D
Definition
Guest
Is this necessary if the tracks are going to be sent to someone to master them professionally, as essentially that is what they are going to do to it anyway, just with much better sounding compressors and EQs.
K
kid848
Guest
... Maybe very very light compression... but I normally don't put any effects across the main out...
M
MASSIVE Mastering
Guest
I use *mild* buss compression when mixing (1-1.5dB of gain reduction or so) here and there. If more is needed, then it's very likely that something needs dynamic control *in the mix* instead. Basically no EQ... If it's needed on the buss, it's missing in the mix.
2nice
Active member
Definition said:
"much better sounding" isn't totally accurate, as there are compressors and eqs that sound just fine and yet come a dime a dozen. such is not the case with, say, filters... they have a totally audible gap in quality between the nice ones and the cheap (free) ones. but compression and eq dont necessarily have to be done with anything fancy.
what engineers will do, however, is hear your mix without any personal attachment to the music, which you cannot do since you created the music. and they have waaaay better monitors than you, and a better room to play them in. and they are familiar with all the guidelines (proper listening level during mixdown, necessary headroom, etc) that will make your music sound prime. and not to mention, they do this profesionally, so they are most likely much better at compression/eq than you or me.
i got a little off topic... to answer your question, if you are definitely going to send your stuff to a mastering engineer, let them do the eq (if any) and compression for the total mix. not because of their equipment, but because of their skills and the fact that they didn't make the music.
Last edited:
N
neilwight
Guest
not sure i fully agree with you 2nice.
my comps and eqs sound very nice, definately top end and definately better than dime a dozen hardware
(never mind software)
most mastering houses i know are in similar situations, infact most i would trust to send things too, without exception have great sounding outboard.
now whether you need all this to make good tracks is an entirely seperate question but for 2buss processing where impact is more critical and the tasks more demanding then in my experience its certainly beneficial to have tools like this
regarding 2buss EQ and Compression at a before mastering stage.
IMHO this is fine if its purpose is to get the track sounding as you want it. most times adjusting at an individual level gives you much more control and clearer results and 2buss is more a band-aid type approach but there are plenty of circumstances where some 2buss processing can get you there quickly or easily.
as an artist/producer you need to ensure that the track when it leaves you is as close to sounding as you want it to be while at the same time ignoring the obvious lack of volume when compared with mastered work. its this point that really does the damage pre mastering. loud and overcompressed mixes coming to mastering after taking a hammering with compression and limiting on the 2buss and so its this you need to be careful of.
if some light compression or some eq shaping helps the track sound more complete and as per your ideas then by all means use it, if its there just to make it loud then dont
my comps and eqs sound very nice, definately top end and definately better than dime a dozen hardware
(never mind software)most mastering houses i know are in similar situations, infact most i would trust to send things too, without exception have great sounding outboard.
now whether you need all this to make good tracks is an entirely seperate question but for 2buss processing where impact is more critical and the tasks more demanding then in my experience its certainly beneficial to have tools like this
regarding 2buss EQ and Compression at a before mastering stage.
IMHO this is fine if its purpose is to get the track sounding as you want it. most times adjusting at an individual level gives you much more control and clearer results and 2buss is more a band-aid type approach but there are plenty of circumstances where some 2buss processing can get you there quickly or easily.
as an artist/producer you need to ensure that the track when it leaves you is as close to sounding as you want it to be while at the same time ignoring the obvious lack of volume when compared with mastered work. its this point that really does the damage pre mastering. loud and overcompressed mixes coming to mastering after taking a hammering with compression and limiting on the 2buss and so its this you need to be careful of.
if some light compression or some eq shaping helps the track sound more complete and as per your ideas then by all means use it, if its there just to make it loud then dont
2nice
Active member
neilwight said:not sure i fully agree with you 2nice.
my comps and eqs sound very nice, definately top end and definately better than dime a dozen hardware
most mastering houses i know are in similar situations, infact most i would trust to send things too, without exception have great sounding outboard.
now whether you need all this to make good tracks is an entirely seperate question but for 2buss processing where impact is more critical and the tasks more demanding then in my experience its certainly beneficial to have tools like this
i gotcha... with regard to "dime a dozen" compressors, i was referring to the idea of "transparent" digital (software) compressors, as used in, say, a protools mixdown. to me, they all sound about the same although some can be pricey for some reason.
i see that its not quite the same as using an analog board with hardware compression, where you get all the great analog warmth assuming that you have nice equipment. and id assume that analog compression shouldnt be bought cheap.
but i need a little education on this... assuming that i am doing all the mixing/etc myself for a DIY-type album, and my compression is in the digital (software) domain, would i be correct if i said that fancy software compressors (waves, izotope, etc) arent really a big deal? and do you think that software mixdown and compression will hurt my mix (considering that i only use light compression settings anyways)? i know that people always used to complain that digital mixdowns messed up the low frequencies and sounded "cold" but (according to dr dre in scratch) this has been somewhat fixed as of the late releases of protools... am i correct? and anyways, i already have some of the "warmth" since i do use some real analog synths, analog filters, vinyl samples, live instruments, etc...
I look at compressors as different more often than not rather than better than one another. Some will be better for some uses others will be better for other uses.
You'll have an easier time using different compressors for different things than tryin to get by with one compressor, even if it's proven to sound good. You can do with whatever you have but if a compressor gives you the character you're looking for then it's worth using it. I've never heard a free compressor that I liked but there's not a lot that I've tried also.
You'll have an easier time using different compressors for different things than tryin to get by with one compressor, even if it's proven to sound good. You can do with whatever you have but if a compressor gives you the character you're looking for then it's worth using it. I've never heard a free compressor that I liked but there's not a lot that I've tried also.
A
AltheKiller
Guest
what are some real ones yo liked?