Alot of perople ask questions

Adlib311

Umbrella Music Group
about mastering, and blah blah blah.,...But the just looking for an answer that can avoid them learning the technicailtys...

wells here my question...from what i understand...mastering uses A multi band compressor Eq and a limiter....

Now i know how to use these things..But i never Masterd a track..Besides doing that i know there are technicalitys like Rms and things like that...Basiclly to keep it short..what are all the technical things that you want to moniter when you are mastering a song or Cd...

alot of people have waves bundles and the waves program...i also do to..I know mastering will take years to become atleast a lil bit good...so im tring to get a head start and practice on sum just for fun...

what should i Moniter? what the hell is RMS...and what other technical stuff is involved.,..Beside the Plug ins and the room...also when using the MBC should i be light compression..i read in scratch magaizine that people squash the track with compression to kill the dynamics and be able to apliphy the overal volum by alot! could nayone clear this up for me?
 
Basiclly to keep it short..what are all the technical things that you want to moniter when you are mastering a song or Cd...
If you're asking *any* of those questions, I'd suggest that you have several years of full-time study, experimentation and practical experience coming...

* Maul-the-band compression is VERY rarely used in mastering - It's a band-aid for a mix gone wrong that can't be remixed.

* EQ is something that the mix asks for. Same with dynamics control. If you don't know what the mix is asking for, see above (about study, practical experience and experimentation). The whole point is listening objectively - Without that, all you're really doing is second-guessing your own mixes.

If you're not even certain of the basics of mixing (RMS levels, when & how to apply EQ and dynamics control, etc.), I'd seriously consider at least getting a couple of good books on the basics and go from there. Then, grab Bob Katz's "Mastering Audio" book - Don't try to jump into that - It expects that you have a thourough knowledge of the recording process before you read page one. It's also not a book on mastering technique - Again, you develop your own technique once you learn to listen and know what your tools do.

YOu can always start by reading your Waves manual also - Excellently written. I'm not a big fan of their plugs, but their literature is pretty good.
 
Adlib311 said:
from what i understand...mastering uses A multi band compressor Eq and a limiter....

Accually from what I understand mastering uses an Eq if needed, a compressor (not multi-band), and a limiter (this could be multi-band). And I have heard that many people use some noise reduction. And everything else that includes Exciters, Maximizers, and MBC are used if absolutely needed.

But what I want to know is what part of the process do you think makes the most difference to get the best possible sound and makes you worth every penny on that paycheck. I mean if someone mixes the track perfectly and has compression done in moderation as needed and the track has a really clean sound with pleanty of headroom what makes a Mastering Engineer a must have?
 
The ME might decide that the track is good as it is and leave the track mostly untouched. Of course, there's the whole loudness deal but if the mix sounds good as it is then it might only need something minor. An ME might run the audio through a compressor that has certain character that could make things sound better. Maybe the compressor has a bright but pleasant sound, a punchy sound, a smooth sound, etc... And this will also help the tracks in the entire album have a similar sound.

No one can really say something like "an ME will remove harsh sound from a track by cutting the high frequencies with a broad eq". Because then people might think that all mixes are harsh before mastering and that you have to tame the highs. So it's hard to mention something and have people only apply a technique where needed and not just because they know how to apply something.

You absolutely have to learn your tools and how they sound. A compressot isn't just a compressor and an eq isn't just an eq. You could find that the Waves Rennaissance EQ can be very aggressive with filtering while the Cubase built-in eq is works better as a broadband eq rather because isn't not very accurate at all. while they are all compressor, the Waves Rvox, Rcomp, limiters, and C compressors all have very different sound to them. The limiters are forgiving but not great. The Rcomp has a pleasant sound but you'll have to really play with it if you plan to push it. The C compressor is pretty good for dynamic controls but sound real ugly when set wrong (and ugly period). The Rvox plugin can be good but can be bad in as many cases. Your experience may be different. It is why experimenting is very important.
 
Morning_Star said:
But what I want to know is what part of the process do you think makes the most difference to get the best possible sound and makes you worth every penny on that paycheck. I mean if someone mixes the track perfectly and has compression done in moderation as needed and the track has a really clean sound with pleanty of headroom what makes a Mastering Engineer a must have?
A flat transfer is the ideal situation... Of dozens and dozens of records I've recorded and/or mixed, I had ONE flat transfer during mastering - A simple straight pass with no processing (except for a straight level boost *just* kissing a limiter.

But as with every other project, I mixed it on an "okay" set of monitors (maybe $2,000 or so) in a room crowded with gear. I was intimately familiar with every single note and had a very subjective idea of the sound. There was *no way* I could make any type of critical decision that I didn't already make to the best of my ability.

The mastering engineer on the other hand, was listening to the project for the very first time (totally objectively with no prejudice at all about the sound) on a FAR superior set of loudspeakers in a FAR superior room with FAR superior equipment than what I was using during the mix. When he said "You know, there's really nothing in here that I'd want to change - What do you say we just leave it alone?" That was probably the best feeling I ever had.

Still, the load, heads & tails, sequencing and assembly alone probably took four hours or so. It was the cheapest mastering session I ever attended, but I left with a compliant production master that was properly assembled and coded, logged and error checked (BLER), etc.

Which is basically what mastering was always about - Listening objectively, then changing the sound as little as possible while assembling a compliant production master. Of course, there's some light tweaking to get all the mixes to sit well together, and perhaps a bit of a "polish" even on really great mixes - But over the last decade or so, there are VERY few projects that come in that are as simple as a flat transfer... Some of the bigger budget stuff comes close - There, it's usually the volume thing - "Make it loud" while changing the sound as little as possible. Sounds easy, but that's actually the hardest part of the job - Pushing a mix beyond where it wants to sit at *always* damages the audio - Trying to counteract that damage is the trick. Part of that is using gear that's up to the job. Another part is knowing where to quit - when enough is enough. Objectiviy and monitoring again.

But generally, you're paying for ears, experience and a supreme monitoring situation. Translation doesn't come from listening to mixes on a dozen sets of cheap speakers that you're not really familiar with - It comes from tweaking the mixes on an *excellent* set of speakers that the engineer is amazingly familiar with.

It's weird that this question comes up as often as it does though... It really isn't anything new - It's a specialty, just like anything else. Some guys design cars, some guys build them, some guys paint them, some guys put the finishing details on.
 
adlib,
look in this section for the radio cast about mastering thread. if you go and listen to the file at the link i think you might find it quite an interesting 15 minutes.
 
Back
Top