My mastering plugins suck.

[RawDepth]

I usually don't do much home mastering. Instead I keep tweaking my final mixes for days until I am happy with them. I do have a few mastering plugs with dozens of factory presets, but rarely use any of them. Today I had some free time on my hands, so I ran a recent mix through each preset one at a time and gave it a real close listen. (I was only trying to get the song louder and punchier.)

Some were obviously as wrong as they could be, while others were more subtle. In every case, I ended up preferring the original mix with no mastering at all. Once I had narrowed the group down to only two or three plugs that had possibilities, I still spent hours tweaking settings, (mostly threshold, att, and release.) Again, in every case, I found something to complain about. It wasn't a bad mix, it just wasn't getting what it needed. No matter what I changed, I could also hear undesirable EQ changes or soundfield balance changes that I didn't like. While some things got better, I usually ended up burying the vocals slightly or maybe one or two instruments getting "in your face" more than it needs to be. Maybe I'm getting too picky. I don't know.

Oh well. I just confirmed what you guys have been telling me for years. Stay away from mastering plugs.

 

[Massive Master]

Well certainly, stay away from presets.

This also covers part of the "mastering your own mixes" thing -- You've already done what the mixes were telling you to do. Now you're trying to do more. Much of the time, it's a "best guess" at best.

 

[Lt. Bob]

It's mastered once it's burned to CD.
I get my stuff to sound alike and at the same volume levels ...... I don't do anything that someone would call mastering but they are, in effect, mastered once I burn them.

 

[kip4]

You've got to start somewhere good luck Robbie.
Not that i'm any kind of ME nor do i pretend to be.
Why dont you try mastering someone elses track?
Keep learning and shareing as you go please.
I just love to learn from y'all.

 

[Massive Master]

It's mastered once it's burned to CD.

I know it's just semantics, but it's mastered once the production master has been created.

There was a time that "once it's burned to a CD, it's mastered" was a relatively common statement -- But at that point, blank CD's were about $75 and no one was doing "one-off's" for the band. If you were burning a CD, it was "for real" (and about a quarter of those would fail, even with a $2500 drive). And no one was making "sort-of" CD's -- You authored properly formatted discs, carefully checked compliance, etc. There was no "iTunes" discs that aren't to spec, there were no "WMP" discs that aren't to spec, etc.

THAT SAID: If the discs you're making are the production masters, there you have it.

 

[mixsit]

.. Once I had narrowed the group down to only two or three plugs that had possibilities, I still spent hours tweaking settings, (mostly threshold, att, and release.) Again, in every case, I found something to complain about. It wasn't a bad mix, it just wasn't getting what it needed. No matter what I changed, I could also hear undesirable EQ changes or soundfield balance changes that I didn't like. While some things got better, I usually ended up burying the vocals slightly or maybe one or two instruments getting "in your face" more than it needs to be. Maybe I'm getting too picky. I don't know. ...

You did one thing- moving away from the presets totally right.
But those other things- where improvement made in one way- some other things/aspects being lost or compromised- -is so true- -so often- with dynamics. i.e. compression / limiting..

And I don't believe for one minute that that can't happen or doesn't apply across the board- "Mastering" plugs..? Any comp/limiter, 9 times out'a ten. Listening close enough..?
You pick your best compromise.

Oh well. I just confirmed what you guys have been telling me for years. Stay away from mastering plugs.

 

[mixsit]

..This also covers part of the "mastering your own mixes" thing -- You've already done what the mixes were telling you to do. Now you're trying to do more. ..

What's to be added


Helps me switching hats'-- out of 'mix mode, into 'finish/polish mode-- Is when I start to hear the songs all in a row' in context of each other.

But then about half of that time I get-- 'Get my ass back to the mix anyway!

Many.. many hours later, gulp' ok this just might be.. it.

 

[ido1957]

Keep trying new things until you get the right results. Good luck!

 

[RawDepth]

I am wondering whether I should go back and tweak the mix just to accommodate the final compression/limiting anomalies.

 

[gecko zzed]

It's often been said that there are no rules in recording, but there are few that I have set for myself:

1 avoid fixing in the mix what should have been fixed in the tracking
2 avoid fixing in the mastering what should have been fixed in the mix

On that basis, I would say that going back to the mixes is a darn good thing to do.

 

[Massive Master]

I am wondering whether I should go back and tweak the mix just to accommodate the final compression/limiting anomalies.

There's some thought in that --- I don't mix often anymore, but I *do* smash the hell out of everything temporarily once the mix is nearing completion. Just a straight, simple limiter (usually G-Clip, which is an awe-inspiring little plug) and get it up "near commercial levels" listening for things that stand out.

1) Yes, this will give you a good idea of how the mix will sound "post-crush" --

2) It's also a good tool to find things that aren't sitting well in the mix that might otherwise go unnoticed. You might find level adjustments, you may very well find anomalies that "weren't there" before (pops, clicks, hiss, clocking errors, excessive lip-smacks, etc., etc., etc.).

It's not simply a tool to find out how the mix will sound -- It's a tool to make a better mix. There are plenty of times where I have a "Hmmm... Those BVox really are a little too loud..." or "Yeah, the hat could come up a bit in there..." moments. As a bonus (if nothing else), I wind up with less surprises to and from whoever gets the mastering gig on the project.

And things that *do* stand out -- Do the vocals disappear? Does the snare get sucked down into the image? Does the image freak out? Those aren't just "things that happen" -- They're things that can be controlled. If you find the snare is being sucked out, you can push it a bit more -- Does it sound fine in the mix now? No, it probably sounds too loud. But if you pull some 200Hz out of it, all of a sudden it doesn't sound too loud - and it doesn't get sucked out of the mix "under pressure" (doesn't work all the time - just an example). I find people using freaky A&R on snare all the time that might sound reasonable during the mix (actually it doesn't, but for some reason they think it does) but falls apart under any real scrutiny and certainly under any dynamics adjustments.

Long story short - Smashing the mix can reveal weaknesses in the mix that might not be obvious otherwise.

 

[RawDepth]

There's some thought in that --- I don't mix often anymore, but I *do* smash the hell out of everything temporarily once the mix is nearing completion. Just a straight, simple limiter (usually G-Clip, which is an awe-inspiring little plug) and get it up "near commercial levels" listening for things that stand out.

1) Yes, this will give you a good idea of how the mix will sound "post-crush" --

2) It's also a good tool to find things that aren't sitting well in the mix that might otherwise go unnoticed. You might find level adjustments, you may very well find anomalies that "weren't there" before (pops, clicks, hiss, clocking errors, excessive lip-smacks, etc., etc., etc.).

It's not simply a tool to find out how the mix will sound -- It's a tool to make a better mix. There are plenty of times where I have a "Hmmm... Those BVox really are a little too loud..." or "Yeah, the hat could come up a bit in there..." moments. As a bonus (if nothing else), I wind up with less surprises to and from whoever gets the mastering gig on the project.

And things that *do* stand out -- Do the vocals disappear? Does the snare get sucked down into the image? Does the image freak out? Those aren't just "things that happen" -- They're things that can be controlled. If you find the snare is being sucked out, you can push it a bit more -- Does it sound fine in the mix now? No, it probably sounds too loud. But if you pull some 200Hz out of it, all of a sudden it doesn't sound too loud - and it doesn't get sucked out of the mix "under pressure" (doesn't work all the time - just an example). I find people using freaky A&R on snare all the time that might sound reasonable during the mix (actually it doesn't, but for some reason they think it does) but falls apart under any real scrutiny and certainly under any dynamics adjustments.

Long story short - Smashing the mix can reveal weaknesses in the mix that might not be obvious otherwise.

That's all good to know. So I am not crazy after all, just finally noticing when little things are wrong.

Thanks, John and Gecko.

 

[mixgeneral]

Interesting approach, in my experience just limiting the hell out of a track will usually result in pretty loud artifacts like weird distortion..

 

[Massive Master]

Sure it will. But it will also let you know how the mix might react to "war volume" while pointing out certain things that might stand out.

 

[mixgeneral]

I agree John, although it may completely ruin the mix but its definitely a way to get a basic judgement

 

[Massive Master]

Keep in mind here that I'm not suggesting actually rendering the file in that manner -- I'm just suggesting "pressure testing" (for lack of a better term).

 

[Greg_L]

I agree with and can relate to everything everyone has said. I "master" my own stuff and go through the same problems and processes that's been mentioned. Things changing under compression, going back and forth with the mix, etc. The beauty of home recording though, to me, is that you CAN do it all yourself. Sure, the internet wisdom says to send everything off for professional mastering. I don't want to put anyone out of work, but to hell with that. Unless you are on a deadline and/or have completely ineffective ears and a horrible listening environment, you can do it yourself with patience and practice.

 

[TASCAM MAN]

I usually don't do much home mastering. Instead I keep tweaking my final mixes for days until I am happy with them. I do have a few mastering plugs with dozens of factory presets, but rarely use any of them. Today I had some free time on my hands, so I ran a recent mix through each preset one at a time and gave it a real close listen. (I was only trying to get the song louder and punchier.)

Some were obviously as wrong as they could be, while others were more subtle. In every case, I ended up preferring the original mix with no mastering at all. Once I had narrowed the group down to only two or three plugs that had possibilities, I still spent hours tweaking settings, (mostly threshold, att, and release.) Again, in every case, I found something to complain about. It wasn't a bad mix, it just wasn't getting what it needed. No matter what I changed, I could also hear undesirable EQ changes or soundfield balance changes that I didn't like. While some things got better, I usually ended up burying the vocals slightly or maybe one or two instruments getting "in your face" more than it needs to be. Maybe I'm getting too picky. I don't know.

Oh well. I just confirmed what you guys have been telling me for years. Stay away from mastering plugs.[/Q

If a MIX sounds good already then....you dont need to do anything else to it !!!

 

[Lt. Bob]

In every case, I ended up preferring the original mix with no mastering at all. :

to me this is a common misunderstanding of what mastering even is.

Mastering is getting everything to sound as good as possible and have volume levels consistant from one song to another and have the sound be consistant from one song to another. And it's getting the overall volume up to where you'd like it (or not if you prefer more dynamics)

It's NOT a specific set of changes or operations or effects or processing that have to be done for it to be called 'mastered'.
Ask a mastering engineer ..... they'll all tell you that sometimes, if a mix is very well done, they end up not doing very much at all and those are the mixes they prefer to work with.

If you get it to where it sounds it's very best (that's subjective but you know what I mean) and sounds coherent from one song to the next .... it IS mastered.

 

[RecordingMaster]

There's some thought in that --- I don't mix often anymore, but I *do* smash the hell out of everything temporarily once the mix is nearing completion. Just a straight, simple limiter (usually G-Clip, which is an awe-inspiring little plug) and get it up "near commercial levels" listening for things that stand out.

This is great to hear from you, because I've actually been doing this as of late and I was actually not planning to make mention of it for fear of being shamed for "mixing into the limiter". Not during the entire mix process, but when I am at the point where I feel it is nearing completion, I'll do this just to check all the possible issues that could come up that you mentioned. It's a hell of a time-saver as opposed to opening the original mix back up, adjusting what now needs to be changed, re-bouncing the file (and waiting for it to play through in PT), re-saving it, seeing if it works this time, etc. While I don't "master" anything by ANY means (since I'm clearly not an ME), the closest thing I get to mastering is maybe a linear phase eq to low-cut the mix at 25-30 hz, maybe some light buss compression at no more than 2-3 db GR for the "glue", and then a soft clipper or brickwall limiter (genre dependent) to get it up there.

I've found everything you said to happen to a certain degree for me, like BG vox that you thought were seated well, but the limiter is bringing them out too much, or snares becoming too quiet or too loud. The biggest thing for me is songs that have an intro/outro/break with only 1-2 tracks playing, then when the rest of the band comes in, that intro part was way too loud. But in the mix without the limiter, it sounded fine. So knowing that, I can adjust and automate those tracks to be quieter in those places.

I find people using freaky A&R on snare all the time that might sound reasonable during the mix (actually it doesn't, but for some reason they think it does) but falls apart under any real scrutiny and certainly under any dynamics adjustments.

What is "A & R"?