When the L2 has to attenuate the loud parts of the signal it sounds --- well, it changes the sound of the signal and not in a good way. Detail is lost and there is some distortion (or something!) introduced. The L3 does not have this artifact and has a much more transparent signal. Even my clients could tell the difference between the L2 and L3. Now, if you spank the L3 (as in go more than 4-6DB of attentuation) you can start to hear elements of distortion on the loud parts. I'm no expert on the L2 or L3. So someone chime in if they have had more experience.

“ The L2 Ultramaximizer and F6 Floating-Band Dynamic EQ are tools I use for really helping cymbals where the snare is too dominant. “ The L2 Ultramaximizer and F6 Floating-Band Dynamic EQ are tools I. Junior Senior Malayalam Movie Mp3 Songs.

Obviously everybody has their own subjective experience. I have to disagree that the L3 sounds better than the L2. You're substituting one kind of problem with another if you listen carefully. You will quickly grow tired of the L3 artifacts.

The artifacts you're hearing from the L2 when pressing it hard is a type of distortion, which often happens when the lows kick in. This means you're pressing the L2 far too hard, or you should use another type of limiter (and not necessarily the L3). Since the L2 is a broadband limiter, any part of the frequency range exceeding the threshold will result in gain reduction. Remember that getting a loud signal is a sum of many parts - not only the limiter.

I would never or very rarely use more than 2-3 dB of GR in the L2 or any other type of limiter in a mastering situation. It's simply a weak method of getting a loud signal.

A lot of people expect the limiter to be the magic bullet that provides all the loudness and don't understand why 'it can't take more than 4 dB before it sounds ugly'. As the L3 is multiband it splits up the bands but you will also get distortion - more often audible in the high frequency bands. This is a nasty kind of digital distortion that can sound quite harsh. On top of this distortion the L3 has a huge problem with the crossovers between the bands which skew the frequency perception and causes another type of distortion which messes with the coherency of the mix. I believe there's a test website that visually shows this problem in the L3 in comparison to a couple of other limiters.

Add the two types of distortion from the L3 and you will get a quite fatiguing sound that might sound slightly louder than the L2 at first but certainly not better. On top of this distortion the L3 has a huge problem with the crossovers between the bands which skew the frequency perception and causes another type of distortion which messes with the coherency of the mix.

I believe there's a test website that visually shows this problem in the L3 in comparison to a couple of other limiters. This is surprising because the L3's cross-overs are totally phase compensated - hence its very high latency. Gundam Wing Endless Waltz Special Edition. This is why they've just released an L3LL which is a low latency version of the same plugin but with 'minimum phase' crossovers - like the ones in the C4 you would presume. I'm speculating that the reason the OP was enjoying the L3 more than the L2 on his piano recording was the main reason multiband tools like this can be cool - you can affect portions of the signal while leaving other sections totally untouched.

With a phase conpensated tool like this, the benefits should be even more transparent. Having said that, why do you need to limit a piano performance with 4-6 dB of gain reduction anyway?