.

I'll try this!

Y'all are talking about post-mastering, right? i.e. After you've mastered the song to a WAV/MP3 when you prepare the MP3 that you are going to share?

When I'm at that point in the process, I normalize (defaults) and then do a high-pass filter (I find that my mastered songs out of the MBR have a lot of infrasonic frequencies). But I never do compression, because I assume that the MBR mastering process (preset) already did that. What's going on here? Does it help to add compression again, or should I not use a lot of compression in the MBR mastering, and instead add compression in Audacity.

at the end of the day I compare tracks to other tracks...and I fail often at getting them the same or comparable to others on the site as far as "what do I experience when I listen compared to others around it in the list?" 
in your tracks they always sound "big" to me... and that is a win... but others might hear that different too...
I don't know anything about the MBR... but I spent a ton of time on the BR1600 so I gotta believe those mastering tools are similar... however I would guess by now those are also vintage and outdated somewhat...
I don't care that much though... I am vintage...

in a way we are just little kids in a sandbox .... playing with stuff.  some kids grow up to use the big digging tools and actually move mountains and stuff... though I am not always convinced it is all for the good...

lol... on a different note... it is snowing nicely here today!