Flippin' Clippin' ! - Episode 96 | The Mastering Show Podcast

We’ve been using “soft clipping" in mastering for over 20 years at this point, but it suddenly feels as if it’s all anyone is talking about ! New plugins, new suggestions about how to use it, and wild new claims about how amazing it sounds.
Except it doesn’t.
At least - not all the time, and not for all material.
In this episode Joe Caithness and I dig deep into the details and talk about:
* What clipping is, and what it isn’t
* The crucial differences between hard and soft clipping
* What makes a great clipping plugin (and why comparing them is a nightmare)
* Some of our favourite clipping plugins and how we use them
* The kinds of material that work best with clipping, and what type to use
* The golden rule to follow if you want to experiment with clipping yourself
Full show notes and links on our website:
themasteringsh...

[@SuperAgentAB]

I want to hear your thoughts about AP Mastering's clipper scam video.

[@ProductionAdvice]

@@SuperAgentAB I haven’t seen it, I’ll take a look [Update] OK it's fun, but TL;DR version - he makes some valid technical points but is getting tied up in the semantics, IMO - and the "scam" claim is just click-bait. Here's the full comment I left there: This is a great click-bait title - nice work! But basically it just boils down to semantics. I’ve watched the follow-up and mostly agree with the technical points you make. Personally I don’t ever hard clip - and if I do, I make sure it’s oversampled. BUT to say that soft clipping isn’t actually clipping… I understand the technical distinction but at a certain point the end result of saturation is a maxed-out value, which is effectively clipped. Saturation is never reversed in the real world in the way you demonstrate, so even though the information is technically still there, no-one will ever hear it. And to say that all hard clipping sounds bad is just as “inaccurate” as calling saturation distortion “clipping”. You say yourself in the follow-up that over a few samples, hard clipping can sound fine. I actually think it’s great that you’re getting people to think I’m more detail about this stuff, but doubling down on the idea that clipping is a “scam” and hard clipping should never be used because it always sound bad undermines your credibility. If you want to be super-precise and nuanced about the technical stuff, you need to do the same with your musical commentary as well, IMO. Joe gives some great examples of times when hard clipping can be useful and sound absolutely fine in the latest episode of my podcast, which came out today coincidentally (I found this video after someone in the comments there asked about it) As always in audio… it depends !

[@thegroove2000]

@@ProductionAdvice Thanks for this fella.

[@thegroove2000]

@@ProductionAdvice Analog saturation and digital saturation are indeed different processes with distinct characteristics: ## Analog vs Digital Saturation **Analog Saturation:** Analog saturation occurs when an audio signal is driven beyond the linear limits of analog equipment[1]. This process introduces harmonics and non-linear distortion in a gradual, often pleasing way[2]. Key characteristics include: - Smooth rounding of waveforms - Addition of harmonic content - Compression-like effects on transients - Frequency-dependent behavior Analog saturation can come from various sources like tape machines, tube circuits, and analog consoles, each imparting its unique character to the sound[2]. **Digital Saturation:** Digital saturation, on the other hand, is an emulation of analog saturation characteristics using algorithms[2]. While digital systems can clip when overloaded, true saturation requires more complex processing: - Digital clipping alone produces harsh, unmusical distortion - Advanced algorithms are used to replicate analog-like behavior - Can offer precise control and flexibility ## Key Differences 1. **Waveform Behavior:** Analog saturation gradually rounds off peaks, while simple digital clipping creates an abrupt cut-off[3]. 2. **Harmonic Content:** Analog circuits naturally generate complex harmonics, whereas digital saturation must artificially create this effect[1]. 3. **Frequency Response:** Analog saturation often affects different frequencies uniquely, while digital emulations must specifically model this behavior[1]. 4. **Transient Response:** Analog gear can naturally smooth transients, but digital systems tend to preserve sharp transients unless specifically programmed not to[2]. 5. **Variability:** Analog saturation can vary based on circuit components and signal levels, while digital saturation is typically more consistent[3]. While digital saturation plugins have become increasingly sophisticated in emulating analog characteristics, many producers still value the nuanced, often unpredictable nature of true analog saturation. However, digital tools offer greater flexibility, recall, and precision in applying saturation effects. Citations: [1] www.soundonsound.com/techniques/analogue-warmth [2] www.abletonlessons.com/music-production-tips-and-tricks/unveiling-the-warmth-a-deep-dive-into-audio-saturation [3] www.waves.com/analog-vs-digital-distortion-music-production [4] gearspace.com/board/so-much-gear-so-little-time/1309354-analog-vs-virtual-saturation-what-you-think.html [5] www.reddit.com/r/mixingmastering/comments/trb9u7/lets_be_real_here_is_it_possible_to_achieve/ [6] www.izotope.com/en/learn/what-is-audio-saturation.html [7] www.masteringthemix.com/blogs/learn/analog-vs-digital-exploring-the-pros-and-cons-of-both-worlds-in-music-production [8] www.linkedin.com/pulse/analog-vs-digital-which-better-kushal-jaju

[@thegroove2000]

And of course USE YA BLOOMING EARS.

[@ProductionAdvice]

@@thegroove2000 Pleasure !

[@thegroove2000]

Fascinating stuff thanks.

[@thegroove2000]

Im more into depth , thickness, girth than loudness. People have volume controls on their gear. They can turn it up.

[@DrAudioBot]

nice episode. cheers

[@ProductionAdvice]

Thanks !