I can't make a CD image, or a DDP image, I can't edit PQs, I can't edit ISRCs, I can't enter a barcode. SONAR IS NOT A MASTERING APP.

Ah yes! That's the key isn't it.

Does CD Architect do this? Does Pyro? What?

Regards,
David

ORIGINAL: nprime

Dear me, this thread is making me nauseous.

It would seem that most of you think that mastering a song is all about obtaining maximum volume, or worse yet matching someone else's idea of perfection by "duplicating " their frequency distribution.

Mastering is a very specialized art. I dare say it takes as many years to become good at it as it does to become a competent recording engineer.

And, most importantly, mastering requires top end gear in top end room. The idea that poeple are "mastering" in their bedrooms on $300.00/pair speakers makes me sick to my stomach. A real mastering house has spent thousands of dollars on the room's acoustics alone, then probably ten times that on professional monitors, amplification, and hardware. The people who work there do nothing but mastering. They are specialists.

To compare what you people are doing with a couple of cheap plug-ins in an acoustically incorrect enviroment to these places is a joke.

You are making your songs as loud as possible with the least possible dynamic range, and then forcing them into an EQ pigeon hole. If you are happy with the results then bully for you, but...

Please stop calling this mastering. It would more appropriately be called "apprenticing".

Rod

I master my stuff all the time (SONAR4 and UAD-1 plugs) and have gotten a few deals, film placement and music library, with my mastered tracks. That said, if my project was a CD release for example, I would be better off giving the tracks to a mastering engineer with the ears and gear.

I think everyone should try it themselves, if for no other reason, than to understand and more completely appreciate the value a mastering engineer adds.

You've never used a someone else's mix for reference? I would argue that if one is working in a specific genre for commercial release, it would be beneficial to reference similar material and mix in a manner appropriate to that genre. Just the other day, I ws working with a client in my studio and we were grooving to some tracks we had just recorded and I had just put together a rough mix.

Then we flew in a Maroon 5 track, "Harder to Breathe", and it knocked us out. We realized then and there that we had to start over again, strarting with tracking drums on a Neve console. EQ pigeon hole my arse. Those maroon 5 tracks sound great.

Ken

My only requirement is that it sounds good to my ears, and to the ears of my band when it's my band's cd.

In the end you have a product you are happy with. Good for you!

Rod

nprime,

Let me begin by saying that I am not even close to being able to master (still trying to perfect mixing).

With the rapid advancements in technology, I can't help but wonder if it's no longer necessary to invest thousands and thousands of dollars on room acoustics, monitors, etc. I've interned in a couple of studios with these expensive Neve boards and all. One owner/engineer swore that one could never come close to the same sound on Pro Tools, etc. The other studio used a couple of multi band EQ's to treat the room, but I read that that isn't even the best way to do it anymore. He now uses Pro Tools along with his vintage analog board.

I can certainly understand being reluctant to give in to the newer and less expensive equipment after investing my life savings in the older, much more expensive analog equipment. But some of the folks in and out of this forum seem to be doing very well in their smaller, less elaborate studios.

Having said that, common sense dictates that you still have to have the experience, ears and know-how, no matter what you use. But with the right tools and know-how, isn't it possible to do at home what was only possible in the big studios years ago?

I'm not challenging anyone. I'm trying to learn all I can. Just wanted everyone's opinion, especially those that are actually mastering professionally.

In all fairness,

A multitracker is not the sort of precision tool designed for mastering. However, it can give the very best mix possibilities towards the end product and finished master product.

Frank made a very good point. The major label (which does not include all of the field but a large percentage) mindset toward mastering it on the verge of sonic carnage and appalling by any standard - no matter how low it may go.

But in their defense - their decisions are based on your demands as the customer, they will only give you what you want or will tolerate.

In looking for a means to master. Stop looking towards sonar - it is not designed (yet - but I'm hoping that some talks happening right now will change that soon) nor capable of that task at the standard people would judge the output from Sterling/Masterdisc or others at in the here and now, For what it's worth, neither is Vegas/Cubase/Nuendo/Logic/Protools etc at present. It's like trying to do a proper assembly job requiring a jewellers screwdriver and using a swiss army knife attachment to make do with. Yes, you can get something going, but not easily, not happily and usually that awkwardness translates to less than happy making results or uneccessary compromises at best

It is a very capable and growing multitracking and composite mixing application that can bring you the results that will make the end run of the process, a pleasure and a fine representation of your work if looked at in that perspective.

DDP images are still used, but who wouldn't accept a redbook compliant PMCD these days

Our CD manufacturers demand DDP, on whatever format that we can supply it - Exabyte, DVD/RAM, Or even a CD. The reason they don't accept audio CDs is because of the lack of data intergrity, they simply don't possess the vigourous error checking facilities like a DDP image does. CD-ROM's even, have more error checking facilities than CD-audio.
However, they will accept a red-book CD at a push. We have to do this if a client wants CD-text, as SADiE is incapable of writing CD-text, and it's the only option we have available for writing DDPs.

ORIGINAL: ooblecaboodle

Howeven, I CAN't master in Sonar, because it HAS NO MASTERING FEATURES.

I can't make a CD image, or a DDP image, I can't edit PQs, I can't edit ISRCs, I can't enter a barcode. SONAR IS NOT A MASTERING APP.

Well, since none of that was required by the manufacturing company pressing my band's cd, I guess my band's cd isn't "mastered" at all.

I'm sure there's a major-label way of doing it that involves stuff Sonar can't do. But how much of it is really necessary for the end cd to sound good to modern ears? I think of mastering in terms of processing the mixed audio into the state that will be reproduced exactly by the cd. Sonar can do that (although the pencil tool would make it easier)

hey rod,
you did a good thing by pointing out the skill level of a pro-grade mastering
engineer .. i completely understand what you're talking about .. so wading in
was cool.
jeff
btw: the coolest stuff happens when you set the threshold on the L3 to -19db ;-)
(i'm kidding ... )

This is the best "mastering" thread of all!
That may be because the "pros" aren't responding.
I also only make Cds for family and firends (still too chicken to put any up here).
I have been using the process that Scar does.
Say "Ohhey". When you counsel against exporting to wav and reimporting, are you against it because the signal might get corrupt? I mean, since we are digital, we don't get added tape hiss, but is that analogous to what you are saying?
Fac is the man. On almost all of the many threads on this subject, it has just come down to "You can't master your own CD, no how no way." Now, Fac says, "There are a few tools that you can use that will definitely add to your finished product."
If he can do it, I can do it.
On that note, I didn't get the Voxengo mastering Suite deal because it seems to me that;
1. Elephant and Curve EQ should allow loudness maximization and comparing EQs to commercial mixes;
2. Each of those plugs looks like it will take a bit of effort to learn to use and, if they don't add appreciably to Elephant and Curve EQ, they probably aren't worth the effort.
Now, the question is, do the CD Architect type programs add appreciably to overall quality of the CD and how hard are they to use?

do the CD Architect type programs add appreciably to overall quality of the CD and how hard are they to use?

well, for a replication house, CD architect does a lot of things to ensure that the output
is Redbook compliant and supports the appropriate meta info (ISRC, track titles, etc.).
About the only thing it doesn't do is detailed QA checks ... but nowadays (if burning at 4x)
it's rare to get a kick out.

[edit- .. didn't answer your second question .. CD architect is a very easy program
to use imho .. but i'm used to the Sony stuff and they all work about the same]

jeff

ORIGINAL: ohhey

ORIGINAL: rallenjones
...
Say "Ohhey". When you counsel against exporting to wav and reimporting, are you against it because the signal might get corrupt? I mean, since we are digital, we don't get added tape hiss, but is that analogous to what you are saying?...

I don't know the technical reason why there is a change in the sound I just know there is. Maybe it's becuase I export at 24bit ?

On my system, when I re-import the stereo mix into the same project and flip the phase... it nulls -- Silence -- even against the multi-track mix.

ORIGINAL: nprime
Please, I'm not stupid.

Did you read all my posts?

I fully understand that the A&R guys dictate that the "Volume Wars" will continue. But I don't think every major label release is handled this way. There are still a few top end mastering engineers who get to work with top end producers who care about the final product quality more than the ultimate volume of the product.

I still stand by my contention that what the bedroom studio people are doing is not "mastering", call it whatever you want though, I not sure why I even bother to care.

To each his own.

I'm sorry I waded into this discussion, as usual. Seems having a strong opinion on anythng isn't wanted here.

Eveyone go back to whatever the hell it was you were doing before...sigh.

Happy Waveform smashing!


Rod

Whoa! I didn't say you (or anybody) was stupid... not even implying it.

ORIGINAL: rallenjones
On that note, I didn't get the Voxengo mastering Suite deal because it seems to me that;
1. Elephant and Curve EQ should allow loudness maximization and comparing EQs to commercial mixes;
2. Each of those plugs looks like it will take a bit of effort to learn to use and, if they don't add appreciably to Elephant and Curve EQ, they probably aren't worth the effort.
Now, the question is, do the CD Architect type programs add appreciably to overall quality of the CD and how hard are they to use?

Allen,

Elephant is the loudness maximizer. CurveEQ is just a very good EQ. They are both easy to use and come with presets which are actually useful to start from.

Elephant has various limiting algorithms but I use exclusively the EL-2 mode. I've tried the other modes but always preferred the EL-2. There's even a new EL-3 mode which is supposed to be smoother but it doesn't seem to work too well with my music. The cool thing about EL-2 is that there's only two parameters to mess with: Input Drive and Limiter Speed - and Limiter Speed has only six or seven levels, so it all amounts to pushing the input drive a few db's up and selecting the best Limiter Speed for the job (according to your ears). There's also an optional high pass filter that you can use to remove DC and subsonic content but I never use it (I always have CurveEQ placed before Elephant and that's where I remove low frequencies).

IMO, the trick to using a loudness maximizer (mastering limiter) is always listening to both, processed and unprocessed signals, at the same level. This way you don't fool your ears into thinking that something sounds better just because it's louder.

With Elephant you do this by turning down the output level about as much as you turn up the Input Drive. For example, IN = 6 db, OUT = -6 db. Here the signal will have about the same level when the limiter is active than when it's bypassed (unless the original signal was too quiet to begin with). I constantly change between processed/unprocessed signal (by just bypassing Elephant) and listen carefully for any degradation in sound quality or noticeable changes in dynamics (especially on drums). If everything's fine, I can push the limiter a bit more (turning INPUT up and OUTPUT down). As soon as I hear something wrong I back it up a little bit.

When I've reached the level I want, or when the limiter starts degrading the signal I leave it there and raise the output level back to 0 db (actually I leave it at -0.3db), and then render the signal.

I never squash my songs that much. They're usually in the -14 to -12 db RMS range, which is a bit better than today's commercial CD's and sound just as loud. I usually listen to CD's in my car, over traffic noise and all, and my CD's cut through it just fine. Sure, a decent engineer with proper equipment would probably do a better job, but for what I do this is good enough.

Dynamic Range > Overall Volume in my honest opinion.

Funny you should mention Bob Ludwig, I had a brief email correspondence with him regarding the serious "louder is better" wars going on in the mastering industry. One thing he said was this.

Lemmie dig up those emials..

Hi Stephen,

** is there a pressure to master CD's at this high level..
YES! It has only been POSSIBLE to do it with the invention of digital domain "look-ahead" limiters which are about 10 yrs old now.

.and is it ultimately hindering sound quality??
YES! It probably contributes to the lack of sales as much as anything I bet.
Who wants to put on a record and listen a second time when it is such an assault?
I always say I'm glad they weren't invented when the Beatles were making records!
Compression CAN be a good thing for pop music, but generally it's over the top now. It CAN'T go much higher than it is because there is physically no more room left.

Bob

Pretty neat little blub on his take. Unfortunately, he also said that he is often told by clients to "make it loud". He seems to make the best of it though. Even so, 90% of all rock CD's sold today are hit with a limiter so hard, that it is audiable to the trained ear. And it's sad. To hear a Kick Drum come in and just suck the life out of surrounding instruments. (Yuck)

ORIGINAL: nprime

ORIGINAL: ohhey

ORIGINAL: nprime
....

Please stop calling this mastering. It would more appropriately be called "apprenticing".

Rod

Rod, I've ripped many major label CDs that were "mastered" by mastering houses with the very best gear and so called talent that money can buy. Frankly, I'm not impressed. I sure wish I had been given the chance to "apprentice" them because that music is ruined forever, pride and profit will not let the artist go back and fix it now and the mastering house is not going to ever admit they did anything wrong, the opportunity to hear that music in all it's glory has been lost. Less then 1db of dynamic range ? Clipped waveforms throughout the entire CD ? If that’s mastering I’m very glad I can’t afford their services.

There is no substitute for skill and experience. It must be very disappointing for some when they pay a professional to do a job and get back that kind of crap.

I do not understand this instaiable need for maximum volume, I mean WTF is going on here (the industry). I think your point is well taken that the reason the bedroom studio folk are doing this is because they are emulating what they hear in professional releases. Bring back dynamic range, PLEASE!

However, I think when Bob Ludwig masters a high end release himself (not just his studio with the latest new guy at the controls) the results can be stunning. If properly done, mastering should take a great recording and make it incredible.

BTW Frank, I certainly wasn't meaning to include you (I did say "most of you") in my diatribe. I think you and I approach this from a similiar angle.

It's really funny when you say "Frankly".

Rod

In school, we had a few lectures on "The Dark Arts of Mastering." And it is that, truly... We all know some quick and easy, or cheap and nasty ways to master our mixes and that's great, but it's not even close. Sure the home recording techniques and technologies have vastly improved in the last 10 years...it's crazy. Some would argue that you don't even need to go in a studio save to rent their gear or to transfer stuff to tape before going back into software. Mastering equipment and facilities...on a private scale...? It's just not happening yet folks, the quality is not there regardless of platform, plug-in, A/D/A conversion, or outboard gear. You need the tools (which are WAY different than the stuff "we" use,) and you need the room (which is designed WAY different than the ones "we" are in,) and you need the ears (which have to be more trained than most of ours at recognizing the colors and placements of frequencies.)

I've had the opportunity to hear demos of my mixes both pre and post mastering and it is a sight to be seen...er sound to be heard. Generically speaking, it fills more space with sound...not gain or noise...SPACE. It sounds great on ALL manners of repro (playback) and it makes you want to freaking cry.

I agree with all of nprime's statements on mastering. I would recommend if you find someone who offers free mastering demos or whatnot to take him up. Most of the time they will let you sit in on the process...if they do take them up on it.

Ultimately it comes down to target demo of the project, because you have to spend money on this. But it is so worth it...so worth it. No, I couldn't afford Bob Ludwig and his DC powered lair, but a company in NY that was drumming up business here at Full Sail. I was blown away at the results.

Can't use it all the time, though. That's why I whip out Sonar, Sound Forge, my multiband comps and limiters and EQ's and CD architect and everything I can get my hands on to SMASH THOSE WAVEFORMS UNTIL THEY SOUND LIKE SEVENDUST!!!

(I love Sevendust)

If you care about the song at all though you will (1) get a copyright (only 30 bucks) and (2) get it professionally mastered.

Take a good one!
Tony