"mastering" questions....

  • Thread starter Thread starter Reds Garage
  • Start date Start date
Farview said:
Why would you mix out to split mono? Most of the time you would mix to an interleaved stereo file.
Click to expand...

Multiple mono is meant to yield better quality, but I don't agree its even worth using multi-mono, I use stereo interleaved all the time.

Eck
 
Decipha said:
red... send me a copy of the track and I'll do a quick mix job on it and send it back to you, i prefer 320 mp3 send via putstuff or lightningmp3
Click to expand...
Ummmmmm......what???

G.
 
ecktronic said:
Multiple mono is meant to yield better quality, but I don't agree its even worth using multi-mono, I use stereo interleaved all the time.

Eck
Click to expand...

Eck -

Please elaborate, other than a potential difference in pan laws I'm not aware of any difference.
 
masteringhouse said:
Eck -

Please elaborate, other than a potential difference in pan laws I'm not aware of any difference.
Click to expand...
The pan law difference would make multiple mono the problem, stereo interleaved is always how you mixed it.
 
Farview said:
The pan law difference would make multiple mono the problem, stereo interleaved is always how you mixed it.
Click to expand...

Also the potential for phase issues with multiple mono make them more of a problem.
 
Massive Master said:
That's what I was thinking also...
Click to expand...
Thank you. If I'm crazy, at least I'm not alone ;) :D.

First I thought he was talking about mastering something, since that is what this thread is about. But then he says he wants an MP3 source, so that can't be it. And then he says he wants to make a "mix" for him, but he's going to make a mix from a mixdown file? That's an MP3 to boot?

I know that Decipha is a well-intentioned young man, but my brain hurts.

G.
 
Or maybe he's a genius who figured out how to reconstruct audio from lossy compression and how to separate tracks from a stereo mix.

Just maybe.
 
I'm in the "tame the transients first" camp. Also, if the tracks are accessable, you can usually find the culprit(s) of the transients and treat them at the track level instead of in the mix file. The less surgical dynamic processing on the whole mix, the better. And the less "bad" dynamics in the mix file, the louder the mix can get during mastering without damage.
 
Robert D said:
I'm in the "tame the transients first" camp. Also, if the tracks are accessable, you can usually find the culprit(s) of the transients and treat them at the track level instead of in the mix file. The less surgical dynamic processing on the whole mix, the better. And the less "bad" dynamics in the mix file, the louder the mix can get during mastering without damage.
Click to expand...

Well said.
 
masteringhouse said:
Or maybe he's a genius who figured out how to reconstruct audio from lossy compression and how to separate tracks from a stereo mix.

Just maybe.
Click to expand...
If that's the case, he's wasting his time here. That kind of genius gets one tenure at Princeton or the NSA :D.

G.
 
Quoted from Wikipedia(I know, I know :p):

Pan Law functions can be different in different kinds of mixing consoles and other recording gear. For example, in Digidesign Pro Tools, the pan law is 2.5 dB.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Farview
The pan law difference would make multiple mono the problem, stereo interleaved is always how you mixed it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mastering House
Also the potential for phase issues with multiple mono make them more of a problem.


Great info, I had no idea about the 'pan law'. Crazy, I paid to go to a 'professional' sound engineering school, and they never touched on it once. As a matter of fact, I don't recall if the text we used even said anything about it either. It was 'Modern Recording Techniques' I believe, but don't quote me on that ;) .

So I did a quick bit of research on pan laws on the internet, and can understand how it would affect my mix. If I used multiple mono, would there be phase issues because the center is 2.5 db louder than the stereo interleaved mix or is it because the mono channels don't really have any stereo info, just differences in volumes of the various elements of the mix?

The guy I'm going to said he uses wavelab to master, and at first asked for the songs in audio format(stereo, obviously). When I told him I had it all bounced into split mono or stereo interleaved data files, he then said that would be better. From the sounds of it I should go with the stereo interleaved mix, as it seems the safer route to go. Judging by the comments here, anyways!:D Thanks guys, keeps getting better!
 
The phase problem doesn't have anything to do with panning laws, it's a problem related to two mono files not being timed perfectly, possible latency issues between the two tracks, or software bugs. I've experienced this from some clients where having them send me the same track(s) as stereo interleaved resolved the issue.
 
masteringhouse said:
Maybe he's a humble genius. :)
Click to expand...
That's even rarer! :D
-----
Red, that Wikiality wacky woo woo entry is woefully incomplete and misleading. It gives the impression that PT has only one pan law and that it's only a half dB off of a 3dB standard.

There's much more to it than that, including the fact that the vast majority of NLEs are not limited to a single panning law, they are usually customizable amongst several options. Also, how they acheive that 3dB center notch can be entirely different, which is equally important.

For a bit better of a taste, check out Craig Anderton's EQ article published on Harmony Central at

http://www.harmony-central.com/articles/tips/panning_laws/

G.
 
EddieRay said:
2. You can't master just one song.
Click to expand...

Do you guys think it will always be this way, or do you think in the future, maybe even now a little (with the single online pick your own tracks think), you'll be using most of the processes that are in Mastering for a single song, maybe it would be called something else ie: Finishing, finalizing...
 
ds21 said:
Do you guys think it will always be this way, or do you think in the future, maybe even now a little (with the single online pick your own tracks think), you'll be using most of the processes that are in Mastering for a single song, maybe it would be called something else ie: Finishing, finalizing...
Click to expand...

I don't agree that you can't master one song. I actually do this quite often for dance oriented artists, though it might include a few remixes it's still only only one song.
 
si. i only said you can't master one song because, he's the mixing engineer.

if you're putting an eq on your master fader, and you have access to the mix...i think there's something fishy going on.
 
cello_pudding said:
si. i only said you can't master one song because, he's the mixing engineer.

if you're putting an eq on your master fader, and you have access to the mix...i think there's something fishy going on.
Click to expand...

Ah sorry I took the statement out of context. I totally agree in that scenario.
 
masteringhouse said:
Eck -

Please elaborate, other than a potential difference in pan laws I'm not aware of any difference.
Click to expand...

Multiple mono is meant to be better as you are processing each wave seperately, I think it has something to do with getting better dithering.
I could be totally wrong but its something I found out through the Pro Tools courses.

Eck
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top