DP's Song window for mastering??

[FMiguelez]

Hello.

I'm stuck in traffic and annoyed. So all I can do right now is thinking, or stressing out that I still have like 1 hour left to get home [sigh].

So, I currently, I use the following workflow to master my music libraries:
- Import all Final Mixes and stems. Each gets one track.

- All these go to the master fader, where I automate a plugin chain for each song (a piece of cake with snapshots). I navigate with markers, very quickly.

Everything is fine and works great, as long as I don't want to change the order of the pieces. Yes. I can do this by navigating with the markers, but I was wondering if the Song window could be used successfully for this (to try different sets of orders via different songs)...

Would this be even possible?
I have used the Song window only a few times, for other things, and I don't remember how well automation behaves between chunks, and when putting everything back together.

So I take it I would have to make one chunk per piece, and then put them together in the Song window. Afterwards, I could convert all the chained songs into a master chunk with my preferred order, yes?

Should I bother? Should this work? It would be very nice!
I won't be able to try this until tomorrow night, so any caveats or ideas will be appreciated.

[magicd]

You can work in the song window but that seems like a more clumsy method than staying inside a single sequence chunk.

When I'm mastering I don't use a Master Fader because I want to process each track separately. I don't use any automation when mastering. That would have been done in the mix stage. So each track has it's own plug-in chain. That makes moving the order of the songs around an easy task.

Dave

[stubbsonic]

There are compelling reasons to use automation during mastering, as it can help with things like solving problems in one section that don't exist in other secctions.

[FMiguelez]

You can work in the song window but that seems like a more clumsy method than staying inside a single sequence chunk.

When I'm mastering I don't use a Master Fader because I want to process each track separately. I don't use any automation when mastering. That would have been done in the mix stage. So each track has it's own plug-in chain. That makes moving the order of the songs around an easy task.

I see...

Perhaps I should try your method. So instead of automating the plugins in the master fader for each piece, you simply duplicate your mastering chain for each track and set them there.

I definitely see how this allows you total freedom to move tracks around. The only slight tradeoff is the small extra-processing due to the duplicated mastering plugins.

Thank you Dave!

There are compelling reasons to use automation during mastering, as it can help with things like solving problems in one section that don't exist in other secctions.

Agreed.

With my current method, it is a must.

Also, sometimes I also like doing a little macro-dynamics work on certain pieces. This can't be done at the mixing stage because it depends on how piece x sits among the other pieces (sometimes it's nice to lower or raise the intro, give the climax of a song a lift, lower the coda in one pice x so piece y doesn't seem to start too loud, etc).

[magicd]

DP uses plug-in pre rendering. That means the plug-ins are not using CPU resources if no audio is playing in the track.

You certainly can automate during mastering if that's what you want. And if you need to move a song in the track, the automation can be selected with the audio for the move.

Dave

[daniel.sneed]

Just my two (or three) cents on this.

I generally set :
- a master fader on main output, with mastering dynamic plugs and the like (multiband comp, exciter, stereo widener, maximiser, dither...).
- one track for each song (one soundbite each). Marker at beginning and end of each song, including end silence if any.
- Trim and MW Eqaliser on each song track to keep levels and tone consistent across the whole album.
- in case level automation is required, I set an aux track, called sub-master. Every song track is then routed to the sub-master track, and the sub-master track is routed to the main output. Any level automation will be performed on this sub-master aux track.

Many listening of the whole album in continuity.
Also jumping from here to there, specially high and low level parts.
And, of course special attention required about going from one song to the next one.
It may take days and nights...

[magicd]

It may take days and nights...

And many trips out to the car!

Dave

[Prime Mover]

There are compelling reasons to use automation during mastering, as it can help with things like solving problems in one section that don't exist in other secctions.

^ THIS. I most definitely automate during mastering, typically when a track has a few wildly different sections (as most of mine do) with different arrangements, it's often like mastering a few different songs. Also quiet acoustic intros and bridges, things like that.

Bob Katz has a whole section dedicated to ideas on automating, and how to use it while not going against the energy of the track.

That said, I know Magic Dave is a total pro... this just demonstrates that everyone as their own unique way of doing things, and there isn't one right way.

[bayswater]

You can work in the song window but that seems like a more clumsy method than staying inside a single sequence chunk.

When I'm mastering I don't use a Master Fader because I want to process each track separately. I don't use any automation when mastering. That would have been done in the mix stage. So each track has it's own plug-in chain. That makes moving the order of the songs around an easy task.

Dave

I like the point about automation above, and the point you made (later) about pre-rendering. I hadn't thought about that.

But however easy it is to change the order of songs with this method, isn't it easier to have each song in it's own sequence, each sequence with one track and it's own plugin chain, and change the order by dragging the sequences around? Or did I miss something in the above approach? I assume you're using various range selection methods and region commands to move the songs.

[FMiguelez]

But however easy it is to change the order of songs with this method, isn't it easier to have each song in it's own sequence, each sequence with one track and it's own plugin chain, and change the order by dragging the sequences around? Or did I miss something in the above approach? I assume you're using various range selection methods and region commands to move the songs.

Yes.

The more I think about it, the more I see how it should be an improvement from my current mastering method.
I will try mastering my next project with the Song window to see if I like it. So far I don't see any caveats, except that at first I thought one can not automate the master fader if it's in a V-Rack (to be accessible to all chunks). But if my memory serves me well, one can have a master fader per chunk, and it will always access those when in Song mode... Is this correct? Otherwise, any track or plugin automation would have to be in each track.

And then what happens? Once you have a preferred order, you can convert all the chunks in the Song into one continuous chunk, correct? If this is the case, does it also take the automation of the tracks and/or master tracks from all the chunks, and places it all correctly consolidated into this final one? I know it does so with tempo, but I don't know if it really works for automation...

[Shooshie]

I'm trying to make sense of everyone's posts, and the best I can figure is that we're just not all on the same page. When I think of mastering an album, I'm thinking of taking a series of 2-tracks (one per song) and setting them up in a series to make a unified whole of an album. You can do this in something like DSP-Quattro, which is really designed for that kind of thing, or you can do it in DP.

If you do it in DP, we're talking about:

• 1) Mastering a whole album in one Sequence Chunk (which I will refer to as Sequence)
  • OR
  2) Loading Sequence Chunks into a Song. (henceforth written with Upper Case S to imply DP's Song chunks)

If you use a Sequence to master an album, you have more ready access to each song, but there are at least two ways of doing this:

• 1) loading each song into the same stereo track (or 5.1 track), demarcating each song by a Marker, for getting around from song to song with ease
  2) loading each song into its own stereo track (and still using Markers to facilitate jumping around while working, or for moving songs)

If you choose the single stereo track method, the advantage is in using one plugin set that alters all tracks in the same way — same compression, reverb, EQ, noise reduction, and other processing. If all tracks were recorded at the same place and time, this may be an effective way to work. If some tracks are of totally different character, they may need processing that's over and above the norm for most tracks. In that case, you'll probably do better by loading each song into its own 2-channel track within a Sequence. In other words, instead of having tracks named violin 1, trumpet 1, or bass, piano, etc., you'll have tracks named Song 1, Song 2, Song 3, etc., for a total of about 14 to 18 tracks per album. Even when doing this, you'll still want to use Markers to place each song where you want it in the play list on the album.

The advantage to putting each song into its own track is that each song gets its own plugin chain, and you can tweak it however uniquely it needs to be tweaked. With either method, moving a song means selecting from marker to marker, then for all tracks making a cut, move the cursor to the new location, and paste.

If you choose to use the Song Window, the only advantage I can see is that you can reorder the songs quickly. It will be much more awkward to access each song for mastering. If you are considering doing this, let me make a suggestion: Use the Song Window to play with the order of the songs until you are happy with what you've got. Then save the Song to a Sequence, where each song is in its own track. Then the Song Window method at least becomes feasible as a PART of the operations of mastering, but not the home for the nitty-gritty work of mastering each track. Plugins, levels, and such will be done in the resulting Sequence Chunk, after you've ordered the songs in the Song Window.

So, to say it again briefly, the only real advantage I can see to using the Song Window method is in playing with song order for the album. It's ok to do that, but when you like your order, save as a Sequence, and continue mastering within a Sequence Chunk.

Maybe this will help make sense of what seemed to me like several points of view from different "pages", now brought together on the same page. Sequence Chunk mastering also leaves open the possibility of using automation, if you prefer, within a single Sequence, whether on one track per album, or on one-track per song.

There doesn't have to be any mystery or rule to the method you use. Just do what works for you for the time, circumstances and material you're working in.

I've actually gotten used to mastering in DSP-Quattro, after having originally done so in WaveBurner. There are lots of advantages to using one of those apps for mastering, though the material may warrant staying in DP for it. Again, it's up to you.

As always, I defer to those with more skill at this, such as Magic Dave or Bob Katz, or whichever guru you prefer.

Shooshie

[stubbsonic]

Am I correct that DSP-Quattro doesn't do automation of effect parameters?

[Shooshie]

Am I correct that DSP-Quattro doesn't do automation of effect parameters?

I don't know of any, but that doesn't mean anything, because I don't automate my mastering stuff, generally. I get that part taken care of in the mix, same as Magic Dave. If I had something I wanted to automate in the mastering, I'd probably automate that effect on the 2-track before exporting it to DSP-Quattro. Or just master in DP.

Shoosh

[FMiguelez]

[EDIT]
I guess I was still sleepy, since the answer I posted here belonged to my OTHER thread...
Sorry about that! ]

[FMiguelez]

If you choose to use the Song Window, the only advantage I can see is that you can reorder the songs quickly. It will be much more awkward to access each song for mastering. If you are considering doing this, let me make a suggestion: Use the Song Window to play with the order of the songs until you are happy with what you've got. Then save the Song to a Sequence, where each song is in its own track. Then the Song Window method at least becomes feasible as a PART of the operations of mastering, but not the home for the nitty-gritty work of mastering each track. Plugins, levels, and such will be done in the resulting Sequence Chunk, after you've ordered the songs in the Song Window.

Exactly, Shoosh. You nailed what I want to try, and I appreciate your suggestion.
But your suggestion is precisely what worries me a little...

Will DP really convert successfully all the automation from the Song window (once I have my preferred order) to a regular sequence one I settle on it?
(I know you suggested to automate on a regular sequence all my tracks once I settle on their order, but once I'm inside a chunk that belongs to a Song, I would be nice to be able to tweak or adjust there, since some of those adjustments (macro-dynamics) would depend on the order of the songs (a lifted intro, a dB less of a coda so the next song's intro sounds better, etc).

How about the opposite? Suppose I have everything mastered already into a regular chunk (what you called Sequence, above). But then I want to try a different song order. How easy would it be to turn this back into Song mode while retaining whatever automation I already have?

In short, will automation translate properly when switching from Song mode to regular chunks, and viceversa?

Unless it does it perfectly and reliably, it cold be a recipe for disaster, me thinks...