I'm having a hard enough time mixing, let alone mastering. I use Sonar Platinum, Waves Gold, Waves CLA plugins, and Izotope 5. Best of luck to you,

HELLYA, you can't go wrong with Ozone. Whether you end up getting it or not, grab the iZotope mastering guide, which is a free download and 90% of the information is relevant even if you don't have Ozone.

I've been through the free guide a couple of times, it's definitely worth your time, especially if you're just getting started.

Just to revisit this...
 
Critical listening skills are what is really needed (what some call developing 'Golden ears' - hate that term, it's totally meaningless). CLS require patience, guidance, self-reflection and a properly setup listening environment with calibrated speakers. I would say, 'learn to mix well before attempting mastering' but getting into mastering taught me a tremendous amount about mixing and recording that I thought I know but didn't.
 
All audio work is, in the end, psychoacoustics which means the buck stops with the person. Developing CLS will pay more return on investment than anything...
 
Gary  

Wise words, Gary. If you're unhappy with your mastering (or mixing) results, lack of fancy software is probably not the problem.

I'm probably the last guy in the world who needs to weigh in on mastering (but why let that stop me).  I think mastering began back in the days of vinyl records to control sonics and stop the needle from jumping off the record, as well as keeping all the tracks at the same volume, so there might have been a reduction in bass or maybe a slight HF boost, but I don't think mastering was done to make major sonic changes in the recording.  Today (I think) mastering is used to prepare a recording for different play-back systems, i.e there may be a radio master, a CD master, an itunes master, a youtube master etc.  So, all that goes to say mastering isn't meant to "fix" a mix or be a magic bullet to make a bad mix "better".  If you find you need to fix a song, don't expect that to happen in mastering, instead go back and remix it.  Think about mastering as making your music ready to distribute and what smaller touches it needs to do that.  Just my thoughts.  Others may disagree and YMMV.
 
best of luck with your music!

I do wonder what happened to Danny D. since this thread? 
 
The original poster used X3. We are light years ahead of that now in terms of mastering potential. No mention was made of the material being mastered either. This would figure into some of the techniques/plugins used. 
 
 
 

Starise
I do wonder what happened to Danny D. since this thread? 
 
The original poster used X3. We are light years ahead of that now in terms of mastering potential. No mention was made of the material being mastered either. This would figure into some of the techniques/plugins used. 
 

 
I'm still here Tim...I just read these days as my opinion is a little too strong for people to handle...thus getting me into trouble and wanting to choke them out. ;)
 
I will say this real quick....I have to disagree with the golden ears thing, Gary mentioned. There are super obvious things that many people just don't understand until you DO have the right ME in your corner.
 
Golden ears means "save my ass because I'm too close to my material." If I had a nickel for every client I saved due to them not noticing something that was extremely crucial, I'd have enough to share with you guys and we'd all be rich.
 
Golden ears means you are attentive, you hear everything, you can separate music from the non-music. You can judge what calls to make for the better of the project instead of putting your own personal stamp on something. You can remain biased yet informative and as close to the music as the creator. You have a knack for album creation that goes beyond just eq-ing, compression and fixing noises and oscillations etc. You are a musician that is into several styles of music so you know how to handle the different genre's and client needs. That's the guy I want as my ME.
 
Jude77: For the record, you're correct. Too many try to recreate their mix within the mastering stage and ruin it. However, sometimes we need polish, other times you work it harder. Some clients have the master mix but may not have the work files to remix. So, unfortunately, we have to master and sort of recreate for the better of the material, which will sound drastically different from the mix export. But in the real world, it normally doesn't happen that way.
 
For example, I won't do a master for someone unless the mix is right. If I hear errors that I think they can fix, I tell them what they are and how to fix them. This way, when we master, this baby is ready to go. Not many want to go through that trouble. But alas, there is one left that lives for honesty and the quality of audio. If I can't make a project better, I won't take on the job.
 
There should never be loads of mastering to where a project no longer sounds like what was exported out as the mix unless the client asks for that or like I said before, there are no mix files to remix. Mastering is not a dark art. It is, however, a gift when you have the right person. I can hear two gnats getting it on in another room if it's been printed in a song.....we need to be critical as we are the last people to touch the material before it goes to pressing.
 
You want someone that goes through everything with a fine toothed comb that thinks more about your happiness and the fidelity of your audio over a quickie master and a paycheck. That's the guy you want in your corner...and you only need him if you are selling something to the public. All other projects for your head etc....can be done on your own. :)
-Danny

Danny Danzi

Starise
I do wonder what happened to Danny D. since this thread? 
 
The original poster used X3. We are light years ahead of that now in terms of mastering potential. No mention was made of the material being mastered either. This would figure into some of the techniques/plugins used. 
 

For example, I won't do a master for someone unless the mix is right. If I hear errors that I think they can fix, I tell them what they are and how to fix them. This way, when we master, this baby is ready to go. Not many want to go through that trouble. But alas, there is one left that lives for honesty and the quality of audio. If I can't make a project better, I won't take on the job.
 
There should never be loads of mastering to where a project no longer sounds like what was exported out as the mix unless the client asks for that or like I said before, there are no mix files to remix. Mastering is not a dark art. It is, however, a gift when you have the right person. I can hear two gnats getting it on in another room if it's been printed in a song.....we need to be critical as we are the last people to touch the material before it goes to pressing.

That, to me, is what mastering is all about and what I was trying to say.  Very well pull.