I’m working on a solo neoclassical piano track using a VST instrument with EQ, compression, and saturation on the insert chain. On the master bus, I’m using a Maximizer. I need to add a fade-out at the end.
Here’s the workflow I’m planning:
Render the piano VST to audio with all insert effects ON, but with the Maximizer OFF.
Apply the fade-out directly to the rendered audio.
Do a final export with the Maximizer ON on the master bus.
Does this sound like the best approach? Or is there a more Cubase-specific way to handle this more efficiently?
As Martin indicated, the fadeout should go after the Maximizer. Here is what I’d do in your scenario:
Piano VST with any inserts on an instrument track. They route to the Stereo Output. You can freeze them if needed for performance, or not. Or you can render-in-place with effects to an audio track then disable the instrument track. If you render to an audio track, that would also be routed to the Stereo Output (and I think the render function does this automatically).
Put the Maximizer (and/or any other mastering plugins) in the pre-fader inserts on the Stereo Output.
Use fader/volume automation on the Stereo Output to deal with any fade-ins and fade-outs.
If dithering and noise-shaping are needed (e.g. for a CD-quality render), put the dithering plugin (e.g. Cubase’s Lin Dither) in a post-fader slot in the Stereo Output and set the bit reduction and noise-shaping options to fit your needs.
a neo-classical piano piece that has been (lightly) compressed and (lightly) saturated
Out of curiosity, what inserts (if any at all) would you and other experts (not being ironic) on this forum consider for a neo-classical piano track or (for that matter), a solo piano track?
Even the historical music (like baroque, romantic, classicist, …) is compressed when recorded nowadays. If you play it on the digital piano, the samples are already processed (EQed and compressed) too. So I would expect an unprocessed record nowadays (if that was your point).
I think the confusion comes from the fact that I’m using Ozone 11 Maximizer, which includes a built-in clipper called ‘True Peak.’ Maybe I could turn off the internal clipper and instead add a separate clipper in the post-fader slot
As Martin says, the samples will already have been processed to an extent - any dynamics in the recording should be from your interpretation of the piece. Unless something sticks out, I’d leave it alone. If there are a few peaks or valleys, consider using volume automation rather than compression.
Certainly EQ to your taste as long as it doesn’t interfere with the quality of the sound.
It’s a representation of an acoustic instrument in the classical genre so I would avoid any saturation or clipping like the plague, unless you’re deliberately going for something beyond the natural quality of the piano.
I’d spend most of my time getting the sound of the space right, whether ambience or chamber or hall. That’s going to make the biggest difference in the presentation of the piece (over and above the actual playing).
For finalising, I’d consider using two (or even three!) limiters in series to bring the level up, each one doing a small amount so as to minimise additional distortion / artifacts in the recording.
I’m not very familiar with Steinberg’s Maximizer specifically, but I’m assuming it is a compressor and/or limiter. I typically use Ozone 11’s Maximizer as a mastering limiter to avoid any clipping and rein in true peaks (in addition to any trying to increase loudness at that stage).
In any case, whatever you use for a mastering limiter, assuming you are not using fade-ins/fade-outs to raise the volume, should be done pre-fader. You don’t want a mastering limiter, which generally is trying to make things a bit louder, raising the bottoms of your fades, and, assuming you’re not raising the fader above 0 dbFS at that stage in your chain, you won’t get any new clipping (i.e. that wasn’t already in place at the output of the mastering limiter) since you’re only lowering volumes with the automation.
Each company uses the term Maximizer differently - it can refer to all sort of combined functions. The term was first introduced by marketing teams and it is not about a specific and predefined set of functions. That’s why there’s a lot of potential room for misunderstandings ever since
I’m using Ozone 11 too. I was fooled by the “true peak” limiter inside. As per saturation, it’s really for the sound I have in mind, the genre is not strictly neoclassical, it’s more of a crossover I guess. Might you wanna have a listen, here’s a track i composed using EW Bosendorfer Imperial to which I applied a light saturation (and another couple of things) Doesn’t sound bad (to me, at least https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZ6dY3gJcRE
That was someone else who was commenting on the saturation. Personally, I wouldn’t know the difference between neoclassical and much of anything. Heck, I can rarely even figure out how to classify my own recordings in terms of genre.
I did have a listen, though, and it sounds pretty good to me. I think the concern of whoever had mentioned the insert effects on “neoclassical” may have been that classical solo piano would generally have pretty wide dynamic range, and compression would obviously clamp down on those. (I have no clue of “neoclassical” would be the same on that front since I have no clue what “neoclassical” is.) Your piece didn’t seem to have very a terribly wide dynamic range, but that may be your intention, and I think it worked in the context of the piece.
“For finalising, I’d consider using two (or even three!) limiters in series to bring the level up, each one doing a small amount so as to minimise additional distortion / artifacts in the recording.”
Using two or three limiters in series is an interesting point. By ‘in series,’ do you mean placing 2-3 limiters consecutively on the same output bus chain (as I assume), or applying a limiter to an already “limited” mixdown?
Regarding compression, saturation, I’ve posted a link to a piano track mastered with these plugins applied. Feel free to give it a listen if you’d like and let me know if anything sounds off to you.
Yes, this is what I mean. Each one doing a small amount of gain increase will give fewer artifacts than pushing a single limiter.
I’ve recorded several classical ensembles over the years (both traditional and neo) and my objective has always been to leave as little sonic footprint as possible on the final outcome, so I don’t push anything near the limit. Preamps are well within ‘normal’ operating range, tape decks are never going beyond 0 VU, compressors or limiters are doing no more than 0.5 to 1 dB reduction with very low ratios… that sort of thing.
That’s me. Your desired outcome might be quite different.
Edit: Sorry, forgot to listen to the clip. It’s a nice piece of music and very well played. If it were up to me I’d still lose the saturation though.
