MOTUnation.com

Hey everyone, thanks for all the help, this site is an invaluable resource!

I'm looking for some general tips and info on Mastering.
I know there was a page somewhere on this board about it, but I can't find it anymore. Anyone know the link? Thanks very much.

Nairb

Go to this link.

http://www.izotope.com/products/audio/ozone/guides.html

Download the "Mastering with OZONE" guide. It's very helpful.

Yes, read all you can and then get some tools. I like the universal audio stuff found here:
http://my.uaudio.com/store/
Specifically the precision limiter and the precision multiband.

In the end your ears will have to be the judge according to the genre you're working with. I love to a/b my mixes with my favorites of the same genre and try to achieve what the "big boys" do. Can't say I'm always successful - but always getting closer.

Just wanted to post an encouraging note. If you read up on mastering tips from the "pros", various mastering guides (yes, Izotope's Ozone mastering guide is excellent), and "apply" what you learn using your ears and good judgement, you really will get better at mastering.

It's a worthwhile endeavor. I would love to just hand every track I mix to Bernie Grundman or George Marino or Bob Ludwig and let them go at it. But I'm not that rich. Ever if I did have the finances, the time factor is always the other consideration - clients and projects often need something "at the end of the day" or the very next morning. And, it is often a case where what I hand them will be what goes on the CD, or the film, or on the compilation or the website.

I'll say one more thing - as great as mastering engineers are, and as important as mastering is, it really isn't as much of a job as mixing. Really.
The goal in mixing is to end up without anything to do at the mastering stage except make it louder. Some of my most satisfying moments have been when a mastering engineer told me "I really don't have to do anything to this". Of course, I've also had mastering engineers tell me to go home and re-mix the track, so I haven't won the gold every time.

My rule: If it is NOT getting distributed and mass produced (as in self released or MySpace or your website or a CD for show vs. on the shelf at the record store, iTunes, etc), then home mastering is fine, if done properly and intelligently. If it is a run of 1000 CDs or on iTunes you really owe it to yourself and your project to have it professionally mastered. I just through this whole process with my friends' band and it was eye-opening. their mastered record sounds better than my stabs at it and only ran them <$500 for like 15 songs, paid by the hour. The mixes sounded good, so it wasn't a crazy fix it mastering session.

Night and day, really.

Jeff

I just recently had the exact opposite experience.

Paid to have my band's record mastered.

Didn't like it, re-did most of the mastering myself. Much better. The mastering engineer I paid just overcompressed everything. I had asked him to re-do it, he did, but it didn't really improve things.

It just depends on how confident you are in your mastering abilities. I wouldn't discourage anyone from deciding that they can become good at mastering (or anything else).

gearboy wrote:My rule: If it is NOT getting distributed and mass produced (as in self released or MySpace or your website or a CD for show vs. on the shelf at the record store, iTunes, etc), then home mastering is fine, if done properly and intelligently. If it is a run of 1000 CDs or on iTunes you really owe it to yourself and your project to have it professionally mastered. I just through this whole process with my friends' band and it was eye-opening. their mastered record sounds better than my stabs at it and only ran them <$500 for like 15 songs, paid by the hour. The mixes sounded good, so it wasn't a crazy fix it mastering session.

Night and day, really.

Jeff

For the most part I think this is a solid statement, however, it should be said that the abilities and taste of mastering engineers can vary greatly so it's not an automatic that pro mastering = way better sound. In fact, I've had positive experiences at mastering studios and experiences not unlike Mr. Polich's so it's good to do research on the engineer's previous work and go in knowing what you want and having at least a basic understanding of the effects of different choices made in the mastering process, particularly when it comes to dynamics. There's a terrific book called the Mastering Engineer's Handbook with a couple little sections that give a really good insight into the approaches a mastering engineer can take to compression/limiting and eq and the effect of such approaches. Another book, which is probably the best reference on audio period, is Mastering Audio by Bob Katz. Another variable with mastering engineers is their ability to communicate and listen to clients - I've been in a mastering session where the mix engineer was in the room and said right at the gate what they wanted and what they didn't want - the mastering engineer nodded and acted like he was listening, then proceeded to do the opposite - thankfully, the mix engineer politely called him on it an hour or so in and he got it, but he wasted an hour and half of time due to an inability to listen to the client.

Dubnick wrote:I've been in a mastering session where the mix engineer was in the room and said right at the gate what they wanted and what they didn't want - the mastering engineer nodded and acted like he was listening, then proceeded to do the opposite - thankfully, the mix engineer politely called him on it an hour or so in and he got it, but he wasted an hour and half of time due to an inability to listen to the client.

Hey Dubnick, what town was that in? I have a feeling I know who you're talking about.

But I know what you're saying. A good mastering job requires three things IMO.

1) Great equipment.
2) A great room.
3) A great engineer who knows how to listen, not just to the music, but to the client.

BTW, a good engineer with average equipment will produce a better master than a bad engineer with top shelf equipment every time.

Phil

Project Nairb 1 wrote:I'm looking for some general tips and info on Mastering.

Are you looking for tips on selecting a mastering engineer or mastering yourself?

As far as picking an engineer, I suggest listening to their work. For what you're going to spend on a mastering job, it's worth it to find out what they've mastered, invest in a few CDs, and listen critically.

As far as mastering yourself...
Listen, read, listen, experiment, listen, read some more, listen, read, read, read, listen. Did I mention listen? It takes time, practice and knowledge. Don't get discouraged if your first attempts sound like crap. Just keep learning and adjusting. Keep in mind that the world's greatest engineers started out that way.

Phil

I'd rather not say, but there aren't a whole lot of mastering engineers around here so maybe you could guess - you can PM me if you want. Another funny experience I had, and I believe it was the first time I was at a mastering house at all, was having the mastering engineer, who is actually very highly regarded for good reason, and in my experience very, very nice, tell myself and one of the mix engineers on the project that whenever a clients expresses a desire for the end product to be loud, he essentially stops listening to them or even trying - he just goes on auto-pilot and hands them the finished product. Now, this may have just been him exaggerating to make a point about his annoyance with certain types of clients (apperantly we were one of the few rock-oriented clients who didn't talk about loudness when it came to mastering thier project), but to tell a client you just met this was a poor call - he is an excellent mastering engineer, but I've never gone to him since. This person also disparaged a stylistic choice to a mix client of a good friend of mine, who happens to be one of the best guys out there, and caused that client to get so paranoid about the choice, which they were originally psyched with, that they demanded a recall - needless to say, my friend and the studio he worked for obliged, but never recomended this mastering engineer again. Now, in my experience this person has always been exceedingly cool, going out of his way to be complimentary when I'd run into him, even though I haven't brought anything to him since, but it's so weird that he would shoot himself in the foot like that with clients and potential clients. Anyhow, sorry for the rambling - guess my point is that it is crucial that you feel comfortably with the mastering engineer and that he listens. My best experience was with a gentleman named Henk Koistra - I don't believe he works anymore, but he was quick without rushing, could explain what he was doing, was very nice and professional, and if disagreed with anything you requested, he would simply say, "I can do that, but the potential downside of that choice would be a, b & c. Would you still like me to try?". I wish all mastering engineers were like that guy.

Software mastering question:

Mostly we all talk about what plugs we like, but i'm curious about setup work flow.

let's say i have 15 songs done and mixed. exported to my desktop in a folder as sdII files.

what next?

do you take them into your program of choice, say peak, and start with song one. apply desired plugins that will be done across each song and then bounce that down, convert sample rate if needed and then save out dithered..then go to next song.

or is there a batch process known to where you can just apply these master settings to all songs at once?

basically i had this project the other day where i just wanted to give the band a "pumped up" version of what "mastering" will do. they had 20 songs and i wanted to apply ozone 3 to each track and it seemed really lame to have to open each track up in peak and bounce them individually with the same settings. i wish i could have just selected them and "applied to all" somehow.

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.

All mastering engineers do it one track at a time, so to speak.

What you do is apply your processing to the mix, in the mastering app, then "process" or "bounce" it so the processing is "embedded" in the audio file - but DON'T apply the dither (uncheck it at the "maximizer" stage before you process/bounce). Then save the file as a new 24-bit "mastered" file. When you're done with all the mixes this way, you load them up into a playlist, in the right order, with the spaces between each track set correctly, the track markers and codes set, set the dithering to "on" and then burn, in real-time, the whole "album" - it becomes, essentially, one big 16-bit audio file.

That's the full, pro mastering house way. I do it an easier way - I have three sets of file folders - the "unmastered" 24-bit source files, the "mastered" 24-bit files, and the "16-bit masters" file folder. When I have all the processed 24-bit files done, I open them all again in Peak and go back and forth between all of them to check for level matching, making sure they're all about the same volume. 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.

Once I'm happy with the volume balance of all the tracks, I again do a "Save As" on each individual track, making it a 16-bit file, with Peak's dither set to "on".

One last step I do with the 16-bit files - I trim the start of each file, so that there is about 0.35 seconds of "black" before the audio starts. There should be no noise or any audio "before" the actual waveform of the song begins. You can use the zoom tool to move in and find the exact zero crossing point where your audio begins. Then just "Save" the file again. It doesn't change the actual audio for the track in any way.

The 16-bit files are now all in their own folder, and I just burn an audio CD master in Toast 8, which allows me to name the tracks, set the gaps between tracks, and enter the product code for the CD if I want. I've sent many projects to duplication houses like this and never gotten a complaint.

When burning in Toast, make sure not to change the gain of any of the tracks. This changes the "wordlength" of the 16-bit files and is potentially ruinous. Set all your volume levels at the second stage, with the 24-bit "masters" as I explained above.

The advantage to having all the 16-bit masters as individual files is this - if you want to change the order of the album later, or add more tracks to it or remove some tracks, you have that option. And, you also have the option of sending out the individual tracks themselves for inclusion on compilations or an internet radio station, or for release as singles or as part of a three or four song "EP".

Im about to have a 6 track ep ready for mastering. It's the first time I send something of mine out to a pro. I have to say I'm pretty terrified. I mean, I've spent countless hours and revisions getting these mixes to sound balanced and pleasing. I don't know. it's a little scary to think of some stranger applying EQ and compression to my entire mix. i hate squash. i hate it. i hate. it.

that said,

can anyone recommend a good mastering engineer in the San Diego-OC-LA area?

OldTimey wrote:can anyone recommend a good mastering engineer in the San Diego-OC-LA area?

No I can't, because I'm from the east coast, but I do have a suggestion. When you think you know who you'll be using, take the time to do your homework. Find out what he/she has mastered and spend a few bucks if necessary to by some of those CDs and give them a close listen. Make sure that what this guy does is what you want. I've heard some horror stories about mastering engineers. Be sure you get to know his work before you put your money on the line.

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

Phil