EQ and MASTERING

[robbysaudio]

Hi

I'd lile to know what you think. I have a number of tunes to master at home to make a CD. Assumng I've got the mix sounding good, but after mixdown there's that stereo mixed track; lacking all the love and sparkle and all sounding a tad weak and 'rounded-off' in places. I'd expect this, so I have two options (possibly more?)

I have an early T-Racks mastering suite which is great, but I've also set up some really hot EQ's in Sound Forge.

The sound forge EQ settings I create really bring the top end back to life and put some of the drive back into the sound - I'm happy

So then, I load the original file into T-Racks and, of course it has it's sweepable parametric EQ, but Compressor and Limiter sections, also. I fiddle with that and again the track sounds cooking. What about a two-step ...?

OK, if I now load the previously EQ'd (SF) track into T-Racks maybe I don't need to use the EQ section, but I could benefit from the Comp and Limiter, but how far would this go to undoing the work done with the Sound forge EQ?

What do think are my best options?

Can anyone also explain why T-Racks has both Comp and Limiter and outline the use of both in the mastering stage?

Over to you, Master-chiefs ....

 

[Massive Master]

I'm not even certain what you're asking...

If your own mixes are lacking in (whatever) then why are you trying to do something different because you put a hat that says "mastering" on? Go back and fix the mixes.

The reason for the comp and the limiter is that one is a compressor and the other is a limiter - Again, I don't understand the question. If you need a compressor, there it is. If you need a limiter, there it is. If you need both, there they are.

The idea is to know the tools and know what they do. Then you will know what the mix needs -- Although still, if you weren't happy with the mix as it was... You see where I'm going here?

 

[jmorris]

If you are asking can you eq. in sound forge then compress and limit in T-racks the answer is yes. You can use whatever you want whenever. The order of processing DOES matter but bouncing between different programs does not.Does this help?It also sounds like you have some presets you like for eq. in sound forge??? Be careful with that. Now, having said that.When I'm recording a live gig in a club,in the mix stage,or I should say after the mixing stage,I'll find a stereo eq. I like for the entire mix.Nothing drastic, just cut a tad here,boost a tad there.I will save it as a preset and run all the stereo mixes through.You have to remeber that a band playing an entire night with the same drums,gtrs,bass,vocals and all the same mic,processing and same room lends itself to this with a good result. If you are using a "standard preset" for eq. you have created and running a whole bunch of mixes through it, that may cause you problems. There is NO standard eq.An eq. for all occasions so to speak unless in my so mentioned example IMO.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Assumng I've got the mix sounding good, but after mixdown there's that stereo mixed track; lacking all the love and sparkle and all sounding a tad weak and 'rounded-off' in places. I'd expect this

Not to sound too strident about this, but an honest question: Why do you expect this?

Where does this pervasive attitude always come from that one should expect their mixes to be lacking and that they can fix that best by waiting until after the mixing is done to fix it?

If at mixdown your mix is lacking, then your mix is lacking, and you should go back and fix it *in the mix*.

Use whatever plugs you like. There is absolutely nothing special about T-racks that means it can only be used in mastering. All it is is a collection of the very same kind of EQs, compressers, limiters, etc. that are also used during tracking and mixing. Use - or at least develop - your mixing skills so that you get a great sounding *mix*, not an insufficient mix that needs more work.

The difference between a limiter and a compressor is a matter of degree. Limiters work only at the higher compression ratios with (in general) harder knees than most compressors.

G.

 

[masteringhouse]

It sounds like you need a more comprehensive DAW to perform mastering. It's best to hear all of the processing at once for all of the tracks rather than going back and forth between DAWs for a single track.

I would drive me nuts working this way ...

 

[Erockrazor]

If at mixdown your mix is lacking, then your mix is lacking, and you should go back and fix it *in the mix*

I think this is good advice to take a look at robby.

Just imagine if you could get your tracks sounding right before you took it to the mastering level. It would raise your production a whole ... two step?

Fix it before you master it. Add that "sparkle" before you master and see how the tracks come out in the end. This should make a noticeable difference in your final mix.

Good luck.

Also, it's not a sin to use something from t-racks on a single track that needs .. "sparkle". Whatever makes your track work, works.

 

[robbysaudio]

OK

I get the pattern of your points here folks. I'm in total agreement, with your attitude to fix it 'in the mix' and I admit my questions did come across as vague. I've since, simply tried different mixes out then ran them through various other software as a mastering stage. I've let my ears do the decision making.

I don't wholly understand why though, if all this can be done in the mixdown of the multi-track, that mastering as a 'specialised area' exists. Even in the best recording house products, with top notch production, the mix goes to mastering, doesn't it?

I don't assume that the mixdowns will be rubbish, I can just hear there's a difference. Thanks to all who took the time to respond - very much appreciated

Take care

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

I don't wholly understand why though, if all this can be done in the mixdown of the multi-track, that mastering as a 'specialised area' exists.

Mastering is (supposed to be) the process of prepping the mixed tracks for publishing, not the area where the mixing is actually done.

Sure, you can make a mix sound better in mastering, but that doesn't mean that is where you should do it.

It makes a difference in overall quality where things are done in the process; in general, the earlier in the process you inject the quality, the better off you'll be. Quality tracking witll beat trying to massage so-so tracking in mixing any day, and quality mixing will beat trying to massage the mix in mastering any day.

Think of mastering as detailing a car. Sure, detailing will make *any* car look better, no question. But you detail a rusty old Chevy Citation, it'll still look like a rusty old bucket with a nice cleaning and polishing. Detail an '08 BMW, though, and it'll make the difference between just another nice car and something from the Auto Show that makes you drool involuntarily .

Equally as important is that there will - more sooner than later - be a problem with the mix that just cannot be fully or properly fixed after the fact. if one is not used to getting things right in the mix, they'll waste hours in the mastering trying to scratch an itch they just can't reach. Learn to frontload the quality and how to mix as if there were no such thing as mastering, and such problems will never happen.

G.

 

[RAMI]

Think of mastering as detailing a car. Sure, detailing will make *any* car look better, no question. But you detail a rusty old Chevy Citation, it'll still look like a rusty old bucket with a nice cleaning and polishing. Detail an '08 BMW, though, and it'll make the difference between just another nice car and something from the Auto Show that makes you drool involuntarily .

What? No food?????

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

What? No food?????

The food analogies tend to show up mostly when I'm hungry. I made that post after lunch .

G.

 

[Bristol Posse]

Think of mastering as detailing a car. Sure, detailing will make *any* car look better, no question. But you detail a rusty old Chevy Citation, it'll still look like a rusty old bucket with a nice cleaning and polishing. Detail an '08 BMW, though, and it'll make the difference between just another nice car and something from the Auto Show that makes you drool involuntarily .
.

BMW???? control that drool (I'm sure there's a plug for that) and set your sights a little higher

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

BMW???? control that drool (I'm sure there's a plug for that) and set your sights a little higher

Who needs "higher"? At some point, aiming higher just sends the arrow sailing over the target.

G.

 

[NYMorningstar]

OK

I get the pattern of your points here folks. I'm in total agreement, with your attitude to fix it 'in the mix' and I admit my questions did come across as vague...

It would be even better to fix it at the source Good recorded tracks will almost mix themselves.