simple ways of mastering?

[doclegion]

I been recording my own music now for a while and i have a few songs that sound good just need a small polish. Anyone got any opinions?? I got waves diamond bundle there is just so much shit i dont know where to start
any comments? that would help Thaks

 

[DestroyTheColossus]

I dont know if my techniques are good or not. I know its not up to a proffessional mastering job, but it sounds good enough to me for a home recording.

Saturator
Izotope Ozone 3 - EQ if needed (normall hi/ lo pass), Multiband Compressor
G Clip
G Clip (as suggested by steven slate)
Izotope Ozone 3 - Limiter
Voxengo Span (to see where your RMS level is)

 

[Brett - K A L I S I A]

Honestly the simplest and best way for you is to get it done by a pro. By not doing what you're doing, or even what to do, you're just doing more harm to your music than good. You can send me a PM if you're interested (check out my links).

 

[ArtGarceau]

I been recording my own music now for a while and i have a few songs that sound good just need a small polish. Anyone got any opinions?? I got waves diamond bundle there is just so much shit i dont know where to start
any comments? that would help Thaks

I would start by reading Mastering Audio by Bob Katz, and then scheduling an attended session with a local mastering engineer.

Mastering (pre-mastering) is less about making your tracks sound "better" and more about making multiple songs sound cohesive as an album. A positive side effect can be the perception of your songs sounding better. A good ME will remain pretty transparent if the songs already sound pretty good. More often than not the most drastic difference between the original and pre-master will be volume.

 

[Trep]

Masterings a pretty popular topic on this forum.

If i was recording for a band release at all i would definately get the real deal pro job done,

if its just for you a basic master is not a bad idea.

Simplistic as it sounds, i just use a decent Compressor and EQ. leave multiband and all that to jazz the pros i say. but atleast your mix might have a little more punch. I wouldnt say theres much harm there

 

[smy1]

Art: I have only once been at a mastering session and I will never do it again. It never helps at all except serve my ego and it is boring as hell. Unless I know the room and speakers, who am I to tell the mastering engineer what to change? And why should I sit there for 8h if I have no input anyway??

To the original poster: for demos just use this chain: Sonalksis Free G (to reduce level if you come into the mixbus too hot) - EQ - Compressor - EQ - Limiter. I actually mix through this chain with the compressor just taking 2-4db and the limiter only catching stray peaks.

 

[ArtGarceau]

Simplistic as it sounds, i just use a decent Compressor and EQ. leave multiband and all that to jazz the pros i say. but atleast your mix might have a little more punch. I wouldnt say theres much harm there

A decent compressor and EQ is meaningless if you don't have a decent room or monitoring chain. The whole setup is meaningless if you can't burn an error free redbook disc. Even that is meaningless if the manufacturing plant requires PQ info that you can't provide.

There is a lot more to mastering than making things sound "better." In my opinion that is the smallest part of the job.

 

[seditz740novaprospect]

A decent compressor and EQ is meaningless if you don't have a decent room or monitoring chain. The whole setup is meaningless if you can't burn an error free redbook disc. Even that is meaningless if the manufacturing plant requires PQ info that you can't provide.

There is a lot more to mastering than making things sound "better." In my opinion that is the smallest part of the job.

good post i agree 100 percent................

 

[mintcheerios]

I'm going to say something that's potentially controversial, but it's been on my mind for awhile and I need to say it.

I think pro mastering is generally unnecessary and a waste of money for most home recording artists. The usual argument is generally that a pro mastering engineer will do a way better job than you will. I have doubts that that is even true, but let's just say that it is true for a moment. So what? I'm sure people like Sneap and Bogren will do a way better job mixing my tracks, but we mix our own tracks anyways since we can learn and control the way our music sounds. We can agree that many homemade mixes posted on this site are better sounding than some mixes made by pros out there. If it is acceptable for home artists to mix and track themselves, why should they avoid attempting to master themselves? Because they'll screw it up? But isn't screwing up a vital step in learning how to do anything?

I understand that mixing and mastering are different processes and that knowing how to mix doesn't mean you can master well. But knowing how to mix doesn't mean you can't learn to master well (I would argue that you're way better off than someone who knows nothing about mixing). It's not like the difference between mixing and mastering is like fishing and architecture. I think the general apprehension towards recommending a mixer to master something themselves roots from the feared notion that it would somehow be unfairly merging the two disciplines.

If you don't know how to make a redbook standard CD or how to edit PQ info, then learn it (that is if you even need it for you purposes). The money you'll save from mastering yourself can be used to buy WaveLab which allows you to do just that (and is used for applications in the mixing stage as well).

Now if you're a musician who doesn't record music, doesn't know what a compressor does, and doesn't want to learn, then of course you let someone else do it for you. However, if you are an enthused tracker and mixer, I think learning to master is a logical next step. A lot of music I enjoy listening to was self-mastered by the artist (Dimitar's latest cd being an example).

 

[R-Stuur]

^^^ Amen to that. I dont see any harm in people trying themselves either.

This sort of seems like the last barricade from some of the industry people to keep the DIY people out. Sorry but some of the mixes on this forum are bloody amazing compared to the shit put out by some of the pro's.... why can't that apply to mastering either?

 

[seditz740novaprospect]

^^^ Amen to that. I dont see any harm in people trying themselves either.

This sort of seems like the last barricade from some of the industry people to keep the DIY people out. Sorry but some of the mixes on this forum are bloody amazing compared to the shit put out by some of the pro's.... why can't that apply to mastering either?

because mastering covers a lot more then just making it loud . Making the mix translate is the key to a good master ,the majority (say 95 percent) of people recording at home do not have the proper room treatment, or a perfectly flat monitoring system to create a good master ........ not saying it cannot be done, a good mix will translate on most systems without mastering....

 

[seditz740novaprospect]

I been recording my own music now for a while and i have a few songs that sound good just need a small polish. Anyone got any opinions?? I got waves diamond bundle there is just so much shit i dont know where to start
any comments? that would help Thaks

if you got your waves bundle like the majority of people that got them, i would watch what you say!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

if you payed for it, i apologize..... too many people recording at home with waves bundles worth way more than everything they have to record with ...

 

[mintcheerios]

The "most home artists don't have the proper equipment to master" argument doesn't fly since you can say the exact same thing to mixing and tracking. I don't have an 1176 analog compressor, but people think my mixes sound fine just using the $50 Stillwell Rocket Compressor (which owns). When it comes to mixing, we agree that if it sounds good, it is good. It seems to me when it comes to mastering, it can sound good and be accepted by the manufacturing plant, but if it wasn't mastered in a state-of-the-art acoustically treated space using the AVALON VT747SP Tube Compressor with monitors handcrafted by Ghandi, then you just messed up your mix.

I do recognize a good mastering job by a pro sounds awesome (listen to Bob Katz's work on Necrophagist - Epitaph), but I equally recognize a good mixing job by Colin Richardson.

 

[The Unavoidable]

I have noticed that, that there seem to be alot of "don't master yourself" kind of thing going on around here. Which is understandable, but how is anyone ever going to learn if they never try it?

 

[Keessi]

A decent compressor and EQ is meaningless if you don't have a decent room or monitoring chain. The whole setup is meaningless if you can't burn an error free redbook disc. Even that is meaningless if the manufacturing plant requires PQ info that you can't provide.

There is a lot more to mastering than making things sound "better." In my opinion that is the smallest part of the job.

About the PQ info... They are fucking USELESS and TOTALLY BULLSHIT nowadays. It had a function back in the day when radios played from CD's and not from the computer. When you rip a cd on to a computer, PQ info does not transfer. It's a relic.

I'm not only making this shit up either, Mika Jussila from Finnvox studios told me this when I was observing his mastering for a month or so... He actually called up the finnish recording assosiation(or something...) and asked what is the code for nowadays. They could not give him a decent answer...

Most of what the clients want at mastering is 50% making it sound better and 50% making LLLLLLOUUUD!!!! At least like 3 out of 4 of the clients(visiting Mika) we're always asking "Is it gonna be as loud as the new in flames(or insert the new 'loud' cd)?"

 

[ArtGarceau]

I have noticed that, that there seem to be alot of "don't master yourself" kind of thing going on around here. Which is understandable, but how is anyone ever going to learn if they never try it?

I'm definitely a supporter of people learning to master, but first you have to know what mastering is. A lot people think that mastering is just to make your mixes loud and sound good. That is a crock!

There are definitely some prerequisites when learning to pre-master. The first is a balanced room and second is a full range speaker setup. How can you possibly do any critical listening if your room or speakers don't reproduce sound accurately?

The "most home artists don't have the proper equipment to master" argument doesn't fly since you can say the exact same thing to mixing and tracking.

Yes and no. Lots of grammy winning albums have been mixed completely ITB , and lots of well recorded records have been done on less than stellar equipment.

The key to a good master is having an ME that has a critical ear. If your gear and room prohibit what is reproduced then you can't do your job.

 

[ArtGarceau]

About the PQ info... They are fucking USELESS and TOTALLY BULLSHIT nowadays. It had a function back in the day when radios played from CD's and not from the computer.

Most of what the clients want at mastering is 50% making it sound better and 50% making LLLLLLOUUUD!!!! At least like 3 out of 4 of the clients(visiting Mika) we're always asking "Is it gonna be as loud as the new in flames(or insert the new 'loud' cd)?"

-Tell the replication house that the PQ info is bullshit. Give Bob Katz a call and ask him his opinion. I don't think you understand what the PQ codes are judging by your response.

-If you need a mastering engineer to make your songs sound good then don't quit your day job. A better perceived sound is a positive side effect, but not the goal.

 

[Brett - K A L I S I A]

Should the fact that "Death Magnetic" has been kind of mastered before the real mastering engineer even touched anything be mentioned as to "be careful, if you don't know what you're doing you're doing more harm"?

 

[ArtGarceau]

About the PQ info... They are fucking USELESS and TOTALLY BULLSHIT nowadays. It had a function back in the day when radios played from CD's and not from the computer. When you rip a cd on to a computer, PQ info does not transfer. It's a relic.

I'm not only making this shit up either, Mika Jussila from Finnvox studios told me this when I was observing his mastering for a month or so... He actually called up the finnish recording assosiation(or something...) and asked what is the code for nowadays. They could not give him a decent answer...

PQ codes are used by the replication house to quality check their work, and it has nothing to do with what you are talking about. The PQ sheet is a list of the track lengths essentially (there is a little more to it than that and I can scan one and post if you'd like).

Are you talking about ISRC codes? Right now you are regurgitating misinformation in an attempt to challenge me. Why?

 

[mintcheerios]

I'm definitely a supporter of people learning to master, but first you have to know what mastering is. A lot people think that mastering is just to make your mixes loud and sound good. That is a crock!

There are definitely some prerequisites when learning to pre-master. The first is a balanced room and second is a full range speaker setup. How can you possibly do any critical listening if your room or speakers don't reproduce sound accurately?



Yes and no. Lots of grammy winning albums have been mixed completely ITB , and lots of well recorded records have been done on less than stellar equipment.

The key to a good master is having an ME that has a critical ear. If your gear and room prohibit what is reproduced then you can't do your job.

The key to a good mix also requires a critical ear and the equipment/room to properly monitor. It would be considered outrageous if you paid a pro mixer to mix your cd and he only had headphones to monitor, a bunch of free amp sims for guitars, and downpitched guitars to get bass. People might say that you wasted money or that you should have hired someone else. If someone attempted to mix this himself with the same equipment, he would be encouraged to try it or possibly be considered crafty and resourceful.

Now if we change the subject to mastering, a few things differ. If you paid someone to master your mixes and he only had headphones, a copy of Wavelab with free plugins on a 3 year old PC, it would also be considered outrageous. This is the same, but here is where it gets different. If someone says he's going to attempt this at home with only that stuff, suddenly they're at risk of messing up their own mix. Suddenly they don't have the proper equipment or the know-how to do it themselves. Suddenly it is justifiable to spend over $500 to have a pro do it when you so ardently saved money in the mixing stage scrounging for free drum samples and plugins on internet forums.

The truth is that a decent self-mastering job can be done at home in the same way a decent mix can be done at home. You won't sound like Bob Katz, but I don't think anyone ever stopped mixing at home because they didn't hope sound like Jerry Finn. I think an encouraging attitude towards self-mastering is more needed than a facility with top equipment.

Also, Izotope Ozone 4 is slated for January 2009.