• SONAR
  • SONAR for Mastering - the Future? (p.9)
2015/04/26 09:37:09
Sir Les
If the trend to internet everything continues...why master?...mp3s?....at what cost?...seems redundant now to my mind..in ethics....fun none the less, to try to master that conceptual ideal....but is it necessary if mp3s are the new raven rave?...
2015/04/26 10:05:42
DonM
Sir Les
If the trend to internet everything continues...why master?...mp3s?....at what cost?...seems redundant now to my mind..in ethics....fun none the less, to try to master that conceptual ideal....but is it necessary if mp3s are the new raven rave?...

Read Bob Katz's book on Mastering for iTunes and you'll know why we 'still' master.
 
-D
2015/04/26 10:34:06
interpolated
I always found iTunes files to be a bit 'exaggerated' and equalised towards Apple-centric hardware. 
2015/04/26 10:50:27
ltb
interpolated
I always found iTunes files to be a bit 'exaggerated' and equalised towards Apple-centric hardware. 


iTunes files are normalized to -16LUFS internet/mobile standard.
Another reason why Sonar should already have this type of metering included as other daws do.
2015/04/26 11:19:32
interpolated
Maybe...
 
 
2015/04/26 11:26:59
Anderton
Wow, this thread is turning into a gold mine of ideas and techniques. I've written a few articles on mastering in DAWs, now I need to go back and edit them 
 
Also in a truly odd coincidence, Friday Sweetwater asked if I could do a second seminar for GearFest - on mastering in your DAW. I guess there's a lot of that going around...
 
tlawhon - I do something very similar in SONAR, except I put each clip in its own track so I can put effects in the track's FX bin instead of doing clip FX.
2015/04/26 12:37:31
brconflict
And let's get nobody here wrong. Sonar CAN and has been used for (m)astering (Thanks Craig, that's a great way of depicting the difference by the capitalization ~ Although I prefer the capitalization as the process or title, while the product is lower-case; it's just a matter of taste for me, nothing subversive). There is no reason it can't provide what most people need to get music out there in any format. For me, it's easier to produce the final master in Wavelab, since the workflow is conducive to final editing and building the master as you'd want in the final product. It mainly gets all of the other "mixing" functions out of the way. Conversely, I've mixed entire sessions in Wavelab, and it's NOT a good tool for that. Sonar is the current choice for me. 

In answer to the proper metering, metering is getting better and better all the time. If it were just a bit easier to accomplish, I'd have two or three monitors dedicated strictly to meters, and Wavelab remembers that. Your ears can tell you what meters can't, but meters will reveal things your ears can't, such as super low-end rumbling. If you do this professionally, metering is paramount. The more accurate your masters are, the better they will translate to other formats, such as radio or online. Video game manufacturers and TV production now require standards to be maintained. So, here, even Wavelab falls short. You need a real measuring tool such as Waves Loudness Meter (WLM) or Flux's Pure Analyzer System to know whether you're compliant to their needs or not. That said, you can succeed in mastering with Sonar, but not as easily.

To help Sonar become that tool I would like to see...
 
idea: Sonar to have a new screenset (notated as "M" vs 1-10) that gets all the normal mixing elements out of the way and provides an entirely new Mastering window. When you Export a stereo mix, you can select "master" as one of the destinations. That way, when the Export finishes, you are promptly switched over to the mastering screenset and you now have the workflow elements in front of you that will be much more conducive to the way people use Wavelab. 


  • More metering options, and a palette to select them with
  • Ability to move your meters to a second screen and save those positions
  • Editing tools tailored to the process (i.e. no split comping needed here, so it is removed in this screenset)
  • Single track window (or 7.1 if sorround Mastering) for easy editing (i.e. no Lanes to collapse or expand
  • Bring all "process" tools to the forefront for easy view and access, such as nomalization, or other useful tools. 
  • Fast output switcher for multiple monitor setups
  • Upload/Posting capabilities
  • Larger faders and other Sonar controls for easy accuracy when tweaking. 
I'm sure there's TONS more we could add to this, but this is something I think would be a great way to add the flexibility. 
2015/04/26 22:38:45
Anderton
brconflict
 
idea: Sonar to have a new screenset (notated as "M" vs 1-10) that gets all the normal mixing elements out of the way and provides an entirely new Mastering window.



I like where you're going with this.
2015/04/26 22:48:34
FoggyMind
I find this post very interesting.
Though I have only done demos in the past, I try to make them finished.
I'm now moving it fully finished projects. I wonder...
No one is talking about other plugins that clam to master technically (I would assume) in any DAW that will support them?
I use IK T-RackS Deluxe and Slate FG-X as say a final level before I export to MP3.
I guess my ears are my best tools.
 
So anyway, I have been using Cakewalk Sonar. 4 7 8 X3 and now Plat. But Craig is saying maybe down the road Sonar will be good for mastering.... I confused.  What else is new. ;)
 
Am I doing it wrong? what do I need to use?
 
Thanks!
2015/04/26 22:57:43
Keni
Definitely some interesting approaches here...

I too prefer not to have the project loaded when I master... So I approach this a little more old fashioned...

I do a finished mix in Sonar and when the mix is what I want I do a file export as 24/48...

Then I open a Sonar project I call Mastering (no thought to capital or small m) where I have my favorite mastering tools already inserted and ready for activation as I decide which tools I want for the current song... I then do a save as if I want to save the mastering session for clients and such so I can go back and make alterations

Here I gave various compressors, limiters, eq's, and metering for such as inter sample modulation and volume range...

I then export the master dithering to a 16/44.1 format...

Finally, I load all the project songs into CD Architect where I do my sequencing and relative volume adjustments... Then do a red book burn from there...

So for me, the only real needs I would have would be the song sequencing and indexing...

But a collection of high grade tools such as Ozone and RX4 would be a very welcome addition and really complete the picture! ;-)

Here's looking to the future!

Keni
© 2026 APG vNext Commercial Version 5.1

Use My Existing Forum Account

Use My Social Media Account