chuckebaby

ceemusic

chuckebaby

Sanderxpander
FWIW, linear phase EQ isn't always the best choice for low frequency cuts. But use your ears of course.

well then what is ? (and remember we are talking about the mastering stage.)

min. phase

Hey what ever floats your boat. IMO, linear EQ is always the best choice. then again im not here for a debate, I was simply trying to leave some helpful info for the OP but I guess I should have known better that some of us cant have their morning coffee without trying to have sort of debate. the typical.. "I believe you are wrong".
Regular EQ’s have phase shift between the different bands. When you boost or cut 30 Hz, that frequency range is technically delayed by a tiny amount, which can in effect cause smearing.
Linear-phase EQ keeps all the frequencies 100% in phase. In other words, all the frequencies pass through the EQ at the same speed, resulting in zero phase issues between bands. If its good enough for YOAD NEVO (look it up) then its good enough for me.
 
With that said, use what ever you want. have a nice day.

well you asked...

ceemusic

chuckebaby

ceemusic

chuckebaby

Sanderxpander
FWIW, linear phase EQ isn't always the best choice for low frequency cuts. But use your ears of course.

well then what is ? (and remember we are talking about the mastering stage.)

min. phase

Hey what ever floats your boat. IMO, linear EQ is always the best choice. then again im not here for a debate, I was simply trying to leave some helpful info for the OP but I guess I should have known better that some of us cant have their morning coffee without trying to have sort of debate. the typical.. "I believe you are wrong".
Regular EQ’s have phase shift between the different bands. When you boost or cut 30 Hz, that frequency range is technically delayed by a tiny amount, which can in effect cause smearing.
Linear-phase EQ keeps all the frequencies 100% in phase. In other words, all the frequencies pass through the EQ at the same speed, resulting in zero phase issues between bands. If its good enough for YOAD NEVO (look it up) then its good enough for me.
 
With that said, use what ever you want. have a nice day.

well you asked...

yes and you gave a very detailed well thought answer.
I especially like the part where you abbreviated minimum (min.) that was cool. 
 
Its my fault really, I probably should have ignored the last 2 posts and told you guys to use a boss pedal board EQ if you want.
Good luck

Just because of pre-ringing. I didn't mean to turn this into an argument. But like you said, use what you want. You specifically said you use it for low cuts so I just thought I'd mention it.

chuckebaby
 
I probably should have ignored the last 2 posts and told you guys to use a boss pedal board EQ if you want.
Good luck

ROTFL!!!

I look at mastering as tweaking. If it needs more than some minor tweaking it should be remixed. I use Ozone for mastering. Though not as much as I once did.  The plugins that come with Sonar Platinum such as the LPs are fine for mastering but personally I can't hear a difference using them or the Quardcurve. But then I cut more than boost. 
I do have an empty project setup for mastering and a whole bunch of plugins on the master buss. Many of them are for analysis.
 
The notion that mastering is for maximum loudness bothers me.  I suppose for some kinds of music such as heavy metal rock that may apply but I don't think that works for an acoustic guitar and voice. Nor would one want to do that to classical music or jazz. One would want as much dynamic range as possible for a lot of music. If you think about Pink Floyd and Far side of the Moon if that had been mastered for maximum loudness it would have destroyed the album. 
 

chuckebaby
There's nothing wrong with Sonars mastering templates but I find creating your own mastering chain produces better results (that's if you have better plug ins of course).
 
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
 
Mastering is an art form. Its almost as if it is a totally different animal compared to recording and mixing.
It takes a good ear and even better judgment. It may literally take years to perfect the craft.
However one can achieve good results as long as following a few guidelines.
 
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.

Hey Chuck!  Thanks for the tips!  Added this to my notebook.
 
It's probably safe to assume that you'll never reveal the "Secret sauce"?

Mastering is to make your final mix sit well between other commercial releases in a similar genre, spectrum-wise and dynamics-wise. That can mean vastly different things for different tracks. Sometimes it means squashing all dynamics out, sometimes there's hardly any compression at all.

If anyone's interested here's an article about why you might want to use a specific type of EQ for a specific application. The pros and cons of linear phase are also covered.
http://www.emusician.com/...art-eq-selection/51562

JohnThe notion that mastering is for maximum loudness bothers me.  I suppose for some kinds of music such as heavy metal rock that may apply but I don't think that works for an acoustic guitar and voice. Nor would one want to do that to classical music or jazz. One would want as much dynamic range as possible for a lot of music. If you think about Pink Floyd and Far side of the Moon if that had been mastered for maximum loudness it would have destroyed the album.

I totally agree. I watched a documentary on TV, where the sound engineer admitted that the suits upstairs wanted the artists' stuff "radio ready." No more careful tweaking--jack the waveforms to the edge of the screen, baby. You can see the proof by visual comparison in SoundForge of old rock versus Beyonce, e.g.. We're talking Top 40 stuff, so it wouldn't be used for jazz or (GASP!) classical.
 

Ricebug

JohnThe notion that mastering is for maximum loudness bothers me.  I suppose for some kinds of music such as heavy metal rock that may apply but I don't think that works for an acoustic guitar and voice. Nor would one want to do that to classical music or jazz. One would want as much dynamic range as possible for a lot of music. If you think about Pink Floyd and Far side of the Moon if that had been mastered for maximum loudness it would have destroyed the album.

I totally agree. I watched a documentary on TV, where the sound engineer admitted that the suits upstairs wanted the artists' stuff "radio ready." No more careful tweaking--jack the waveforms to the edge of the screen, baby. You can see the proof by visual comparison in SoundForge of old rock versus Beyonce, e.g.. We're talking Top 40 stuff, so it wouldn't be used for jazz or (GASP!) classical.
 

Good point guys
The loudness war is out of control. The problem is most clients want what everyone else has. you give them a dynamic mix and they will refuse it. Everyone is trying to keep up with the Jones' and take it one step farther, which is essentially ruining good music mixes.
 
I've tried several things to lighten the load but it is very time consuming.
Hand limiting is one of them (Better known as Automation) Its nearly impossible to do during the mastering stages though I do once in a while, but in the mixing stages, lay off hard compression and use a more dynamic approach= hand limiting. EQ is another troubled spot for most novices in the mixing and mastering stages.
I used to EQ every single track to death in my early years (Ruined many good recordings as it was all printed to tape) however, I found that by using EQ only fix troubled spots and to boost certain frequency's (Example: kick and bass) so they sit well in the mix will take away most headaches you'll get by EQ ing to death.
Low pass/hi pass the same. I've decided to only use Hi/low pass in the mastering stages as I felt as though it was taking something away from the raw tracks. giving it an almost un natural feeling. I guess sometimes its what we cant hear that adds to the flavor of a good mix.
 
Good luck on your mastering ventures its a lot of fun and its where the mix comes alive.