PlanetZ forums - scopeusers.com

Hello everybody,

I actually use Optimaster as main device for my mastering chain, but I think you cannot get a real "Punch" out of it..I mean the overall volume at the end is always not so "loud", isn't it? Well I was wondering if it would be a good idea to buy a TC Finalizer PLUS (hardware), but I cannot test it. ..any experience with it? Can you make a sort of comparison between them?
Thank you so much!
Ste

just two words more..
BTW I love OPTIMASTER, and I think it would be nice to use both in the mastering chain..Any experience?
THX

Hi there, it was *many* years ago (2001?), so I could be wrong on what I'm saying...

I practiced with a TC Finalizer (hw, but probably not "plus") when I was attending a course of recording/mastering: well, from what I remember, it is much a different thing compared to optimaster, it had fewer possibilities to modify the signal, it was barely an (advanced) limiter with some algorithm optimizations, but nothing more. Of course, it sounded quite well.
But I don't know anything about current or recent models...

Ciao
Fede

Lasciate perdere il TC finalizer che è meglio!
In ogni caso sperare di ottenere risultati di qualità utilizzando un solo dispositivo (software o hardware) è assolutamente improponibile.
Una catena di mastering è molto complessa e restando in ambito software si possono fare ottime cose a patto di conoscere nel dettaglio quello che si usa.
L'optimaster è un ottimo propdotto per dei "rough masters" ma pensare di ottenere un brano che suona come i cosiddetti "top" solo con l'optimaster...beh,dai,magari fosse così facile!!!

I wouldnt buy a finaliser...i worked with the 48 and 96 k version and both are sucking the life out of the material in my oppinion.

Its an old box that was ok back then but i would stay with optimaster.Tweaking it is also a pain in the butt.

And if you cant get it"loud" enought with the optimaster(shudders) then...look elsewhere.

Always found the TC Finalizer harsh when pushed too hard.

Optimaster is quite transparent but can be "too in your face" if overused.

TC Finalizer is a multi-stage mastering chain, with very good 24/96 A-D, 5-band eq, normalize, 3band expander, 3band compressor & limter. It also offers M/S processing and sonic enhancement (digital radiance generator!!).

I learned audio mastering on one of these, and consider the fx, esp. EQ and multi-compressor high quality.

The Scope Optimaster has similar parameter control to the TC multi-comp but much more inclined to distortion. The TC multi-comp is insanely clean. I think that's why you can easily "suck the life out of the material" until you get used to the controls (and avoid the instant volume seduction).

I don't trust Scope Optimaster - I found it often produces a grainy, harsh sound. My favorite mastering comp is the one Timeworks made for Scope - single band smooth compression.

For me multi-band compression is less desirable these days and with all the surgical eqs and BX_Digital in my Scope arsenal, the TC Finalizer hasn't been fired up in years.
But it's still the best multi-comp I've got, if I ever need one.

/dave

Well i always tried to tweak it...for 2 years at that place actually...i dunno.The converters are not bad at 96 k but the sound of the process wasnt for me.I heard good productions made with the 96k version but for me it wasnt it.If i "would" buy one today i wouldnt pay more than 250 to 350€.

It wouldn't surprise me if you found one for that price. They've really lost their resale value.


/dave

Or you can buy a powecore pci with Master x3 that's basically the plug-in recreation of the tc finalizer.
Im selling just one for 200 euros!

Well, guys
thank you so much for your answers...
I think I'll keep my Optimaster and eventually I'll look for some good Maximizer, just for the end of my mastering chain..
Thanks again for your replies !!!
MERRY CHRISTMAS and HAPPY NEW YEAR
Ste

kwild wrote:Lasciate perdere il TC finalizer che è meglio!
In ogni caso sperare di ottenere risultati di qualità utilizzando un solo dispositivo (software o hardware) è assolutamente improponibile.
Una catena di mastering è molto complessa e restando in ambito software si possono fare ottime cose a patto di conoscere nel dettaglio quello che si usa.
L'optimaster è un ottimo propdotto per dei "rough masters" ma pensare di ottenere un brano che suona come i cosiddetti "top" solo con l'optimaster...beh,dai,magari fosse così facile!!!

Si, certo sono perfettamente d'accordo. Sono anni che sperimento sul mastering e non posso che condividere quello che dici, in effetti è proprio per questo che cercavo qualcosa per "alzare" il livello finale della traccia..Il Finalizer l'avrei usato praticamente solo per quello, e l'avevo trovato a "buon prezzo" da LuckyMusic..ma dalle risposte non credo valga la pena
L'Optimaster per determinate cose fa un ottimo lavoro secondo me. A livello software non ho trovato nulla di paragonabile, per quanto riguarda la compressione (e limiting) multibanda, quindi sarà presente ancora per un po' nella mia chain
Ma cercherò un buon "maximizer",
ad ogni modo grazie per la tua risposta e tanti auguri di Buone Feste!
Ciao
Ste

you can use optimaster for the compressor, but try sonic timeworks mastering limiter at the end of your chain, this keeps the punch. You can stay in the scope environment then too.

Jah Servant wrote:you can use optimaster for the compressor, but try sonic timeworks mastering limiter at the end of your chain, this keeps the punch. You can stay in the scope environment then too.

I find interesting also the limiter from Spacef that comes with FAT Inserts!

[edit] Uh, this is my 1000th post! Wow! [/edit]

limfat is great too, it all depends on how much you want to limit though, you can push sonic timeworks more, but limfat works really good. Some clients want their stuff louder and you can't convince them otherwise so sonic timeworks works good for that.

I really hate the gain battle in mastering!
I find the listen very difficult in these days because the dynamic is now only a far memory
My reference for mastering is a mix between actual recordings and the past master like '70 (Pink Floyd, etc.)
I prefer a bit lower overall volume but an intellegible and enjoyable listening.
The hard limit master is only for one shot radio passing, not for daily home listening!

A good workaround is pump up with hard limiting the drums section and also, a little, the bass section, and leave the overall mix at low/mid limiting.
For the voice i prefer to work with tube saturation in preamp stage and/or with one good compressor to pump up the presence.

of course, but like I said, you can't tell some people otherwise, they just complain that it's not as loud as some other song and that's all they know.

Back on topic though, I find that the limiter in optimaster doesn't keep the punch so good (to get rid of transients you need the shortest attack time and this kills the punch in optimaster), limfat is better for light to medium limiting (it catches the transients, I always set this from lowest to medium I find that I don't need the higher or brickwall settings), which can give a more classic master and sonic timeworks can be used more agressively. What I normally do is I use limfat on my master mix buss, just to catch the peaks, which is mainly drums, sometimes I have put it on the drums alone too, again just to catch the peaks, this removes the transients and makes mastering a little easier for me. Either way I get the same effect, a mix that doesn't have these very short transients (a few ms), which can be a problem with the digital medium. Also, using a parallel compressor during mastering helps fatten and bring a few db extra gain as well and it's very transparent.

i like the optimaster for final compression, but i agrree, i don't use the limiter.

BTW the UAD limiter is a very good plugin for pimp your mixes...

Alternatives: Sonnox & Waves, but very expensive!