Order of The Processing Chain In The Master Channel

  • Thread starter Thread starter SR Krishnan
  • Start date Start date
S

SR Krishnan

New member
What is the usual and most frequently used order of the processing chain in the master channel to get fat, loud and crisp master?
 
Practically all of what makes a master fat, loud and crisp happens at the mix stage.

Normally I start with eq and end with the limiter, with other processing added between those two as needed. If I do need to add more processing it's usually a sign that the mix could have been done better, though sometimes I do like to add some subtle compression to a good mix.
 
Why the limiter? Just in order to make the whole thing louder, right?
 
dobro said:
Why the limiter? Just in order to make the whole thing louder, right?
Click to expand...

Because even a tight mix will generally have a peak-to-average ratio that's higher than I want in the finished product. Even if I'm shooting for a moderate -16dBRMS (0dBFS square wave reference) I generally need to take a little off the top with a limiter to make it fit.
 
My feeling it is generally more true for folk than for rock. Although rock might generally be overall louder, with a pile of instruments belting away there's often not many quieter bits. If you are recording a folk group, I would expect there to be more spaces, and hence bigger variation from load to soft.

Then again you can get spacious rock and dense folk.
 
gecko zzed said:
My feeling it is generally more true for folk than for rock. Although rock might generally be overall louder, with a pile of instruments belting away there's often not many quieter bits. If you are recording a folk group, I would expect there to be more spaces, and hence bigger variation from load to soft.

Then again you can get spacious rock and dense folk.
Click to expand...

I'm glad you said it...


Every self master I have done (which I am not really a fan of doing myself) is different between them.

Mastering is typically making a bunch of tracks cohesive and at similar levels and sound between them. That should be done for the most part in mixing stage, but there is always that fine tuning between songs.

For that situation I generally run FF Pro-Q first then FF Pro-L. Sometimes if something by another is out of whack, I may add a compressor previous to eq of individual tracks. Sometimes one or more of these just on individual tracks before it even hits the master bus.

Then usually only a master limiter and dither on the final stereo bus. But that depends on what each individual project needs.
 
That confuses me then (what both of you said), because I would have thought that a folk mix would naturally have a greater peak-to-average ratio because of a greater dynamic range - you want it to sound a lot like it does in real life, right? What am I not understanding here?
 
dobro said:
That confuses me then (what both of you said), because I would have thought that a folk mix would naturally have a greater peak-to-average ratio because of a greater dynamic range - you want it to sound a lot like it does in real life, right? What am I not understanding here?
Click to expand...

Yes, but with the dynamic range in folk music, you may want to make sure that the emotional (quieter) parts are not lost. Just as you do not wish for the parts when things get good and heavy.

It is not about making everything loud and the same volume. It is about getting a recording to sound like what you play in a live situation-through speakers. They are not the same animal.


Just take a listen to a live recording of a acoustic performance. Not one that was mixed, one done right off the board. It does not have that 'goodness' that you hear from the PA in a venue with a good PA and attributes of the room.

That is tough to pull off through some speakers in a different environment that does not have the ambient nature of a 'room'.


The idea is to mimic what you feel in open space, with a pair of ear buds/home stereo/car stereo/whatever. The problem is the room. Nothing compares to what you hear in your ears from a live situation.


Recording/mixing/mastering is really only trying to recreate what actually was heard in the environment it was played in.

It aint easy, but that is where the control over dynamics come to play. In a live situation, there is much about the room itself that could care less about the peaks and lower levels of dynamics. When recording, there is a much more limited threshold as to what will work through a set of speakers, as opposed to some big ass speakers moving air in a large space.

Hope this made any sense. That is just my personal take on it.
 
Last edited:
dobro said:
That confuses me then (what both of you said), because I would have thought that a folk mix would naturally have a greater peak-to-average ratio because of a greater dynamic range - you want it to sound a lot like it does in real life, right? What am I not understanding here?
Click to expand...

The simple answer is that you just don't limit that kind of mix as much and you let the listener turn it up.
 
dobro said:
That confuses me then (what both of you said), because I would have thought that a folk mix would naturally have a greater peak-to-average ratio because of a greater dynamic range - you want it to sound a lot like it does in real life, right? What am I not understanding here?
Click to expand...

Yeah I kind of thought Gecko threw a bit of a 'curve there. :) Rock' or whatever the sound of the limiter reigning in the snare' ..or the band for that matter can be part of the vibe. Not so much lighter/acoustic music (being very general here.
 
bouldersoundguy said:
dobro said:
That confuses me then (what both of you said), because I would have thought that a folk mix would naturally have a greater peak-to-average ratio because of a greater dynamic range - you want it to sound a lot like it does in real life, right? What am I not understanding here?
Click to expand...
The simple answer is that you just don't limit that kind of mix as much and you let the listener turn it up.
Click to expand...

Good, cuz I haven't been putting a limiter on any of my stuff. I haven't had anybody in the Clinic tell me 'you need a limiter on that mix' either. But I'll try it to see. Thanks.
 
dobro said:
Good, cuz I haven't been putting a limiter on any of my stuff. I haven't had anybody in the Clinic tell me 'you need a limiter on that mix' either. But I'll try it to see. Thanks.
Click to expand...

I have to wonder why you actually haven't tried using a limiter? Not even just for the master out. It is not so much about getting the whole project or any track 'loud'.

In fact using a limiter on individual tracks can be very useful in some situations. Especially if you have a good one that actually has control over what it does. :)



And there would be no reason for anyone in the Clinic to tell you to use a limiter for your tracks. It is the 'Mixing Clinic. Not the 'Make my tracks really loud mastering clinic'. lol



More importantly and kind of sadly, the OP did ask a question that many have problems with-or expect easy answers for...


Boulder and Massive have it correct. It all comes down to getting it right in the mix first.

The 'chain' in mastering is not something that is a formula. What is used or done by a ME is based on what is needed for the mix and fine tuning of whatever that is.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, it's all good. I've only recently started paying attention to what I put on the master buss. I used to just mix and let the outcome take care of itself. But once I've nudged and tweaked everything in the mix as far as what passes for skill can take me, I find it's useful to address the whole thing on the master buss with some subtle tweakery.

As for why I've never used a limiter, that's easy - I've never seen the point. Probably because I don't know what it's useful for. :D That's why I'm going to explore it.
 
dobro said:
As for why I've never used a limiter, that's easy - I've never seen the point. Probably because I don't know what it's useful for. :D That's why I'm going to explore it.
Click to expand...

If your music ends up in a playlist with other stuff it may sound relatively quiet. I heard one of my mixes on a podcast years ago and it was noticeably low. A limiter is a way to take the peaks down so you can bring the average level up.

I'm not recommending making your stuff loud, in fact it looks like the way streaming etc. is going levels will be automatically evened out between songs bringing them all to around -16dB RMS. Actually there's a new sort of measurement called LUFS that's a little more sophisticated.
 
My mastering chain is eq, compressor, limiter. I should point out that often the limiter is often only grabbing the occasional peaks and not slamming the track. If I an mixing an album as opposed to 1 track I will have the eq, compressor on each song and the limiter on the whole album, again only grabbing the occasional peaks.

Alan
 
witzendoz said:
My mastering chain is eq, compressor, limiter. I should point out that often the limiter is often only grabbing the occasional peaks and not slamming the track. If I an mixing an album as opposed to 1 track I will have the eq, compressor on each song and the limiter on the whole album, again only grabbing the occasional peaks.

Alan
Click to expand...

Ditto...
 
dobro said:
Yeah, it's all good. I've only recently started paying attention to what I put on the master buss. I used to just mix and let the outcome take care of itself. But once I've nudged and tweaked everything in the mix as far as what passes for skill can take me, I find it's useful to address the whole thing on the master buss with some subtle tweakery.

As for why I've never used a limiter, that's easy - I've never seen the point. Probably because I don't know what it's useful for. :D That's why I'm going to explore it.
Click to expand...
I think when people are first starting out the tendency is to try to master the song in the mix session on the 2 bus.
I don't think is a great habit to get into, only because mastering is generally a separate process with a different frame of mind ..and there most likely aren't any records in your collection where the songs were mastered in the mix session.

It might be worth a shot to mix for the song and get that the best you can with no attention paid to pushing the level.
..then give the song a rest and come back creating a new session with only mastering in mind.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top