fac
Max Output Level: -51 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2427
- Joined: 6/15/2004
- Location: San Luis Potosi, Mexico
- Status: offline
RE: Mastering in Sonar, why not?
October 02, 05 10:12 AM
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: evan
I like -14 to -12 db RMS range too. Do you use multiband compresion before the limiter? Most times I use wide-band compression (using Voxengo's Crunchessor) but sometimes I use Vintage Warmer's two-band compression My usual mastering chain is Crunchessor->CurveEQ->Elephant. Sometimes I replace Crunchessor with VintageWarmer if I feel the track's too clean:  I use compression only to tame out those peaks that may be out of control. I set Crunchessor to give me about 3db of reduction at the loudest peaks. I've demo'ed some multiband compressors (Voxengo Soniformer, Waves C4) but I've failed to see how the could improve my masters. They just made the process over-complex (especially with Soniformer). I know Crunchessor is not the best compressor for mastering but I'm getting good results. Maybe I'll try Polysquasher someday.
post edited by fac - October 03, 05 9:00 PM
|
sinc
Max Output Level: -44 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3116
- Joined: 11/1/2004
- Location: Colorado
- Status: offline
RE: Mastering in Sonar, why not?
October 02, 05 10:25 AM
(permalink)
Sonitus Multiband (tweak according to program)
Kjaerhus Classic Master Limiter (Again, on a light setting.) [I'm looking to replace with a better one, maybe Vintage Warmer] Why do you do that? Is there something you don't like about the limiter in the Sonitus Multiband? Do you turn that limiter off and use the Classic one instead for some reason?
|
evan
Max Output Level: -83 dBFS
- Total Posts : 394
- Joined: 1/3/2004
- Status: offline
RE: Mastering in Sonar, why not?
October 02, 05 12:53 AM
(permalink)
Thanks for your response FAC. I've demo'ed some multiband compressors (Voxengo Soniformer, Waves C4) but I've failed to see how the could improve my masters. For example when you need compression only in the low range. Anyone using multiband compression when mastering, where do you put the crossovers?
|
dcastle
Max Output Level: -49 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2623
- Joined: 11/15/2004
- Location: Inland Empire
- Status: offline
RE: Mastering in Sonar, why not?
October 02, 05 12:58 AM
(permalink)
Anyone using multiband compression when mastering, where do you put the crossovers? It depends! In most of my recordings the vocal is the most important, so I don't like a crossover in the 300-3000 vocal range. Therefore, I usually choose 3 bands with crossovers at 300 and 3000. This lets the music breath, but keeps the vocal range intact. This only works if I have scooped out a little mid-range EQ in instruments that overlap the vocals --- especially piano and guitar. Regards, David
ASUS M3A78 AMD 9950 Quad 2.6G 8GB Shure • Rhode • Audio-Technica • Allen&Heath GL2200-24 MOTU 24i • Presonus Firepod • E-MU 1212m • Zoom H2 SONAR 2XL-8PE • Sound Forge 1-9 • Audacity 0.1-1.3
|
NYSR
Max Output Level: -60 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1550
- Joined: 6/23/2004
- Location: Binghamton, NY USA
- Status: offline
RE: Mastering in Sonar, why not?
October 03, 05 8:06 PM
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: Elvenking
Wow...I think that was the most concise explanation I have ver heard of the whole process. Bravo.
ORIGINAL: The Scar
Did you write that or cut'n'paste it from somewhere??? (I agree with Elvenking's comment, too.)
T.
Thanks, I have followed the recommendations of the Grammy, Producers and Engineer Wing for years. That was sort of impromptu. But I've understood that three step process from the time CDs were first being released.
Cakewalk customer since Apprentice version 1, PreSonus 16.4.2 ai, 3.5 gHz i7
|
agincourtdb
Max Output Level: -27.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 4753
- Joined: 2/9/2004
- Location: Maryland USA
- Status: offline
RE: Mastering in Sonar, why not?
October 03, 05 11:54 PM
(permalink)
I'm using the Classic Master Limiter to increase and match the RMS from tune to tune, I guess... it's a one-knob plugin, and setting it at between -1 and -4 for all the tunes on the cd allowed me to match percieved volume of the 'louds' throughout the album. I don't mess with the Sonitus Multiband limiter, it's on but set to 0.
|
evan
Max Output Level: -83 dBFS
- Total Posts : 394
- Joined: 1/3/2004
- Status: offline
RE: Mastering in Sonar, why not?
October 04, 05 6:28 AM
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: dcastle
Anyone using multiband compression when mastering, where do you put the crossovers?
It depends! In most of my recordings the vocal is the most important, so I don't like a crossover in the 300-3000 vocal range. Therefore, I usually choose 3 bands with crossovers at 300 and 3000. This lets the music breath, but keeps the vocal range intact. This only works if I have scooped out a little mid-range EQ in instruments that overlap the vocals --- especially piano and guitar.
Regards,
David
Interesting, I'm doing almost the same, I set crossovers at 180hz, 3000hz and 5000hz. Four bands. I like to use an expansor in the 3-5khz band (from Bob Katz's book  ). Ozone default setup is crossovers at 120, 2000, 10000. As you said, I don't like that cut at 2000hz.
|
SteveD
Max Output Level: -47 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2831
- Joined: 11/7/2003
- Location: NJ
- Status: offline
RE: Mastering in Sonar, why not?
October 04, 05 8:18 AM
(permalink)
A multi-band compressor is a tool for fixing problems. Mastering houses need this tool to fix uneven bass, overly prominent and dynamic mids, brittle spikey highs, or spitty cymbals. Why? ... Because they don't have the multi-track. They can't make a correction in the mix. What's you're reason for using a multi-band compressor? I know we run audio through certain hardware or even certain software... like the Pultec Pro, or the Fairchild, with no gain reduction on. It just sounds better having passed through it. But I don't believe the Sonitus Multi-band has this quality. If it's not compressing, I don't hear it. Maybe I'm misunderstanding your application here. Don't get me wrong... the Sonitus Multi-band is an excellent tool. But it can do more damage than good if you're not experienced and careful. If you can go back and correct the mix, don't use a multi-band compressor on the master. Use a single band full range compressor instead.
post edited by SteveD - October 04, 05 10:07 AM
|
Guest
Max Output Level: -25.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 4951
- Joined: 8/3/2009
- Status: online
RE: Mastering in Sonar, why not?
October 04, 05 10:10 AM
(permalink)
If you can go back and correct the mix, don't use a multi-band compressor on the master. Use a single band full range compressor instead. amen steved. this is a tool born of necessity in the mastering phase .. the telephone should be preferred above a mulitband compressor (imho). not that they aren't useful. but, if you've got the tracks, i can't imagine why one wouldn't fix the mix (unless completely out-of-time). jeff
|
j boy
Max Output Level: -48 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2729
- Joined: 3/24/2005
- Location: Sunny Southern California
- Status: offline
RE: Mastering in Sonar, why not?
October 04, 05 11:56 AM
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: SteveD
A multi-band compressor is a tool for fixing problems. Mastering houses need this tool to fix uneven bass, overly prominent and dynamic mids, brittle spikey highs, or spitty cymbals.
Why? ... Because they don't have the multi-track. They can't make a correction in the mix.
What's you're reason for using a multi-band compressor?
I know we run audio through certain hardware or even certain software... like the Pultec Pro, or the Fairchild, with no gain reduction on. It just sounds better having passed through it. But I don't believe the Sonitus Multi-band has this quality. If it's not compressing, I don't hear it. Maybe I'm misunderstanding your application here.
Don't get me wrong... the Sonitus Multi-band is an excellent tool. But it can do more damage than good if you're not experienced and careful.
If you can go back and correct the mix, don't use a multi-band compressor on the master. Use a single band full range compressor instead.
I couldn't agree more. Go back and get it right, there's a radical thought! But I got beat up pretty bad on another thread for suggesting the same thing in the context of using V-Vocal type pitch correctors to fix vocal takes that weren't in tune. We're approaching the day when the only control in our GUI will be a big "FIX" knob. Lotsa fun that'll be...
|
SteveD
Max Output Level: -47 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2831
- Joined: 11/7/2003
- Location: NJ
- Status: offline
RE: Mastering in Sonar, why not?
October 04, 05 12:17 AM
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: j boy
ORIGINAL: SteveD
A multi-band compressor is a tool for fixing problems. Mastering houses need this tool to fix uneven bass, overly prominent and dynamic mids, brittle spikey highs, or spitty cymbals.
Why? ... Because they don't have the multi-track. They can't make a correction in the mix.
What's you're reason for using a multi-band compressor?
I know we run audio through certain hardware or even certain software... like the Pultec Pro, or the Fairchild, with no gain reduction on. It just sounds better having passed through it. But I don't believe the Sonitus Multi-band has this quality. If it's not compressing, I don't hear it. Maybe I'm misunderstanding your application here.
Don't get me wrong... the Sonitus Multi-band is an excellent tool. But it can do more damage than good if you're not experienced and careful.
If you can go back and correct the mix, don't use a multi-band compressor on the master. Use a single band full range compressor instead.
I couldn't agree more. Go back and get it right, there's a radical thought!
But I got beat up pretty bad on another thread for suggesting the same thing in the context of using V-Vocal type pitch correctors to fix vocal takes that weren't in tune. We're approaching the day when the only control in our GUI will be a big "FIX" knob. Lotsa fun that'll be...
Some of us came to your defense on that thread J Boy. A vocalist only has just so many takes before the voice or the performance is lost. The performance is key. One way around vocal fatigue is to send the artist home and try to nail it in the next session... but that isn't always possible. I'd rather have a perfect performance without the need for vocal correction, but even with call-backs that rarely happens... even with big name talent. A little corrective care is most likely all that's needed to make an otherwise awesome performance a keeper. To bring this back on topic, vocal correction happens during the mixing... where it belongs. 
post edited by SteveD - October 04, 05 12:28 AM
|
j boy
Max Output Level: -48 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2729
- Joined: 3/24/2005
- Location: Sunny Southern California
- Status: offline
RE: Mastering in Sonar, why not?
October 04, 05 12:52 AM
(permalink)
Sorry to go off-topic Steve. BTW - There's a good article in the September issue of Sound-on-Sound magazine about mastering. It has some useful info for independent artists as far as what to do up-front to save time and money before schlepping your mixes to them. My point in all of this, in a roundabout fashion, is.. fix it in the mix, don't try and use "mastering" as a fix-all. The less the mastering engineer has to fix, the better the end result will be. That's what they're saying, not me (but I agree).
|
NYSR
Max Output Level: -60 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1550
- Joined: 6/23/2004
- Location: Binghamton, NY USA
- Status: offline
RE: Mastering in Sonar, why not?
October 04, 05 1:04 PM
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: j boy
Sorry to go off-topic Steve. BTW - There's a good article in the September issue of Sound-on-Sound magazine about mastering. It has some useful info for independent artists as far as what to do up-front to save time and money before schlepping your mixes to them. My point in all of this, in a roundabout fashion, is.. fix it in the mix, don't try and use "mastering" as a fix-all. The less the mastering engineer has to fix, the better the end result will be. That's what they're saying, not me (but I agree).
Exactly, Just as the Mastering cannot fix a bad mix so the mix cannot fix a bad take. AT best they can only minimize the damage. As I said above. Mastering is not a step used to fix rather it is a step used to place the preferable mix into its delivered environment. The best time and place to fix things is the time and place where they got broke.
Cakewalk customer since Apprentice version 1, PreSonus 16.4.2 ai, 3.5 gHz i7
|
lukejs
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
- Total Posts : 47
- Joined: 1/28/2004
- Status: offline
RE: Mastering in Sonar, why not?
October 04, 05 2:03 PM
(permalink)
If we just think about sound here, not the pq codes, cd text and all that other stuff regarding the actual burning of the CD, I think it comes down to this....ask yourself, and be honest... will the best plugins available now for mastering be able to compete with the best analogue gear used for mastering ? From what I've seen, I don't think we're there yet.... although some say the UAD-1 precision limiter, and EQ are pretty good, as well as the Sony Oxford stuff for Powercore.... I think that a pretty good job of mastering can be done in Sonar with the tools available ( and the uad-1's and powercores ), but there's really no substitute for going through some really good analogue gear, (granted the DA converters are exceptional) and really accurate monitoring that can be gotten from a mastering house. I think what's more important is our emphasis on the quality of our mixing, because a great mix will be much easier to master. I'd say the majority of Sonar users don't need mastering guidance, they need mixing guidance. After all...isn't mastering just final touch ups on dynamics, EQ, and Stereo spread (m/s processing) ...and maybe a touch of reverb to gel the mix ??? It's a hell of lot harder to get a song mixed and ready for mastering , than what it is to master a song because of so many more variables that need to be addressed for each track as well as the whole mix. So my advice would be to concentrate on improving mixing... and send your stuff to mastering houses for mastering..... their monitoring systems, analogue gear and tuned rooms will do far more justice to your mix than what you can do in Sonar. If you've got great speakers, a great room, great plugs and dsp cards, and great ears, and mastering experience....you can probably do it all at home .... but ..who has all that ???
|
j boy
Max Output Level: -48 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2729
- Joined: 3/24/2005
- Location: Sunny Southern California
- Status: offline
RE: Mastering in Sonar, why not?
October 04, 05 2:20 PM
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: lukejs
So my advice would be to concentrate on improving mixing... and send your stuff to mastering houses for mastering..... their monitoring systems, analogue gear and tuned rooms will do far more justice to your mix than what you can do in Sonar. If you've got great speakers, a great room, great plugs and dsp cards, and great ears, and mastering experience....you can probably do it all at home .... but ..who has all that ???
I just wish my wife would see it that way, when I go to withdraw a couple of thousand dollars out of the checking account to pay for professional mastering... "But honestly dear, my mixes will sound soooo much better on soundclick.com if they're professionally mastered!"
|
SteveD
Max Output Level: -47 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2831
- Joined: 11/7/2003
- Location: NJ
- Status: offline
RE: Mastering in Sonar, why not?
October 04, 05 3:29 PM
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: j boy
ORIGINAL: lukejs
So my advice would be to concentrate on improving mixing... and send your stuff to mastering houses for mastering..... their monitoring systems, analogue gear and tuned rooms will do far more justice to your mix than what you can do in Sonar. If you've got great speakers, a great room, great plugs and dsp cards, and great ears, and mastering experience....you can probably do it all at home .... but ..who has all that ???
I just wish my wife would see it that way, when I go to withdraw a couple of thousand dollars out of the checking account to pay for professional mastering...
"But honestly dear, my mixes will sound soooo much better on soundclick.com if they're professionally mastered!"
All good points here... and I don't hear anyone saying... "Who needs professional mastering? I've got Sonar!!!" Agreed... A good understanding of mixing techniques is a must and goes a long way in the mastering process. Never stop learning. Here's the thing though... Do you think those guys running the mastering houses just bet the bank one day and opened shop without trying their hand at it? 'Course not. They spent years studying, trying, failing, studying, trying, succeeding (a little here and there). Eventually, you realize you've learned what it takes, and your attempts show that with the right equipment... you could do this. There's a good chance that by the time you can make that statement you will have learned proper mixing techniques, you are running a commercial recording studio, and maybe even earned a degree in electrical engineering while you were at it. THEN, you bet the bank and hang out a shingle for mastering! I say it's fine to try your hand at post production processing (let's call it that so we stop upsetting folks by prematurely calling it "mastering"). Just don't leave out the study part. Read, read, read. Do the research. Then try to apply what you've learned. For example... can anyone post the typical number of frames of silence at 30fps before audio on a professionally mastered song? Too much time... and you've got unnecessary dead air. Too little time... and CD players all over creation will be cutting off the intro to your pride and joy when they press the seek button on their boogie boxes and car radios. My favorite expression is, "The more I know, the more I realize I don't know". Study it, and by all means try it on your reference CDs for clients... but don't stop using or recommending Mastering Houses until you are one.
|
evan
Max Output Level: -83 dBFS
- Total Posts : 394
- Joined: 1/3/2004
- Status: offline
RE: Mastering in Sonar, why not?
October 04, 05 3:38 PM
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: SteveD
A multi-band compressor is a tool for fixing problems. Mastering houses need this tool to fix uneven bass, overly prominent and dynamic mids, brittle spikey highs, or spitty cymbals.
Why? ... Because they don't have the multi-track. They can't make a correction in the mix.
What's you're reason for using a multi-band compressor?
Ok, multiband compression is not a rule. From my point of view the most important thing is the mix. I do go back often to the mix. But, when you engage a limiter and you start to gain dbs the mix can change. In other words, your perception of the mix might change; you can hear more noise, hiss, eq changes... and your starting mix was perfect. You can make corrections not only with an eq but with a multiband compressor/expansor too. With multiband compression you can get more headroom aswell so the limiter works better. Besides, you can improve the whole mix with mastering eq and comp. For example; you a have two vocals tracks, you treat each one individually and you make a bouncing. Sometimes if you eq again this bouncing the two voices works much better together. In a mix is more or less the same. Do I explain myself?
|
NYSR
Max Output Level: -60 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1550
- Joined: 6/23/2004
- Location: Binghamton, NY USA
- Status: offline
RE: Mastering in Sonar, why not?
October 05, 05 8:52 AM
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: j boy
I just wish my wife would see it that way, when I go to withdraw a couple of thousand dollars out of the checking account to pay for professional mastering...
"But honestly dear, my mixes will sound soooo much better on soundclick.com if they're professionally mastered!"
If professional mastering sounds better to you, then you would be better off learning what and why the pros do what they do. In fact, it would cost you much less to join a pay to enter producers forum, and spend $500.00 to $800.00 on the best books available (books the pros use written by snooty grammy winning tech-geek producers) and learn to do it yourself. I feel fortunate in that most of what I produce HAS to sound as if it were unpolished live yet done as well as if it were pre-recorded. This means the environment does not require the radical squashing techniques used for CDs and radio mixes. I've actually grown to hate that sound. What I produce for the most part either ends up in video as a background (you notice it only if you deliberately try to) or is used to enhance a live performance where the pre-recorded material is blended with live performance of both instruments and vocals. A so called pop-rock professional master does not blend well with live performance without something sticking out like a sore thumb. I require a relatively unpolished finish. But on occasion I do have a client who needs a demo that requires the usual volume competition treatment.
Cakewalk customer since Apprentice version 1, PreSonus 16.4.2 ai, 3.5 gHz i7
|
losguy
Max Output Level: -20 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5506
- Joined: 12/18/2003
- Location: The Great White North (MN, USA)
- Status: offline
RE: Mastering in Sonar, why not?
October 05, 05 10:49 AM
(permalink)
|
mb
Max Output Level: -83 dBFS
- Total Posts : 372
- Joined: 11/16/2003
- Location: in my studio
- Status: offline
RE: Mastering in Sonar, why not?
October 05, 05 3:27 PM
(permalink)
Bob Katz does'nt even recommend Pro Tools (on mega HD systems) for mastering so i think sonar is realy out of the question with it's limited audio engine you need top end gear to do professional mastering and definetely not sonar with cheap bedroom monitors so guys dream on....there is a bit more to mastering than what sonar can offer > we all know some guys think sonar is the alfa and omega but realy it is not, take my word for it !!
....timing is everything in life....
|
djwayne
Max Output Level: -55 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2021
- Joined: 8/7/2005
- Location: USA
- Status: offline
RE: Mastering in Sonar, why not?
October 05, 05 3:46 PM
(permalink)
Here's some words of encouragement from Michael Brauer.
"Put a monkey in my room with my gear and see what happens. If he mixes better than me, I"m gonna be pissed.
Put me in a room with whatever is available, and i'm going to deliver you a great mix. No excuses for lack of toys or different formats such as mixing in the box. Mixing is mixing, You're either a mixer or you're a monkey. Simple."
|
SteveD
Max Output Level: -47 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2831
- Joined: 11/7/2003
- Location: NJ
- Status: offline
RE: Mastering in Sonar, why not?
October 05, 05 3:58 PM
(permalink)
|
SteveD
Max Output Level: -47 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2831
- Joined: 11/7/2003
- Location: NJ
- Status: offline
RE: Mastering in Sonar, why not?
October 05, 05 3:59 PM
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: djwayne
Here's some words of encouragement from Michael Brauer.
"Put a monkey in my room with my gear and see what happens. If he mixes better than me, I"m gonna be pissed.
Put me in a room with whatever is available, and i'm going to deliver you a great mix. No excuses for lack of toys or different formats such as mixing in the box. Mixing is mixing, You're either a mixer or you're a monkey. Simple."
Somebody IS paying attention!
|
djwayne
Max Output Level: -55 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2021
- Joined: 8/7/2005
- Location: USA
- Status: offline
RE: Mastering in Sonar, why not?
October 05, 05 4:45 PM
(permalink)
|
mb
Max Output Level: -83 dBFS
- Total Posts : 372
- Joined: 11/16/2003
- Location: in my studio
- Status: offline
RE: Mastering in Sonar, why not?
October 05, 05 5:21 PM
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: SteveD
ORIGINAL: djwayne
Here's some words of encouragement from Michael Brauer.
"Put a monkey in my room with my gear and see what happens. If he mixes better than me, I"m gonna be pissed.
Put me in a room with whatever is available, and i'm going to deliver you a great mix. No excuses for lack of toys or different formats such as mixing in the box. Mixing is mixing, You're either a mixer or you're a monkey. Simple."
Somebody IS paying attention!
huh ???? there is a very big difference between mixing and mastering, kids..... somebody is realy not paying attention to the real world out there apart from this forum another useless uninformed sonar we know everything thread but anyway kids knock yourselves out > !!
....timing is everything in life....
|
SteveD
Max Output Level: -47 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2831
- Joined: 11/7/2003
- Location: NJ
- Status: offline
RE: Mastering in Sonar, why not?
October 05, 05 5:29 PM
(permalink)
ORIGINAL: mb
huh ????
there is a very big difference between mixing and mastering, kids.....
somebody is realy not paying attention to the real world out there apart from this forum
another useless uninformed sonar we know everything thread
but anyway kids knock yourselves out > !!
I'm just saying I don't think you read my posts. I've studied what's going on in the real world (in Mastering Houses), and I don't claim to have their gear and I'm not an ME... (sound familiar? I keep saying this for guys like you. ) I've simply maintained that you can practice the craft of Post production processing... (see I didn't call it mastering) while reading and researching what it is that these guys do. And you can use Sonar to do that. That's all.
post edited by SteveD - October 05, 05 11:04 PM
|
djwayne
Max Output Level: -55 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2021
- Joined: 8/7/2005
- Location: USA
- Status: offline
RE: Mastering in Sonar, why not?
October 05, 05 6:02 PM
(permalink)
|
zumbido
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
- Total Posts : 11
- Joined: 10/23/2005
- Status: offline
RE: Mastering in Sonar, why not?
October 23, 05 1:50 AM
(permalink)
May I suggest Har-Bal. Ignore the demo (it's only in 8-bit audio). Get the full 30-day demo version for $95. If you don't like it, you'll get a full refund. This application really works. What it really will reveal is the 'problems' in your mixing environment. I use it in conjunction with T-RackS. I create an EQ filter file in Har-Bal. Render it. Open up this 'X_eq' file in T-RackS and ALWAYS use the 'opto+half-inch' preset for multiband limiting. Simply stated, Har-Bal optimizes the overall EQ and T-RackS increases the overall volume.
post edited by zumbido - October 23, 05 1:59 AM
|
FEARNOTT INC
Max Output Level: -89 dBFS
- Total Posts : 77
- Joined: 2/14/2004
- Location: Atlanta, Ga.
- Status: offline
RE: Mastering in Sonar, why not?
October 29, 05 12:04 AM
(permalink)
This may be late in the matter of timing, but if you are able to read this and get it; maybe it will help. Perfect Practice Makes Perfect. What do I mean by that? If you learn how to do something wrong, you just LEARNED how to do something wrong. If you LEARN how to do something correctly, then you learned correctly. Once you have learned correctly, then you can do correctly. After receiving Dual music degrees and working in production studios and listening to the quality of music released, you learn a couple of things. I studied when we still had to use a splice bar. Come on folks, the pros know the time it took to make a 30sec spot with splice tape. Also we use the ART and the 2-inch Tape Decks and the MTI boards with patch bays. Life in the digital age is so much simpler now. The point being after doing a couple of projects with the knowledge of real professional experience it is possible with what you have to do a decent job of production level mastering if not a solid job of Mixing. The use of the busses in Sonar will prove to be invaluable. Also along the lines with ( fac) it will help with most of the plugins, even though it is possible to use the ones in the producer edition, with the advent of some that were in the older versions of Sonar. They work in tandem very good. With that said find a decent music school with sound teaching in production capabilities with a focus on this facet. Study well and be open to correction and advise from your peers and instructors and you should be at a good starting point. Thank you.
|
joseph.barron
Max Output Level: -83 dBFS
- Total Posts : 376
- Joined: 10/15/2005
- Status: offline
RE: Mastering in Sonar, why not?
October 29, 05 12:07 AM
(permalink)
|