GT Pro - mastering

  • Thread starter Thread starter paresh
  • Start date Start date
P

paresh

Member
Hi guys - I'm new...Since there's no post -production mastering in GT Pro, and they talk a lot about intensive CPU demands, I'm wondering if it's just designed to mix & burn one song ("project") at a time? If so, how do you compensate for the lack of mastering, or is that over-rated? Thanks!
 
We must know that any regular Cakewalk products (including GT Pro) is not realy "mastering" program :) They can be used to multi tracking audio, apply some effects, mix, sequence MIDI (not in GT Pro), etc. However, editing and mastering the final works handled with other application such Wavelab, SoundFroge, CoolEdit, etc...

If you look for dedicated mastering program, go seek the programs I mentioned above, otherway, if you only look program to tracking audio (only), GT Pro may suite your need. If you do MIDI also, then Home Studio or SONAR will be the best for you :)

Hope it helps...
;)
Jaymz
 
As you correctly realise, Mastering needs a digfferent set of tools than mixing. But you could use GT with some add-ons (plug-ins;) ) to help you.

Mainly its compression and EQ, with some reverb. Mastering is meant to work on a stereo track only, mixing uses as many tracks as your system can handle.

Mastering in a multitrack software package like GT Pro is difficult.

Its like trying to do ballroom dancing in rubber boots. It can be done, but very inelegantly:rolleyes:
 
What exactly is mastering?

I record tracks. Mix them down. Put them on CD.

What does mastering do to make things better, and when should you do it?
 
Ah, grasshopper, you have much to learn.

Mastering puts the final polish on your mixes. Generally in mastering your mixes will be eq'd so that they will translate well on a variety of different systems, the overall CD will be given a more cohesive sound, and the volume levels will be increased and even'd out from song to song.

You should know that even the professionals have their mixes mastered.

Here's some more info: http://www.drtmastering.com/faq2.htm#whatis
 
I figured as much.
I guess you could say that I "master" with Cakewalk then.

What features does a mastering program have that makes such a difference?

When I play my mixes on a stereo, or on say, WinAmp on my PC, I always did notice that some of my tunes don't seem to light up the full spectrum on the EQ graph like a professionally mastered song from Disturbed, for example. Is this what Mastering is all about? Cuz that's the one thing I've struggled with.

Thanks for the link. Very interesting.
 
"The mastering engineer has fresh, experienced ears. By the time the mixes are done, everyone involved is fried. It's tough to keep perspective after you've heard a mix 50 times. A new outlook, a new set of listening skills - attuned to the complete presentation rather than the detail of the mixes - can make a huge difference."

Words to live by. :)
 
Jammer said:
I figured as much.
I guess you could say that I "master" with Cakewalk then.

What features does a mastering program have that makes such a difference?

When I play my mixes on a stereo, or on say, WinAmp on my PC, I always did notice that some of my tunes don't seem to light up the full spectrum on the EQ graph like a professionally mastered song from Disturbed, for example. Is this what Mastering is all about? Cuz that's the one thing I've struggled with.
Click to expand...
Mastering involves suites of hardware and/or software that specifically addresses the finishing of the mix. The reason your levels didn't light up the spectrum could well be that the EQ and compression wasn't set up very well. Or at all.

Here is a link to compression that you might find interesting by Rip Rowan:

http://prorec.com/prorec/prorec.nsf

http://prorec.com/prorec/articles.nsf/files/F717F79532C9067386256688001A7623

There are several other articles in there that you would find interesting.

Incidently, I was fortunate to work with well known BBC trained engineer recently on a live acoustic recording session who would not use compression - he changed the levels manually as the music was played and being recorded:eek:
 
Paul881 said:
Incidently, I was fortunate to work with well known BBC trained engineer recently on a live acoustic recording session who would not use compression - he changed the levels manually as the music was played and being recorded :eek:
Click to expand...

Gee !!! Never thought you are that old, Paul :eek: :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top