timidi
Max Output Level: -21 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5449
- Joined: 2006/04/11 12:55:15
- Location: SE Florida
- Status: offline
Re:Serious Mastering
2011/12/28 21:00:08
(permalink)
jamesyoyo timidi I gotta say, I've tried Ozone, and I don't get what all the love for it is about. Everyone on the forums here seems to love it. idunno. What am I missing? When you are as good at arranging, playing, and recording as you are, the need for it is not so obvious. For the rest of us, it does the trick. Wow James. That's real nice of you to say. I just do what I do. Mostly, I avoid overdoing anything. But, really I felt I had to acknowledge your remark. While all along feeling kind of awkward doing so cause I might seem like a dick touting my own horn or something. Hope not. Thanks. The Ozone I've tried was I think ver 4. I think I probably didn't put as much time into it as I should but, everything just seemed kind of harsh. I have a feeling though that if that was my only tool, I would seek out how to rein it in and get good results. My "mastering chain" per se would be simply Waves L2 or lately L3. Because, it's done. It's basically the way I hear it except it needs to be louder. I guess Ozone could probably do that. I should check it out again. Actually, in this day and age, I think "mastering" is mostly a bunch of hype. I "master" as I move along in a project. It might be "wrong". But, it's what I hear at any specific moment as it happens. I'm kind of touchy about first impulses being the best. I don't "mix" my tunes. They are already mixed by the time I'm done (whatever that is). I don't have any lip smacks unless I want them. I don't think I've ever in the past 15 years or so, taken a tune and put all the faders to zero and started over. It's all part of the creation process as you add or remove stuff. It just is what it is. My favorite technique is to NOT listen to a mix in my car. Cause then I'll get real depressed....:) I dunno. Sure, if some record company wants the expense and trouble of "mastering" my stuff by the current 'go to' guy, that would be great. But, for now, I don't think it makes that much difference for, bottom line, an MP3..
|
Danny Danzi
Moderator
- Total Posts : 5810
- Joined: 2006/10/05 13:42:39
- Location: DanziLand, NJ
- Status: offline
Re:Serious Mastering
2011/12/28 21:11:09
(permalink)
SongCraft: Hahaha I had a feeling that would ring a bell with a few people. :) Finally someone that feels my pain! :) It's actually not so much pain now though. You know how it goes...once you lock in with something, it becomes second nature. You got quite a lot of time in this too...so I'm sure you've been through a lot of the same stuff I have. It's interesting really and pretty much like anything else....you mess around, make a few gains, fail a few times, make a few more gains, more lab work and it becomes a challenge that you just can't get enough of...next thing you know, you're on a mission. LOL! Aww thanks so much for the kind words on my stuff, I appreciate it. I need to update it...kinda old and I've come a long way since then. Working on a new album at the moment so once I get that all sorted with the label I'll be putting up some newer stuff as well as some lab work I've been messing with. Glad ya liked it though, thanks again. I gave your stuff a listen a few weeks back actually and really enjoyed it. You had a few things with the networks eh? That's incredible! Nothing like that for me. Closest I came to anything that commercial was stuff I did for clients and stuff I did for video games in the past. Did a bit for the first Sega CD system they ever released which tanked in about a year...but had quite a bit of my music as work for hire on one of their formula 1 racing games. A few things for the first version Playstation....stuff like that. That's a tough business...gotta know someone and most of it is work for hire that they don't even give you a name credit for. Glad yo hear you've had some success man...that's awesome! :) James: spot on there. Yourself, Tim, bitflipper, you do great work...though mastering will polish you all up a bit...with the talent you all have, I'd say it's not a necessity. :) Rus: LOL man, I wish I was an expert. But unfortunately, I'm just a guy that tries as hard as possible with passion that won't quit. It's pretty much a process of what we all do all the time really. You read up on something...try a few methods that credible individuals point out to you, some work, some fail, you read more...sometimes it inspires you to try new things....you gain ground, you lose ground, sometimes you fail. It's all a learning process of what works for you really. I could list my entire mastering chain, as well as how I do things and 5 people may say "dude I tried that...and guess what, Ozone sounded better!" I don't think you missed anything with your piece...it's just that some of the little things actually make a huge difference in some of this stuff. Josh: Not auto-leveling, manually leveling with automation. I just listen to a tune and adjust the levels of the tune manually while making sure I stay in the -3dB range, that's all. For example...some guys may have a tune going on that has a clean part and then a part that builds with energy and gets dirty. Most of the songs that come in like that, don't have much difference in volume between the two parts because everyone is just so obsessed with compressing the heck out of everything and evening it out TOO much. I also master/level and peak control per section of a song. Most guys throw some stuff on a tune and it's done. I treat each section differently IF there are different sections. For example, I posted a song on the songs forum here. Most of the song is the same except for the middle guitar solo section. That section was mastered differently than the rest of the song because it needed to be. A change in direction means a change in the mastering. Another example, Philip (the guy who started this thread) and I have a really awesome tune that we did together that I hope he posts someday. In the tune, we fused rap/skate and rock together. The song needed different mastering procedures for the sections presented. The song has 4 parts. Each one had to be treated differently. The rap/skate part, the build/solo section, the rock part and then the actual blend of rock/rap at the same time. It was a challenge, that's for sure. Loads of automation in the mastering area with 2 different mastering chains. But it worked out really well in my opinion. So that's how I treat this stuff. Some of it...I know is over-board and probably not feasible for most people. However, I like the results I get and so do my clients...so I stick with it. :) -Danny
My Site Fractal Audio Endorsed Artist & Beta Tester
|
bitflipper
01100010 01101001 01110100 01100110 01101100 01101
- Total Posts : 26036
- Joined: 2006/09/17 11:23:23
- Location: Everett, WA USA
- Status: offline
Re:Serious Mastering
2011/12/28 23:02:37
(permalink)
Anyone care to give us neophytes a rundown on the process you use to master? Including the software involved? Not so much the hardware because I will never have access to the expensive products. I'd like to to experiment with some of the given methods. Nobody's going to address Chas' request? Too big a subject, maybe? Or too many possible answers, perhaps. I'd give it a shot, but my process would likely be different from everyone else's and might not be good general advice for everybody. It also depends on the genre, instrumentation, and ultimate goal. What works for my classic rock might be totally inapplicable to your ambient punk dixieland.
All else is in doubt, so this is the truth I cling to. My Stuff
|
ChuckC
Max Output Level: -61 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1488
- Joined: 2010/02/13 01:22:55
- Location: Port Charlotte, Fl
- Status: offline
Re:Serious Mastering
2011/12/29 00:30:59
(permalink)
Rus W ^ Most novices (not saying you are one, but I'm not ashamed to say that I am one) I've also heard though (about FX in general, which I am guilty of) is that if you can hear it, it's too much. TBT, every knob is a "volume" knob until you figure out it isn't - even if you still use it like one. (Guilty, but odds are great that I'll get someone to properly mix my tracks) Rus, I am a novice. I don't consider myself at a pro level by any means of the imagination. I am improving every day and each project is better than the last. When I am posting an observation on here (especially in this post) it's just my take and I am half expecting some objections to it because I could very likely be dead wrong! I am not affraid to try/fail or in his case post and be wrong. I'd rather someone tell me if I was. I get that if you don't know better any plug in can sound like it just adds volume... (I am not that novice/noobis!) What I mean was that for me I dialed the threshold on the t racks stuff to where I would have expected pumping and artifacts all over and All I hear is a volume increase. I didn't hear it doing anything for me otherwise I could have started playing with attack and release times to see if I liked the compressors sound... It was on a friends computer (I think he had the demo) and I just didn't get it? I don't have it myself but from the hour or so I played with it I gathered that it wasn't really for me at this point.
post edited by ChuckC - 2011/12/29 00:47:11
ADK Built DAW, W7, Sonar Platinum, Studio One Pro,Yamaha HS8's & HS8S Presonus Studio/Live 24.4.2, A few decent mic pre's, lots of mics, 57's,58 betas, Sm7b, LD Condensors, Small condensors, Senn 421's, DI's, Sans Amp, A few guitar amps etc. Guitars : Gib. LP, Epi. Lp, Dillion Tele, Ibanez beater, Ibanez Ergodyne 4 String bass, Mapex Mars series 6 pc. studio kit, cymbals and other sh*t. http://www.everythingiam.net/ http://www.stormroomstudios.com Some of my productions: http://soundcloud.com/stormroomstudios
|
Rus W
Max Output Level: -80 dBFS
- Total Posts : 541
- Joined: 2010/11/04 00:09:34
- Location: North Carolina
- Status: offline
Re:Serious Mastering
2011/12/29 00:41:29
(permalink)
Danny Danzi Rus: LOL man, I wish I was an expert. But unfortunately, I'm just a guy that tries as hard as possible with passion that won't quit. It's pretty much a process of what we all do all the time really. You read up on something...try a few methods that credible individuals point out to you, some work, some fail, you read more...sometimes it inspires you to try new things....you gain ground, you lose ground, sometimes you fail. It's all a learning process of what works for you really. I could list my entire mastering chain, as well as how I do things and 5 people may say "dude I tried that...and guess what, Ozone sounded better!" I don't think you missed anything with your piece...it's just that some of the little things actually make a huge difference in some of this stuff. -Danny You're just saying that to make me feel better. I didn't mean to put you on the spot like that! :) You clearly haven't heard or at least seen a screenshot of the waveform. Peaks are the first thing I noticed. They probably weren't bad @ reduced volume w/ "mastering" applied, but they are a problem. I also use the VoxSpec Analyzer as a gauge as well, but that plug has more to do with volume than frequency - well, RMS, but I'm lookng at the Y axis display the dB and on occasionally I'll hear my speakers "buzz" if a peak in that plug is touching 0. (The mids most often for me) When using this, I have my slope set 3.5. So where exactly should your master be upon mixdown if you don't adjust the tracks individually - or leave them alone once you've set them? It sounded like you recommended -3 instead of a limiter taking care of it.
iBM (Color of Music) MCS (Digital Orchestration) "The Amateur works until he (or she) gets it right. The professional works until he (or she) can't get it wrong." - Julie Andrews
|
Philip
Max Output Level: -34.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 4062
- Joined: 2007/03/21 13:09:13
- Status: offline
Re:Serious Mastering
2011/12/29 00:48:39
(permalink)
Bit, I think SongCraft and Danny may have addressed a partial rundown of Chas's request. Of course, the Ozone documentation explains things extremely well (downloadable from Izotope, iirc). But, I agree there are too many differences per song. And there are some that don't even normalize ... let alone maximize their mixes. They become: "the dude that puts out mixes with artifacts in them" (--Danny) :):):):):):) ... that about summed it up then! LOL! In life, we Westerners don't dare show-off our blemishes. We're even afraid to show them to our sympathetic MEs, the 'artifact-physicians' that might help heal our pining love-groans. -- VanGogh never painted with artifacts (or did he?) and only required one ear. :) -- That 32-bit protools-loser never sold a painting (or did he?) I'm not defending VanGogh's poor presentation skills ... just tryin' to understand. If VanGogh had a yuppy friend-collaborator (other than that equally demented Gauguin) ... he might have been in touch with his own generation ... instead of becoming the greatest painter of all time. You (all) and I, as Westernized perfectionists, OTOH, probably don't want to be: "the dude that puts out mixes with artifacts in them". To complicate things worse, Westernized perfectionism may be vanity-of-vanity in God's eyes; I don't know. I suppose there is a lot of leeeee-way here. (@Danny: I'll try to post our (Hood1) collab, tomorrow-eve ... as it show-cases serious mastering artistry. (I doubt Ludwig or Bob Katz could have done half as well ... for my ears at any rate)
|
Rus W
Max Output Level: -80 dBFS
- Total Posts : 541
- Joined: 2010/11/04 00:09:34
- Location: North Carolina
- Status: offline
Re:Serious Mastering
2011/12/29 00:49:55
(permalink)
ChuckC Rus W ^ Most novices (not saying you are one, but I'm not ashamed to say that I am one) I've also heard though (about FX in general, which I am guilty of) is that if you can hear it, it's too much. Then again, was that about the track individually or in context? That is some sound advice, but it's obvious if you put reverb on a vocal, you'll hear it when it's just the vocal; however, in context with everything else - provided, the other stuff is mixed well also, you'd barely notice it. Whatever the plug (hardware or software), it all comes down to getting it to fit well in the mix. Those second pair of ears does wonders. TBT, every knob is a "volume" knob until you figure out it isn't - even if you still use it like one. (Guilty, but odds are great that I'll get someone to properly mix my tracks) Rus, I am a novice. I don't consider myself at a pro level by any means of the imagination. I am improving every day and each project is better than the last. When I am posting an observation on here (especially in this post) it's jut my take and I am half expecting some objections to it because I could vey likely be dead wrong! I get that if you don't know better any Plug in can sound like it just adds volume... (I am not that novice/noobis!) What I mean was that for me I dialed the threshold on the t racks stuff to where I would have expected pumping and artifacts all over and All I hear is a volume increase. I didn't hear it doing anything for me otherwise I could start playing with attack and release times to see if I like the compressors sound... It was on a friends computer (I think he had the demo) and I just didn't get it? I don't have it myself but from the hour or so I played with it I gathered that it wasn't really for me at this point. Danny said the same thing. Who am I to put him or anybody here on such a pedestal? More than likely, this stuff is not for me either; however, doesn't make the experience meaningless. I guess my stuff will be as thin a paper from now on! :) LOL @ noobis! I thought about using that term, but backed off! Sounds so immature in whatever form! :)
iBM (Color of Music) MCS (Digital Orchestration) "The Amateur works until he (or she) gets it right. The professional works until he (or she) can't get it wrong." - Julie Andrews
|
Danny Danzi
Moderator
- Total Posts : 5810
- Joined: 2006/10/05 13:42:39
- Location: DanziLand, NJ
- Status: offline
Re:Serious Mastering
2011/12/29 01:12:56
(permalink)
☄ Helpful
Yeah peaks can kill the outcome of a master for sure. Here's what they are most times.. Vocals, snare drums, kicks, toms, bass, certain chords on electric guitars. How to fix them: On vocals, it's usually the eq's we use and the lack of compression. Sometimes we need more compression than we think we do, and your attack time can be crucial depending on your delivery. Some guys use more threshold than they need when sometimes all they need to do is decrease attack time/release and maybe increase a ratio. On kicks, snares and toms, it's mostly eq's. A kick with a lot of low end is gonna peak up. You either curb the low end or compress it a bit. Same with snares...we want them to pop/crack and remain dynamic, but the compressor you choose here is important or the snare can be all over the place. With toms...I really don't like to compress them much because of how dynamic they are. When I do compress them, I usually automate. Watch for low floor toms...some guys put enough low end into them to make them sound like kick drums and you don't want that. It's a good rule of thumb to run your drums into a bus with a light compression on them so that it keeps the kit tight as an entity. This further controls peaks on the entire kit. For the bass, most times it's the pop/slap type stuff that may get us, or a guy using a pick that is banging the heck out of it. In this situation, you're going to need more compression with a shorter attack time IF his pick is really making things stick out. You'll also need to watch for 5 string basses with a low B because that low B is always going to leap out a bit more than the others. A Multi-band limiter can really help here IF you absolutely have to. I try to stay away from them though unless it's a necessity. Electric guitars when played in certain areas can really ramp up. If you use high gain sounds, you can really notice this as the distortion will literally make the guitar levels on your meter change. For example, chug an E chord down the bottom of the neck and watch your meters. Then chug an A chord and look at the meter. Pretty big difference. G#, A Bb and B will usually get you more meter level than all of the others. Don't forget to high pass your electric guitars. Remember, we don't need anything below 80 Hz in a guitar tone. Sonitus is an awesome tool for just high passing and low passing if you use that eq for nothing else. Anything below a Q of 1.6 will start to remove low end. Anything above 1.6 will raise lows. Most dirty guitar usually need to be high passed from 120 Hz on down. I've had to go as high as 150-200Hz at times. It all depends what works best as well as how bad off the tone is. This is another problem with guys that create these monster guitar tones "all alone". They sound great by themselves, hideous in a mix. Also, in certain clean sounds...if you don't compress the right way, you can easily have a high note leap out at you. Don't be afraid to compress these things a little more than normal. As long as you don't lose dynamics or hear any pumping or breathing, you're ok. Acoustic guitars...same thing. However, the key with this animal is...it's all in how the player executes. If he bangs on it, you'll need more compression which of course could affect the expressiveness. It's best when you have a guy that is focused on how he executes his playing. This way it remains dynamic at all times. If you pay a bit more attention to the above instruments and treat them differently, you'll notice you have way less peaks going on. You can even use a little compression glue on your master bus if you feel the need. Just don't go nuts if you'll be sending your stuff out to be mastered. However, if you do what I said on all the other instruments, you'll notice a drastic improvement in those peaks and may not need any 2 bus glue at all. I rarely use any over here other than the UAD Fatso Jr once in a while. But I'm talking glue...not cement. LOL! As for final levels, everyone has different opinions on the final export numbers for mixes and masters. It depends what school you come from and what works best with the material you're dealing with IMHO. For final mixes: I like to see a final peak on my master bus at -3dB. For some reason, I've always done it like that. Then I read Bob Katz book and saw he recommended it too...so I've always stuck with it. In the mastering stage: I still try to do all my work at -3dB and most times will allow things to creep up to about -2.5dB while using a very light limiter just in case but I try to keep things at -3dB. When the REAL limiter finally gets put on, this is where the volume will change. I like to have my final masters hit at -0.1dB and usually adjust the limiter volume/threshold based on the genre of the material. Hope this helps a bit. :) -Danny
post edited by Danny Danzi - 2011/12/29 01:17:12
My Site Fractal Audio Endorsed Artist & Beta Tester
|
Rus W
Max Output Level: -80 dBFS
- Total Posts : 541
- Joined: 2010/11/04 00:09:34
- Location: North Carolina
- Status: offline
Re:Serious Mastering
2011/12/29 03:53:51
(permalink)
^ Yes, it helps me to understand it (somewhat) but executing it? I'll leave that up to you or someone else.
iBM (Color of Music) MCS (Digital Orchestration) "The Amateur works until he (or she) gets it right. The professional works until he (or she) can't get it wrong." - Julie Andrews
|
ChuckC
Max Output Level: -61 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1488
- Joined: 2010/02/13 01:22:55
- Location: Port Charlotte, Fl
- Status: offline
Re:Serious Mastering
2011/12/29 07:54:25
(permalink)
Danny Danzi Most dirty guitar usually need to be high passed from 120 Hz on down. I've had to go as high as 150-200Hz at times. So glad to hear you say that! remember you telling me about highpassing at 80hz and then I wondered why for me I often end up pulling that all the way up to 125-135hz to get rid of the mudd. I though well advice is good but my ear says that at 80 it's still rumbling like hell.... So I went with what my ears told me. Good to have confirmation!
ADK Built DAW, W7, Sonar Platinum, Studio One Pro,Yamaha HS8's & HS8S Presonus Studio/Live 24.4.2, A few decent mic pre's, lots of mics, 57's,58 betas, Sm7b, LD Condensors, Small condensors, Senn 421's, DI's, Sans Amp, A few guitar amps etc. Guitars : Gib. LP, Epi. Lp, Dillion Tele, Ibanez beater, Ibanez Ergodyne 4 String bass, Mapex Mars series 6 pc. studio kit, cymbals and other sh*t. http://www.everythingiam.net/ http://www.stormroomstudios.com Some of my productions: http://soundcloud.com/stormroomstudios
|
SongCraft
Max Output Level: -36 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3902
- Joined: 2007/09/19 17:54:46
- Status: offline
Re:Serious Mastering
2011/12/29 08:14:28
(permalink)
ChuckC Danny Danzi Most dirty guitar usually need to be high passed from 120 Hz on down. I've had to go as high as 150-200Hz at times. So glad to hear you say that! remember you telling me about highpassing at 80hz and then I wondered why for me I often end up pulling that all the way up to 125-135hz to get rid of the mudd. I though well advice is good but my ear says that at 80 it's still rumbling like hell.... So I went with what my ears told me. Good to have confirmation! Similar situation with vocals for example; and yet it's the 'same person' but a different song and key, and although its the same mic pre-amp and exact setting it was probably recorded with slightly less or more distance to the same mic ;) "Because there are so many variables to consider it requires different settings" .
|
timidi
Max Output Level: -21 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5449
- Joined: 2006/04/11 12:55:15
- Location: SE Florida
- Status: offline
Re:Serious Mastering
2011/12/29 10:52:57
(permalink)
☄ Helpful
bitflipper Anyone care to give us neophytes a rundown on the process you use to master? Including the software involved? Not so much the hardware because I will never have access to the expensive products. I'd like to to experiment with some of the given methods. Nobody's going to address Chas' request? Too big a subject, maybe? Or too many possible answers, perhaps. I'd give it a shot, but my process would likely be different from everyone else's and might not be good general advice for everybody. It also depends on the genre, instrumentation, and ultimate goal. What works for my classic rock might be totally inapplicable to your ambient punk dixieland. Chas, a valuable tool for me is Har-bal. It is great for seeing what you hear (or don't hear). I usually will "bounce to track" a mix, drag it to my desktop (I don't use export) and load into HB to see what's going on. I will usually do something to it in HB, usually just smooth out a few peaks, drastic low and high pass. Save it, drag back into Sonar (or maybe wavelab) and take it from there. Taking it from there lately is, using Waves L3 to bring the volume up. I don't limit that much unless I really need to or the type of music "requests" it. I might try a multiband or regular compressor in front of the limiter but not much. Usually a ratio of like 1.5 and a hit of maybe 1or 2 db. As I said earlier, I think "mastering" is really all a part of mixing in this day and age. That said, most of my tracks have 1) the sonitus eq and 2) a waves compressor. That's about it. What I do with those depends on what I hear. Like has been said a lot here, using high and low pass and high and low shelves is great for cleaning up stuff. maybe 150hz down on guits and even voc sometimes. For bass, I don't care much for any of the highs. I usually dramatically get rid of all of it. Compressors are usually at a low ratio unless I really want to smack something. However, I usually find that if that is the case, I need to go in and work it out with gain envelopes (I do a lot of "riding" with clip envelopes) . So then, ration of 2.5 - 5 and gain reduction (via the threshhold) of usually no more than 3 or 4 db at the hardest hits. Usually more like just touching 3 db). As far as effects go, I don't like reverb much except very lightly. If I hear it, I roll it back. I've been using waves verb and their impulse verb and the Sonar impulse verb mainly with just a preset I pick. I do like the waves delay on a buss and lately a teeny tiny touch of the waves doubler on a buss for whatever just to widen it up a bit. I do feel that this is all a pretty homoginized way of doing things as it is nothing special or dramatic. I've never gotten good results when pushing anything too hard. To me, the best "mastering" is accomplished by a clean well played parts. Keep in mind that most of what I do is to just get the song across. Hope that helps.
|
chasmcg
Max Output Level: -78 dBFS
- Total Posts : 642
- Joined: 2011/06/09 13:02:27
- Location: Sulphur Springs, TX
- Status: offline
Re:Serious Mastering
2011/12/29 13:12:35
(permalink)
timidi, thanks for the information. I've used Har-bal in the past but never felt I got any results from it. I will look at that again. I like your tips about mixing and will put them to use. I always tell a friend that the "big boys" always seem to have a gloss or sheen (the magic) over their songs that I can never achieve. But I don't have their tools (or knowledge) either. But with a little work and computers/software, to me, most of us on this forum, don't sound too shabby.
|
timidi
Max Output Level: -21 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5449
- Joined: 2006/04/11 12:55:15
- Location: SE Florida
- Status: offline
Re:Serious Mastering
2011/12/29 13:29:09
(permalink)
chasmcg timidi, thanks for the information. I've used Har-bal in the past but never felt I got any results from it. I will look at that again. I like your tips about mixing and will put them to use. I always tell a friend that the "big boys" always seem to have a gloss or sheen (the magic) over their songs that I can never achieve. But I don't have their tools (or knowledge) either. But with a little work and computers/software, to me, most of us on this forum, don't sound too shabby. I think the "results" you get from harbal are quite subtle and, for me, more of a way to see prospective frequency peak problems that I may not be hearing. I have notice That hb can help a little with definition also. as far as that sheen goes, I don't think it is "over" it as it is "in" it. meaning wonderful rooms, preamps and boards. I've just come to the conclusion that nothing I have can come close. I keep trying but I don't think you'll get it out of any of the tools available to "us". I do feel the Sonar linear64 eq (or whatever it's called) touches on that magic. But, as par for the course, the friggin thing doesn't work.
|
Danny Danzi
Moderator
- Total Posts : 5810
- Joined: 2006/10/05 13:42:39
- Location: DanziLand, NJ
- Status: offline
Re:Serious Mastering
2011/12/30 01:15:15
(permalink)
ChuckC Danny Danzi Most dirty guitar usually need to be high passed from 120 Hz on down. I've had to go as high as 150-200Hz at times. So glad to hear you say that! remember you telling me about highpassing at 80hz and then I wondered why for me I often end up pulling that all the way up to 125-135hz to get rid of the mudd. I though well advice is good but my ear says that at 80 it's still rumbling like hell.... So I went with what my ears told me. Good to have confirmation! Hahah yeah it all depends Chuck. Most of the death metal guys....you gotta go down lower for. The stuff that you're playing is more modern sounding which is going to be up a little higher. As long as you're not rumbling or experiencing that "whoomfing" sound, you're doing good. :) -Danny
My Site Fractal Audio Endorsed Artist & Beta Tester
|
bitflipper
01100010 01101001 01110100 01100110 01101100 01101
- Total Posts : 26036
- Joined: 2006/09/17 11:23:23
- Location: Everett, WA USA
- Status: offline
Re:Serious Mastering
2011/12/30 11:39:57
(permalink)
Har-Bal's getting a lot of attention lately due to the release of version 3. Surprisingly, no one's got anything negative to say about it this time around. So in the interest of objectivity and balance, let me register a lone caveat regarding Har-Bal. Though not at all a bad product, I don't like the way it's marketed. It's oversold and overhyped and if it actually does help your masters at all, then you need to go back into the mix and fix it there rather than using Har-Bal. H-B is marketed on two false premises: 1) that EQ is what makes a good master, and 2) that matching EQ from your favorite records will make yours sound like them. In truth, a well-mixed song needs very little (if any) EQ. It never needs an 8,192-band equalizer. In truth, EQ-matching is a specialized technique for specific situations, not for mastering. I'd still recommend Har-Bal to students of audio. As a learning/experimenting tool it's fun. But (with apologies to timidi) I would not include it in a mastering-tips thread.
All else is in doubt, so this is the truth I cling to. My Stuff
|
Danny Danzi
Moderator
- Total Posts : 5810
- Joined: 2006/10/05 13:42:39
- Location: DanziLand, NJ
- Status: offline
Re:Serious Mastering
2011/12/30 11:59:45
(permalink)
Aye, my thoughts also bit. I do like that program though...just not for mastering. I didn't know they had version 3 out....I have the first 2. The only thing I didn't like about it was it would trip off my virus program until I put the exe on the block list. They had a comment about that on their website somewhere. I was like..wait a minute...I pay for this and I can't even run it because of a virus?! Did you ever get any warnings using it? Something in the actual exe file would trip mine off every time. I'll tell ya what I really do like about it...analyzing what others have done. It's also a great tool for copping sounds when they are all alone. Like for example, say you record a sound that's really close to one of your heros. Then use HAR-BAL to extract an eq out of the instrument you want to cop from your hero that is playing by itself in a song, and you'll nail the tone about 98% every time. It's really great for stuff like that. I used it all over my Van Halen tribute album I've been working on. But for mastering....I never liked it and copping a curve from a mastered album from it and putting it on your own...sounds terrible. The reason being...our instrumentation is different...it will never work that way. I'll tell ya though...whatever Tim does with it...he sure does get great quality so I'd never knock it the way he uses it. Quite impressive. :) -Danny
post edited by Danny Danzi - 2011/12/30 12:01:35
My Site Fractal Audio Endorsed Artist & Beta Tester
|
DeeringAmps
Max Output Level: -49 dBFS
- Total Posts : 2614
- Joined: 2005/10/03 10:29:25
- Location: Seattle area
- Status: offline
Re:Serious Mastering
2011/12/30 12:06:26
(permalink)
Off topic but, I've found Har-Bal useful when I can't get an over dub done on a different day to sound "right". The match eq has helped more than once with that. T
Tom Deering Tascam FW-1884 User Resources Page Firewire "Legacy" Tutorial, Service Manual, Schematic, and Service Bulletins Win10x64 StudioCat Pro Studio Coffee Lake 8086k 32gb RAM RME UFX (Audio) Tascam FW-1884 (Control) in Win 10x64 Pro
|
timidi
Max Output Level: -21 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5449
- Joined: 2006/04/11 12:55:15
- Location: SE Florida
- Status: offline
Re:Serious Mastering
2011/12/30 13:18:03
(permalink)
LOL. I don't need no steenkin apologies Mr. Bit. My girlfriend does though (a lot). But, thanks for thinkin of my feelings:) And thanks Danny. That was Kind of you to say :) Harbal is just another tool for me. I agree with Bit that It is definately not what it claims to be. The whole EQ duplicating thing is all just a bunch of hype. That said though, if you study commercial tracks with it, you start to get a feel for what 'looks right'. I just think it's a good way to see visually what's going on for sanity sake after you've used up your ears:) I agree with Danny and Tom as far as matching up individual instruments or getting "that sound" your after. Or, again, just seeing what's going on with say, James Taylor's guitar. Just wish it was a local plug in of some sort.
post edited by timidi - 2011/12/30 13:22:19
|
bitflipper
01100010 01101001 01110100 01100110 01101100 01101
- Total Posts : 26036
- Joined: 2006/09/17 11:23:23
- Location: Everett, WA USA
- Status: offline
Re:Serious Mastering
2011/12/30 13:35:16
(permalink)
And that's why I still recommend Har-Bal to beginners, as a tool for analyzing commercial recordings for the educational value. Too bad you have to pay $99 for that, though, when SPAN will teach you the same lessons for free.
All else is in doubt, so this is the truth I cling to. My Stuff
|
JeffinOz
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
- Total Posts : 15
- Joined: 2011/12/27 21:16:44
- Status: offline
Re:Serious Mastering
2011/12/30 14:04:35
(permalink)
Hey Danny I would not mind knowing your thoughts on using reference tracks while you are mastering. I do a lot and have never found the need to use something like Har-Bal. I like using my ears to match things. I am mastering an EP for a client right now. I did not mix this one. They sound very much like The Black Keys so they gave me the latest Black Keys CD to use a reference. It has proved to be very useful. I set the commercial CD tracks up on another track so they are playing all the time. When I am mastering I have got my digital mixer setup so I can at the touch of a button listen to anything. eg the Raw tracks, my mastered sound and also the CD's and ALL at the exact same volume too. I find it is very easy to set the EQ when you can switch back and forth like this. Also it removes your monitors and the room acoustics from the equation to a large degree too which is also good, although my monitors and room sound pretty good anyway. Are you into VU meters at all as well? Do you have any because I could not master or mix without them. (every decent mastering studio on the planet has them, I wonder why that is) I am very dependent on them. I was tweaking a track yesterday and using the Smart C2 again. I was choosing between either 10ms or 30 ms attack setting. (thats one thing I don't like about the C2, there are some big jumps in those attack settings) What I noticed was I could not hear that much difference if at all but the VU's changed quite significantly in their ballistics when I chose the 10 ms setting. (A very stong case of the VU's showing you something you could not hear!) They became much more stable so I left it on 10ms. I am not a great fan of fast attack settings, to my ear once you start going down too fast the music gets ruined pretty quick, especially on the C2. By the way the C2 has done a brilliant job of quite a few styles that I have thrown at it too and so has the PSP Xenon as well. I find that limiter is pretty at home with anything! It is still a killer limiter IMO.
|
Rain
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 9736
- Joined: 2003/11/07 05:10:12
- Location: Las Vegas
- Status: offline
Re:Serious Mastering
2011/12/30 15:05:24
(permalink)
So Harbal is? An analyser and an adaptive EQ? I thought there was more to it. Doesn't Ozone allow you to do just that, among many other things? I often used the basic Logic EQ in analysis mode to see what I was hearing in pro mixes vs mine, to learn. W/ my upgrade, I now have an adaptive EQ, which I guess I could use for quick fixes. But I tend to prefer the hard way, to earn the skills.
post edited by Rain - 2011/12/30 15:10:36
TCB - Tea, Cats, Books...
|
bitflipper
01100010 01101001 01110100 01100110 01101100 01101
- Total Posts : 26036
- Joined: 2006/09/17 11:23:23
- Location: Everett, WA USA
- Status: offline
Re:Serious Mastering
2011/12/30 16:10:42
(permalink)
Har-Bal is more than just an EQ, especially in the new version which apparently adds some kind of amplitude analysis to its previous bag of spectrum tricks. It also has a limiter and an effect they call "Air", which is reminiscent of what the BBE does. But at its core, Har-Bal is essentially a high-resolution equalizer, with up to 8,192 bands. (Those who understand the problems inherent in multi-band effects and in high-Q filters can make their own inferences about potential distortion.) Har-Bal takes a song and "analyzes" it, producing EQ curves that represent the minimum, maximum and average levels across the spectrum. This in itself is mildly informative, but is rarely useful when trying to figure out why your mix sucks. Har-Bal will then offer to automatically adjust the EQ on your full mix and "fix" it for you. If your starting EQ was really, really bad, then such adjustments might actually help. But if that's where you're at in your development, you're in need of more than some software. What really puts me off Har-Bal is the way it's marketed. They feed on ignorance and the desperation everybody feels when they're starting out mixing and mastering. They imply that professional mastering engineers use it. They do not. They say that it was designed by a world-famous mastering engineer. It was not. If they'd only be honest about what it does and what it's good for, I would have no complaints.
All else is in doubt, so this is the truth I cling to. My Stuff
|
Rain
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 9736
- Joined: 2003/11/07 05:10:12
- Location: Las Vegas
- Status: offline
Re:Serious Mastering
2011/12/30 16:26:18
(permalink)
As always, thanks for the clarifications, Bit. :)
TCB - Tea, Cats, Books...
|
Middleman
Max Output Level: -31.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 4397
- Joined: 2003/12/04 00:58:50
- Location: Orange County, CA
- Status: offline
Re:Serious Mastering
2011/12/30 16:41:08
(permalink)
I concur with Bit and others on the use of Harbal. Here is what is most challenging for beginners; comparing a mix to a final commercial CD. The delta is the mastering process. No matter how hard you try there is a difference in the sound due to EQ, parallel processing not to mention expensive compressors and amplifiers which made the commercial track sound, well, commercial. Also a very well tuned room with full range speakers that will put your home studio monitors to shame and reveal things you did not even know existed. If you try to make your mix sound like the commercial track you will be adding plugins on your master buss or over compressing the tracks in the mix to get there. A lot of people don't have access to the raw mix which would really be the best reference point. You just can't listen through multiple layers of compression and EQ and shoot for the same results on your raw tracks. It's a long frustrating road with random variables and years of experimentation. Get to a mastering studio and spend a few hours learning what a raw mix versus a mastered mix sounds like. It will go a long way toward knowing what not to put on your master buss and when you are actually building a mix that will come out of mastering with the results you would like. Pay the mastering engineer for a few hours of education. All that said, an EQ, compressor and limiter plugin will provide a rough. You can mix into that kind of setup but wait until you think you are close before going down that path. That can lead to pain frustration and anger. The path to the dark side. Which leads to gear acquisition and plug in purchases to try and find a shortcut to the sound you are looking for.
|
joshcamp
Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
- Total Posts : 146
- Joined: 2004/09/08 11:39:20
- Status: offline
Re:Serious Mastering
2011/12/30 16:58:44
(permalink)
thanks for the info danny. how about manually zooming in to the offensive peaks and adjusting the gain ?
|
JeffinOz
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
- Total Posts : 15
- Joined: 2011/12/27 21:16:44
- Status: offline
Re:Serious Mastering
2011/12/30 17:07:53
(permalink)
I should mention that when I am talking about comparing your mastering to a reference CD then I am referring to a situation where the mix is already done. Not comparing your mix to a mastered commercial CD which can be more difficult as Middleman says. But if its a final mix then it can be easier for sure and note that the beginner in Middleman's post is important here. If you are not a beginner though you can easily use reference CD's in a mastering situation. The first thing to do is get all the levels exacly the same so when you switch none of the sources will have the advantage of being better due to being louder. Its interesting how ordinary some commercial CD's can in fact sound when you listen to them this way. I don't have any problems matching EQ's from commercial CD's to the EQ process I may be working on at the time in a mastering situation. You can easily listen right past the compression and limiting and just hear how the EQ is really sounding. I think it would be harder in a mix situation though because your mix has got nothing on it so to speak and the commercial CD has got it all. The fact that some commercial CD's may have been mastered in a mastering suite with fantastic monitors is actually a good thing because when you get your own EQ sound very similar after a while you know you must be in similar waters to actually being there in that situation with the expensive speakers. I agree it is still better to do the mastering in that ideal monitoring situation but if you cannot then my approach is the next best thing by far. My mastering always translates fantastically well so I must be doing something right. If you do go to a mastering studio make sure the mastering engineer is in fact good. Many are not and are useless and usually make things sound worse. Find out first by listening carefully to some of the material that masteirng house has put out there. Just because a mastering studio is there it does not automatically mean the results are great.
|
Middleman
Max Output Level: -31.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 4397
- Joined: 2003/12/04 00:58:50
- Location: Orange County, CA
- Status: offline
Re:Serious Mastering
2011/12/30 17:16:27
(permalink)
JeffinOz My mastering always translates fantastically well so I must be doing something right. If you do go to a mastering studio make sure the mastering engineer is in fact good. Many are not and are useless and usually make things sound worse. I would imagine you have done some work on making sure your room is balanced. I concur about mastering & engineers in general. Talk is cheap, tasteful results indicate someone is aligned to the musical results you may be pursuing. Actually tasteless results may align if you are working on a new sound.
|
JeffinOz
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
- Total Posts : 15
- Joined: 2011/12/27 21:16:44
- Status: offline
Re:Serious Mastering
2011/12/30 18:16:03
(permalink)
I have posted one of the tracks I recently mastered from a very nice CD called 'Oh Hawke' by a local guy here called Dan Lethbridge. I have made it downloadable so you can download the full res wave file and listen to it on your system. Don't stream it as it only plays at mp3 128 KBits/sec. It wont sound that great compared to the wave file. Be quick because this is all ahead of this being released and I will at some point have to make it non downloadable. I have got two other tracks if anyone is keen to hear them too. http://soundcloud.com/jeff-evans
|
Danny Danzi
Moderator
- Total Posts : 5810
- Joined: 2006/10/05 13:42:39
- Location: DanziLand, NJ
- Status: offline
Re:Serious Mastering
2011/12/30 20:25:27
(permalink)
Hi Jeff, Well to be honest, sometimes listening to refernece material is the death of me...other times it can be helpful. It all depends what issues the song may present to me. Most times, I can just tell when something sounds the way I want it to. Other times....like when you get mixes you've advised the client to redo that they couldn't and your stuck with certain things....that's when it gets tough and I usually pull out some reference material if need be. I do usually do a final comparisson at the end of a project just to see how I faired...but seem even at that, it becomes subjective. How can you compare something with totally different instrumentation and recording techniques to something else, ya know what I mean? Granted, yeah, we can compare a little...but when we get too anal about that stuff I think it can be more of a setback than a remedy..but that's just me. Good job on your song you posted...it sounded really well done. One thing if I may Jeff? This is not super important or anything...but it would be like presenting a new car to the new owner without taking a mechanic's finger prints off the door. You have a bit of a DC offset in the tune. Nothing bad at .012 thousandth of a % but there should be nothing there if you can help it. That's one thing you never see from Katz or Ludwig....DC Offsets. I let .001% go if I see one, but anything more than that and I gotta find out what the deal is. I'm just overly anal with that stuff even if it doesn't make a big difference I can hear. If the big boys don't get it in the numerical readings, there's a reason for it and I don't want any DC offsent neither. LOL! You got a good sub-low coming from that kick...it's in a good way at about 52Hz or so...a bit more than I would have probably used, but it works for the tune. That could be contributing as sometimes sub lows can tip off DC readings. Like I say...it's fine just the way it is and I don't hear anything bad...but it's nice when we can remove the finger prints off that new paint "just because". :) Great job on the tune though...and yeah, those attack time settings on that C2 drove me nuts. As for VU meters, yeah I use them too. Would I be lost without them? Err...I dunno man...sometimes a little dirt under the nails isn't a bad thing and being too anal is. :) Josh: You have to be careful with that also...though sometimes I have to do it. You gotta really zoom in though because if you don't, you'll get sudden drops in your audio and major inconsistencies. I try not to do this unless I absolutely have to, but do it on a daily baisis because there's no way around it for some situations. I always try to hear what makes it a transient that sticks out. Why does it peak there, what instrument, what's the cause? Too much high end on something? Too much low? Lack of compression? And it all depends on how bad the peak is. You can drive yourself crazy trying to systematically fix them all. LOL! The best fix is to try not to let them happen while you're mixing. Always run your Sonar preview meter on your master bus so it draws that little master wave file picture....you know what I mean? This will tell you what's happening in your mix before you even export it out so you can take a look at the instrument that's cause trouble and nip it before you get to the mastering stage. That's the best way to handle it really. Sometimes a little bus glue can fix it...but to be honest, to me that's just a cover up....I like to fix it at the source. If you got a snare that's causing peaks all over, it needs to be comped or you may need to take a little of the high end off of it. If you have a bass guitar that's causeing trouble...it most likely needs an eq adjustment or a compression adjustment. Sometimes we can get carried away with low end in bass...or sometimes we can accentuate the 2.5k "clack" frequency a bit too much. But to answer your question....yeah, you can zoom in and take care of some of these...just because. Don't try to totally remove the peak or you'll hear the sound fade on that part. A few increments is usually ok, but zoom in as tight as you can so it just gets that one place and doesn'r effect something good. :) -Danny
My Site Fractal Audio Endorsed Artist & Beta Tester
|