Changes in Mastering Approach

[VinnieD]

I think it all comes down to individual choices, when mastering ‘DIY’…

I have as philosophy to put not that much processing on the master fx bus, as I prefer to address issues in the mixing stage. I sometimes tried a little automation on the master track, but have not had good results with that yet.

My usual flow is to have an initial compressor act as ‘glue’ (ex: Steinberg Vintage), add a little EQ shine/ taming (UAD Pultec Legacy) and some distortion warmth (Steinberg Magneto II). Then I might play a bit (post fader/ EQ) with stereo width enhancing and top it off with a Maximizer. This is my starting point, as I might use another distortion unit , or use the built in EQ in stead of the UAD… Individual plugs may differ, but I usually end up with a very similar stack of Master FX.

I put this all in a separate MasterFX bus, so that I can A/B with a reference tune over the master bus, with the reference separate from the Master FX bus.

I add a limiter (if needed) and ditherer in the master out for export purposes only.

My approach is almost always on the total sound of the track, as I try to adjust individual trouble spots earlier, as I can do that with access to the full mix (a mastering tech usually only has a stereo track to fix issues in…). I think the best way to master is actually having a good mix earlier on, faders are the most important, but underrated tool in our DAWs I think.

So it all comes down to your own preferences (=ears) and skills (which I have not that many of yet)

[foolomon]

Thanks for your input!

[PeppaPig]

@VinnieD

My usual flow is to have an initial compressor act as ‘glue’ (ex: Steinberg Vintage),

If you want to use freebes for glue compression - do yourself a favour and download variety of sound’s LA thrillseeker.

[PeppaPig]

@foolomon

But if the project being mastered is your own meaning that there is some expectation of consistency in the results between it and previous projects then I disagree that you cannot expect to use the same plug-ins. 99% of the time, my mastering chain is the same (with differences to the compressor, EQ, and limiter settings), though there have been the exceptions to this.

Particularly if you’re mastering an album - sometimes individual tracks have to suffer to glue the sound of the album together.

[foolomon]

@PeppaPig

@VinnieD

My usual flow is to have an initial compressor act as ‘glue’ (ex: Steinberg Vintage),

If you want to use freebes for glue compression - do yourself a favour and download variety of sound’s LA thrillseeker.

Yeah, I was planning on downloading this as well as the Tokyo Dawn Labs Kotelnikov GE and Nova GE plug-ins. I’m not sure how Thrillseeker will stack up against FabFilter C2, but I’m going to give it a whirl anyway.

Has anyone had any experience with VoS TesslaSE or TesslaPRO to use instead of Magneto?

[Reymobius]

@foolomon

But if the project being mastered is your own meaning that there is some expectation of consistency in the results between it and previous projects then I disagree that you cannot expect to use the same plug-ins.

If you’re mastering projects that you mixed yourself, you’re definitely doing it wrong. I certainly red-book projects that I’ve mixed, but then I pass them to a different ME. The only projects I master are projects I haven’t mixed myself, or what’s the point of mastering?

This approach fundamentally overlooks the entire point of mastering. Frankly, this is the school of thought that finishing individual tracks constitutes mastering. Doesn’t get much more wrong than that.

[foolomon]

I don’t do it that way. I mix in one project and, when I’m happy with the mix, I export to 44.1 / 24 stereo WAV and create a new project just for mastering. In there I duplicate the track and mute the dup so that I can solo it midway during mastering to do A/B comparisons.

[keyzs]

@foolomon

Anyone here do mastering with a multi-band compressor instead of a “standard” compressor? What about a maximizer?

I’m thinking of doing that to squash the kick drum (at the fundamental frequency) and possibly the mids (for guitars) so that the upper end of the frequency spectrum gets some space. And then I may add a maximizer (don’t use one now) to fill out the overall mix.

If you use either…

What settings do you use on the MB compressor?

Where do you put the maximizer in the effects chain during mastering? I’m guessing after EQ but before tape saturation, exciter, or limiter.

Hi Larry, i believe the above example is a mixing issue rather than mastering. By changing the way the kick sounds, that process should be done during the mix stage; likewise the mids for guitars too. That way, the individual instruments would have their own space on the sound stage.

At the moment the only thing, i assume, that affects the way the kick sounds may be due to a bass clashing in the mix. Generally for guitars, because of their screaming upper mids, a lot of eq needs to be cut. The crucial balance of other instruments and vocals would then sit nicely in the areas of these cuts.

Essentially mixing a single instrument track, a compressor used is only to equalise levels by bringing them up or limit peaks depending on how it may be set. As for the MB compressor, it would be my last resort tool only if a 2 track is provided. There is so much more flexibility working on tracks individually. As mentioned above, if the compressor is used on the final mix then all frequencies will be affected.

Mastering i would humbly say its a different art altogether. However it is not a complicated as it is hyped out to be. The most misunderstood point about mastering is MAXIMISING levels. Apparently this is not true. Mastering is used to provide an average acceptable level across the entire production medium (ie a CD or a movie). If for example 8 songs on a CD; every song is mixed differently however, at the mastering stage just before burning the audio CD master disc, the entire collective of 8 songs are processed together. That way, all songs will have the same average loudness while retaining their individual dynamic range.

hope this helps… cheers!!!

[PeppaPig]

@foolomon

@PeppaPig

@VinnieD

My usual flow is to have an initial compressor act as ‘glue’ (ex: Steinberg Vintage),

If you want to use freebes for glue compression - do yourself a favour and download variety of sound’s LA thrillseeker.

Yeah, I was planning on downloading this as well as the Tokyo Dawn Labs Kotelnikov GE and Nova GE plug-ins. I’m not sure how Thrillseeker will stack up against FabFilter C2, but I’m going to give it a whirl anyway.

Has anyone had any experience with VoS TesslaSE or TesslaPRO to use instead of Magneto?

For tape simulation ferric tds (imho) sounds much better than magneto - another great free VST.

[alexis]

@foolomon

…

Has anyone had any experience with VoS TesslaSE or TesslaPRO to use instead of Magneto?

Are you unhappy with Magneto?

[foolomon]

I don’t use it. If I need something like this, I have other options like NI’s Supercharger GT, SoundToys’ Little Radiator, etc. Then again, I haven’t looked at Magneto II.

[foolomon]

@keyzs

@foolomon

Anyone here do mastering with a multi-band compressor instead of a “standard” compressor? What about a maximizer?

I’m thinking of doing that to squash the kick drum (at the fundamental frequency) and possibly the mids (for guitars) so that the upper end of the frequency spectrum gets some space. And then I may add a maximizer (don’t use one now) to fill out the overall mix.

If you use either…

What settings do you use on the MB compressor?

Where do you put the maximizer in the effects chain during mastering? I’m guessing after EQ but before tape saturation, exciter, or limiter.

Hi Larry, i believe the above example is a mixing issue rather than mastering. By changing the way the kick sounds, that process should be done during the mix stage; likewise the mids for guitars too. That way, the individual instruments would have their own space on the sound stage.

At the moment the only thing, i assume, that affects the way the kick sounds may be due to a bass clashing in the mix. Generally for guitars, because of their screaming upper mids, a lot of eq needs to be cut. The crucial balance of other instruments and vocals would then sit nicely in the areas of these cuts.

Essentially mixing a single instrument track, a compressor used is only to equalise levels by bringing them up or limit peaks depending on how it may be set. As for the MB compressor, it would be my last resort tool only if a 2 track is provided. There is so much more flexibility working on tracks individually. As mentioned above, if the compressor is used on the final mix then all frequencies will be affected.

Mastering i would humbly say its a different art altogether. However it is not a complicated as it is hyped out to be. The most misunderstood point about mastering is MAXIMISING levels. Apparently this is not true. Mastering is used to provide an average acceptable level across the entire production medium (ie a CD or a movie). If for example 8 songs on a CD; every song is mixed differently however, at the mastering stage just before burning the audio CD master disc, the entire collective of 8 songs are processed together. That way, all songs will have the same average loudness while retaining their individual dynamic range.

hope this helps… cheers!!!

Great post, and I agree. I’ve since started thinking that perhaps I should use the kick as a sidechain to compressing on the bass track to keep the two from clashing. I don’t know.