Loudness before or after?

It depends a little, if I have to do everything myself my process blends together a bit more and I may be pushing to loudness in the mix a bit more before final mastering. If I have to deliver a mix to be mastered externally it's a good idea to leave what may seem a generous amount of headroom (peaks on mastering bus averaging maybe between -10 and -4dB, definitely no higher peaks). When working in 24 bit there is plenty of audio resolution to boost things later during mastering.

I bounce the mix to a track with no processors in the master bus to create a pre-master. It has full dynamics and typically peaks at around -3 dB. This is what I master, or if I want another set of ears, send to my partner-in-crime mastering engineer Steve Turnidge. Any volume maximization gets applied to the pre-master. 

After

bitflipper
There are good reasons why seasoned mixers tell you that loudness starts with the mix, and that it shouldn't be left entirely to the master bus limiter. A limiter raises everything while squashing peaks, and while that does raise the average RMS by reducing dynamic range, loudness perception is more complicated than that.
 
A good mix with judicious track compression should sound loud even before the master limiter has been engaged. All you have to do is make sure to leave enough headroom (at least 6dB) to allow the limiter to do its thing.

 
It's very revealing to use a maximizer-type plug-in with the option to balance the compressed and uncompressed sounds in terms of perceived level. The subjective difference is usually less than you might expect.
 

bobernaut
Hey guys thanks for the great advice and really quick too! I thank you all. I think I have a question for chuckebaby or maybe you other guys as well.
 
I guess this will seem to be a foolish question, as in, I should already know this, but I am afraid I do not. When I create the buses and send to them, do I then send these bus outputs to the master bus, so that all buses go to the one master? Or, do I leave all my buses alone (drums, bass, etc) and export them along with the master bus when I am preparing to go to master? I have not been sending all the other buses to the master bus because it seems much louder and I don't like giving up the volume but maybe I pick this back up when mastering? I don't know but I want to know so that I can do this right.
 
By the way, thanks so much chucke for all that great info, man. I knew, more or less, about the levels and stuff but you really cleared it up nicely for me. Besides, I have heard your tunes and its wonderful stuff that you are sharing with me (and others) how exactly you accomplish this. I hope you respond to this question because I know you are a busy dude. Also, Sandexpander and Anderton too! I welcome any other help on this if someone else reads this.
 
Dang! You guys have a boatload of posts! No wonder you are so smart!
 
 Many thanks,
 
bob

All your Instrument buses will be routed to your Main Master bus.
This is of course subject, as everyone chooses a different way but I think the majority of users here will agree with me. Send your Buses to the Master Bus and keep that MB clean.
 
Mixing and Mastering is such a craft, there are so many good books and good videos out there but in my opinion: One learns to perfect the craft by trial and error. Making a lot of mistakes is where I learned the bulk of my most important lessons.
 
I will however give up my Grandmothers Secret recipe . (actually its one I've created by trial error) Works well with Rock music, Some Pop and even Metal.
 
- When you begin the Mastering stages use this as a reference:
 
1- Start by opening a new blank project
2- Drag/drop your finished mix on to the audio track
3- Insert your mastering plug ins / mastering chain in to the "Tracks" FX bin.
4- Drop your analyzing, metering plug ins in the master bus.
5- Listen and make adjustments.
6- Export
 
Create a mastering chain using your own plug ins. The order of which you use these plug ins is also very important.
For Example:
 
My Mastering Chain consists of:
 
1- Linear EQ to drop off/filter APPROX 30HZ and under.
2- CA-2A for Analog coloring= a 1 to 1.5 db push / very subtle.
3- The SSL Bus compressor.
4- The L3.
5- Followed by the L2.
6- Some more light Analog coloring.
7-The Secret sauce.

McMoore11
If I'm sending to a mastering engineer I will give him a stereo track that peaks at -6db.  This retains the automated dynamics and gives the mastering guy enough headroom to do his thing.

 
Please convince anyone else who sends anything to mastering engineers to follow your example.
 

Not to start this whole discussion again, but a steep low roll-off is better done with a regular (a.k.a. minimal phase) EQ than a linear EQ.

Anderton
 
 
Please convince anyone else who sends anything to mastering engineers to follow your example.
 

Thanks Craig.  In this instance I concur.  
In other examples it would be wise to have bail money squirreled away.

For me its probably 75% in the mix.  The master only adds a little bit of volume.  The master stage for me mostly provides "glue" and "pop", assuming I did the mix.
 
During the mixing stage, I buss things a lot, with small stages of compression at each stop in the chain(sounds much  more natural than trying to do all the compression in one single stop).
 
 Like lets talk about drums for example, just to make sense of it.  I will gate each close mic and sometimes even the snare if there isnt much going on with the snare.  I will then do a bit of EQ and then light compression on each individual drum track.  Compression settings are typically as follows.  Slow attack around 30ms to keep the transients, and a moderate to slow release just depending on how it sounds(maybe 60ms or so), and I only want to see about 3db worth of compression(and I compress at a ratio of usually 2:1 but as much as 4:1).  If I REALLY need some thump or crack from the drums...  I might even apply a limiter to individual tracks as I see fit.  
 
 I'll then bus all the drums to a master drum bus using the output on each track.  That whole buss is compressed the exact same way I explained above with slowish attacks, modest release, modest ratio, and only about 3db total compression.  I'm keeping a lot of transients, but bringing out a little more fullness yet.  And again, it sounds better than compressing all at once to 6DB on the bus....vs 3db on each track and then 3 db on the buss..
 
I'll also send each individual drum(using track sends) to another "buss" just to parallel compress the whole kit together with slightly more extreme compression(I tend to send hotter levels of the close mics and lesser levels of the overheads so the cymbals dont get to splooshy).  Here I do real fast attacks and releases, often with at least 6:1 ratio and a much higher ratio is not out of the question.  Im usually looking for more like 10-12 DB of compression out of this bus.  This really brings the roundness out of the drums. It doesnt sound good on its own but sounds nice blended in. 
 
Then I will output that parallel compressed bus to the master drum buss and blend it in to taste.
 
I often approach every group of instruments like this, and by the time the mix is complete.... its darn near as loud as the master will be.
 
FYI Im usually working on harder rock to metal type stuff. It might not be the best approach if you are doing some softer styles where you need/want a lot of dynamics(I tend to fake dynamics with tons of volume and panning automation).
 
One last note.  Most of what Im talking about here is perceived loudness.  It DOES NOT need to smash the meter on the master bus lol.  You can be a few DB away from unity on the meter and the track is still going to have a ton of loudness before a master is performed.
 
 

Sorry Sander, It is nothing personal.
 
Im just trying to help this guy out and I feel like you want to start another debate over a topic that we previous beat to death in another thread.
 
Im going to be totally honest here. I watched that 19 minute video and was waiting for any kind of suggestion, any kind of clue, any kind of sign where the guy would say.. "For mastering you should use min phase EQ".
 
Nothing !  I heard nothing of that nature.
 
Im sure your a good guy and have a lot to offer but there's too much drama here man .
Im sure you don't care but Im Blocking you. good luck in the future.
 
 
 
 
 

Chuck, it's not the mastering, it's the low cuts, as I've said every single time I'm mentioning this. The video even starts with an explanation of that. But I'll drop it too. I'm not going to change your process, nor do I want to, if you're happy with it. Block away. At least I've offered some alternative info for the OP.

By the way I'd recommend that video to anyone, it's a great explanation of the (less expected) side effects of EQing.

Hi again!
 
As far as panning and tracking goes...  here is how I'm doing it right now.  Sort of pseudo quad tracking for the heavy stuff.
 
I run the guitar to a direct box and split it.  One line goes to an amp, which is mic'd, and the other is line in and I record just a clean sound.  I can then either re-amp that clean sound(which I do sometimes but rarely), or use a guitar amp simp (something like TH3 which comes with platinum and maybe other versions too but Im not sure...but this is normally the method I take).
 
So in one take I end up with 2 tracks.  I pop on that amp sim and dial up a sound complementary to the mic'd sound, and I pan BOTH tracks from that take the same way.  Lets say left.
 
Then I do another take, again recording the mic'd signal and the line signal and adding a virtual amp, and pan BOTH of those from that take right.
 
In reality its just a double take, but I get 4 tracks out of the deal(even though I have 4 tracks it doesnt truly sound like quad tracking).  I can use that amp sim track to add some flavor down the road by pinging through different amp models and seeing what really mixes well with the mic'd sound
 
I like this method better than actually truly quad tracking most of the time(I say most of the time because sometimes I do like quad.  Just depends on what Im after).  Something about actual quad tracking the same riff seems to take away focus even with a great, tight player.  When that focus and tightness seems to start going away.... I find myself trying to dial in more kick drum, adding too much 3k to the guitars, and trying to bring more top end out of the bass guitar in order to get that tightness and focus back.  And I'm not ashamed to admit I sometimes overdo it and have to go back and pull some of those 'corrections' back and just deal with the fact that it wont be as tight as Id like If I am to leave all 4 guitar tracks in there.  This doesnt necessarily apply if we are talking about a rhythm with a complementary lead part thats playing in octaves or harmonies or something like that.  At that point I could go either way(either have rhythm in one ear and the complementary lead in the other..  or just double track both and pan both left and right, ending up with 4 real tracks)
 
Just a quick tip.  If you do quad track..., and especially if you are quad tracking the same riff,  use less gain/distortion than you think you need.  If the amount of gain sounds 'just right' jamming solo...  once stacked 4 times it actually to my ears tends to sound like it puts a blanket over the guitars and contributes to the lack of focus.  Dialing a little light makes it end up just right once you stack it multiple times.
 
About panning, ... for the longest time Id pan 75% left and right and call it good.  Or in the case of quad tracks...  Id have two tracks with a bassier sound that Id pan 70& left and right, and 2 tracks with more sizzle that Id pan 80% left and right.  Real similar to what you are doing now, but just a little further with the pans.  I rarely go 100% on anything.  I try to make 90% my upper limit.  To my ears...once things hit 100% and have no presence at all in the other speaker it seems like it takes some energy out of the track.  Maybe its just mental and Im afraid of seeing the knob twisted so far but I swear I hear something that I dont like too lol
 
I've recently started to experiment with automating panning more.  Like, I will use my double track method with the direct box that nets me 4 tracks, and using envelopes, I will set the envelope up so that one pairing of guitars are both 70% left, with the other pair being 70% right during the verse.  When the pre chorus picks up I will have the envelope expand the panning on both channels to 80%, and then when the full chorus kicks in, I will set the envelope to grow it further to 90%.  Sort of making the stereo image grow or shrink during bigger and smaller parts of the song.  I often do the same with the drum overheads too and have them move in an out just a little from one part to the next.
 
I do a lot of hard rock and metal stuff too, which is not very dynamic music, and is usually pretty squashed when its all said and done.  So Im using things like that to try to "create" some dynamics, in a space where there arent many, if you will.
 
I wont swear by that technique just yet though.  Its really subtle and I think I'd need to duplicate a mix, but not automate the panning just to hear a before and after in order to say if its really 'worth it' if you know what I mean. 
 
 

Hi Greg, and thanks for more info, I do appreciate it! That method you spoke of is not something that I would likely do because I am trying to everything right out of the box, because I am fairly convinced that it can be done and that this "box" way is the future. Yes, I know, it breaks the heart (mine too), but I don't think that things will reverse as far as this goes. This is no statement pertaining to you and your advice, though, just a boring generalized statement which can very easily be over-looked. There have been so many times that I thought about just going through the mic and amp because I didn't really love the tones that I was getting and having to accept but I discovered that eventually, one can find the right tone if they play around enough with all the settings and plugs. I think what you are doing is pretty smart though and I will put it (your way) in my memory banks!
 
Its funny that you mention, essentially, distortion, drive etc., because I forgot to ask you what settings you use to record with. It seems an easy answer but, as you know, it really is not. I have found that the amount of drive that sounds good actually can't be used or anywhere near it. I use around 40% drive and sometimes less. This on the more "heavy" amp sims. I appreciate your wisdom about stacking and can say that I am past that one, but thanks anyway. It may help someone else!
 
I completely agree with you on the panning. Way left/right seems to create an undesirable hole in the middle (to me, anyway). Interesting what you said about trying to make up for it with the EQ. I am currently striving to find that ideal "metal" sound without going to synthetic, because I really can't stand that particular sound-very phoney-metalish.
 
For me, as soon as I go much past 50-60% left/right, I start to feel as though I am losing my base. I used to do the far right, far left thing too.
 
That's really interesting about you automating the panning, it makes good sense but I am not sure if I want to go down that road yet. I will certainly think about it though and may well end up messing with it, so thanks for including that concept because I really had not considered it other than the lead (sometimes).
 
I appreciate your input on stereo imaging as well. I feel about the same as you on this. Do you suppose that it is merely a matter of taste? Maybe this is why they say not to mix and master your own stuff-too many variables for the artist but no problem for an outside mixer. Maybe we are too close to "our baby" for our own good? Nah! We will keep going, won't we? I have been experimenting with using an imager on the master as well. I don't know how else to make the mix seem to be everywhere like I hear on some famous pro records. Maybe its just a matter of a pro's experience and success?
 
 
Well, like I said, Greg, thanks so much for all your input. I have that to bounce up against when I am trying to make my decisions. Same for all you other guys too, thanks!
 
Hey, Sanderx, thanks for the link. I watched it but this may be too much for me to take in one pass. I see your point, but it doesn't seem simple to me-not on one pass, anyway. I think I am more of a Pensado-type of guy maybe-not saying he isn't sharp, because he is. Thanks for your help.
 
 
Thanks everyone, I am sitting much more stable now thanks to all your input. Massive thanks!
 
bob

Bob,
If you want post a mix (or master if you prefer) and we can have a listen.
I do this often with other producers in my circle. We bounce ideas of each other all the time.
Sometimes its that one thing you don't hear in a mix that is a bit too up front.
 
The most important things I have learned over the years (as far as recording, mixing and mastering my own material). Is the bias we have when it comes Mixdown time.
We hear that solo part because we recorded it our self, so sometimes it isn't loud enough in the mix because we know its there. Sometimes even the untrained ear is good to hear their suggestions.
I have also found the more people to critique your mixes the better. some times we hear a repeating phrase from individuals like "the vocals are too loud" or "I don't hear the drums enough". this helps us put together the pieces.