The DYNAM-IZER

[Mark Bassett]

http://www.rogernicholsdigital.com/tuto ... al-320.swf

Any thoughts?

[wez]

when will people get it into their heads that mastering is not just about making things louder. "So there you go, Mastering with Dynamizer"... oh dear, we obviously still have a long way to go.

how about hearing those A/B comparisons with B compensated for volume.

"i want to change the dynamics... to match that of current releases". yeah, 'current releases' are such a great example of what we should strive for in the treatment of dynamics.

and then... "i want to maintain a wide dynamic range.... and increase the energy level of the song". ok now i'm confused. i thought you wanted to change the dynamics to match current releases. which current releases? oh and apparently i don't have to worry about EQ anymore, that's a relief. and tacked on at the end, as a mere afterthought... "... [it has] to be set by listening..." thanks roger, i'll keep that in mind.

actually i'm confused about a lot of things. maybe this is just pure genius, just not explained very well. or at best it's just another 'go-louder' box/plug in.

right or wrong, i stand by my philosophy that A) there's no such thing as a 'mastering' plug-in, and B) mastering is not a technical process, but an aesthetic one.

[heathen]

What are ya tryin to do Mark? Put Turtlerock outta business? Nah seriously I tried a demo of this this ages ago out of curiosity and its pretty cheezy, looks cheezy and sounds cheezy, pretty poor.

I thought the track sounded better before he screwed with it.

[Luke Garfield]

Hmm. I don't think it sounded too bad after it was treated. I think what is more suspicious is the fact that it just sounds louder and the interface kinda distracts you from the job that your supposed to be doing. But I certainly wont be rushing out to try it out or buy one.