Hardware vs Software "Mastering"

F

fretmeister

New member
All other things equal, does software mastering eqal mastering with outboard gear? I'm using PowerCore MasterX3 in Wavelab. Should I try my hardware compressor (RNP or dbx 1046) on the whole mix or stay with the software? (When I have a project that I think deserves it, I will send it for professional mastering. What I really am wondering, is most everyone using software for mastering now, short of major projects)?
 
Last edited:
Please don't take this the wrong way, but you should really delete all your duplicate posts. Most of us have a tendency to read the same groups of forums, so it'll be read.

That being said, I'll repost my comments here, as this is probably the most appropriate forum for it anyway...

[From Recording Techniques Forum] The quick answer (IMHO) would be that hardware on the way to the software is ideal. My "usual" M.O. would be to shape in the hardware and tweak surgically in the soft. Not as a rule, but as a "rule of thumb" on a good portion of projects.

I don't think you'll get much better results with a 1046 or an RNP (or RNC) that you will with plugs, but it's certainly not illegal to try.

On the software question - Every other M.E. I know uses software (or at the very least, certain digital processors) to some extent. It's almost unavoidable. But again, the crucial shaping would in many, if not most cases, be done through analog gear. [/From Recording Techniques Forum]
 
Whoops....

Sorry about the duplicate post. I didn't realize it went through. I put it here because I thought it was more appropriate. And I meant RNC. Thanks for the thoughtful response!
 
I had a feeling on the RNC -

First, I have to admit that I've never run a mix through an RNC. That being said, I've got to bring up something unique about it - Out of all of the "hottest new things" out there (which the RNC deserves to be a part of), I haven't heard anyone say that it sounds good on the master buss.

Normally, the Hot New Item always comes up as "wait until you master through it!" in the forums. UA's Fairchild plug is a classic example - A great plug, no doubt. For modern mastering? Doubt it. Maybe as a parallel unit, or on "retro" or classical (which I've used it on several times with reasonable results). Maybe...

But for some reason, the RNC never had that happen. Which really makes me want to throw it across a buss and find out why...
 
Fret -
While s/w mastering definitely has its benefits with such things as the ability for total recall and very fine & precise adjustments, h/w mastering has the distinct advantage in sound. There is a certain thickness, texture and sonic character that can only be had using h/w units. You can get pretty close using s/w, but as of yet its not quite the same.

That said, I would probably not use your h/w comps to master your material with. Reason being is that they will probably color your material too much whereas the s/w is probably more tonally neutral - which is the first goal of quality mastering.

Hope that helps...
 
Massive,
I've been exploring the Home Rec website and see that you have contributed tons of info and links on mastering that I am finding helpful. Aren't you afraid that you'll give away all your knowledge and we'll be able to do it as good as you ;)
 
fretmeister said:
All other things equal, does software mastering eqal mastering with outboard gear? I'm using PowerCore MasterX3 in Wavelab. Should I try my hardware compressor (RNP or dbx 1046) on the whole mix or stay with the software? (When I have a project that I think deserves it, I will send it for professional mastering. What I really am wondering, is most everyone using software for mastering now, short of major projects)?
Click to expand...

A lot of this depends on the designer and programmer of the software. There have been null tests done with both the software and hardware versions of the L2 for example that show both to be equal in terms of their processing.

In some cases there are advantages to using the software versions. For example, if your software suppports internal processing at 48 bit, you will not need to go from 48 bit to 24 bit to go into an external processor and back again to 48 bit for other internal types of processing. Keeping the path at 48 bit helps to reduce quantization distortion and the need to re-dither multiple times.

On the other hand, there are advantages to using some types of analog gear in the chain, and in cases where there is no software counterpart to the hardware.
 
fretmeister said:
Massive,
I've been exploring the Home Rec website and see that you have contributed tons of info and links on mastering that I am finding helpful. Aren't you afraid that you'll give away all your knowledge and we'll be able to do it as good as you ;)
Click to expand...

I'll quote Morpheus...

"There's a difference between knowing the path... and walking the path."

All things being equal, if every mastering engineer had exactly the same gear, their finished recordings would still sound different. It's 90% style and technique.

To put it another way, I learned the concept of parallel compression in about 15 seconds. I've spent the last 15 years practicing the "art" of parallel compression. Although I always feel confident in my decisions in the application of it, I'm always discovering different and/or better ways to accomplish it. Others will learn it differently than I did, and apply it in their own style.

As far as contributing information and knowledge, I'll throw another quote - "A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle." That a pretty one.
 
Massive Master said:
As far as contributing information and knowledge, I'll throw another quote - "A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle." That a pretty one.
Click to expand...

Very true MM. Some of the best things that I've learned has come from teaching others (which is one of the reasons I post here).

The innocence of people starting out often brings out a unique perspective in doing things. Also asking the most simple of questions can be more profound than it first appears (see my post on "what is a microphone?")

Just because you learned that "new lick" from Eddie Van Halen in guitar player magazine, it doesn't make you Eddie. More than likely just another one of the many imitators until you can apply a technique with a new and individual style.
 
All things being equal but one ME is using Quality Software and the other using Quality H/W(not rnc,tc finalizer etc.). I'd put my money on the H/W 10 out of 10 times IMHO
 
Teacher said:
All things being equal but one ME is using Quality Software and the other using Quality H/W(not rnc,tc finalizer etc.). I'd put my money on the H/W 10 out of 10 times IMHO
Click to expand...

Personally I'll pick the guy who uses the best hybrid approach of both. It's a lot easier to automate a software plug-in to cure particular problems than hardware, so given the same manufacturer and quality there are advantages. Also the issue of staying at a higher bit depth in the bus as I mentioned before.
 
Massive Master said:
I'll throw another quote - "A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle." That a pretty one.
Click to expand...

But doesn't the wax drip when you hold it sideways??? :D :D



Kidding. Good quote, MM.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top