Mastering in Sonar - Several Stupid Questions

  • Thread starter Thread starter mbouteneff
  • Start date Start date
M

mbouteneff

New member
Hi,

I'm about to try to 'master' my first track in Sonar 3.0, and had a couple questions about dithering and EQ-ing that were mentioned in previous posts here:
https://homerecording.com/bbs/showthread.php?t=214019

- First, a stupid question -- When someone suggests "rolling off at 50-60hz", does that mean physically creating a "low shelf" at 50-60 hz, or creating a large dip? And are we talking about bottoming out, or just a 3 db decrease?

- I understand you're supposed to "dither" and "sound shape" a project just before burning it to CD or compressing to a smaller file format. Does anyone know if you can do this in Sonar 3? If yes, how -- I haven't been able to find the functions in the manual or the software...perhaps it's automatic? If not, are there any free software programs that can dither and/or sound shape?

- Should Normalization be part of the mastering process?

- How does this basic chain of events look (assuming everything is done conservatively...otherwise, the mix should be fixed):

1. EQ
2. Multi-Band Compress
3. Limit
4. Dither
5. Soundshape

Please share any experiences you have mastering (or attempting to master) in Sonar. Thanks!!!!

-Mike
 
Rolling off 50-60 usually means making a sharp high pass however; usually you read things like "rolling off below 50-60". If you just lower gain at 50-60 then that is usually a "dip" or "cut" with a specified Q.

If its a shelf at 50 or 60 then it could be low shelf below that point or above that point frequency-wise or high shelf below or above that point frequency-wise. So you can see "rolling off at 50-60" is confusing without some other descriptive term.

RE: Dithering - if Sonar 3 had it, it is in Options-Audio from the main file menu. I am not sure this existed until v4. In the absence of dithering you could try Sound Forge. However, Sonar 3 may be automatically dithering which is a no-win situation. Check the support documents at Cakewalk.com.

Normalization should not be part of the process. It should be removed from all software in my opinion.

When I master ITB there are 3 plug-ins on the main buss. UAD Precision EQ, UAD Fairchild or Neve compressor depending on the music and the UAD Precision Limiter. As an alternative I will take the whole mix out to external preamps and a stereo compressor.
If I have all the compression I want on the basic tracks I might skip the compressor altogether and just use the limiter for a cleaner sound. This depends on the music.

I never use a multiband for mastering although some do. Dithering occurs during file export by the way.
 
Sonar 3 has dithering: under Options | Audio | Advanced there's an "Apply Dither" option.

MDA also offers a free VST dithering plugin: http://mda.smartelectronix.com/effects.htm

Note that you only need to dither if you recorded at 24-bit. In the help file, there's a page titled "Preparing Audio for Distribution" which you might find handy.


How does this basic chain of events look?
Click to expand...
I'm not sure what you mean by "soundshape", but if it modifies the audio at all, you should move it earlier in the chain, before limiting.

In general, dithering should always be the last thing you do, since it reduces the bit depth (and adds noise) so any subsequent steps will have less precision.

And Middleman is right: normalization is a waste of time.
 
DM1 said:
In general, dithering should always be the last thing you do, since it reduces the bit depth (and adds noise) so any subsequent steps will have less precision.
Click to expand...
Dithering does not reduce bit depth. It adds noise to the sound file. However, it is usually done in conjunction with a reduction in bit depth, since the added noise is designed to help offset artifacts that occur when truncating the file.

Sonar 3 does have the option of dithering when exporting the file. However, the ditering algorithm in Sonar 3 is reputedly pretty weak. It was improved with later versions when the POW-R version was added.

As already noted, you should only dither when reducing the bit depth of a file; otherwise you are addiing noise for no purpose. And it should be done as the very last step in processing before burning your CD.
 
Thanks so much, everyone, you've clarified a ton.

Tubedude: Thanks for the explanation on the 50-60hz line -- yup, it's a sharp high pass, got it.

DM1 and TubeDude: Regarding Dithering, yup, there it is in Options/Audio/Advanced. However, it's in a section of the Advanced tab called "Playback and Recording", and exists as a checkbox that is checked as a default. I'm assuming it only applies to a conversion from a 24-bit file to a 16-bit file, and not a 24 to a 24? (For example, when I finished my mix, I exported to a 24-bit stereo file...hopefully, dithering did not take effect?)

DM1: Would you recommend the MDA dithering plugin over Sonar's dithering function?

Soundshaping ==> Oops, I meant "NoiseShaping", which is related to dithering, and moves Noise to frequencies that are less perceptible to the ear, etc etc. I've only read about it, and haven't found the functionality in Sonar. Does anyone know of a Noiseshaping plugin/software?

Thanks SO much, everyone!
 
For example, when I finished my mix, I exported to a 24-bit stereo file...hopefully, dithering did not take effect?)
Click to expand...
That's right. Sonar will only dither when the bit depth is reduced.


Would you recommend the MDA dithering plugin over Sonar's dithering function?
Click to expand...
dachay2tnr's right, the dither in Sonar 3 isn't highly regarded. I'm not sure about the MDA one, though, 'cause I've never used it. It does have some noise-shaping options, so that probably answers your question :)
 
Thanks, DM1!

Btw, I tried a quick rush-Mastering job last night...there's already a big improvement in volume and clarity of the mp3 that results from the 'mastered' wav. Awesome! However, my mix needs some bass in a big way...and some of the parts are getting mixed up or lost...back to the mix, I guess. Argh. At some point soon, I'll have to post the track here...I'll only get so far without a little helpful wisdom from y'all.

(When I get farther, I'll try dithering with both Sonar and the MDA plugin...and we'll see if I hear a difference.)

Thanks so much for your help!!! Seriously, this board rocks.
 
Not really related to original question, but
For dithering, Sonar 5 has 5 options.
Rectangular,Trianular, Pow-r 1, Pow-r2 and Pow-r 3.
I read the descriptions of each. Does anyone prefer one over the other?
 
How create a 44.1 Hz MP3 from a 48000 Hz mix?

How do I convert a mix (or a .wav?) that was recorded at a sampling rate of 48000 hz to a mix (or wav) that's a 44.1 hz file?

My first song was recorded at 48000 hz -- I created an mp3 using the free "cwenc" mp3 encoder, and tried uploading it to Soundclick and GarageBand... They tell you to use a 44.1 hz mp3 file, and I found out why -- everything played at about 2/3 speed!

I'm not sure if I need to edit the mix, the wav, or use a different mp3 encoder that can create a 44.1 hz mp3 file from a 48000 hz file...any ideas on the best way to approach this?

Thanks!

-Mike
 
there's an option to resample down to 44.1khz when you go to export.
 
Actually, in Sonar 3 (which is what I'm using), I'm not sure that option exists in "Export" -- looking in the pop-up window, I see only file name, file type, format, bit depth, and separation.

In the Help file, I found this under "24-bit Tips":
"It is not possible in Sonar to change the sampling rate of a project after audio has been recorded; other sound editing applications can be used for this purpose, but the sample rate conversion may also degrade the quality of existing audio".

Uh-oh. What if I export to two stereo audio files, create a brand new project with a 44.1 Hz sampling rate, then import those same audio files. Would that work? Will sound quality be screwed?

And for that matter, if I'm just recording music for CD and/or mp3 production, is there any point to recording higher than 44.1 Hz?

Thanks,

Mike
 
44khz versus 48khz is basicly a 10% increase in sampling and would theoretically result in a 10% increase in sound reproduction accuracy. if that 10% isn't important to you during the mix/master process, then just record in 44.1khz.

i record in 88.2, but mostly because i can.
 
From things Ive read and have been told you basically should record at 44.1 if you plan on putting the finished material on cd....seeing as how commercial cds only use 44.1 you encounter some problems when conerverting a higher khz number (unless its double ie 88.2khz)...but even then that difference will hardly be noticable unless your doing really acoustic music or classical. So if your doing rock pop generic radio music id stick to 44.1 as you will hardly notice the change in sampling rates...especially if your not a trained producer/engineer/etc etc etc....oh and if your going to mp3 to stick it online i think that basically negates all improvements in sound cause mp3s pretty much blow....haha...just my thoughts...take it or leave it....
 
janesaid2me: i disagree with your first sentence. i would say your sampling frequency during recording should be based on how closely you want to interpret the original sound during the record, mix, master process. the medium that you finally use to publish your works has nothing to do with the creation process.

I have a great digital camera that captures really clear images. even if those images end up being 'dithered' down to a web banner, I have the original image to use for making edits... same thing with audio.
 
Thanks, guys. Perhaps I'll try recording at 88.2 for my next project then. That is, if I can. (I did buy that 2nd harddrive, after all...)

Thanks!

-M
 
THANK YOU! (my first track!!)

Hey,

I wanted to extend a HUGE thanks to everyone in the Cakewalk forum -- you've been extremely helpful over the last year in helping me to get my first project off the ground!

I just posted an mp3 of the song I've been working on in the MP3 Mixing Clinic (I ended up using some EQ, multi-band compression, reverb, and compression/limiting plugins to do a quick mastering job). It still needs a lot of help, but WOW am I psyched to have a draft finished! I could really use some feedback -- here's the MP3 mixing clinic page:

https://homerecording.com/bbs/showthread.php?t=219201

Thanks for all of your help!

-Mike

PS. In case you don't feel like clicking around, here's a 192 kbs version of the track:
 
mbouteneff said:
In case you don't feel like clicking around, here's a 192 kbs version of the track:
Click to expand...
Very nice! :cool:

My only advice would be to not take advice from me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top