Mastering Question

[Daddydex]

Hey guys. For do it yourself mastering do you just stick your plugins on the master track at the end of the mixing process or do you render to mp3 and then run the mp3 through the mastering plugins? I know if I have to ask that I am nowhere near being able to effectively master but I do like to mess with things.

Thanks,

Dan

[Big John]

I think 'whatever works with the gear you have' is probably the sensible answer.
I use Digital Performer 4.6 on a G4 Mac with the computer FULL of RAM,
i run any effects on each track as needed, i usually use one Reverb setting overall (to tie things together) but run it on an Aux track so can control it independently on each track then the only thing i have on the 'master out's' would be a fairly hefty EQ and then the L1 limiter.
I always master them to 'Sound designer II' or 'Aiff' format depending on where they are going.

If i'm making an MP3 i will start a new session, import the finished track, make any adjustments i think neccesary and export as Mp3.
If i think the machine is getting a bit bogged i might bounce some 'stem' tracks together, acoustic guitars or drums etc. i will bounce them down to a stereo pair to lighten the load.

Thats just MY system though and i'm sure we all have our own little quirks, i am after 'consistency' in my recordings so often make lots of notes on paper or on screen, there's nothing worse than thinking, "well, i did it yesterday and it sounded great, now, how the *&^& did i do it ?".

I was the part time 'Mac guy' at the academy of art in Cambridge for awhile and the students were constantly told "Keep a digital diary", if i had any advice to give that would be it, if someone likes 'that' sound you need to be able to re-do it.

Apart from that ----- if it sounds like you want then it's all good !

[elmerbumpkin]

compress (to mp3) last

[Daddydex]

Thanks guys, so it seems there is more than one way to skin a cat.

John, I have been using that reverb trick and it does add life to a recording.

Dan

[octatonic]

Originally Posted by Daddydex

Hey guys. For do it yourself mastering do you just stick your plugins on the master track at the end of the mixing process or do you render to mp3 and then run the mp3 through the mastering plugins? I know if I have to ask that I am nowhere near being able to effectively master but I do like to mess with things.

Dan,

I mix to AIFF then have a separate process for mastering, which is send it to a mastering engineer in a separate studio.

I do however master projects that I haven't mixed for people who are on a budget.
I am not a professional mastering engineer- I track and mix, but simply having a new set of ears in a new acoustic environment is sometimes all you need to get a track to a releasable level.

The whole point of mastering it to get a second set of ears and most importantly in a separate acoustic space to address issues that are specific to the room you record in.
As a general rule you should NEVER master in the same room as you mix, unless that room is incredibly well designed and as close as acoustically flat as possible.

Say, for example, you mix in a room that is 23 x 16 x 10ft.
You end up with room modes at the following frequencies:



See the build up around 300-400hz?
That is going to mean the room is resonant at those frequencies.
You are likely to hear those frequencies more in that room and when you eq you will end up with a hole (because you will have compensated for them) in your recording.

A mastering engineer will have a much better room than you with a frequency response that is flatter and will hear this (if he is 1/2 decent) and be able to compensate for this.

What is your current mastering chain?
Apologies if this sounds overly didactic but mastering is not just about "making it louder", compressing it to sound bigger and trying to have it compete with commercial recordings.

It is a process whereby a separate acoustic environment and an experienced mastering professional can provide "musical balance" to a track- to redress the acoustic issues and mixing decisions that ultimately detract from the quality of the recording.
IMHO this cannot be done by 99.99999% of mixing engineers when they are working on their own material.

I'll offer to back this up by offering to master a track of yours with my mastering chain in my acoustically balanced studio- you can decide for yourself if I am talking out my backside.
I'll even give you a point by point breakdown of what I did and why I did it.

That was a little long winded, I know- and I am not trying to discourage you from experimenting but I would like to dispel some very common preconceptions people have about this process.

Mastering is more art than science but I'll outline my process here.
I take a track that is usually a 24bit 96khz AIFF and put it into Protools HD.
My HD rig has a lot of IO on it and all the outboard is connected so I can aux it into the Protools rig.
There is a patchbay in place so if I want to connect two pieces of hardware in series I can do it without having to pass through multiple A/D/A stages.

For compression I have my TDM plugins (Compressorbank, Sony Oxford compressor mostly) a stereo pair of
Empirical Labs Distressors, a Focusrite Red 3 and Compounder and a couple of cheaper units.

EQ I have some TDM plugins (Massenburg EQ, Filterbanks and a couple of others) and a Manley Massive Passive

There are some metering tools I use (Waves Paz and a rackmount strobe tuner) and some outboard effects (Lexicon PCM90, MPX1, Ensoniq DP Pro).

There are some other bits and pieces that might get used but that is the bulk of it.

Most plugins are unsuitable for mastering to any acceptable degree- I can't think of a time when I've used a Waves compressor or EQ for mastering with the exception of L1/2/3 which get their own section.

L1 (and 2 or 3) really changed the game- in the hands of someone who is experienced they can provide the missing bit of life to a track. Mostly though, they are overused and end up destroying the track- removing the dynamic range AND SOUNDING VERY SHOUTY ALL THE TIME.
Use with caution.

Anyway, I am happy to master a track and provide you with some real world advice as to what I did in that specific instance- let me know if you want to take me up on that.

[Daddydex]

Thanks Jim, I will absolutely take you up on that offer. Let me get my s*** together on my end and I will PM you. So you would want an AIFF file? I will have to figure out how to send it to you.

Also, maybe I should post the original file on Soundclick and then we can post the mastered take so everyone can benefit from your knowledge.

Great post Jim, you addressed some issues I didn't consider.

Dan

[octatonic]

Originally Posted by Daddydex

Thanks Jim, I will absolutely take you up on that offer. Let me get my s*** together on my end and I will PM you. So you would want an AIFF file? I will have to figure out how to send it to you.

Also, maybe I should post the original file on Soundclick and then we can post the mastered take so everyone can benefit from your knowledge.

Great post Jim, you addressed some issues I didn't consider.

Dan

Hi Dan,

I always balk at making those kind of posts because 1) I know I sound a bit pompous when I do. 2) I'm really not like that. 3) I don't want it to sound like I am trawling for work.

I have my own websites with FTP- I'll create you an account and you can pop it up there.
We can post both versions for sure.
What if anyone else wants to have a go at it too- maybe we can turn this into a bit of a science experiment?

I have a couple of days next week where I am not doing much so if we can do it by then I can spend a bit more time on it.

Two more things I forgot to mention in my novel above.

1. Multiple sets of monitors. A very important component.
I have 3 sets of monitors- Some Genelecs, Some Dynaudio's and some B&W stereo speakers.
There are also boom boxes in the studio and in my house for reference mixing and I routinely go for a drive just to hear the tracks in the car stereo.

2. Remixing. Not in the "techno" remixing sense.
I have had mastering engineers suggest to me that I go back and mix tracks again when work hasn't been up to par.
Usually it is issues of bass management (I often mix bass heavy) or phase problems on the top end due to over-processing. Very important as a mix engineer to not be precious about it, listen to what they say and then get on with the job.

[Daddydex]

That would be a fun experiment. If anyone else wants a go at it, let me know.
I will finalize the mix later tonight. The song is Bob Dylan's "I Shall Be Released".

Dan

[Daddydex]

For those of you still following along, the mp3 is now posted on my Soundclick page:

http://soundclick.com/share?songid=6495269

When Jim has completed the mastering process I will post that version as well.

If anyone would still like to take a crack at mastering the song please let me know and I will send you a copy. I think it would be great to compare the different results.

Dan

[DLGinSC]

Very nice.

[barreloflafs]

Great job (although I may be accused of being biased!)....

barrel

[Daddydex]

Originally Posted by barreloflafs

Great job (although I may be accused of being biased!)....

barrel

Folks, I give you my brother. About time you found this place! Now go buy a tele.

Dan

[barreloflafs]

Originally Posted by Daddydex

Folks, I give you my brother. About time you found this place! Now go buy a tele.

Dan

You meant to say BIG brother....

BUY a tele? Can't I just borrow one of yours?!!!

[Daddydex]

Originally Posted by barreloflafs

You meant to say BIG brother....

BUY a tele? Can't I just borrow one of yours?!!!

Of course. But more importantly you can post a picture of my Les Paul.

Oh yeah, and find the recent thread on Silvertones.

Dan

[Bonneville Bruce]

Dear Mr. Richmond,

Your posts are very edifying and not pompous in the least. Please keep them coming, as these are the most coherent posts on mastering that I have encountered on the www.

I have a specific question on your item 2 below about remixing. 1) Are you talking about re-mixing a stereo pair of tracks, or the set of "raw tracks that make up the pair, or both?

2) Please elaborate a bit on this, "Usually it is issues of bass management (I often mix bass heavy) or phase problems on the top end due to over-processing. Very important as a mix engineer to not be precious about it, listen to what they say and then get on with the job".

3) When does mixing or re-mixing become mastering?

I'd also like to take a swing at mastering Dan's song, for the education it will bring.

Sincerely yours,

Bonneville Bruce

Originally Posted by octatonic

Hi Dan,

I always balk at making those kind of posts because 1) I know I sound a bit pompous when I do. 2) I'm really not like that. 3) I don't want it to sound like I am trawling for work.

I have my own websites with FTP- I'll create you an account and you can pop it up there.
We can post both versions for sure.
What if anyone else wants to have a go at it too- maybe we can turn this into a bit of a science experiment?
...

Two more things I forgot to mention in my novel above.

1. Multiple sets of monitors. A very important component.
I have 3 sets of monitors- Some Genelecs, Some Dynaudio's and some B&W stereo speakers.

2. Remixing. Not in the "techno" remixing sense.
I have had mastering engineers suggest to me that I go back and mix tracks again when work hasn't been up to par.
Usually it is issues of bass management (I often mix bass heavy) or phase problems on the top end due to over-processing. Very important as a mix engineer to not be precious about it, listen to what they say and then get on with the job.

[Daddydex]

+1 about Jim. I was never put off by any of his posts.

Bruce, as soon as I figure out how to get the track to Jim I will get it to you. Thanks for playing along.

Dan

Originally Posted by Bonneville Bruce

Dear Mr. Richmond,

Your posts are very edifying and not pompous in the least. Please keep them coming, as these are the most coherent posts on mastering that I have encountered on the www.

I have a specific question on your item 2 below about remixing. 1) Are you talking about re-mixing a stereo pair of tracks, or the set of "raw tracks that make up the pair, or both?

2) Please elaborate a bit on this, "Usually it is issues of bass management (I often mix bass heavy) or phase problems on the top end due to over-processing. Very important as a mix engineer to not be precious about it, listen to what they say and then get on with the job".

3) When does mixing or re-mixing become mastering?

I'd also like to take a swing at mastering Dan's song, for the education it will bring.

Sincerely yours,

Bonneville Bruce

[Dave_O]

+1 on what Bonneville Bruce said...
that was the most coherent explanation of mastering I've ever seen in 25ish years of recording. Back in "the day", when mastering was about getting stuff onto vinyl, no-one would tell you what they were doing. It was like some secret society!! In the digital realm, it's a different ballgame, but still a bit of a black art.
I'll take your advice onboard next time I do some recording.
Thanks Jim!!!

... I love this forum.....

[octatonic]

Originally Posted by Bonneville Bruce

Dear Mr. Richmond,

Your posts are very edifying and not pompous in the least. Please keep them coming, as these are the most coherent posts on mastering that I have encountered on the www.

I have a specific question on your item 2 below about remixing. 1) Are you talking about re-mixing a stereo pair of tracks, or the set of "raw tracks that make up the pair, or both?

2) Please elaborate a bit on this, "Usually it is issues of bass management (I often mix bass heavy) or phase problems on the top end due to over-processing. Very important as a mix engineer to not be precious about it, listen to what they say and then get on with the job".

3) When does mixing or re-mixing become mastering?

I'd also like to take a swing at mastering Dan's song, for the education it will bring.

Sincerely yours,

Bonneville Bruce

Thanks guys...

1. Remixing in terms of going back to the original session data, the raw session data and doing it again.

2. The bold area I guess you added for emphasis so that is the sentence I'll answer.

Well, it is amazing how some mix engineers can be precious about their recordings. They sometimes view the mixing process as an art in itself (I disagree- I think it is an engineering task, not a creative process in itself, but the lines are blurred) and they will often ignore the advice of a professional mastering engineer because they believe their work is precious.
Mix engineers have to deal with the same sh1te from artists who view their songs as immutable universal truth and wont change a word or chords because it interferes with their sense of self.
Basically, mastering engineers make suggestions that should really be listen to by mix engineers if they want their mixes to improve.
Most mastering engineers spend more than 1/2 the cost of their studio on acoustic treatment.
They hear stuff that people like me don't.
Some people are too proud are arrogant to acknowledge that.
I admit, I had that attitude for a while, but I wised up to it- it gets you nowhere and mixing again takes only a couple of hours.

3. Well mixing a track again is nothing more than a suggestion a mastering engineer might make if the track he is working on isn't up to standard.
This happens from time to time, nothing to worry about- the worst thing I can do as a mix engineer is ignore that advice.
FWIW I usually do final 10-20 mixes of each track anyway- all with slightly different changes (vocals up or down by 1db, or any other instrument). It is normal.
Remixing occurs in my studio, not the mastering engineer's.
FWIW Mastering engineers are referred to as ME's- mix engineers are not, no idea why but I will write ME from now on and I mean Mastering Engineer.

I'm glad you guys appreciate my posts- my way is not the only way to do it of course, so this is all IMHO.
I post a lot on Gearslutz as well, as do a lot of industry pro's- you can get a hell of a lot of great information there although it is a bit less polite at times.

[StuH]

Dan nice tune, it's your best by a mile.

Nice post Jim very informative, keep them coming.

[Daddydex]

Thanks Stu, I am still reading up on compression and Eq. I have a long way to go but thanks to you guys things are improving.

Also, I did finally upgrade my RAM to 2 gig (maxed out now). Good deal at newegg.com. The RAM made an incredible difference in Reaper. I also found out my computer will not support two monitors. No matter how much I kick and scream, it ain't gonna happen. I will keep my eyes out for a good deal on a widescreen flat panel.

Thanks again.

Dan

[StuH]

Dan you have no available pci or pcie slots on your motherboard? Are you going to get ezdrumer?

[Daddydex]

Originally Posted by StuH

Dan you have no available pci or pcie slots on your motherboard?

No. I guess there is a video card available that can supposedly do the job but it is reported to be very buggy. I will try to find where I read that.

Dan

[Daddydex]

Originally Posted by StuH

Dan you have no available pci or pcie slots on your motherboard? Are you going to get ezdrumer?

Stu, here is a thread that shows you what I am up against.

http://help.lockergnome.com/windows/...ict579902.html

It is bleak to say the least. After reading that, would it even be worth it to get a widescreen?

Dan

[StuH]

Ohhh that sucks dude.
If you have no available slots left is there something you can take out that you don't need like an old video or game controller? I put in a ATI Radeon HD Pro for 90 bucks probably alot cheaper in the States that's working great. Snapper her into a pci slot and Bob was my uncle.

[Daddydex]

Originally Posted by StuH

Ohhh that sucks dude.
If you have no available slots left is there something you can take out that you don't need like an old video or game controller? I put in a ATI Radeon HD Pro for 90 bucks probably alot cheaper in the States that's working great. Snapper her into a pci slot and Bob was my uncle.

That made me giggle.

I will have to research further because I have no idea how to answer your question.

Dan

[barreloflafs]

Originally Posted by Daddydex

Of course. But more importantly you can post a picture of my Les Paul.

Les Paul? The gold top? That is YOURS?

uh oh...As it happens, I had it up on the workbench just yesterday. Had to tweak the setup a tad:



Ummm.....I think we need to talk.

barrel

[octatonic]

Originally Posted by Daddydex

+1 about Jim. I was never put off by any of his posts.

Bruce, as soon as I figure out how to get the track to Jim I will get it to you. Thanks for playing along.

Dan

For anyone who wants to take a stab at mastering the track, I put it on my web server here:

http://www.jamesrichmond.com/client/...x/I_Shall2.aif

All you need to do is download it, process it however you want and then PM me.
I can give you ftp access to my web server and we can discuss it.

Let's have at it... :-)

[Daddydex]

Originally Posted by barreloflafs

Les Paul? The gold top? That is YOURS?

uh oh...As it happens, I had it up on the workbench just yesterday. Had to tweak the setup a tad:



Ummm.....I think we need to talk.

barrel

Hey, I was looking for that saw too.

Dan

[Big John]

Doncha just love this forum when it works like this ?

[octatonic]

Ok,

I have spent about 1/2 an hour listening to the track and about 40 mins working on it in Protools.
This isn't my final version, just a work in progress to give you an idea of how I approach this sort of problem.
The file is located here:

http://www.jamesrichmond.com/client/...ll_bounce1.aif

As I finish this post, it is still uploading so anyone who is reading this straight after I post might want to give it a few mins before commencing the download.

The first thing to notice is it is a lot larger now.
That is because I upsampled it to 24bit/96khz.
Why?
Because the processing I do in the digital realm performs better at a higher sample rate.
It makes no difference at all to the original file to be upsampled, it sounds exactly the same.

The first thing I did was insert McDSP Analog Channel across the track.
This is a console/tape emulation plugin.
Hear how there is a much more pronounced bottom end in the track now, compared to the original?
That's why.

It is actually slightly overwhelming- which I'll tighten up later- but for now I kinda want to leave it alone and see what you think.

Then I added 2.8db of hi-shelf EQ at 12.3khz. (Massenburg TDM EQ Plugin) to get the hihat sizzling a bit more (but not too much, this isn't an 80's metal song after all).

Then I created a reverb bus and sent the whole track through the TC Electronic Non Linear Reverb (TDM plugin) but filtered out everything from 500hz and below and anything over 3k.
That reverb bus is then mixed with the original track at quite a low level (-20db roughly) to provide a bit more ambience and warmth.

Finally everything was put through TC Electronic MD3 multiband limiter/mastering plugin.

This is a very complex plugin- kind of like an "L1 limiter for grownups"
My problem with the L1 is it is very On/Off in the way it works.
MD3 has much more scope.
I've done some mid range EQ treatment, some multiband compression with it- just to massage the overall balance.
I need to pay attention to the upper mids a bit more- but hopefully you will find more separation in the instruments, less low-mid grunge.

I may all use it later to deal with the hard panning of the vocal- but need Dan to comment on this.
Dan- did you intentionally hard pan the vocal for a reason?
If this is an artistic choice then I can leave it alone, but if it was done to try to fit all the other instruments in then we can probably deal with it but using a crossover to take out the frequencies around the vocal, mix them back to mono and then use a spatial effect to simulate 'stereo' at those frequencies.

or... you can remix the track with the vocal to the centre and lower it a bit as well.
The vocal is VERY high in this mix now but that is because the track was mixed with a bit of a midrange hole.
When I have had it hit the multiband compressor kick in, it levelled out all the mids which kicked the vocals up too high.
Usually at this point I would say, go back and mix again, drop the vocal by 2-3db and pan it closer to the centre, leave everything else the same.
When go back and reapply the multiband compression it will fill the void and you should have a relatively balanced track.
It is also a bit louder.
I haven't crunched it (yet). I will do a couple of passes later with L3 and you can see how it can be used and abused.

This was all done pretty quickly- I haven't turned on any of the outboard so far for instance but should give you an idea of the process.
A mastering engineer (remember I'm not one) would probably begin with hardware in the first instance but I've started this way for recall reasons- we are probably going to do several passes of this, and setting everything up again each time will be a PITA.

If anyone wants screenshots of the plugin settings, let me know and I can do them later today or tomorrow.
I'll spend a bit more time on it over the coming days, but I have a tracking session now that I have to do.

Curious as to what people think.

Jim

[Big John]

Originally Posted by octatonic

....Then I created a reverb bus and sent the whole track through the TC Electronic Non Linear Reverb (TDM plugin) but filtered out everything from 500hz and below and anything over 3k.
That reverb bus is then mixed with the original track at quite a low level (-20db roughly) to provide a bit more ambience and warmth.
Jim

That sounds neat, what if any are the EQ set's for that plug in ?, i'm just listening through my little ipso boxes but it does seem to have 'sweetened' things without getting in the way.
Point taken on the L1 too, wonder if she'll buy me the MD3 for a late birthday/early Christmas treat ?, is it just TDM or is there a VST version ?

[octatonic]

Originally Posted by Big John

That sounds neat, what if any are the EQ set's for that plug in ?, i'm just listening through my little ipso boxes but it does seem to have 'sweetened' things without getting in the way.
Point taken on the L1 too, wonder if she'll buy me the MD3 for a late birthday/early Christmas treat ?, is it just TDM or is there a VST version ?

I don't have the session open but I think I cut 80hz by 1.4db, cut 1k by 1.2db and boosted 6k by 1.2db.

Not much at all really- it is the multiband compression that really sorts it out. Reducing the dynamic range in the low end and low mids gives the track more energy, but the dynamic range on the top end stays the same so it doesn't sound over-compressed.

MD3 for TDM is $1200- there is no *true native* version but you can buy a Powercore card and buy the plugin.

The powercore plugin is a grand, and the cards are $500-1500.

A used TDM rig these days can be had for $4k roughly if you shop around= but then you need to spend at least $10k in plugins and tdm plugins always cost more, usually double, than native plugins. It sucks but there is a good reason for it. TDM plugins are coded in assembly, much more labour intensive.

The MD3 is taken directly from the TC System 6000 which is about $10k.
I've never used one myself but told by a colleague that it is stonkingly good.

[Daddydex]

Jim, I was screwing around with my Reverb channel (bus) and must have accidentally panned the vocals. I am kicking myself for not catching it. I will remix with the vocals centered and dropped in volume. Am I still cool to upload to your FTP? Thanks.

I haven't been able to listen to what you have done so far. I am not sure why it won't play but I will figure it out.

Dan

Dan

[octatonic]

Originally Posted by Daddydex

Jim, I was screwing around with my Reverb channel (bus) and must have accidentally panned the vocals. I am kicking myself for not catching it. I will remix with the vocals centered and dropped in volume. Am I still cool to upload to your FTP? Thanks.

I haven't been able to listen to what you have done so far. I am not sure why it won't play but I will figure it out.

Dan

Dan

Hi Dan,

Yes you can still upload to the ftp.

Your audio card might not be 96k capable.
I can convert it back to 24bit/44.1khz if you want and repost it.

[Daddydex]

I can choose 96000 Hz at the time of rendering. Is that want you want? I will give it go.

Dan

[Larry F]

Dear Jim,

Thank you for sharing your thoughts and techniques. I find this these posts very informative.

A question. Why is the Massenburg EQ better than Waves? Features, sound quality?

[octatonic]

Originally Posted by Daddydex

I can choose 96000 Hz at the time of rendering. Is that want you want? I will give it go.

Dan

Hi Dan,

I would say it is best to leave things as they are- render to 44.1k- let's not introduce more unknown elements than we have to.
If you didn't track at 96k it won't help anyway.

[Daddydex]

Originally Posted by octatonic

Hi Dan,

I would say it is best to leave things as they are- render to 44.1k- let's not introduce more unknown elements than we have to.
If you didn't track at 96k it won't help anyway.

Good then, I will render and upload right now.

Dan

[Daddydex]

Mission accomplished. I think I even got it in the correct folder this time. Let me know if you need anymore changes.

Dan

[Daddydex]

For those still following, I posted a version for comparison on my soundclick page. This is the AIFF. file run through L2. No other treatment.

http://www.soundclick.com/bands/defa...?bandID=803496

Dan