mastering moron

ok, i'm moving along recording and getting close to having a completed product - i'm liking my mixes and know that i will be tweaking them. once i'm finished mixing and am happy with what i've got - i should have them mastered...right? ok, i'm a bit lost when it comes to this, 1) i can't afford to send it off for mastering 2) what does mastering do exactly?

my understanding is , the levels are brought up as high as possible without overs and some eq is added to the whole product where needed (?) to add some sparkle or whatnot

example: i have a few songs now - that to me (keyword: me) sound great - the levels are nice without many overs, i know i could run back through and apply a little bit of compression to take those out, but they are so few that i think it would not help, but hurt the whole feel of the project (song)

i guess i'm having a hard time visualizing (metaphorically speaking) what a mastered song would sound like - can anyone point me to an example of a mastered song versus the un-mastered version of the same song? or splain to me what the process does exactly?

this may be better suited for the techniques forum - but i've read those posts and still am a bit in the fog.

thanks

Mastering is the same type of thing as mixing, its a dedicated process that is determined mainly by the time and effort you are willing to invest (and money, to be honest. Although you can pull it off without spending a lot, it just needs a better ear). It can be as simple as putting a tad of compression on, or as complex as 10-band para EQ, multiband compression, stereo imaging, limiting, etc... I'd recommend checking out Izotope's mastering guide. It's meant for Ozone, but it applies to any mastering. I don't know the link right off hand, but you can find it by digging around izotope.com or doing a search on this forum for "ozone mastering guide" as its been referenced here several times. Hope this helps.

Joe