Mastering Tips

[wylie1]

Good luck Oldtimey
I have a question.
Normally when finishing a mix I put the MW EQ then MW Limiter24>16 on the Master fader bounce to disk/burn cd.
I then use this for a listening reference on other systems then come back for more tweaking.
Is there a DP plug I can insert on the master fader that will add dynamics?
I would like to pick up Ozone but haven't got there yet.
Also everything I record is in 24bit

[msmith92]

There's no way to "batch process" a dozen or more individual tracks - because each track has different aspects to it, different problems. The "template" that works for one mix won't necessarily work for the next one.

i was just curious cuz i've seen people take their finished mixes and put them in protools all on one track and apply processing to the overall. and i wasn't sure how they managed that.

[FMiguelez]

i was just curious cuz i've seen people take their finished mixes and put them in protools all on one track and apply processing to the overall. and i wasn't sure how they managed that.

I would want to think they automate the plugs parameters for each song/piece.

Now, I've always been curious about this, but how come dither is not applied when reducing the word length from 32 bit FP to 24 bits? Is quantization noise not an issue in that case? If not, why not?
If you keep working with the 24 bit files, and process and reprecess them into say, DP, would not that be going from 24 to 32, back to 24 and 32 manytimes over? Is this not cumulative?

[David Polich]

No, don't get dither and 32-bit floating confused. DP's "internal" processing is 32-bit float. But a 24-bit audio file's output is still 24-bit.

Actually, forget the math - if you record at 24-bit, and you output at 24-bit, then you are at 24-bit in the end. That's all that matters. Someone else here will know more about the exact math, I'm not a digital audio math expert.

If you choose to output your mix as a 16-bit file without dithering, you have a problem. So just export any mix soundbites as 24-bit, if you are going to open them up in another app like Peak.

If you are doing your mastering within DP, with something like MW limiter or Ozone inserted on the Master Buss, then you set the MW limiter or Ozone, or whatever to dither IF you are doing a 16-bit bounce.

Regarding the Pro Tools question - putting all the audio tracks into one long Pro Tools file is the same as doing it in Peak or DSP Quattro or Audacity - you are putting all your audio files in a row, WITHIN one project file, as a playlist.

You can actually use any DAW as a mastering app. You can use DP as your mastering app - take all the separate mixes, import them into a new DP project, then place them all on their own dedicated tracks in DP, line it all up so they play one after the other, put whatever you want on the Master Buss, then do a Bounce (or a real-time record pass). Export the resulting file as your master CD file, one big file with all the tracks. You could also place all the individual mix files as soundbites on one stereo track in DP, one after the other.

I don't recommend this, as it can get confusing, it's easier to master each track individually, within a dedicated mastering app like Peak. At least for me it is. I treat DP as my mutli-track DAW, and Peak as my mastering DAW.

[msmith92]

. I treat DP as my mutli-track DAW, and Peak as my mastering DAW.

me too. seems to be the most organized and best sounding in the end. imho.

[OldTimey]

BTW, I listened to some of your stuff from another thread here somewhere. Nice stuff!

Phil

Thanks! That's really appreciated! I made the mistake of putting it up on a Myspace page and linking to it there, the sound quality suffers quite a bit on myspace compared to homemade mp3s.

this next project (also 100% mixed and arranged in DP) will be hosted on a proper website!

[OldTimey]

Actually, forget the math - if you record at 24-bit, and you output at 24-bit, then you are at 24-bit in the end. That's all that matters. Someone else here will know more about the exact math, I'm not a digital audio math expert.

yeah what David said. Don't worry about 32-bit float to 24-bit. DP handles all the dithering needed there. Bottom line, if you export out of DP to a 16-bit file, be sure to have a dither plug on the master fader, Ozone, MW limiter, L2/L3. etc.

To me, for home brew mastering, I export my mixes at 24-bit, full sample-rate (ie, 88.2 or 44.1 depending on project) and leave SRC and bit-reduction/dither for the final stage. (Compression, EQ, and Limiting happen first.)

[James Steele]

Thanks! That's really appreciated! I made the mistake of putting it up on a Myspace page and linking to it there, the sound quality suffers quite a bit on myspace compared to homemade mp3s.

MySpace blows. They can let people upload thousands of bad home snapshots per profile, but yet they still feel the need to compress MP3s down to 96kbps from what I've heard. It's a joke. I used to actually have my own embedded MP3 player that played 128kbps MP3s off my own server, but then the downside is that there is no easy way for people to add your song to their profile and your number of plays on your profile and all of that doesn't move.

I've mentioned the quality issue of the MP3s once in a MySpace forum and got shouted down about it, so I don't bother any more. Uploading an MP3 to MySpace turns it into instant suck as far as quality goes.

[OldTimey]

I've mentioned the quality issue of the MP3s once in a MySpace forum and got shouted down about it, so I don't bother any more. Uploading an MP3 to MySpace turns it into instant suck as far as quality goes.

agreed, but its a good idea to have a page for exposure. I don't let people download my tracks off myspace anyway. it's only for streaming, sounds like crap, but most people listening to music on myspace aren't listening to it on the old hi-fi if you know what i mean.

that said, James, you live in SoCal, who do you use for mastering?

[OldTimey]

james, ps, congrats on 2000 posts!

[Dubnick]

This thread has been sticking in my head all day, and while I wouldn't claim to be an "expert" on much of anything, I do feel like I might be able to offer some ideas that can help whether you are going to try and master your own material or bring it to a mastering engineer:

#1.) Pick up and read Mastering Audio by Bob Katz - an invaluable resource. Also, at least take a glance at the compresion & eq sections in The Mastering Engineers' Handbook.

#2.) Mix, mix and then re-mix till it sounds as close to where you want it to be as possible, without anything on the master buss - no eq, no comp. If you can get that mix sounding how you want in a wide variety of listening environments (your home studio, a professionally designed mix room, your car, a little tv size auro-tone like speaker, etc.) then you are well on your way. Make sure when you are checking the mix you do so at a variety of levels, but spend most of the time checking it at low and moderate levels. This seems totally obvious, but ideally, you want the mastering engineer to spend the least amount of time troubleshooting your mix - the more troubleshooting they/you have to do, the more time it takes and the more you will have to comprimise your sonic vision (?). Do not leave anything to be "fixed" in the mastering. Polishing? Maybe. Fixing? No. Don't waste your time and money - go back and fix it in the mix. I found, personally, that a surefire way of gauging whether or not I'm truly done with the mix, is if I start attempting to master it and find myself reaching for the multiband compressor to fix something. If I need to do this, I need to revisit the mix.

#3.) Once you have it as close to how you want it to sound in your mind's ear (?), pick one or more appropriate references and compare the overall balance, both panning and eq wise at a matched level. By appropriate, I mean of the same style and, if possible same instrumentation and similar arrangement - an ideal version of what you'd like your mix to sound like. If possible, use at least one pre-mastered reference that you know and trust - if there is a mix engineer in your area whose work you love, you might try asking them for a pre-mastered mix for you to use as a reference. Switch between your mix and the references and see if it sits well with them or if something bad jumps out - your mix obviously won't sound identical to the references, since it's a different song, performance, recording and mix, but at a matched volume, you don't want it to sound horribly out of place either. Don't worry about more subtle eq differences between your mix and a mastered mix, since the mastering engineer is likely to have done some subtle sprucing up with EQ - your mix should be closer to the pre-mastered mix than the post-mastered mix, so don't sweat subtle differences - just listen for massive differences that make your's sound bad in relation to the one you like. I believe Bob Katz website has a long list of what he considers great mixing/mastering references on his site, laid out by either peak or rms levels of the finished master (can't recall which). After doing a thorough comparison of the mixes with your ears, you might want to check out how they compare via a real time analyzer like the one in iZone that allows you to take mix snapshots of the spectrum analysis in FFT display. I'm not saying you should rely on your eyes to make final decisions regarding your mix, but if you are in a less than ideal monitoring situation, particularly when it comes to bass, a spectrum analyzer can be helpful in spotting potential issues that your monitoring conditions may not allow you to notice.

#4) Listen to a variety of mastered music in the style, instrumentation and arrangement of your mix. If you are able to find a solid pre-mastered mix for reference, a/b that pre-mastered mix to the post mastered mix, at the same level (very important) and ask yourself what you like and don't like about the mastering. Listen at low and moderate volumes in monitoring situations you know and trust. The most important part for me has been to make clear observations on what negative effects certain mastering approaches have - make your own list of mastering pet peeves and be specific - find examples. For example, here's my little list:

- Unpleasant clipping/distortion audible throughout the cd - Ex: One By One cd by The Foo Fighters.

- Kick drum attack disappearing at the loudest points of a song - Ex: Pardon Me by Incubus and Keep Fishing by Weezer.

- Obvious or even relatively subtle pumping and/or rounding off or softening of attacks/transients - some people like this effect to varying degrees, feeling that it presents a warmer more analog sound when done right. While appreciate that, and do feel like a tiny bit of pumping can have a warming effect, it doesn't do so without side-effects, including making the mix a bit more "wimpy-loud", to steal a phrase from Mr. Katz excellent book, than in-your-face-up-front loud. This one is more subjective than the previous two - some people dig it, just not me. Still, it helps me to know that I don't like it. I won't list any examples here, because when it's bad it's obvious, and when it's well done, it doesn't ruin the listening experience for me. I'm sure everyone can think of examples of this.

- Inverse dynamics - one voice and an acoustic guitar should never be louder than an entire band rocking out, yet there are some records out there where this happens - some really big records too. I think this is something people miss sometimes cause they are listening at too high a volume. Ex: Killjoy by Rocketscience.

- Too much high end "sheen" or "air" added. This always sounds weird to me and adds a bit off distance to the mix in a weird way.

- "Wimpy loud" effect - when the cd is loud, but sounds wimpy, far away and lacks attack or immediacy.

#5) Do as much research as you can to determine what approaches/techniques to EQ/Compression result in what you hear as negative end results.

There are more specific approaches I use when I do any kind of psuedo mastering at home, and I've arrived at these approaches by doing all of the above and for the most part, I am very happy with what I am able to do on my own. More importantly, trying to learn as much as possible about achieving both the results I want and don't want in mastering have given me the ability to communicate with mastering engineers more effectively and be able to pinpoint what I don't like to hear happen to my mixes. I think this thread would perhaps be more helpful and interesting of those of us who master our own mixes occasionally would post both our processes and examples of the work, pre and post mastering - perhaps at each stage. Anyhow, I hope I didn't drone on too long and that someone found something useful in my random rambling.

[FMiguelez]

#2.) Mix, mix and then re-mix till it sounds as close to where you want it to be as possible, without anything on the master buss - no eq, no comp.

This is GREAT advice. I'm afraid that I usually put "mastering" plugs in the mix bus when I'm done with around 80% mixing.

Hmmm. I'll try next time to just not do that and try your advice instead. It just seems so logical. If you have a great mix without the help of the mastering plugs, then you are almost there.

Thanks for that one!

I think this thread would perhaps be more helpful and interesting of those of us who master our own mixes occasionally would post both our processes and examples of the work, pre and post mastering - perhaps at each stage. Anyhow, I hope I didn't drone on too long and that someone found something useful in my random rambling.

I too would like this very much.

Volunteers?

[Dubnick]

I think this thread would perhaps be more helpful and interesting of those of us who master our own mixes occasionally would post both our processes and examples of the work, pre and post mastering - perhaps at each stage. Anyhow, I hope I didn't drone on too long and that someone found something useful in my random rambling.

I too would like this very much.

Volunteers? [/quote]

Thanks man - I'd actually volunteer, but I'm so slow with stuff that I'd rather just post something when I get around to it. I feel like with something like mixing or mastering advice, it seems a lot more useful to be able to hear an example of what the person is suggesting - gives you a better idea if a technique or suggestion is just what you need or is in the total opposite direction of what you are going for. Hope someone starts the ball rolling - it'd be fun to check out people's approach.

[Splinter]

If some are too loud I use "Change Gain" to bring them down a db or so. But I do NOT "increase" gain on any track, since they've already all been run through the maximizer.

Dave:

This is backward, my friend. You should match your average levels before maximizing, which should be the last step in the chain before dither. Your average level should be consistant before peak limited, then your entire project should be limited as a whole to "maximize" your level to disc and use the full bit depth.

Honestly, I wouldn't bother with Peak or Bias or any other "mastering" software unless I had to enter subcode information. I do all my mastering in DP. I give each song a track, sequence and space them appropriately, match levels with the faders, automate fades, process each song with plugs, strap L3 with dither @ 16bit on the Master fader, and Bounce SDIIs with the Add to Sequence option. Then I split each song from the bounced file where I want an ID. Rename the soundbites, export as AIFF, burn in Toast with 0 seconds between IDs.

Easy!

[simonr]

I was at a talk by Bruce Swedien just the otherday, look him up on google. A superb engineer with years of experience and a whole sh&tload of a-list performers have his name on their albums. Right back to Count Basie. His list of albums was much longer than my johnson !! (OK, that's not a good measuring stick!)

He had some things to say, but suprisingly very little in the way of detailed things. He doesn't work like that. The minutae don't worry him, its the overall. Although he travels to jobs with 105 microphones!

1. If there's a trade off between Music and technology the Music MUST WIN
2. He said that the only plug in he could ever recommend to anyone was Waves De-esser. (He uses Pro-Tools by the way)
3. When asked how he managed to make things sound so separate, yet together in a very loud mix (Earth Song by Micheal Jackson)(Listen to it, critically, MJ may be a kook but that performance and production is overwhelming- at the loud bits you can hear every instrument track - no mush). he said I don't know. I just listen. I use the right mic, I LISTEN.
4. He uses extensive use of stereo recording, with a preference for blumlein pairs and the use of a decca tree for orchestras.
5. He uses a Neumann U47 he bought new in 1957 for nearly every vocal he ever does.
6. He was extremely critical of the modern MO of "making everything as loud as possible"
7. he had yet to hear an interesting surround sound mix. In fact he quipied that knowing some of the musicians he had known it would be rather scary to hear them behind him !!!
8. Know your gear, especially your mics. Don't read the blurb on them, LISTEN to them. get to know where they sound best to you.


I don't know if any of this makes sense, or is actually true, or is remembered verbatim.(I may have interpreted some points) Or if it means anything to anyone. But the gist of what he was saying was. Be true to the music, listen, reproduce the music. he said, forget your recording studio for a while. Go out and listen to live music, hear how it sounds. Go back and reproduce that, not just loud stuff.

Although Bruce Swedien has been lucky in that he has always had the very bestof the best artists to deal with, his words and attitude (he was a very nice bloke) were eye-opening and refreshing.

Simon R