Mastering for non-engineers

O

odiwgal

New member
First I want to say that I'm a very experienced musician, but relatively new to home recording. I'm also new to this discussion site, and WOW...there are some really talented and knowledgeable folks here. This is a terrific resource!

Now, on to my questions. I am tring to get a handle on the mastering process. I'm lost on the details of just what it takes to end up with a finished product that's suitable for burning to CD. Now, I realize that the ideal situation would be to take a mixed version of a project to a mastering house where it could be transformed into something special, but I'm interested in just what can be done in my own studio.

First things first. Is this what happens before mastering?:
1. Record dry tracks that sound as close to what you want as possible (factors being mic selection and placement, levels)
2. Tweak tracks by adding EQ, effects, compression, etc.
3. Mix down to stereo
4. Master the mixed stereo WAV file.
5. Burn to CD

Is that the right order?

On the mastering part, what's typical? It seems that alot of people here are using Wavelab. What exactly are you doing? Mainly compression and normalization?

Any specific mastering techniques for computer-based recording would be HIGHLY appreciated. Or if this has been discussed before here, pointers to threads.

Thanks again...GREAT site.
 
i think a lot depends on what your purpose for recording is
if just for yourself/few friends you can probably get away with minimal mastering using a home setup

if aimimg for more broad release a mastering house can be invaluable to put the final touches on a project.

maybe the most important aspect of mastering is to let an experienced set of ears listen to your project and go from there...
hope this helps some...there are some good articles on Home Rec home page
 
Mastering is mainly compression issues and overall EQ. However it does boil down into many other factors. In our mastering suite, all the racks units are mostly specially designed for mastering and you wouldn't find them in general recording only studios. professional mastering tends to use a whole new set of equipment.

you may wanna just consider the dynamic range of your final mix. normalize your tracks and if you want, add limiters, or compressors or whatever, but without squashing your track. watch out with your eq, be carefull not to add too much bass, it's easily done. if you're not too up to date with mastering, while you're learning, make adjustments to things such as compresison, and it's a good idea to play them back in a walk man or something to see if it sounds ok. after ive done a big mix / mastering session, i stick the mix on minidisc, and go away for a while and listen to it on a regular portable player, if it sounds good in that and the bass isn't rumbling or anything, then its a sucsess. what monitors are you using? what equipment are you using?

if you want computer mastering, theres a great budget package called T-Racks. it has a valve-like compressor with all saturation facilities, a limiter and an EQ. you can get some good results for a home studio if you play around with it. here, we use soundforge as our mix editor, allthough any effects and processing are done usually with outboard gear.but sometimes we need to move bits of the songs around, like move a verse somewhere else or something. for that, soundforge is great. wavelab is also a good package for you.

hope that helps, let me know if you need any specif information, i can try and get the mastering engineer to help you out.
-Romesh
Long Wave Studios
 
Thanks for the help so far. It might be useful to tell you about my equipment.

Echo Gina 20, 2in, 8out
Cakewalk Pro Audio 9
Mackie 1202vlz mixer
Alesis RA-100 amp
Alesis Monitor One reference monitors
Lexicon MPX1 processor
Oktava MC012 mics
Audio Technica AT 4047/SV mic

I WANT to record in Cakewalk, export a stereo mix, then master that to a finished product...all on the computer. I have Soundforge CD Architect 4, and Adaptec CD Creator 4.

Sounds like if I get T-racks, do a little EQ, compression, and normalization, I should get a pretty good result. Right? Bottom line is that I'm not sure what to "do" with the wave file to declare it as "mastered". I mean, should I scan the wave file, look for and compress spikes so that normalizing will work, uh..."normally"? And if the answer lies with EQ, normalization, and compression, in what order do they happen?

So far, I've gotten pretty good-sounding results with the "Louis Armstrong" method..."if it SOUNDS GOOD, it IS good". Am I off base?
 
Hate to burst your bubble, but true mastering gear alone will run you in the order of tens of thousands of dollars more than the gear you listed.... You can burn $5K for a compressor alone.......... and let's not even talk about monitoring!

Check out http://www.digido.com for mastering info from the premiere mastering engineer Bob Katz.

Bottom line - if you really want to master a project, send it to a mastering house, otherwise you have a steep and expensive learning curve ahead of you. With DIY mastering, you're pretty much limited to the areas LongWave described.

Bruce Valeriani
Blue Bear Sound
 
More to it...

Also someone mentioned earlier that mastering was mainly compression and EQ...True these processes are included but many other things are done such as phase and frequency alignment, tonal balancing and a host of other things. Tis a tricky process indeed. However if you're just "mastering" for your own home project than you may not have to worry about some of these issues. Again as someone else mentioned it's all dependant on your final use of the CD. Cheers!
 
Bruce, what you say is true, but maybe you didn't notice this bit in the original post:

"I realize that the ideal situation would be to take a
mixed version of a project to a mastering house where it
could be transformed into something special, but I'm
interested in just what can be done in my own studio."

Learner training.
 
Hmmm...

...true Dobro, that little part escaped me... but what I, LongWave, and Sonic Valley wrote would still apply!

:)

Bruce
 
mastering can still be done at home

If you wanna do budget mastering, you CAN do it at home but you just have to understand its nothing like mixing in a proper studio. Take Long Wave Studios (my studio), people hire the mixing or the mastering suite JUST to use our monitors so they can see what their mix sounds like somewhere else. and they sound awful. usually cus they've stuck the final mix into a Behringer Composer or something and used desk EQ.

The best thing to do on a budget is to either buy a package like T-Racks, or soundforge, whatever or..

spend a bit more money and buy a TC Finalizer Express. They're cheap compared to the others, they're only 700 UKPOUNDS. dunno how many dollars, but thats not expensive for mastering. if however, you go the software route, it may be wise to get something like an SPL Vitaliser cus thats your only really good way of tightening up the bass end. that unit is ok for home studios, some people use it profesionally too.

over here in the UK, you are seeing more Finalizers in studios.

-Romesh
 
I'm sorry LWS, I was with you to a point, but you lost me on advising the use of a Finalizer. Call me purist & elitist about it, and no doubt this should spawn the flames (and in the end, no one will listen anyways!), BUT the last thing the world needs are more recordings brutalized by the likes of Finalizers and Sonic Maximizers in the hands of DIY'rs who A) don't know how to use them, and B) don't have the monitoring system in place to judge their use correctly even if they did know how to use them!

I know software, computers, technology, blah, blah.... the most expensive plug-in in the world won't help you if you don't have the monitoring/listening room available to make the proper sonic decisions. Even less if you don't even know what to listen for!!!

If you're at home, with basic gear - it's NOT MASTERING - you can even things out a bit with compression, sweeten a bit with EQ, rearrange song order on a cd, even burn a CD-R - BUT IT'S NOT MASTERING!!!! You're essentially doing what is already happening at a pro facility at mix-down (except for the song order). If you REALLY REALLY want to master at home - scrape $50K budget together, buy the gear, then spend a few YEARS training your ears to know what to listen for........

Let the flames begin! ;)

Bruce
 
Yeah, I'm glad you stuck your neck out a bit. I'm not gonna flame but I'll talk about two things that occur to me.

"If you REALLY REALLY want to master at home - scrape $50K budget together, buy the gear, then spend a few YEARS training your ears to know what to listen for........"

Well, maybe this is a wee tiny flame... :D Nobody 'scrapes' $50,000 together - that's a major investment, and if you DO invest that much money in mastering equipment, you're not a home recordist - you're either a pro or a sad bastard. The person who started this thread definitely defined his/her aims as being homerecording on a budget less than the cost of going to a mastering studio (or buying mastering studio gear).

Second, is there anything you can do with a Finalizer that you can't do with Waves? (I know, I know, prop the door open with it, anchor your boat with it, but aside from that...) If you're amateur, I mean. I know a Finalizer can't do what a real mastering studio can do, but can it do what software can't, or! can it do it more easily?

Finally, I love to speculate. And my speculation is wondering if British recording has different criteria to American, different ideas of what's acceptable, desirable, etc. I know that's certainly true in songwriting. Or is recording truly international?
 
good questions...so I will repeat them:

1. can a finalizer do more than any current software?

2. are the standards of "good" sounding recordings international...or vary from country to country? (hope I got that one correct ;-)

Personally, I do not have a finalizer, but every piece of software under the sun..almost..since I am more computer oriented.
I'd move to a country where the standards are *less* ..so my stuff would more favorably compare!!! ha!!
 
First of all bruce,

when I said you can master at home, I was getting the point across that it is the closest you can get to doing it at home.

Bruce, If you know how to use a Finalizer, you CAN produce some really good results. Now, im not running a home studio, im running a very well established 8 studio recording house. When we finishing doing the recording side of a track, at the end of the day, we make a rough mix and chuck it through a finalizer just for the artists and engineers to listen to overnight to get ideas for the next day. the sound of the rough mix through a 24/96 finalizer is AMAZING. simply cus I, or one of the engineers here know how to use the damn things. I agree, ive had many a mix come here cus they've used a finalizer wrong. By the way, just for the record, our mastering suite doesn't run on a bunch on finalizers.:-)

I dont think there's anything wrong with using a finalizer on a mix if you're recording at home. you can obtain a good sound much easier than using a computer and a lot better. the compression in general is better on the finalizers. and if you get the 24/96 finalizer the overall quality is better than throwing everything into a computer that runs in 16bit (unless you have a 24bit card).

Bruce, how many recordings have you heard by finalizers? You've probably heard all bad one's if you dont think they are any good. I wouldnt be happy to use it on a recording that was to be used commercially, but for a home studio, and for use on rough mixes, the unit is perfect. infact, 3 weeks ago, we had two guys who hired out our dance studio. The tracks were recorded on a full blown Pro Tools system and was mixed on two mackie d8b's. we made two main mixes...one straight out of the D8B, and one with a 24/96 Finalizer (by their request). Last week they took both the tracks to a friend's mastering studio (a PROPER one), and the only thing that was adjusted was the fade out. the quality of the mix that came out of that finalizer was so amazing, the mastering studio didn't touch the sound of it. it's due for release in UK in a months time now.no one would ever know it was mastered on a finalizer, and if we had our way, we wouldn't let it go through it, but it actually came out sounding excellent.

you said..

'the last thing the world needs are more recordings brutalized by the likes of Finalizers and Sonic Maximizers in the hands of DIY'rs who A) don't know how to use them, and B) don't have the monitoring system in place to judge their use correctly even if they did know how to use them! '

i dont think this is really a valid point. people dont know how to use them because they haven't spent enough time using them, if you spend some time getting to know it, your recordings wont be brutalized. another quick story, going back a while now, a guy had done a dance track in his own studio..as i was saying earlier, people hire out our mastering suite to check mixes. well this guy had done all the mixing and mastered it on a Finalizer using HI-FI stereo speakers, not monitors. he brought it to the studio and we played the DAT through our monitors...almost perfect, a little bit too pumpy on the low end, but just a tiny bit. we tried the real test by playing it through ns-10's out of curiosity, it even sounded good on that. it show you can definitely get somewhere with a finalizer.

almost everyday i come into contact with people using Finalizers professionally and amateur, if you spend time with them, the results can be obtained. why discourage someone getting a finalizer when if he spends time with it, his recordings may not end up 'brutalized'. again, im not saying all this is the same as going to a proper mastering studio..


ahh, like bruce said, let the flaming begin.
-romesh
long wave studio

anyway, that's just a little story for you Bruce.

-romesh.
love wave studio
 
Romesh,

My comments weren't directed at you specifically - I gathered from your bio and comments that you weren't a DIY'r - my whole point to the rant was that there is A LOT more to the art of mastering than running a mix thru a Finalizer.

Even in the hands of a professional, what's it used for a majority of the time - TO RESCUE BAD MIXES. If you already have a good mix, only minor tweaks are needed - a Finalizer (or the equivalent plug-ins) is the quick and dirty answer to "mastering" in much the same way as a Sonic Maximizer is to brighten a recording (you'd use it to fix something but the better way is to record it properly in the first place!)

Anyways, I don't want a big debate about it - it's not going to change. I just don't like the way recorded sound is headed - high-compression, 3-4db overall dynamic range, and bright enough to blow tweeters across the room. The reasons why that is have a lot to do with amateurs mis-using gear and looking for the quick answer, rather than learning the craft of recording engineering and mastering.

...and I'm out!

Bruce :)
 
"The reasons why that is have a lot to do with amateurs mis-using gear and looking for the quick answer, rather than learning the craft of recording engineering and mastering."

I thought the compression wars rose out of commercial recording in pro studios, with a whole decade of people thinking louder was cooler, and with the amateurs following suit. I had no idea that home recordists were setting the trends that the big boys follow. They'll be stocking pro studio mic cupboards with Rode NT-1s next. :D

Anyway Mixmkr, I don't think we got our questions answered. Poo.
 
What Im hearing is that the main components in the mastering process are the talent of the engineer and quality monitors.

So, for the sake of a productive thread lets assume that through trial and error we could learn how to master the same way you guys have.And in this instance for the sake of this question I ask you big pro's:

Can software like waves be used for mastering if there is no other option available?Lets say im just doing it as an experiment to learn how its done, like a homework assignment.Cant it be done?

If yes, How.....

This is not an issue of mastering something to go to the pressing plant, but on a pc with software for a demo or limiteed release.

So,
1. What software is good for the mastering process?

2. Is good software better than lousy hardware(and they tend to cost the same)?

3.Any tips for us lowly home recordists?

Lets just imagine this takes place in a world turned on its head in wich these are the only options...
 
Here is an idea!!!

Instead of getting into a theoretical debate about the merits of mastering at home with such and such hardware/software, and the results in may/may not produce, why don't you just start trying to do it with what you got!

It is not like a little experimenting is going to end the world.

Stay within your budget. You are going to spend about $1000 for ANY home recording type of mastering solution.

A little hint though, the pc route is the better bang for the buck.

So now you know. Get out and start doing it and report back your results.

Ed
 
Well,

Sonusman, we haven't got like experience (duh duh duh i'm dumb duh duh duh).
Do you work with software, if yes can you give us an idea what to start with? and where to end.

Think of these keywords "Dumb, but willing to learn."

Thanks
Guhlenn;)
 
I've achieved some decent results with old mixes using Sound Forge. It's by no means mastering, but the outcome has been way better than the original mixes. What it really came down to was a LOT of patience (which I don't have... I know I could've done better if I'd been more patient) and trial and error, and if something that disturbs you really much, it's generally better to re-record it..

tweak, listen, undo, tweak, listen, undo, tweak, listen advance.....

Good luck
- Mesh
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top