Maximization, Limiting, & Clipping: An In-Depth Look at Their Similarities and Differences

Let’s Look at Their Basic and Biggest Differences

Just a heads up, you’ll likely disagree with what I’m saying at first, but that’s because these processing types are usually combined in newer plugins.

Technically, a limiter is a compressor with a 10:1 ratio or higher. And that’s it - it was originally designed for broadcast to make sure the signal didn’t exceed a particular level. It doesn’t amplify the signal more than needed for operation, it doesn’t increase quieter details, at least not purposefully, it doesn’t have different algorithms to achieve unique timbres aside from 1 or 2 stages of compression, it just turns things down when they cross a threshold.

Early limiters and the limiters we use today incorporate lookahead to observe the incoming signal prior to it being processed. When a peak exceeds the ceiling, it’s turned down - it’s not clipped, or truncated, its amplitude is lowered.

Clearly this isn’t how we think of limiters today. When we think of limiters we think of loudness - this is due to maximization or the amplification of quieter aspects of the signal.

Most limiters follow this model - instead of only attenuating when a signal hits a certain level, limiters allow for the amplification of the signal into the limiter so to speak.

By amplifying the signal while having a cutoff for the peaks, we maximize or increase the quieter aspects of the signal, causing increased detail, and a louder signal.

So to recap, limiting refers to attenuation of the peaks - not reshaping, but a reduction of amplitude.

Maximization refers to the amplification of quieter or lower amplitude levels - this can be achieved with a limiter, but can also be done with a lot of other processors.

Meanwhile, we have another processor that causes maximization - a clipper. Like a limiter that has a maximization function, we can increase the signal’s level into the clipper.

The difference lies in the treatment of peaks. Instead of lowering the amplitude of the signal, like a limiter, a clipper reshapes the waveform until it eventually becomes a square wave.

So, a clipper maximizes, and causes waveshaping; by shaping a sine wave into a square wave, clippers create odd order harmonics. Periodic odd order harmonics play a big role in the aggressive sound of a clipper.

Additionally, clippers sound louder, since we’re not reducing the peak’s amplitude like with a limiter. We retain their amplitude while reshaping the waveform, and adding distortion.

We’ll get into some more detail in a moment, but let’s quickly listen to a mix limited, then the same mix clipped.

The amount of maximization, or the amplification of lower levels will be identical, but the treatment of the peaks will vary. I’ll push both aggressively so the effect is easier to hear.

Watch the video to learn more >

What Other Processors can Maximize?

Although only limiters limit, and only clippers clip (at least intentionally), maximization can occur with a lot of different processors.

For example, a big reason to use parallel compression is to maximize the signal.

If I compress a signal, then introduce the dry signal into the output, we’ll notice how we achieve maximization - that is, the amplification of quieter details while retaining peaks.

In this example, notice that neither limiting nor clipping is occurring.

Or say I use the Oxford inflator - now I’m maximizing through waveshaping, and the peaks are processed with a soft-knee clipper. Something similar happens with Vintage Warmer 2.

Quieter details are amplified, while higher amplitudes are amplified to a lesser extent.

If they become high enough in amplitude, the peaks are attenuated. This time though, they retain their shape and aren’t clipped.

One more example, if I use this MWaveShaper by Melda Audio, a personal favorite and it’s free if you need a good wave shaper - you’ll notice how I’m achieving maximization by very subtly increasing the value of low amplitude signals.

Unlike most maximizers, waveshapers can be used much more aggressively and creatively.

If I amplify the noise floor, I can achieve an incredibly noisy and distorted sound.

Or I could lower the higher amplitude values to achieve hard or soft-knee compression - granted with a higher level of harmonic distortion than most compressors.

If we zoom in on a waveform, we’ll notice that we can reshape the wave in a multitude of ways. Whereas clippers wave shape primarily by creating square waves, I could use this processor to create sawtooth waves, mimic lower bit depths through stepped waves, and do just about anything I can think of.

So this brings us to a clearer definition: Modern Limiters maximize, attenuate peaks, and don’t wave shape, or at least they aren’t supposed to.

Clippers maximize and wave shape in a very controlled way - meaning they create square waves. An exception being Newfangled Audio’s Saturate clipper, which includes a detail preservation function that reshapes clipped peaks.

Waveshapers can be used to maximize, and of course, to reshape the wave in much more complex ways.

Although it seems a little complex, due to some limiters being called maximizers like Izotope’s Maximizer, or some limiters including clipping algorithms like Voxengo’s Elephant limiter - it helps to think about limiting, clipping, and maximizing as 3 different types of processing, that can be combined into a single plugin - instead of 3 distinct types of processors.

Before we go, let’s compare maximization caused by parallel compression with maximization caused with a wave shaper - the amount of harmonic distortion and the maximization will occur differently, so you should notice a difference in the their sounds.

Watch the video to learn more >