Mastering software

  • Thread starter Thread starter Gsuscares
  • Start date Start date
Trell Blaze said:
I'm a Wavelab guy myself, but since I was forced into Windows Vista (my computer crashed and anything available at the time had Vista), I can't use it anymore.
Click to expand...

That exactly what happened to me when I moved and got a new computer a few weeks ago. I have Wavelab on my other computer, but didn't want to leave the room every time I was going to finish a song.

So, I got REAPER, which works on Vista. And it's free. I don't really care which hosting program I use, I just needed something that worked.
 
RAMI said:
That exactly what happened to me when I moved and got a new computer a few weeks ago. I have Wavelab on my other computer, but didn't want to leave the room every time I was going to finish a song.

So, I got REAPER, which works on Vista. And it's free. I don't really care which hosting program I use, I just needed something that worked.
Click to expand...

Thanks. I'll look into that...
 
Trell Blaze said:
Southside Glenn: You've obviously used both. What are your thoughts as far as comparison (strictly in terms of preping your pre-master...sequencing/spacing/crossfading, ect...)?
Click to expand...
They both are quite up to the task, IMHO.

I have to admit a bias here. In that I have grown up on the Sonic Foundry (now Sony) products ever since SoundForge v2 (Windows 3.1x, 16-bit), and currently use newer versions of Forge, CDArchitect, DVD Architect and Vegas on a fairly regular basis on my Xp machines.

While I first turned on to Steinberg back with CubaseVST (also the 16-bit version), I have always felt more at home with the SF stuff simply because I by default have more hours on it. I'm not saying that it's intrinsically "better", it's just the look/feel that I've gotten used to. I'd prefer to stick with the SF stuff myself, but only because it feels like a broken in pair of blue jeans to me, I'm comfortable with it. And I wouldn't hesitate recommending it to anybody, because it does it's job and does it well.

But that does not mean that I don't recommend the Steinberg stuff. I know at least a few folks who grew up on Steinberg jeans that feel as comfortable for them to wear as the SF stuff does to me.

And as far as I can tell, as far as critical functionality, there isn't a whole lot of major difference between the two bundles; they'll both get the job done reliably and efficiently.

G.
 
SouthSIDE Glen said:
They both are quite up to the task, IMHO.

I have to admit a bias here. In that I have grown up on the Sonic Foundry (now Sony) products ever since SoundForge v2 (Windows 3.1x, 16-bit), and currently use CDArchitect, DVD Architect and Vegas on a fairly regular basis.

While I first turned on to Steinberg back with CubaseVST (also the 16-bit version), I have always felt more at home with the SF stuff simply because I by default have more hours on it. I'm not saying that it's intrinsically "better", it's just the look/feel that I've gotten used to. I'd prefer to stick with the SF stuff myself, but only because it feels like a broken in pair of blue jeans to me, I'm comfortable with it. And I wouldn't hesitate recommending it to anybody, because it does it's job and does it well.

But that does not mean that I don't recommend the Steinberg stuff. I know at least a few folks who grew up on Steinberg jeans that feel as comfortable for them to wear as the SF stuff does to me.

And as far as I can tell, as far as critical functionality, there isn't a whole lot of major difference between the wto bundles; they'll both get the job done relaibley and efficiently.

G.
Click to expand...

Damn...I think I was in Jr High when Win 3.1 was in use...lmao

I'm a Steinberg guy for the same reason's u're an SF guy so I suppose it's safe to say that there's no serious reason to jump from WL to SF if WL is my broken pair of jeans, no?
:D
 
Trell Blaze said:
Damn...I think I was in Jr High when Win 3.1 was in use...lmao
Click to expand...
You young punk rat bastard kid!!!!
(J/K :) :D)

I was writing sequencer control software for my first synth/home studio on my TRS-80 back in '79 when Bill Gates and Steve Jobs were still skipping classes and getting stoned together. Their subsequent paths were obviously more fortuitous than mine has been since then :(.
Trell Blaze said:
I'm a Steinberg guy for the same reason's u're an SF guy so I suppose it's safe to say that there's no serious reason to jump from WL to SF if WL is my broken pair of jeans, no?
:D
Click to expand...
That's how I see it, FWTW. If it ain't broke to you, why bother fixing it, right? :)

G.
 
Yes,like you said,I got my tracks mixed but some tracks have more bass & some more treble.I just need to even it out so I can put it on a cd for production.Remember it's a home recording so I can't go through an expensive process ( I understand the pros go through a whole bunch of stages before it comes to production)
 
WOW! You guys are amazing.Thanks for all the inputs.I guess my search for a recording forum has ended.
I will consider your suggestions.Thanks once again.
 
bkkornaker said:
probably the "Izotope Ozone" program is what your looking for. It inexpensive, and has all the basic features you'll need in mastering your own material.

it does come with factory presets for mastering all sorts of styles of music, but you'll soon find out you'll have to further tweak them to your likings......

i use it, and it does the job well.
Click to expand...

Look like Izotope is more for pro tools.I use a Nuendo.Is there somethig that will work for it?
 
Gsuscares said:
Look like Izotope is more for pro tools.
Click to expand...
Not true. Izotope make stuff in VST plugin format also, which is right up Nuendo's alley.

Just do Gsus a favor and don't steal it. ;)

G.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top