"Pseudo mastering" signal chain

I finished a project a few days ago and since most of my clients either can't or don't want to pay for a proper mastering job, I usually end up having to do it myself. One of these days I may try out some proper mastering software, but in the meantime, I make do with the tools at my disposal.

For this project I came up with a signal chain I was pretty happy with and thought I'd share it. In order of appearance on the master buss:

Bootsy's Baxter EQ. Used it to add a nice sparkle and a bit of low end.

Bootsy's Ferric. Adjusted to add a bit of squash and signal coloration.

Sonitus Multiband. Just a few dB of compression per band.

Pro Channel EQ for overall tone shaping. Broad Q settings and 1 or 2db of boost and cut on a couple of the bands.

Pro Channel Concrete Limiter. Averaged between 1 and 3 dB of limiting.

I was able to get a pretty good volume bump without the music sounding super smashed or choked. I then took the mixdown and imported it into Audition 3 and used the peak limiter to add another 3 dB of gain. Client was very happy and for the first time I could listen to my "mastered" version without hanging my head in shame.

+1 to the Op and +1 to Jeff,

Please forgive the following novel which may be totally disregarded as loopy and foolish ... but today I spent hours on masters alone ... so I've got to spew opinions a bit:

IMO/JMO there is no such thing as "pseudo mastering".  You and I can do as well if not better than most mastering houses ... if the heart and mind are enlivened.

(Gasp!  Uh Oh!  I think that I hear some trouble in the hood ... many excellent producers here still swear by traditional MEs.  And ... Oh what a hypocrite I am!

...  Alas it is true that I currently enlist a mastering house/ME ... but that ME himself is a rock star performer/producer ... above the level of Jeff Lynne, IMHO)

1) Though I'm guiltiest: of sinning ... real artists seem most responsible to do their own real mastering ... never downgrading their heavenly gift with silly sinful terms like "pseudo mastering", "fake art", "cheating", etc..

2) As home-schooling is equivalent to (or better than) village-schooling, so is modest home-digital mastering equivalent to (or better than) $$$$-studio mastering. 

3) Pro-MEs who usually forget to use references are oft worse than hobbyists who emulate reference materials.  IOWs: It is wonderful and magical to master via reference-comparisons (of favs) and/or EQ matching reference favs. 

4) I'd never trust a 'pro' or 'friend' to master for me, unless his heart is knit into my vibe and my musical references.

5) Hopefully, I'd never permit a Bob Katz, Ludwig, or any pro ME to ever master my mixes ... unless he himself is a rock star, an avid multi-performer, and a part of my band (AKA ... who himself plays strongly and faithfully in my band and, thus, collabs in my shameful crimes). 

6)  Is the journey over?  Is there new life available after a song is mastered?  Certainly:  A *finished* song may be the beginning of an inspired set of edits: within itself and for other songs ... (as a reference, an audio sample, etc.)

7) IIRC, its not sinful (in most states) to 'alter' one's master and/or emulate sections with artistic changes.  I think I'll start requesting 24-bit masters (from my ME) ... to allow more fluid edits in Sonar.

That said:

The LP64 is great if it doesnt crash Sonar :):):)

Someone will recommend Ozone and or a tape emulator (maybe Ferric fits the tape requirement ... I dunno).

Some may state the UAD Studer 800 emulator (or real thing) *glues* things well ... on the track or master buss.

Ozone does EQ matching quite well, IMHO ... though its limiter is not in the ball park of Pro-Fab, Slate, and the PSP Xenon (iirc)

Finally, nothing replaces, manual gain-envelope compression and volume envelope compressions ... of all tracks ... during personal gain-staging of a mix.

... So that a great mix requires little if any mastering.

OTOH, I need all the loving help and feedback I can get for my songs.