Should mastering = only loudness

[wishtheend]

This is kinda a hypothetical discussion. Just something I've been thinking in how I'm approaching my mixing. The question is should mastering, in an ideal world only be about getting loudness and balance between tracks overall? Whenever I'm listening to reference mixes, I'm hearing that postmastered sound and wonder how much additional comp/eq/sat goes into typical mastering. Like being able to hear a famous mix pre master. With plugins like AOM Limiter, I'm able to get a comfortable loudness (-9RMS), and feel like I want less and less on mastering and any changes done in the mix. Not really sure t here's even a real question in there

 

[egan.]

I think the answer is yes. The better the mix, the less that should happen at the mastering stage. One of the reasons you saw guys like Sneap and Bogren (this isn't conjecture, they've each said as much) switch to self mastering is that they didn't like all the changes mastering engineers were making to their mix. My personal opinion is that if you're self mastering and you're doing a ton of EQ or widening tricks or whatever then you really need to revisit the mix. Virtually all issues are more easily addressed on a track by track level. The reason stem mastering is getting so popular is it's a bet hedge, giving the ME access closer to mix level decisions without having to pay that price.

 

[SirKnucklesmd]

I save all my M/S functions for the mastering stage and some harmonic exciting. Rarely any eq'ing (Maybe a 1-2db cut or boost here or there). For me mainly about limiting and loudness, but if you have a killer mix some Mid/Side harmonic exciting will really give you some awesome (and natural) sounding separation.

 

[crillemannen]

I have been mastering my own mixes this ladt year. I apply some fx on the masterbus like exciter multiband with VERY modest settings and last limiter. Nothing dradtic is made on the master so i don't feel any need to send it to someone else for them to mess up my initial vision of what The mix should sound like.

A Sneap/Bogren mix probably sound like 95% to pair with the mastered version.

 

[egan.]

I have been mastering my own mixes this ladt year. I apply some fx on the masterbus like exciter multiband with VERY modest settings and last limiter. Nothing dradtic is made on the master so i don't feel any need to send it to someone else for them to mess up my initial vision of what The mix should sound like.

A Sneap/Bogren mix probably sound like 95% to pair with the mastered version.

At least with Bogren, they do.

 

[crillemannen]

And yeah i got a couple of unmastered studio fredman tracks from my internship and they are also like 95% there. Just a tad to much bass and a bit dull in the highs (not dull as in superdull).

 

[rapucore]

I always try to just make my own mixes louder with an exception of a possible high end boost. All magic is done in the mix.

 

[MultiM]

I always render the mixed song then master it, mastering chain for is:
Tape saturation-Mastering compressor(Waves SSL mainly)- limiter.
For some reason I prefer equalizing the whole mix(masterbus eq) in the mixing session, not in the mastering session.

 

[schwinginbatman]

I try to also do as little EQ as possible. A slight low-mid reduction and slight high-end boost, as well as a high-pass in the sub-50Hz or so range, and that's it. From there, mainly just compression and limiting.

 

[alex-sonic]

I always render the mixed song then master it, mastering chain for is:
Tape saturation-Mastering compressor(Waves SSL mainly)- limiter.
For some reason I prefer equalizing the whole mix(masterbus eq) in the mixing session, not in the mastering session.

I'm doing the same things, work great!

 

[Gujukal]

My mixes sounds really different without mastering, but that's because sometimes i use a mastering chain from the beginning when i mix. Is it something bad about that? Maybe i should stop mastering at an early stage, but its nice to hear how the final product will sound.

 

[TonyS.]

I always mix into my chain and then send out two files for mastering. One with, one without the processing. I also send screenshots/ presets of the plugins on the 2bus. Works great for me.

 

[wishtheend]

Thanks for the feedback, good to hear the different POVs. I use to avoid mixing with any faux-master chain, and just focus on the mix. Maybe plugs have just gotten better that I have to fight less and less, but really after my 2buss, my chain is simply an EQ, and then AOM limiter and then Fab-L catching any overs. I set Fab-L with no gain, ceiling at -0.5db and then just turn up AOM until it's getting around -10 to -9db RMS on the Pro-L meters. Anything else that needs to be done to the mix either is fixed on track levels, or to the 2buss before the limiters.

 

[alex-sonic]

My mixes sounds really different without mastering, but that's because sometimes i use a mastering chain from the beginning when i mix. Is it something bad about that? Maybe i should stop mastering at an early stage, but its nice to hear how the final product will sound.

I get your point of view I also prefer when the song is mastered but it's better in my opinion to not master it at the beginning
For me I do mastering when I think 80-90% of the mix is over and then I make some tweak on my mix but I know it's tempting!

 

[TonyS.]

To mix in some 2Bus-Processing at an early stage has nothing to do with mastering.

 

[Flow Of Time]

I tend to put a lopass on the master, to tame the super highs these days. Could come down to bad mixing though..