joshcamp
Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
- Total Posts : 146
- Joined: 2004/09/08 11:39:20
- Status: offline
best method to tame errant peaks on a master mix
hello all, when prepping a mix for mastering, how do you tame errant peaks or do you not even bother ? I,ve tried compression, but there always seems to be a few peaks here and there that could affect how a limiter would process it. so i've honed in on those peaks, surgically, and reduced the gain a bit, between (-2 to -3db reduction) to even them out. this can get tiring and take some time given a lot of errant peaks. I suppose the best method is to track down the source of such peaks - eg, snares, kick, vocals, etc.. which can help. how about using a limiter on the track before mastering to tame any peaks over, say, -3db ? then, do all regular mastering processes and final limiting to taste ? looking for advise and or tips / methods...
|
batsbrew
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 10037
- Joined: 2007/06/07 16:02:32
- Location: SL,UT
- Status: offline
Re:best method to tame errant peaks on a master mix
2012/01/25 12:37:42
(permalink)
|
joshcamp
Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
- Total Posts : 146
- Joined: 2004/09/08 11:39:20
- Status: offline
Re:best method to tame errant peaks on a master mix
2012/01/25 12:44:00
(permalink)
thanks. so, i assume you do this on the master mix bus - correct ? how is it done ? i'm a novice so please bear with me...
|
batsbrew
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 10037
- Joined: 2007/06/07 16:02:32
- Location: SL,UT
- Status: offline
Re:best method to tame errant peaks on a master mix
2012/01/25 13:48:33
(permalink)
well, for example, if you know that the SNARE track is causing the errant overs, or peaks, go there, and do the automation.
this is MUCH more effective, than say, just sticking a limiter over the track, which will effect the entire track, as well as tax the CPU unnecessarily.
if your resolution on the wave from is tight, you can do automation that is almost transparent.
this takes time, but ultimately, will give you excellent results.
don't do this, until you've finished doing all your other automation, or FX processing, or the like.
|
batsbrew
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 10037
- Joined: 2007/06/07 16:02:32
- Location: SL,UT
- Status: offline
Re:best method to tame errant peaks on a master mix
2012/01/25 13:52:21
(permalink)
ok, so what i described, i see you are already doing.
really, there are only a couple of options that are usable, in my opinion.
doing the automation, provides the most natural sounding results.
but, you could set a very fast acting limiter, to catch ONLY the peaks on the trouble tracks.
there's no point in putting a limiter across the master buss, only to deal with peaks that occur on a handful of tracks.
you COULD buss those tracks, to a sub buss that was setup with a limiter just to deal with those occasional peaks.
|
joshcamp
Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
- Total Posts : 146
- Joined: 2004/09/08 11:39:20
- Status: offline
Re:best method to tame errant peaks on a master mix
2012/01/25 14:10:57
(permalink)
yes, i do try to minimize peaks track by track, but somehow, there always seems to be some peaks that get by on the master mix. i would think that these should be tamed before using a final limiter in order for it to work more efficiently. my workflow goes like this (from master mix) - upsample from 48/24 to 96/32 then to mastering. when mastering, i compress, multiband eq, cake's fx tape sim, tl64 tube leveller, lp64 eq. then i process these effects. now, i will usually see some peaks that i go in and reduce gain on from -2 to -3 db. last step is psp xenon limiter. i think this works ok for me but i wanted to see what other 'best practices' others are using. particularly for transient control.
|
batsbrew
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 10037
- Joined: 2007/06/07 16:02:32
- Location: SL,UT
- Status: offline
Re:best method to tame errant peaks on a master mix
2012/01/25 14:51:46
(permalink)
why not simply take all your tracks down all together, until you get your master buss peaks down to where you want them?
chances are good, that you are driving your individual channels too hard, and the collective peaks are too high anyway.
you could have master PEAKS at -12db, and still call that a HOT signal.
|