Your Mastering Level ?

When mastering I typically allow no more than 0.3 db Peak.
Can some of you fellow Mastering men tell me your master bus levels ?
 
I know all about Mixdown levels, I typically leave that -4-7 db, leaving headroom for mastering.
but im talking Mastering itself. is you limiter set for 0-5 ? 0.2 ?
 
Thanks my good fellows.
 

-0.3 here, but I rarely, if ever, bother with MP3. Most of my masters are burnt to CD

I'm still learning, so I'd have to say 'novice'.

great answers gents. I thank you all kindly.
Trying to trace down a distortion issue in one of my Mastering sessions and im looking from all angles.
Mix is fine (db wise) everything else looks great but im willing to bet the client pushed a compressor too hard because I can hear it in the Mixdown,  Then, when you start to master...you know what that's like, a little pimple turns in to a huge wart = Amplified by X10.
Thought I would seek answers on Mastering levels from my good friends here. even though I know that's not the issue, but thinking maybe ive been pushing it too hard all these years. I guess im in the same ballpark as my mates.
 
Craig, the inter-sample distortion is something I have really never paid too much attention to though being intrigued by you bringing it up in your post, I decided to revisit the subject. It's a good read.
Im very glad you mentioned this as its something I never factor but something I will now be more conscious of.  

bapu

Bristol_Jonesey
-0.3 here, but I rarely, if ever, bother with MP3. Most of my masters are burnt to CD

rodreb
Typically -0.3 here, too.

tenfoot
I too am in the -0.3 camp for the most part.

Mark me down for -0.3 too.

Ed the one thing I've been impressed about your Mixes / Masters is the clarity.
you seem to be able to push it hard, yet keep a good dynamic balance. I admire that.

bitflipper: How does one go about finding out if their chosen limiter is capable or not?
I'd also be curious to know what final, brick wall limiters folks are using these days.
I used Waves L2 for a long time then switched to the Sonnox for an even longer time. Then I tried Cakewalk's Concrete Limiter and that's all I use now on everything. It just has a certain sound and density that I like.

I'd recommend putting the Linear EQ first.

Great logic, Chuck! I agree, wholeheartedly on the conventional overuse of HP/LP (especially HP). It seems to kill too much phat for my taste. I was drawn into that HP filter everything mentality for a short while but, then every mix sounded too anemic to me.
See, Chuck, maybe this is the underlying reason why you and I have a mutual admiration of each other's work! Ha ha!

I dig these discussions between you experts.  They are educational.
 
I have three CD's from a friend.  They all sound good to my ears.  Bluegrass/Folk/Americana type music with dynamics.
 
The first was recorded/mixed/mastered in Nashville (as far as I know).  I imported two wave files from that CD.  On the T-RackS Meter one peaks at 0.1 dBFS, RMS peaks at about -12.  The other file hits 0.0 dBFS and appears to clip slightly, averages around -13 RMS.
 
The next CD was done locally, mixed and mastered by pros.  One song from it peaks at 0.1 dBFS with RMS at around -9.0 dBFS.
 
The third CD was also done here and the song I imported peaks at about -3.0 dBFS with -19.0 RMS.
 
Based on my limited experience mastering my own stuff and uploading to Soundcloud, Reverbnation, and CD Baby, whether a Wave or MP3 file, a peak of -1.5 dBFS seems to survive the conversion/upload process.  If I'm burning my own mastered waves to a CD I aim for -0.3 dBFS - just in case.

chuckebaby

Anderton
I'd recommend putting the Linear EQ first.

In theory this sounds very practical and a "given" if you will.
But I have found by putting the Linear EQ after the SSL and CA-2A it just sounds better.
Sometimes you have to trust your ears more than logic. I know that sound strange but its true.

 
The reason for putting a steep HP first isn't to filter out what you can hear (and I go lower than 30 Hz, because if the cutoff is at 30, it's almost certainly affecting higher frequencies), but to filter out what you can't hear - specifically DC and LF offsets. Now, that doesn't mean those offsets can't provide a sort of "bias" to the compression process that you find pleasing, and if it sounds good...do it! But by making the HP filter the first part of the mastering chain, you're removing any chance of DC offset gumming up the works.
 
Furthermore, I use a lot of electronically generated sounds that are often transposed over a wide range, so they can generate subsonics which also screw up compressors and limiters. Again, the HP filter takes care of those. If you ever are in a situation where a cut cannot go up to the same level as other cuts but you've maxed out the headroom and have a high average level, look below 10 Hz to see if anything is there.
 
I wrote an article that talks about DC offset in both the analog and digital domains, I think you would find it interesting. Remember...your 30 Hz filter is still in the audible range and pre-conditioning the signal for the Multimaximizer, I'm talking much lower than that. What might be optimum for you is to leave your HP filter where it is, but add another HP filter at the very beginning that's tuned below the audible range.

bitflipper
3. Peak limiting is only indirectly related to perceived volume. It's entirely possible to achieve competitive loudness without exceeding a -1.0 dB maximum peak, or even less. Perceived loudness is all about average RMS, and when you lower your brickwall limit you raise RMS, so sometimes setting a lower limit will actually make your mix sound louder.

 
Good advice.  
 
I roughly adjust levels by eye using K-14 levels in Ozone 7. I'm not really interested in hitting that last 1 db. When compiling for a CD, I also check Ozone 7's 'integrated' meter setting to make sure the perceived loudness of all the tracks are compatible. For me this has been working out at about and average of -16LUFS.
 

This is a great read.

Thank you all for this thread. I learned a lot from it!

This is all good information. I am in the -0.3 camp, which is what has been recommended most in stuff I have read. I only do wavs, no mp3s. FWIW I use the Waves L1. 

rodreb
Great logic, Chuck! I agree, wholeheartedly on the conventional overuse of HP/LP (especially HP). It seems to kill too much phat for my taste. I was drawn into that HP filter everything mentality for a short while but, then every mix sounded too anemic to me.
See, Chuck, maybe this is the underlying reason why you and I have a mutual admiration of each other's work! Ha ha!

Absolutely Rod. No doubt you and I work along the same lines. Right down to the styles of music.
And plug ins :-) I too love that Concrete limiter. Very transparent, a lot of gain boost with little distortion/artifacts.
 

Anderton
The reason for putting a steep HP first isn't to filter out what you can hear (and I go lower than 30 Hz, because if the cutoff is at 30, it's almost certainly affecting higher frequencies), but to filter out what you can't hear - specifically DC and LF offsets. Now, that doesn't mean those offsets can't provide a sort of "bias" to the compression process that you find pleasing, and if it sounds good...do it! But by making the HP filter the first part of the mastering chain, you're removing any chance of DC offset gumming up the works.
 
Furthermore, I use a lot of electronically generated sounds that are often transposed over a wide range, so they can generate subsonics which also screw up compressors and limiters. Again, the HP filter takes care of those. If you ever are in a situation where a cut cannot go up to the same level as other cuts but you've maxed out the headroom and have a high average level, look below 10 Hz to see if anything is there.
 
I wrote an article that talks about DC offset in both the analog and digital domains, I think you would find it interesting. Remember...your 30 Hz filter is still in the audible range and pre-conditioning the signal for the Multimaximizer, I'm talking much lower than that. What might be optimum for you is to leave your HP filter where it is, but add another HP filter at the very beginning that's tuned below the audible range.

 
Good reads Mr. Anderton.
I feel very grateful to have you here on this forum. Your experience, wisdom and advise here is appreciated.
I tried switching this up with the EQ first, It is pretty much un noticeable. but given the DC offset usually isn't something that stands out in the mix :-) I kind of expected that. So im taking your advise and going to try this for a bit. If my Masters suck im blaming you. (need someone to blame )
Thanks again Craig.