Is X1 good enough for professional Mastering?

How good are the Mastering features in X1 for a final master?  I am deliberating either using the tools that come with X1 or getting a 3rd party Mastering program such as Ozone or T-Racks but if X1 has all the tool sets and similar features in those programs, it might suffice.  But I don't know because I don't have X1 yet.

The Prochannel thing, is that for Mastering??

Do some of you also use one Mastering program solely or do you switch between Sonar and a 3rd party program?

+1 for Ozone.

Sonar X1 is fantastic for mastering! I would suggest getting a better Spectrum Analyser than what's available natively, but between the LinEQ, Tube Sat, Sonitus, Prochannel etc you have plenty of sound sculpting tools. If you can master with that, you can't master.

If you want to add one more thing, it would have to be a nice Tape Saturation plug....

R

Just for curiosity, Rico and Lance, what do you recommend as a good spectrum analyzer?  Is Adobe Audition sufficient, or do you recommend a stand-alone program or VST?

You can master with virtually any audio application.
Bench marking to pre-existing audio sources is great, if you want to try and sound like it.
There's too much unexplored territory in basic 2.1 left to discover, so why repeat?

X1 is excellent for mastering. I went back to 8.5, but I can't wait for the X1C patch to come out so I can give X1 another try.

Ozone is great, but it's almost geared toward fixing bad mixes. There's almost too much there to get you in trouble and it's very tempting to try and use everything in it. Ozone is great, don't get me wrong, but it can be over used.

The #1 thing that improved my mixing and mastering was to use subtractive EQing. IOW ... no gain ever on any band. If you want a high end boost, decrease the low end using a shelf.

The DAW is a trivial and irrelevant element compared to the room, the monitors, the converters, etc.

I just thought this was worth repeating.

To quote Bob Ludwig: "The vast majority of EQ that we do in mastering is to compensate for the errors in the mix engineer's playback system."

Therein lies the catch-22. It's hard to make meaningful decisions about what to correct if you're mastering in the same room on the same speakers you mixed with.

But yeh, X1 - or SONAR 6 for that matter - is up to the task.

syntheticpop


How good are the Mastering features in X1 for a final master?  I am deliberating either using the tools that come with X1 or getting a 3rd party Mastering program such as Ozone or T-Racks but if X1 has all the tool sets and similar features in those programs, it might suffice.  But I don't know because I don't have X1 yet.

The Prochannel thing, is that for Mastering??

Do some of you also use one Mastering program solely or do you switch between Sonar and a 3rd party program?

I personally don't like the mastering features in Sonar at all. The DAW itself is great, but the tools offered in my opinion, are not tools I've had success with but they CAN be used. I use a few different programs for mastering because none of them give me all the tools I need in one place. I use 2 different programs for editing, Sonar for processing and another for the entire album suite. X1 will work, but I prefer to work in 8.5 for right now and I do just about all my processing in 8.5. If you're still using 8.5, it's perfect for mastering but I would suggest some better plugins more geared for the mastering process.
 
I have a huge article I've written on my forum called "Mastering Myths and some Cold Hard Facts" that I'll share a small section of with you about Ozone etc. This is just my opinion so do what you feel is best.
 
Can I use Ozone or T-Raxx?
 
Yeah you can and they do a decent job, but if you cannot achieve what I have mentioned above properly, (referring to stuff I talked about before this little piece which I didn't think you would be interested in because it's a bit long lol) you need to get the right software and tools to get the job done. Keep in mind, though Ozone and T-Raxx are good products that can help you achieve good results, they are consumer products that were not made to handle what you could be capable of doing in a real mastering environment with the right stuff. The great mastering guys we all know and love are not using programs like that because they are very limited. Waves plugs and the equivalent as well as a mastering program made for mastering is essential due to having graphs, numbers and other tools to assist you in making the right calls. No one needs to rely on a graph or a group of numbers when mastering.
 
Personally, if I was creating CD's for my head or sharing tunes with my friends, I'd use Ozone or something similar. For anything I would sell at gigs or if I release a worldwide CD, I'm going to use the right tools for it or hire someone. You sometimes don't get a second chance at a good first impression. When people pay money to buy your music, you owe them the best possible product you can deliver. Yeah I've heard some great results out of Ozone and the others, but nothing compared to running your own great quality plugs that are geared more for professional sound over consumer short cuts. You get presets with Ozone and just about every plug on the market. 95% of these presets will not work for your project because they weren't created using your music, your sounds or your gear.
 
I use anywhere from 9 to 15 professional plugs when I master. Sometimes my "go to" rack will not do the job and I will have to use other things to get what I'm looking for. So even the professional stuff needs to be altered or changed from time to time. Can you use Pro Channel? Most certainly, but I would suggest the 4k comp and I wouldn't use the PC EQ because in mastering, you need to be specific with your frequency selection and that EQ just isn't going to allow you to hone in on specific frewquencies or give you the options to work with assorted frequencies. You need more than 4 bands of eq. I use 3 parametrics and a graphic most times. Why you may ask? Because I like a full spectrum of choices with each eq and I always know what I'm looking at because each of those eq's will only be showing the frequencies they are supposed to be showing instead of having one that just gives you 10 shots at all the frequencies.
 
I selected each piece that I use due to how it affects the audio in a mastering situation. For example, some people will argue that you can use any eq when you master. Though I would somewhat agree with this, you'll find out in time once you get a few pro plugs that this is not the case. A pro eq will work a bit differently. For example, as much as I love the Sonitus eq, you have to really jump on it with a small Q to hear a difference. You won't have this issue with UAD, Waves or a Roger Nichols EQ. The same with compressors. You need a soft compressor that doesn't give you artifacts. Something that compresses and levels out the little peaks and valleys you created in your master. You wouldn't want to use an 1176 here (in my opinion) or a DBX compressor. You want to go with something like an API 2500 or a 4k compressor. Something that gives you more control and is a bit more transparent and less harsh. The same with limiters. Try boost 11 and then run the PSP Xenon or a Waves L-2. Major difference for the better in my opinion.
 
I can go on and on with this stuff, but I don't want to bore you with details when you just asked a few questions. LOL! I've already typed you a book...sorry about that. Best of luck in your endeavors. :)