Official Mastering and Production thread

[sephfire]

I know we've already got a daunting collection of stickied threads in this forum, but I think if there's any other topic that needs a sticky, it's production. The problem with the art of production is that it's an art that takes many years to truly master. As one of many upstart musicians who lack experience in this field, I say this forum needs a database of production knowledge.

What we need are links to training resources. We need book recommendations, tutorials, and other forms of study media. People can ask questions about concepts, hardware, genre-specific tips and other related issues.

Mastery of this skill is a long-term commitment, but with a thread like this, we can at least help to accelerate that process.


COMPILED RESOURCES:

Websites:
Dave Moulton's website w/ articles (http://www.moultonlabs.com/)
The Loudness Race (http://www.loudnessrace.com) (server down much)
Waves site 1 (http://www.sound.org/titles1.html) & 2 (http://www.sound.org/titles2.html) (guides and plugins)

Tutorials:
general tutorial from Gamedev.net (http://www.gamedev.net/community/forums/topic.asp?topic_id=297627)
Dave Moulton's Golden Ears training (http://www.moultonlabs.com/index.php/full/product01)

Books:
Digital Recording, Software & Plug-Ins by Bill Gibson
The Art of Mixing, 2nd Ed. by David Gibson
The Mixing Engineer's Handbook, 2nd Ed. by Bobby Owsinski

Hardware:
KRK rockit powered speakers (http://www.krksys.com)
Creamware products (http://www.creamware.com)
Powercore Element (http://www.tcelectronic.com/PowerCoreElement)
Powercore PCI MKII & plugins (http://www.tcelectronic.com/Default.asp?Id=1236)
Virus/powercore synthesizer (http://www.tcelectronic.com/Virus)

Plugins & VSTs:
Inspector plugin suite (http://www.elementalaudio.com/products/inspectorxl/index.html)
Firium mastering EQ (http://www.elementalaudio.com/products/firium/)
Har-Bal EQ system (http://www.har-bal.com/)
Interruptor delay (http://www.interruptor.ch/)
Arts Acoustic reverb (http://www.kvraudio.com/get/1725.html)
Kjaerhus Golden Series plugins (http://www.kjaerhusaudio.com/gold-series.php)
Ohm Force plugins (http://www.ohmforce.com/ViewCategory.do?category=Effects)
Sonic Flavors R66 reverb (http://www.kvraudio.com/get/1715.html)
Audio Damage products (http://www.audiodamage.com/)
Elemental Audio plugins (http://www.elementalaudio.com/)
URS EQ plugins (http://www.ursplugins.com/)
s(m)exoscope (http://www2.kvr-vst.com/get/971.html)
Optimaster (http://www.creamware.com/page.php?seite=optimaster&lang=en&submenu=home) (creamware)
UAD-1 (http://www.uaudio.com/products/software/UAD-1/index.html) (creamware)
Vinco compressor (http://www.cwaudio.de/page.php?seite=vinco&lang=en&submenu=home) (creamware)
PSY Q processor (http://www.cwaudio.de/page.php?seite=vinco&lang=en&submenu=home) (creamware)

Other Resources:
zircon's Production thread (http://www.ocremix.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=80810)

(Also read through the thread. Remixers have shared many helpful tips!)

[Spc1st]

Here's a nice little general tutorial about how to make stuff sound good from gamedev.net (http://www.gamedev.net/community/forums/topic.asp?topic_id=297627). The guy even puts up examples of how the piece sounds after each stage of production.

[SnappleMan]

A better way than following a step by step guide to making a shitty cookie-cutter master is to actually learn what every method used to master a song does. That way you'll know what you want your song to sound like, and know exactly the tools to make it sound that way. But I'm just an asshole.

[sephfire]

A better way than following a step by step guide to making a shitty cookie-cutter master is to actually learn what every method used to master a song does. That way you'll know what you want your song to sound like, and know exactly the tools to make it sound that way. But I'm just an asshole.

Agreed. Which is why I don't think a few tutorials are sufficient to cover this topic (although they do contribute). This is where the book recommendations and concept/theory discussions come in.

[Zoola]

A better way than following a step by step guide to making a shitty cookie-cutter master is to actually learn what every method used to master a song does. That way you'll know what you want your song to sound like, and know exactly the tools to make it sound that way. But I'm just an asshole.
While I agree with you on both counts , I looked through that guide and found it to give some nice tips, if nothing more. Looks like a nice staring read if you really are terrible at production.

[the_nihilist]

Some general tips:

Get a quality compressor and EQ.
Roll off frequencies not used by instruments.
Learn to turn stuff down, things don't need to be as loud as you think.
Turn the reverb OFF.
Don't be afraid to really carve stuff up with the EQ to make it fit in a mix.
Remember to pan stuff.
Don't overcompress... except for drums. Ratio's low, threshold a couple db below where it's peaking.
And most importantly, use your ears.

[zircon]

Some general tips:

Get a quality compressor and EQ.
Roll off frequencies not used by instruments.
Learn to turn stuff down, things don't need to be as loud as you think.
Turn the reverb OFF.
Don't be afraid to really carve stuff up with the EQ to make it fit in a mix.
Remember to pan stuff.
Don't overcompress... except for drums. Ratio's low, threshold a couple db below where it's peaking.
And most importantly, use your ears.

I have to disagree with the excessive use of EQ, and frequency rolloff. I've tried this method a number of times and I've found that minimal EQ is almost always preferable. really "sculpting" a sound is OK for purely synthetic stuff (leads, pads), and I do encourage that, but for anything else I think it's a bad idea.

Excellent points otherwise. Reverb on the master track is a terrible idea. Typically this is my final signal path for the master;

* Parametric EQ (only making very small modifications, +/-3db, and usually only to the lows/highs)
* TRacks compressor (I love the sound of this, and I set it so that I get a nice, saturated mix given the type of music I do)
* TRacks limiter (some colored limiting to keep my levels in check)

[sephfire]

I'm already finding this thread helpful. And we're only 7 posts in.

[SirRus]

* Parametric EQ (only making very small modifications, +/-3db, and usually only to the lows/highs)
* TRacks compressor (I love the sound of this, and I set it so that I get a nice, saturated mix given the type of music I do)
* TRacks limiter (some colored limiting to keep my levels in check)

Could you or somebody else elaborate on compression. I have found that a lot of the industry audio-engineers are frustrated with being asked to make CD's as loud as possible through compression. On OCR, the judges also tend to look down on overcompression of tracks as it loses the natural audio quality of the instruments. So my question is what is a "nice saturated mix" setting on a compresser such as the TRacks compressor. Also, do you not generally compress individual tracks like your drumset, guitars, vocals independent from each other? How do you achieve a good balance with this if you are only applying compression to the master track?

As for what I can contribute, I found a really great series on mastering through workbooks and associated ear training from Dave Moulton (one of the top audio engineers in the world):

Some Links:

About Dave (http://www.izotope.com/artists/dave_moulton.asp)
Dave's Website with GREAT mastering articles (http://www.moultonlabs.com/)
Golden Ears Training (http://www.moultonlabs.com/index.php/full/product01)

[zircon]

Could you or somebody else elaborate on compression. I have found that a lot of the industry audio-engineers are frustrated with being asked to make CD's as loud as possible through compression.

Well, that's extreme compression and limiting - reducing a normally large dynamic range to virtually 0 and then maxing the whole thing out at around 0db. It's difficult to do that without actively TRYING to so I wouldn't worry about it.

On OCR, the judges also tend to look down on overcompression of tracks as it loses the natural audio quality of the instruments.

I don't think this is the case. We rarely make a big deal out of compression, in fact more often than not I would say it isn't used ENOUGH.

So my question is what is a "nice saturated mix" setting on a compresser such as the TRacks compressor.

I have an FL mixer preset called "SimpleMaster" that I created for Impulse Prime. I use it in all my projects to date.

The compressor is set to a 12.4ms attack, 702.7ms release, 2.47 ratio, .7db stereo enhance, -15db input drive, and 12db output.

The eq is a little boost of 1 or 2 db in the very low and very high frequencies.

The limiter is set to boost the lows slightly (again), release time of 200ms, 2db input drive, -.2db output.

Also, do you not generally compress individual tracks like your drumset, guitars, vocals independent from each other? How do you achieve a good balance with this if you are only applying compression to the master track?

I compress a lot of my tracks besides the master. Bassdrums, snares, leads, harmony synths.. etc

[SnappleMan]

Saturating a mix with compression is the #1 way to muddle the sound altogether.

The correct way to fill out a song is to carefully balance the frequencies used by each instrument. A true well balanced song has its most important elements added during the MIXING stage, not the mastering.

Like I keep saying, mastering is merely doing some final sculpting of the song with slight EQ and slight compression. Making a song as loud as possible starts at the mixing stage. If you try to overcompress a badly mixed song, you'll end up with something that really hurts to listen to.

By learning how to properly isolate instruments using EQ during the mixing stage, you can compress the song less severely during the mastering stage while still getting a very loud and saturated mix, and thus eliminate many of the problems usually associated with badly compressed songs.

[the_nihilist]

Okay, I read the brief mastering overview from gamedev.net linked in an earlier post, and I just want to say that it's almost all very bad advice.

I'll take it part by part...


2) post-processing (mastering) makes the song as far as quality goes (unless, of course, you're starting out with utter garbage in the first place)


Wrong. Utterly wrong. Mixing does.


No matter what your target format is, the most important thing you need to pay attention to when composing your song, is quality - quality sells. The days when someone like Prodigy could sell millions of records of tracker music, are over.


Opinionated meaninglessness. Good songs sell, quality has just become cheaper and easier to attain. Tracker music will always be awesome. And the Prodigy used Cubase and a Roland W-30. Liam was a keyboardist, and he played those beats in by hand, dammit!


The only solid ways of ensuring the quality sound of your music is by either:


More crap. There are lots of ways to ensure quality sound. Using good samples and synths is a start, but a decent microphone and a quiet room, along with a quality mic pre, is far from impossible to aqquire.


If you want to transpose human voice or some highly pitch-sensitive instrument sound, you'll need to use a vocoder


NO! You use a formant shifter!


Even though it's a good idea to add reverb to each individual instrument track (or group) separately to increase the "breadth" of the instrument (group), always consider adding an extra bit of reverb to the final mix to smooth out any "holes" and make the track sound more flowing. Get a free VST reverb plugin here. It is, however, my suggestion that you do your own additional research and compare several plugins as there's nothing that's guaranteed in this world - including the quality of freeware tools.


And then you get the problem that plagues beginner mixers... way too much reverb on your song. Reverb is a condiment, and this method is like drowning a meal in ketchup. Combine this with any type of mastering compression, and it sounds unbelievably ugly. Turn the reverb off. Mix your stuff dry. Add a tiny little bit of reverb on only the stuff that needs it; you should barely even notice it.


You should use the compressor on every instrument track, not just the final mix to provide consistent volume levels and minimize clipping. Only use the compressor when mastering if the levels are really off - as a rule of thumb you should not start mastering a track that clips in the first place, but instead go back to the drawing board and fix the clipping.

Using a compressor on every track can flatten an entire mix. A much better technique is just turning the fader down and EQing a track to taste. I'm mostly of the opinion that compressors should be used to tame peaks and keep volume levels from getting out of hand... Except on drums, where compression is best abused.


This is probably the most important effect of all mastreing effects - a simple one at that. Fruity Loops has a plugin called Stereo Enhancer, which is essentially the same thing: a stereo signal is delayed in one channel, creating a sense of spaciousness. Ozone, however, provides a greatly enhanced version of this effect: a multiband stereo imager, which allows you to specify different levels of stereo separation in different frequency bands.

The trick here is to apply stereo imaging to each instrument track or a group of instruments separately. It is rare that you need to enhance the stereo properties of the bassline or the bass drum. However, adding stereo separation to the lead synth will give a superb effect. Adding a little less stereo separation to the hats will, in turn, provide more focus on the middle frequencies (eg the lead synth) and not distract the listener.

This whole section is a recipie for phase cancellation problems. If you want "phat stereo effects", pan your instruments. Detune your oscillators. Just about anything will sound better than stereo enhancement.


Even though you'll most likely have to skip this step if you're broke, harmonic excitation adds a lot to a mix if applied correctly (that is, when it's not overdone). In simple terms, what this does is that it adds new harmonics in between existing harmonics to "add color" to the final sound of the mix. As far as I know, it's not possible to obtain a free harmonic excitation plugin, so there isn't much to do on this part if you haven't got the money.


There are tons now, but most of them are pretty useless. Good compressor plugins will do all the work for you in this respect, and harmonic exciters tend to give a very harsh sound to everything. I'd avoid them.


First, download this zip file (~1.5 MB), which contains five files in MP3 format (8 seconds each).

These all sound awful. The drums distort on the 2nd mp3. The third one just detuned the osc's on the synth and added delay. The ones titled "premastered" and "postmastered" just add more distortion to the drums, and plainly haven't had any thought behind them. The unfortunate conclusion I have to give you, is that this is all bad advice from someone who doesn't know what they're doing.

[sephfire]

A lot of those arguments seem to be matters of opinion, personal preference or somewhat genre/style-specific. That or you're just taking his statements far too literally or extremely. Don't get me wrong, I agree with most of what you're saying, but I think there's room for compromise between your preferences and his.

[GrayLightning]

Even though it's a good idea to add reverb to each individual instrument track (or group) separately to increase the "breadth" of the instrument (group), always consider adding an extra bit of reverb to the final mix to smooth out any "holes" and make the track sound more flowing. Get a free VST reverb plugin here. It is, however, my suggestion that you do your own additional research and compare several plugins as there's nothing that's guaranteed in this world - including the quality of freeware tools.


And then you get the problem that plagues beginner mixers... way too much reverb on your song. Reverb is a condiment, and this method is like drowning a meal in ketchup. Combine this with any type of mastering compression, and it sounds unbelievably ugly. Turn the reverb off. Mix your stuff dry. Add a tiny little bit of reverb on only the stuff that needs it; you should barely even notice it.


It depends on the genre. A lot of genres from classical, orchestral, cinematic, new age, electronica, trance, 80s music have A LOT of reverb. Even contemporary works like some of BT's stuff is swamped with "80s style" heavy reverb. It is also personal taste. BT had an interview where he was talking about his penchant for using a lot of reverb, while a lot of the newer musicians he works with (like Justin Timberlake) don't like it. I don't know about you, but I could care less what people like JT who take credit for work done by dozens of "unnamed" professionals, but I digress.

Going back on point, I would be careful about making strong, generalized comments personally. European style productions for orchestral are even wetter. It depends on what you are going for or trying to accomplish.

The other points you raised have merit, but some of it is your personal taste rather than based on facts.

[zircon]

Yep, Gray is right here. In this soundtrack I've been working on recently, one level takes place in a big South American temple. Lots of reverb on numerous tracks was crucial to creating a spacious atmosphere.

[tefnek]

A good way to see how your frequencies should be is to use a spectrum analyzer on a track that you want your song to sound similar to. Izotope Ozone is awesome for this because you can show the average spectrum over a certain period of time.

[sephfire]

A good way to see how your frequencies should be is to use a spectrum analyzer on a track that you want your song to sound similar to. Izotope Ozone is awesome for this because you can show the average spectrum over a certain period of time.

That's brilliant. So simple and yet, I never would've thought to do something like that.

[sgx]

seph wanted me to make some comments in here. I really don't know how much of what I know is actually generally considered correct or good, but I'll drop a few things I thought were helpful in learning what I have.

I like to see visually what I'm doing to a track. I learned a lot about compression by sticking in the vst s(m)exoscope effect onto tracks as I compressed them. http://www2.kvr-vst.com/get/971.html All it does is show you live what the waveform looks like. Doing this I can see exactly how the compressor is squashing the wav. It also helped that one of my main compressors I used is the Sonitus compressor, and it has got a nice little graph on it, and a little dot that represents the db level of the wav. The dot bounces up and down the graph line so you can see exactly when and how hard the compression is acting.

This is kinda weird, but when judging a final mastering mix, part of what I use is how it looks in the winamp visualization (the old winamp vis, not winamp5)..simple skin mode. I've used winamp so much to play all my mp3's, I know what a song that sounds like mine should look like and act like in that vis. I can usually tell if I've got enough bass or treble, and if its been squashed/limited enough (to my tastes).

That's about all I've got. The visual feedback helps as you develop your ear to hear the subtleties of audio stuff.

[bLiNd]

This is an insanely long post, but I wanted to help you guys as much as possible.

Ok, first things first

Ask yourself "How serious am I about making a professional sounding track?"

Because there are a few essentials to help you get the result you are looking for. I would have to say one of the most important things you can do is get yourself some GOOD monitors (speakers) to mix with. Anything flat will give u a natural sound, but these kind of things can be VERY expensive. Thats why I highly recommend KRK rockit powered series http://www.krksys.com
I have the bottom of the barrel (rp-5s) but they do the job, and do it damn well. You can hear EVERYTHING (the slightest bit of clipping is very noticable) but more importantly, they sound VERY natural and are super accurate. White Skies Club Mix was the first track I mixed down and mastered on them. Some AKG k271 headphones would actually work too for mixing down, but mixing in headphones can get you fatigued real quick.

Some important tips

Number 1
TAKE YOUR TIME!!

Work on the track like 2 hours a day for 2 weeks and I gaurantee it will turn out much better than if worked on only a couple times. When you come back to your song with a fresh mind and a fresh set of ears, your judgement is much better. Take breaks during the day so you have a chance to rest your mind and ears and come back to it later. The more patient you are the better.

Number 2
DONT FIX IT IF IT AINT BROKEN!

Eqing and Compression can make or break a song. To tell you the truth i rarely use either. People seem to think every track will need some sort of processing, but it all depends on the source sound and how you want it to fit in the mix. Compression confuses a lot of people so I will make it simple; consider it an automatic fader (like on a mixer) It will just balance the dynamics of a track. One huge example of necessary compression is vocals. Because singing is probably the most dynamic of them all, it will balance the soft parts and the loud parts if done properly, that way it can cut through/sit in the mix. The only time i use compression is on drums (almost all the time), bass, and vocals. In trance, the bassdrum and the bass are VERY important to getting a full dance sound. Its probably the most imporant part of a trance track because it makes people move (you will know what I mean if you have heard trance on a huge 100,000 watt PA) You got to be really careful with those elements because without them there is no drive to a track. Seperating the drum channels i find is much easier (bd on one track, clap on one, hihats on one, cymbals on one, percussion on one) Now these are just tips for trance but some of the same ideas apply to many other aggressive genres.

Eqing is usually used to enhance highs and lows in most of my mixdowns but you must be very careful about this as well. I usually compress my bass with some sort of eq boosting in an area above the frequencies of the bass drum (usually 100-200hz) and cut below that so that the bass drum sits will in the mix. There is also a nice technique you can use to avoid this called side chaining (also just used for effect) Most of the time cutting the unwanted frequencies is much wiser than boosting (usually surgical eqing to fix a sound, is more cutting than boosting) My synthlines usually stay untouched and ill end up using bright reverb (a hipass filter on the reverb can cut out the muddiness and lows of the reverb to give a shimmer decay) on the track instead of making it bright with eq, that way it keeps its body but still has some kind of shimmer to it. Eqing on trance usually isnt as necessary as eqing a rock song, so just use your ears and remember to come back to your track with fresh ears to make a good judgement. It only gets hard at about 20+ tracks of simultaneous audio.

Sidechaining is basically something triggering a compressor to "duck" the sound that its sidechained to. Like if you have ever heard on the radio a background song going and as soon as the dj talks the track gets really low in volume. Its because the sidechained input of the djs mic is ducking the input on the compressor. You can sidechain with the new compressor in Reason 3, and doing it in Cubase SX is very tricky but worth it in the end (only a couple vsts that can do this, like Voxengo Crunchessor). The useful thing about sidechaining with trance is the bassdrum can duck the bass, that way they dont clash in frequency. Plus it gives the bass a pumpy sound which just sounds plain cool. There are tutorials on this alone that you can probably find easily.

This brings me to my next point about being serious with your mixdowns. Be prepared to invest

Number 3
YOU NEED SOME DECENT TOOLS TO GET A "PRO SOUND"
I use 4 dsp pci cards for all my effects processing. A dsp card is basically a dedicated board of digital sound processors that will run proprietery plugins off of the card. Consider it the geforce/radeon of audio. The best part about it is NO CPU HIT!!
My main audio card is a creamware luna 2 (now called scope home) http://www.creamware.com but what is unique about this card besides the fact that it has its own operating system is that it has dsp chips built on to run effects. And the quality of these algorithms is incredible. The reverb it comes with "masterverb" has been an essential tool for the past 2 years. But more important is the Vinco compressor which i use on my bass drums to get them to SLAM (easy to do with any vintage type of compressor/limiter - just limit at 0db and bump up that input knob and attack knob till you get the punch you like) I also use something called the PSY Q which is an aural exciter. Usually these tools are hardware only, but in this case they are hybrid (dsp plugins) There is only one native plugin similar that I am aware of by BBE called Sonic Maximizer but i dont recommend it. PSY Q basically uses phase cancelation to enhance the "pleasing" frequencies of a sound. I only use it on the bass because the highs can sound really messy if not used carefully. But its perfect for airing up a pad or adding boom to a bass. There is also another plugin I have called character on the tc electronics powercore that gives you the same effect
I have the creamware luna, the uad-1 studio pack, the powercore element with the access virus synth plugin and the powercore mkii. So basically I can run all of my hardware quality compressors/limiters/eqs/delays/phaser/chorus/mastering and with the powercore, 2 synths (tc01 and virus) with NO CPU HIT. This is the beauty of these cards, is getting hardware results in a software environment without taxing your machine.

http://www.uaudio.com/products/software/UAD-1/index.html
http://www.cwaudio.de/page.php?seite=vinco&lang=en&submenu=home
http://www.cwaudio.de/page.php?seite=psyq&lang=en&submenu=home
http://www.tcelectronic.com/Default.asp?Id=1236
http://www.tcelectronic.com/PowerCoreElement
http://www.tcelectronic.com/Virus


Now dont get me wrong, there are PLENTY of native vst alternatives out there. Here are some good ones that I recommend

Arts Acoustic Reverb (best sounding native reverb ive ever heard, with minimal cpu hit)
http://www.kvraudio.com/get/1725.html

Kjaerhus Golden Series (Great sounding compressors and eqs, very good for native)
http://www.kjaerhusaudio.com/gold-series.php

Ohm Force plugins (awesome delays, phasers, distortion/compression)
http://www.ohmforce.com/ViewCategory.do?category=Effects

Sonic Flavors R66 Reverb (this reverb is an excellent compliment to the arts acoustic)
http://www.kvraudio.com/get/1715.html

Anything by audio damage
http://www.audiodamage.com/

Elemental audio plugins
http://www.elementalaudio.com/

These are probably one of the best solutions for native mastering besides t-racks and ozone 3.

The URS EQ plugins are the best of any native (some even better than the dsp eqs) but are ULTRA EXPENSIVE
http://www.ursplugins.com/

Waves plugins are decent too but I never find use of them, although I highly recommend these tutorials because the concepts can be applied to any production

http://www.sound.org/titles1.html

(this is mixing and mastering with waves, Ive read the book and gone through the tutorials and its done a world of different for me and my productions)

http://www.sound.org/titles2.html

(this is the trance experience tutorial for expert advice on sound design with synths, mixing, mastering, writing and arranging etc for trance!! i havnt read it personally but from what i hear it is a great resource for people trying to up their dance production)

Number 4
MIXING IT

Now mixdown is the most important part to your pro sound, mastering is only the icing on the cake. Without the foundation of your track (mixing) the cake will fall apart when you put the icing on(mastering) hah

Basically there are a few rules to follow. Different sounds require different kinds of reverbs. Drum sounds (even trance drums) benefit greatly from "plate" type reverbs of rooms and chambers. Experiment with puting a room reverb on the clap or hihats and cymbals. NEVER put reverb on the bass drum of a dance track, it will just muddy and mess everything (unless its a gate reverb to get an offbeat reverb effect). Sometimes its wiser to use delays instead of reverbs. Some artists like M.I.K.E. (push) NEVER use reverb, hes always using delays instead. There are some great free delays out there too that i use religously
http://www.interruptor.ch/
Using echomania can even replace reverb (since its 4 simultaneous tape delays). Using hall reverbs carefully placed on pads and leads in trance will definately open up the track alot, but go easy on the reverb, get the bouncy rhythm delay effect from the delays and then open up the tail of the synth with a hall reverb. I like to use phasers on pads and leads sometimes but usually keeping them mellow. Chorus, is the same way (I use the Uad-1 Choruses which are remakes of the Roland CE-1 and Roland Dimension-D. They are ULTRA lush and thick sounding, very vintage)
Those are basics of fattening a track up. The actualy mixding on the board goes like this for me.

I put the master channel to 0db and bring all faders down. I then turn up my speakers to a reasonable loud volume and start bringing tracks up starting with the bassdrum, then bass, then other drum channels. Then i bring in the accompanying parts like the leads and pads (usually at the main part of the song on loop is where i start mixing) I find what works best is to close your eyes and trust your ears more than the VU meters. You will know when to stop with the faders and for some reason I never go past 0 db on the master track using this technique. It just takes experimentation and patience, but you will eventually get a nice sound. remember, TAKE BREAKS! Even come back the next day if you are getting stuck.

Number 5
MASTERING IS YOUR FRIEND!

Ok mastering can be very tricky and is usually the most difficult part of finishing a track. Basically you have to find a system that works for you. Its really simple actually, surgical eq first, then compression and limitng after is the norm for dance. I used to use t-racks which is great, but using presets isnt always best, you must really know how to you use a compressor and limiter to get the cleanest loudest punch of a track. There are some excellent tools available today for mastering like,

Har-Bal equalization system http://www.har-bal.com/

This program will analyze your track and show a spectral diagram of your song. The rule is basically you want as few extreme hills or valleys as possible. With version 2.0 it uses a function called Intuit-Q which will basically try to fix your track eqing without changing the character of your sounds. This is an excellent pre eqing program which i HIGHLY RECOMMEND buying.

Then I use a mastering eq called firium (from elemental audio)
http://www.elementalaudio.com/products/firium/

This plugin will let you analyze a track and match the spectral diagram to your own track. It still takes some tweaking when done but usually this can really help you out A LOT so you dont have to guess with your eqing. So this plugin basically does the final eqing of my track (its a great eq on its own, the matching is just a cool feature) and there are lots of plugins that do this same job but i find this to be the best one.

Then I use a stereo expander at about 20% to enhance the stereo width of the track.

Now the most important part...MAKING IT LOUD!
http://www.creamware.com/page.php?seite=optimaster&lang=en&submenu=home
its only available to creamware users, and its called the optimaster. Now the excellent part of these tool is it is ULTRA transparent (meaning no artifacts of compression and limiting, its very very clean) But the unique part about this is its Wizard fuction. You basically goto the loudest part of your track (usually the climax) and loop it, then press "START" on the wizard and it will anayze the track and bring it to maximum loudness and punch ON ITS OWN. Loudness PERFECT everytime, no matter what the genre. Amazing... as far as I know there arent any native plugins that can do this and even if they could the sound might not be as good. but the waves ultra l3 maximizer is a decent native alternative (besides t-racks).

Now like I said, you have to find a system that works for you. This is what I came up with after 4 years of experience in mastering. Hans Zimmer is a very proud creamware user and he calls this arsenal of tools his "secret weapon" And i couldnt agree more, its really amazing. But beware, creamware cards take a lot of effort to get running stable, and its a very complex system to work with, so I dont recommend jumping on unless you REALLY want that vinco, psy q, and optimaster. They are pretty expensive plugins as well.

For someone just starting out that wants some good plugins, you will have to spend about 1000 bux but i recommend a Uad-1 card (with the fairchild compressor, the precision limiter and eq) and you can do some awesome mastering with those. Getting a good sound takes time and money (sadly) Ive spent a good 9 Gs on plugins and hardware, but the results are truly great.

Now like I said, these tools only make it easier for me to get the sound I want, but with time and patiences you can get get a similar result with native vsts and even free vsts. I plan on making more tutorials and info when my website launches, hope this helps you out!!

[aismackdemhoes]

Friggin Know it all.... :)

[aismackdemhoes]

One thing bLiNd didn't discuss, is how his snares get too loud. :)

[OverCoat]

hahaha

hi leifo?

[Splunkle]

Hot dang. bLiNd FTW.

Quick question to Zircon though: You mentioned that you had a compressor and a limiter on your master track, and that the limiter was there to keep the levels in check. I was under the impression that the compressor would do that for you. But you always have some sort of reason to do something, so I am preety sure I am missing something. Would you mind bringing me up to speed?

[Catlein]

The limiter could be there as a last resort thing. If one brave little wave fights hard enough and makes it to the 0db endline, the limiter will provide additional defenses.

Um... Zergrush?

[Yoozer]

But you always have some sort of reason to do something, so I am preety sure I am missing something. Would you mind bringing me up to speed?
Not zircon, but you know the difference between a compressor and a limiter?

A limiter is essentially a compressor with an infinite ratio. Which means that if something gets above the level it gets squashed flat instead of bent. A limiter is indeed sort of a last line of defense; albeit that a recording that's mastered properly shouldn't have anything that's flat and at -0db anyway, because it means (unwanted) distortion.

Also, a good limiter shows it when there's clipping. A compressor still has a gain knob, and if it's turned up too much, it can still clip.

[SnappleMan]

Todays mastering standard is -0.1dB to -0.2dB, not 0dB.

These days, if anything hits 0dB it's pretty much considered clipping. But that doesn't stop idiotic rock and metal producers from overdoing it.

[zircon]

Yeah. It's kind of dumb. I usually don't quite go to 0db either, actually, but SLIGHTLY less just in case.

[GrayLightning]

Todays mastering standard is -0.1dB to -0.2dB, not 0dB.

These days, if anything hits 0dB it's pretty much considered clipping. But that doesn't stop idiotic rock and metal producers from overdoing it.

More than just them. I've seen so much professional releases lately hitting 0db! It's becoming an epidemic across the board. :lol:

[SirRus]

this is most certainly a n00b question, but what is a reliable program you all use to monitor the peak levels, and see if your songs are hitting 0 dB or not? Can you rest assured that if your song is not going above this level during the entireity of your song that it is free of clipping?

[OverCoat]

most software has dB meters in it, but any waveform editor will show you the FULL song [Audition, SoundForge, Goldwave, Audacity] and whether it goes above 0 dB or not, of course.

[GrayLightning]

this is most certainly a n00b question, but what is a reliable program you all use to monitor the peak levels, and see if your songs are hitting 0 dB or not? Can you rest assured that if your song is not going above this level during the entireity of your song that it is free of clipping?

http://www.elementalaudio.com/products/inspectorxl/index.html

That's one of the best.

I personally just use the one in Cubase with the free version of Inspector - http://www.elementalaudio.com/products/inspector/index.html.

As for your other question - Not always. SGX had this problem a few weeks ago where he was pushing his limiter too hard and the problems of it only manifested itself when he converted it to mp3.

[SnappleMan]

Well, someone should restate that there is good clipping and bad clipping. And I guess it'll be me. So yeah, there's good clipping, and the inverse of which would be bad clipping.

[zircon]

Well... digital clipping is ALWAYS bad. Analog-type saturation however is usually a cool effect.

[bLiNd]

You cant really judge clipping visually based on an mp3 since an mp3 compresses the audio even more. I master at -0.1db to its maximum punch without audible clipping but almost always the mp3 will clip on a VU meter, you cant trust it. And yes, inspector is a fantastic tool for this kind of thing.

[Splunkle]

Thanks for the quick answer guys, I think I get it now. I was using the Fruity compressor, which might have a limiter built in as well, as no matter how hard I push the gain, it never clips. Curious.

Also, I was wondering just what analog style clipping was. I know that guitar amps (well, most guitar amps) work by pushing the signal too hard through a tube amplifier, which gives that lovely distortion we all know and love, because overdriven tubes to cool things. But then I was also told that in the old days of recording, when everyone was using tapes, many engineeers delibrately cranked the volume up so that the tape would clip, because this produced some sort of spiffy effect, but a different effect from the tube amp.

So I was wondering, when people say analog style clipping, are they refering to one of those forms of clipping, or something else alltogether?

[zircon]

Well, analog clipping is simply when you push the volume above 0db on an analog device, like a tape machine. It can produce a variety of effects depending on the type of device, or even the exact model. Therefore, there's no one way to describe what happens.

[Yoozer]

The difference is that purely digital clipping flattens and analog clipping (because of the nature of the medium) saturates and even compresses before it goes all out of whack. It's the difference between harsh and "hey, that's actually a nice-sounding effect".

[Compyfox]

Sorry but I can't leave it this way.

You cant really judge clipping visually based on an mp3 since an mp3 compresses the audio even more. I master at -0.1db to its maximum punch without audible clipping but almost always the mp3 will clip on a VU meter, you cant trust it. And yes, inspector is a fantastic tool for this kind of thing.

This is why you limit it at -0.2dB!
I mastered so many tracks in -0.2dB with different loudness. In the K-System, -8dB RMS, -6dB RMS, hell even -4dB RMS and higher where you definitly hear the pumping. MP3 has a limit - and that limit is -5dB RMS, everything higher and it has digital clipping even though it is limited at -0.2dB. I engineered so many tracks, did 1:1 tests... no loudness change, no limiting change if you don't push the mp3 format to it's limits. So it's not true that mp3 compresses properly mastered material even further in terms of loudness.

Also if you use massive compression, exciting tools and other enhancers, and in worse case your limiter doesn't really "brickwall limit", your 0.1dB headroom is useless.


Let me tell you why:
CDs in the early days (even still) needed a certain headroom. That headroom is this 0.2dB (sometimes even 0.3dB). The reason was simple. The first CD player had problems with highly compressed material and it had a certain limit. Spikes (so called full scale samples) who caused clipping - most of the time certain synth patches/sweeps, bass, hell even hats - also caused the CD to literally barf (hiccup, skip), because the internal engine couldn't take it anymore.

Even though limiters were accourate, you still needed a certain headroom to prevent clipping. So every mastering engineer who knew this (I'm not talking about project studios who spreaded like mushrooms) used -0.2dB as savety for spikes. And all of their highend metering tools didn't show any clipping at all.

Nowadays there're tools out that catch every single issue (like Penguin Audio Meter, Inspector, soon the new limiter from PSP Audio Ware too if we talk about native plugins) - bitwise. Limiters and compressors are a tad more accourate than 10 years before, but that doesn't mean that they're flawless either. Like Gray mentioned... you wouldn't believe how many wannabe mastering engineers push the tracks to their limits, ignore every law of physics and sell their CDs full of bugs.


You see, this is not a wild and crazy rumor, it is a fact. No Limiter - and by that I really mean noone - works flawless! I tried so many in the last couple of years. Every limiter (hell even Waves!) with a brickwall limiting of 0dB clips. No matter which material I used (except material that was at K-20 and lower of course, which barely touches 0dB peak).


A lot has to do with the attack and release time of the limiter, too. But most of them only have a treshold and gain level. And this is where the -0.2dB (or even -0.3dB) come into play. Chances are that your limiter, as good as it might me, still let spikes through that're not registered by the peak meter (but tools like Inspector) who're still louder than 0.1dB. With the 0.3dB headroom however, you prevent every possible clipping that might occour.


You loose this race however if you:
- make the track louder again after it was mastered (for example CDex internal "normalise" function)
- your mastering limiter uses an EQ after the limiting
- encode into mp3 and the RMS level is stronger than -5dB RMS
- encode into AC3 and your track is louder than K-12 (-12dB RMS, K-System meter setup)


So... as you can see. Loud is definitly not better!
And I guess it is time to post a link to the loudness race homepage: www.loudnessrace.com
(server is unfortunately down a lot, and half of the facts are nonsense, but he has a point)


I could write more about the other stuff mentioned, cause I definitly do not agree with everything. However they're just another aspects of what you could "do" - a different opinion. I just wanted to "fix" this little issue.

But do not forget: Mastering is an own world for itself! There's way more behind it than just "highend" plugins (or even DSP cards) in a certain chain or all-in-one solutions. Else audio engineers would die out.

[sephfire]

Glad to see you in here, Compy. :)

Keep it coming guys!

[zircon]

Another thing to consider - if you are making EQ changes in the mastering phase of more than about 5db then you should really go back and work on the individual parts more. The EQ changes in the mastering phase should be minimal - you're just doing subtle, transparent edits to polish the finished track. All of the major EQ work should be done in the production phase.

This brings me to something that I learned from tefnek, though it's a technique that many major producers use as well. When working with sampled drums, it is a wise idea to put the individual drum parts on their own channels; eg. kick on one track, snare on another, hats/rides on another, toms on another. But after you do the necessary processing and mixing, what you can do is then route all of them into a 5th channel (in FL, you can do this with sends). You can then apply some saturation, perhaps a vinyl effect, a little EQ, and some compression. This can make the drums sound like they were recorded from the same kit, even if your drum track is composed of 30 samples from all over the 'net. Most notably, The Crystal Method uses this technique.

Edit: Some more stuff that I do..

* Always make sure that when you're changing one particular part of a song, you listen to it by itself AND in context of the mix. For example, let's you're doing a basic rock song and you have drums, bass, guitar, and voice. If the bass sounds "off", what you should do is first solo the bass part and treat that by itself. Once you think it sounds good, then play it back with the rest of the mix and see if you were right. This is a sound method of working because you don't want things to be tweaked and sculpted to hell, making them sound lifeless or unrealistic (even though they might sound OK together in the mix), nor do you want them to all be mixed as if they were playing solo, meaning they'll muddy eachother up when played together.

* If you're working with samples and you're spending an inordinant amount of time on one specific sample, trying to make it sound good, you might consider simply trying a different sample. Some people that I have talked to believe that EQ and processing can fix anything. I disagree. Sometimes, making a crappy kick drum sample sound good really is impossible, and you're better off finding a kick sample that sounds closer to what you want, and then tweaking that slightly. You'll save yourself a lot of time working this way. Of course, layering samples is another way to mask weaknesses and build on strengths.. not only for drum samples, but for other stuff too (for example, mixing different string sounds to get a more realistic and expressive blend).

* Vary up the frequency range that the listener is subjected to over the course of the song. No matter what genre you're working in, prolonged exposure to a certain frequency or sound WILL wear down the listener's ears. Try this for yourself. Find a sample of a 10khz sine wave and play it back at a normal listening volume. Annoying? Yep. While you're not actually working with pure tones in a mix, the concept is still the same.

Some common pitfalls include making hihats or other top-end percussion sound really bright and clear, and playing them throughout the entire song. Alternatively, having a low-end synth playing constantly at the same frequency range. Even something as simple as acoustic guitar strums can eventually become grating. Using "bridge" sections in your arrangement is one way to avoid this problem, but also, simply being more aware of what parts are playing for how long can help a lot too.

[bLiNd]

Well compy Im not going to argue with your "expertise" but in the world of club music, louder is better. My white skies club mix is a perfect master for a huge PA. Any mastered wave (properly mastered) wont clip visually or audibly, but any kind of after compression for videos or mp3s or whatever, can cause audible clipping as well. It depends on what your mastering for. If you are mastering for vinyl that will be played on a PA then you can hit the -.1db mark. Creamwares optimaster plugin doesn even have the option of an overhead of -.2db unless you do it manually with a fader. And im sure the German engineers at creamware know a thing or two about their own mastering plugin. Not one plugin ive heard in a software environment comes close to the transparency of the optimaster....

[bLiNd]

So it's not true that mp3 compresses properly mastered material even further in terms of loudness.



I didnt mean in terms of loudness. I meant that the compression of the actual audio to mp3 can cause slight peaks and jumps causing the "Red light" on a vu meter to turn "on". You can usually see graphically the limiting on a wav but if you open the same wav as an mp3 you can see that the limited wav has been compressed. Usually an ultra high bitrate on the mp3 will clip less (And when i mean clip i mean 0db) then a normal bitrate. And let me clarify again, that i mean VISUALLY seeing the clipping on a VU, not actual audible distortion.

[Compyfox]

I recently mastered Shael Riley's "Toybox" album. That album is in -8dB RMS, -0.2dB limiting. No matter if I open the WAV files or the mp3 files in Wavelab for a 1:1 check - both files are the same, none of them clip, the mp3 doesn't get "compressed" or normalised. A demo track that I mastered before for SGX with his mp3 issue was in -6dB RMS, also -0.2dB limiting. Even here, no clipping in the WAV, and not in the mp3 either.

I wouldn't have written this if I'm not sure about it, blind.


Also... You should know better.
Vinyls work on a carving base. The smaller the amplitude (loudness) for carving, the better the record, the less the chance that the needle hovers around but stays on track. I never really gave tracks into press, but I know from befriended engineers that a -8dB and higher RMS is definitly a NO-NO. Some even say that -10dB is way too hot.

The carved amplitude simply would get too big and turn into a squarewave, which also affects the other windings. This for example is also a reason why not to put a flanger or the bass/basedrum for club productions, or "spread" it out. Not only does it sound crappy on 08/15 standard club systems, neither does it work on the vinyl record itself. CDs work on a totally different basis, this is why loudness-driven engineers could easily step over it's limits.


Speaking of Creamware.
Maybe Creamware knows what they're doing, but that you can't even set the limiter to something different than only 0dB is a joke. No wonder that so many CDs are simply mastered the wrong way. Like I wrote in my last post... there are "always" spikes. Not hearable, but the metering tool catches it. And -0.1dB is just too less of a headroom.

Also if I hear the name "optimaster", I get the chills. Every mastering limiter/compressor that I know which uses that name or even part of it, squashed the life out of the music. Especially in radiostations. So it's like a red flag for me which tells me "don't ever touch it!". Not to mention, if you say that this is the only transparent thing you know, then you definitly didn't try the TbT plugins. DSP cards good and fine, but to me they're overrated.


No pun intended, but this is what I learned over the years from several pros (one of them Bob Katz, inventor and defender of the K-System) or read in books/AES papers.

[bLiNd]

All optimaster is, is a finalizer like ultramaximizer by waves. The sound quality of their compression algorithm is insanely good and it really puts waves to shame. You would just have to try it to see what im saying. The limiter can be set to whatever you want. But on the pre-normalizer there is a headroom knob that only goes down to -.1db. Anyway thats irrelevant. When i say that optimasters compression is TRANSPARENT, i mean that there is NO squashing whatsoever. NO PUMPING at all...

TbT?!! FREE plugins, now thats a big warning sign to me for a quality compression. Now if you choose those over creamwares plugins, you are just ignorant.

I have a ton of trance vinyls that i have ripped myself mastered at -.2db to -1.db. You dont need to drag this conversation on anymore. Listen to my white skies club mix and you will hear the quality of the compression ive been talking about. Show me some examples of your own work (your own music) with your plugin choices and maybe ill respect your opinion more.

[Compyfox]

Okay, now this was a clear threat towards my side but okay.

I won't lecture you, I just want you to please accept the facts. Nothing more. If you think your masterings are okay in your book, then they are. If you think "free plugins" aren't worth shit, then they aren't worth shit to you. If you say "-10dB RMS was in the 50ies", then so be it.

You know my works on JoeCam's "Hits & Misses" (which was mastered with a "free" limiter, btw), you heard stuff from Haroon Piracha that I mastered, Trenthian, Zeratul ("Just a Friend", just released on his page), soon even Shael Riley's "Toybox". If you say I talk crap - fine with me. It's your opinion as I have mine in terms of mastering. You say "make it loud", I say "K-12 is more than enough" - whatever, doesn't matter.


It's more ignorant to not consider or even accept other opinions/skills rather than standing ground. I mean... I didn't devote my sparetime in the last 3 years for nothing. And if one of the most well known audio engineers (Bob Katz again) agrees with with what I just wrote, is an AES member, over 15 years in the business and even told me a thing or two, and you say this is not right... then I don't know what is.

No threat, just my 2c.

[bLiNd]

well we just have different goals and different tools. I respect your knowledge about the technical sides of audio, they surpass me greatly. I know how to use my tools to get the sound I want, and same with you. But dont get me wrong, i do respect the time youve put into your know how and expertise. Anyway, I didnt really mean to attack you.

[suzumebachi]

what the hell is TbT? also, i don't quite understand how root mean square works when applied to decibels either... do you basically just mean the overall mean volume of the track?

[zircon]

Right. Peak volume represents.. the peak volume, eg. the loudest the track goes. RMS = Root Mean Squared, which is a representation of the average loudness. It is always lower than the peak.

[Argle]

Well... digital clipping is ALWAYS bad.

Nah, I wouldn't say always. Some of the more extreme electronic genres like industrial are built around really harsh sounds. digital clipping or distortion seems appropriate if you want something nice and abrasive.

[zircon]

No, it's always bad. As in, if you have clipping, it won't even play back properly on some devices.

There's a difference between that and distortion effects which simulate the effect, or recording the effect of the clipping and then compressing it to use in your song. But there is never any case where your actual waveform on the CD should exceed 0.0db.

[Argle]

*shrug*

Can't say I'm an expert on the subject, so I'll take your word.

[Splunkle]

what the hell is TbT? also, i don't quite understand how root mean square works when applied to decibels either... do you basically just mean the overall mean volume of the track?

Yeah, its like Zircon said. If you think about it, they can't use a normal average, because the wave goes both above and below zero decibels. So to make the whole thing positive, we have Root Mean Square, which solves the problem by squaring the number (I hope you recall that a negative number squared is a positive number). Of course, then the square root has to be taken else the values would be all weird, hence Root Mean Squared.

The thing is, it could refer to the overall volume of the track, or just one bit of the track. It is an average of volume over time, but the time period is whatever you se it to be. For example, I have had songs where the chorus was -11dB RMS, but som eof the quieter verses were -13dB RMS. Overall, RMS was about -11.5dB or somesuch.

Also, I think something to to keep in mind when mastering is to keep who the track is intended for in mind. If it is designed for a club, dynamic range isn't that important. If its for home listening, then remember - as Zirc (I think) mentioned earlier - to ensure it isn't all OMG LOUD.

Disclaimer: I am not, by any means, a mastering engineer. If someone more pro than I says otherwise, go with them. Especially if its Compyfox.

[sephfire]

*Front page resources UPDATED*

Yeesh. I start up a new help resource and then let it slip to page 2. Shame on me. Sorry about that.

Anyway, the page 1 link library is properly updated. Feel free to impart more knowledge everyone! And ASK SOME QUESTIONS.

[zircon]

Hey, could you go ahead and link to the production tutorial I wrote on this very forum? It has lots of useful info, imo.

[sephfire]

you betcha. :mrgreen:

[sephfire]

Ok, I've got my own question.

When dealing with hip-hop tracks and the like, you tend to get a lot of heavy bass sounds. Having them all hit at once would easily take things beyond clipping range, but putting them all through a compressor may not get the desired results. Is there a way to compress a set of instruments, but only so a specific instrument gets reduced in volume. For instance, if you have a heavy bass kick drum but also a loud bass guitar. Say you want the bass drum's bass levels to decrease when the bass guitar is there. Is there a good compression tactic for that or is it better to EQ paint that by hand?

[zircon]

Just apply the compression to one particular track. However if your bass guitar and kick are muddying up eachother that's something you need to address either by (1) EQing them separately, (2) changing samples used, or (3) changing the mic/mic position for the recording itself if its a live performance.

[Navi]

a few tips on EQing and Compressing for hiphop tracks, especially if you want that booming bass/kick sound.

cut a lot of your instruments in the middle. around 400-500. this opens room for the heavy low end.

boost your kick around 90+. cut your bass at that point a bit.

compression is important. gray taught me that pop producers use multiple compressors on individual kicks, snares, basses, etc in order to carve out their sound. i'm still experimenting with how this works.

also, you're talking about side chaining, no? i'm not to familiar with side chaining. i'm sure someone else can help you there

[Cyan]

"Say you want the bass drum's bass levels to decrease when the bass guitar is there. Is there a good compression tactic for that or is it better to EQ paint that by hand?"

Sidechaining could be very useful in this case. It's often the other way around, though; you want the bass to reduce in volume when the kick punches in. Sidechaining lets you do this, usually it's one compressor on the bass track, which is triggered by the kick, and reduces the volume of the bass. There are different ways to set up sidechaining depending on what program you use. In Reason, this is quite easy. Cubase is a bit more tricky if you ain't got the right plugs.

[sephfire]

I've been reading up a bit on sidechaining, which may end up being the solution here. I'm using Ableton at this stage which (from what I can tell) has a pretty simple sidechaining setup.

I'd usually opt to make the kick override the bass as well, but I've heard the opposite in a few hip-hop tracks that sounded rather cool. I'll try both ways.

Thanks for the tips. :)

[sephfire]

Ok, it's time we took care of a particular shortage in this thread: book recommendations.

I was browsing the very limited selection at Borders today and found three potential purchases:

1). Digital Recording, Software & Plug-Ins by Bill Gibson
2). The Art of Mixing, 2nd Ed. by David Gibson
3). The Mixing Engineer's Handbook, 2nd Ed. by Bobby Owsinski

I didn't purchase any of these so I could get some recommendations from you experienced guys first. Can anyone vouch for the quality of these resources or perhaps recommend better alternatives?

[Souliarc]

Heh, coincidentally I went to the public library today and picked up the Home Recording Handbook (http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/1844511790/203-5534308-4996731). Though it may not be specifically for mastering, it has a lot of information on current technology and technique. Many professionals were involved in the book, including some from such respected newsstand titles as Computer Music and Electronic Musician.

I also picked up The Home Book of Musical Knowledge and Classical Music 101, but those're more theory and history than anything.

The titles you mention seem like fairly sound titles, i'll check them out as well, thanks :)

[sephfire]

Zis thread, she iz BUMPED.

[sephfire]

I hate to beg for a sticky in a forum already overrun with them, but we really have some great information in here and the makings of a solid knowledge database in the topic post. :puppyeyes:

[Navi]

i wuv u too.

[sephfire]

:mrgreen:

Well, now that we're stickied, it's time I started adding content to this here thread. Zircon recently offered mastering services for CD releases at a nominal fee. Details pasted below:

Hey, I just thought I'd put this out there for those in the community who plan on doing commercial releases of their music. I've been doing a lot of music production over the last few years and it's what I've been studying in school too. Recently, I've been doing mastering work for people and they have been happy with the results. So, I've decided to offer very low cost mastering services for anyone on OCR who would be interested. Here's some basic info.

* What is mastering? Mastering is the final step in the recording process in which a completed song or series of songs are sonically prepared for distribution/duplication. It is very important especially for album releases so that all the tracks on the album have a similar overall sound. In short, mastering is that last polish and shine that makes the track ready for release.

* Why can't I just do it myself? You might very well be able to. I'm not going to tell you that it's impossible to do your own mastering. However, many people do not have the experience, tools, or even the trained ears to objectively master their own music with the same results as an external service would deliver. Even many pro electronic artists who do all the production themselves will go elsewhere for mastering.

* What will you do? Since every song is different, the same exact method can't be applied in each instance. Dance and rock music, for example, typically calls for a more "maxed out" sound - loudness is desirable. For a quiet acoustic guitar and voice track, on the other hand, finer details like the level of noise and balance between the parts would be examined. In any case, I will work with you in achieving the kind of sound you want, applying a wide range of software and hardware tools.

* What if I don't like the results? I would be happy to do one track for you first so you can see how it sounds. If you don't like it, no problem - you haven't lost anything. If you like it, I can go ahead and do the rest of the project. Simple enough.

* How much does it cost? It depends on the project (number of songs, length of the songs, and how quickly it must be completed). However, to give you an idea of the ballpark, we're talking $10-$15 a track. Since this is more of a side project for me, and I like the OCR community so much, I think this is a reasonable price. In comparison you can expect to pay 5 times that or more from a service such as XARC or Omni Mastering (also online studios). Of course, we can always negotiate if there is a special circumstance of some kind.

As a bonus, if you're doing a CD project I'd be happy to work with you on finding the best methods of duplicating, promoting, and distributing your album. It's a process I've gone through numerous times myself and one that I've spent a great deal of time studying as well.

There's a full equipment list on my site, at

www.zirconstudios.com/about.php

If you're interested or if you have any questions, feel free to post, PM me or send me an email at admin@zirconstudios.com . Thanks!


EDIT:
And in other news, I will make an attempt to start browsing the Remxing forums more often in search of nuggets of production wisdom. When I find such pearls, I will quote them here for eternal preservation.

[Mairuzu]

Best book on mastering:

Mastering Audio: The Art and the Science: Books: Bob Katz

Bob Katz is one of the best mastering engineers. The book is full of useful information.

[avaris]

Wats up guys while searching the web I came across this website with lots of useful info on music. It's examples are used with fl studio, reason, and ableton live. I just skimmed over it, but my impression is that it def has some good info that covers all the basics of doin electronic music. Talks about theory, mastering, production, melodies, harmonies, rythms, basslines.

If someone feels like their missing some of the basics in their music you might wanna check it out.

http://www.modcam.com/emusic/

[Splunkle]

http://www.tweakheadz.com/EQ_and_the_Limits_of_Audio.html

Some nice tips on EQing here. Also some hilarious analogies:

The keyboard player starts scowling at the guitarist, who has just ripped off his shirt and put his amp on volume 9. So the keyboard player puts his amp up to 10. Your vocalist is getting all peeved because she can't hear herself now so she starts screaming instead of singing and its o-my-god-awful. Now even the drummer can't hear himself so he starts banging on the crash cymbal. Neighbors complain, police arrive and you find out you are going to jail for some unpaid traffic ticket. That is masking at work.

[avaris]

actually that dudes whole website is insane.

http://www.tweakheadz.com/

He has so much free information it's insane. Plus he's hillarious.

[Souliarc]

http://www.planetoftunes.com/digiaudio/how_a_to_d.html

A small beginner's guide to understanding sample rate and bit depth. I hear a lot of people being confused on what settings to choose, so this should help you out a bit.

[zircon]

Wow, Har-Bal RULES!!! I picked it up on bLiNd's recommendation and it just works wonders.

[Tensei]

I don't know if there's been a question about this topic before, but I'm pretty curious about your thoughts on adding a master reverb to your mastering chain.

Yes, I know the general consensus says " More Reverb = BAD", but I've read in some guides that a medium studio plate style reverb, or a small acoustic room style reverb, combined with a low wet-dry ratio can help make the whole mix 'wash together', and give it the necessary 'shine'. I haven't really extensively tried it out myself, but does anyone else have thoughts to share on this subject?

[The Legendary Zoltan]

Yo. I don't know if anyone is interested, but I was wondering if anyone could give some advice specifically about EQing/Compressing/everything elseing drums for brutal metal. I'm working on one such piece now and I, personally, think the current drum sound I've got sounds cool, but I'm thinking that all the producer heads out there would say otherwise. What advice would you give for producing drums for an extremely busy metal song?

[Malcos]

I don't know if there's been a question about this topic before, but I'm pretty curious about your thoughts on adding a master reverb to your mastering chain.

Yes, I know the general consensus says " More Reverb = BAD", but I've read in some guides that a medium studio plate style reverb, or a small acoustic room style reverb, combined with a low wet-dry ratio can help make the whole mix 'wash together', and give it the necessary 'shine'. I haven't really extensively tried it out myself, but does anyone else have thoughts to share on this subject?

This does work well on some styles that would have a band all together in one room (jazz, rock) as long as you roll off the low fequencies so not much reverb is bring put on the kick and bass. For electronic styles it doesn't have as good an effect...

[DrManhattan]

... it works on some styles, like mentioned before... if you're on rock/metal stuff, it sure needs some ambiance, to put de instruments toghether... I myself use a little bit of room reverb stuff... quite little... I don't like the things too shiny...

[Nicholestien]

Okay, I read the brief mastering overview from gamedev.net linked in an earlier post, and I just want to say that it's almost all very bad advice.

I'll take it part by part...



Wrong. Utterly wrong. Mixing does.



Opinionated meaninglessness. Good songs sell, quality has just become cheaper and easier to attain. Tracker music will always be awesome. And the Prodigy used Cubase and a Roland W-30. Liam was a keyboardist, and he played those beats in by hand, dammit!



More crap. There are lots of ways to ensure quality sound. Using good samples and synths is a start, but a decent microphone and a quiet room, along with a quality mic pre, is far from impossible to aqquire.



NO! You use a formant shifter!



And then you get the problem that plagues beginner mixers... way too much reverb on your song. Reverb is a condiment, and this method is like drowning a meal in ketchup. Combine this with any type of mastering compression, and it sounds unbelievably ugly. Turn the reverb off. Mix your stuff dry. Add a tiny little bit of reverb on only the stuff that needs it; you should barely even notice it.



Using a compressor on every track can flatten an entire mix. A much better technique is just turning the fader down and EQing a track to taste. I'm mostly of the opinion that compressors should be used to tame peaks and keep volume levels from getting out of hand... Except on drums, where compression is best abused.



This whole section is a recipie for phase cancellation problems. If you want "phat stereo effects", pan your instruments. Detune your oscillators. Just about anything will sound better than stereo enhancement.



There are tons now, but most of them are pretty useless. Good compressor plugins will do all the work for you in this respect, and harmonic exciters tend to give a very harsh sound to everything. I'd avoid them.




These all sound awful. The drums distort on the 2nd mp3. The third one just detuned the osc's on the synth and added delay. The ones titled "premastered" and "postmastered" just add more distortion to the drums, and plainly haven't had any thought behind them. The unfortunate conclusion I have to give you, is that this is all bad advice from someone who doesn't know what they're doing.well, i'm a huge amature at mixing but i'm almost certain that you can use reverb in a way that it isn't considered "A condiment"

now correct me if i'm wrong, but on reasons reverb there is this thing, not sure what it is, but it's called ER-Late> or something like that and i think its purpose is just for this, to make something sound "Transperent" but in your face at the same time. I do that alot on cellos, and make 3 cellos, pan one to the semi far right and semi far left and one dead center so the cello goes "around" things like drums. instead of muddying them up.

thats my 2 cents, i'm sure it's wrong as hell xD

[Wix]

Does anyone know if there is anything like that out there? Like, clips or arrangments that you can download that haven't gone through final mix down and mastering. I guess it sounds a bit odd, now that I think about it, but still, if it's out there, it would be great for practice. I know we can all use our own arrangments, but that kills the idea of solely focusing on the mastering aspect by adding biased or your own visions of your song back into the equation. I'm just trying to "isolate the variable" so to speak and just focus on mastering to learn more deeply about all of the sonic properties. Ok, this is way too long now. If anyone knows, let me know! Thanks!

[Swarmer]

I'm new here and to mastering audio, and I'm really bad at it, but I think I have a good tidbit of advice.

When making a song, I listen to it over and over for hours and start to get too used to it, making it harder for me to be more discerning. When it comes to mastering, I missed a lot of parts that I simply just got too used too. I found that an easy way to get a fresher look on things is to turn my headphones around backwards. It reverses all the panning and the song sounds familiar but new. Peculiarities jump out immediately. Of course, the best way to prevent fatigue is to take breaks and work on it in smaller chunks of time, but sometimes that's not an option.

I hope that helps.

[Nicholestien]

I'm new here and to mastering audio, and I'm really bad at it, but I think I have a good tidbit of advice.

When making a song, I listen to it over and over for hours and start to get too used to it, making it harder for me to be more discerning. When it comes to mastering, I missed a lot of parts that I simply just got too used too. I found that an easy way to get a fresher look on things is to turn my headphones around backwards. It reverses all the panning and the song sounds familiar but new. Peculiarities jump out immediately. Of course, the best way to prevent fatigue is to take breaks and work on it in smaller chunks of time, but sometimes that's not an option.

I hope that helps.yeah, i know exactly what your talking about.

here are some tips to get around it.

1.) Mute all the instruments, take a 10 minute break or so, go to an important section of the song, solo the "voice of the song", is it too loud? to soft? Adjust it till it's comfortable to your ears.

then keep bringing in instruments in the order you feel is most important, and keep adjusting the volume levels.,

but in some cases, like the kick drum, it might be to "attacking" , and not neccessairly loud.

i learnt that there is like this difference between how loud something actually is, and how loud it's tone is, or something like that. and how loud a tone might appear changes depending on your volume level, but there is DEFANANTLY, a volume where they are more balanced than the others, I believe this volume level is slightly louder than the volume your "bass" starts to cause rumble on the table, and the reason the bass is overexaggerated is because the table is rumbling.

remember to take off all the effects processing when you did this, this goes for things like EQ too. like when you solo your first instrument dry, enable to eq and compression you did on it to see if you did to much

and don't go for a balanced mix, think hard on what your original idea of the mix was, like, a nice warm mid, slightly thumpin' bass, and highs which don't sparkle, or stick out, etc.

an example of what not to do, is to make the song as balanced as possible, things just sound weird that way. like, the highs aren't sticking out, but nether or the mids, but the place inbetween them is.

[stormfrontrecords]

well, i'm a huge amature at mixing but i'm almost certain that you can use reverb in a way that it isn't considered "A condiment"

now correct me if i'm wrong, but on reasons reverb there is this thing, not sure what it is, but it's called ER-Late> or something like that and i think its purpose is just for this, to make something sound "Transperent" but in your face at the same time. I do that alot on cellos, and make 3 cellos, pan one to the semi far right and semi far left and one dead center so the cello goes "around" things like drums. instead of muddying them up.

thats my 2 cents, i'm sure it's wrong as hell xD

Good tip!!!! You can also direct your reverb. You can have your dry instrument play from one side, but it's reverb will shoot out to the other side only by the way you wire it in the back. It sounds wicked cool in dance music!

Reverb can also sound good in a small dose on the entire mix. It might be the exact thing needed to gel your mix together, but it might also kill it.

[stormfrontrecords]

Heh, coincidentally I went to the public library today and picked up the Home Recording Handbook (http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/1844511790/203-5534308-4996731). Though it may not be specifically for mastering, it has a lot of information on current technology and technique. Many professionals were involved in the book, including some from such respected newsstand titles as Computer Music and Electronic Musician.

I also picked up The Home Book of Musical Knowledge and Classical Music 101, but those're more theory and history than anything.

The titles you mention seem like fairly sound titles, i'll check them out as well, thanks :)

I like the Mixing Engineer's Handbook!!

[kenshin05]

Hi there,
anything is anoyong me a lot when i try to mix,
it's i am not sure of what i am doing, and i think it's what is hard at this... you must know how all work...
And if i am not sure to have understand ?
The thing hard to understand for me is the compressor,
for it can raise the volume, by compressing the sound, it's very used for the drum,
and for what purpose, i have to use it in other instrument ? i think to put some instrument with a louder sound but whitout kill the other, i mean if i want a instrument to be louder in sound than a other if i don't compress it, i want to put it higher with the volume, it kill other sound that is under this volume, well i think compress instrument exeption for the drum is for that purpose, i am right ? or just for a instrument is the same volume than other but seem not loud as the others in the same volume.

Also i take a way to mix the master for my song to be a little more soft, just - 3 to - 5 DB on the 2800 hrz, what you think also of this, Good Idea ?

Well the most important is for the compressor, if i am wrong, i realy need to know why i have to use it exept for the drum^^

[Gimgak]

I've recently become obsessed with expanding my knowledge of all things audio, and have been consuming any information I can get my hands on.

This site has some pretty good info:

http://www.tweakheadz.com/guide.htm

And I've also gotten a lot of information from the magazine Electronic Musician. They have all sorts of articles from interviews with professionals, guides on recording and mastering, and gear reviews.

http://emusician.com/

[Ghetto Lee Lewis]

I like having double (or triple) layers of reverb on instruments that are lacking in sample quality. It works great on cheap sounding synths too (like FLStudio default synths). One trick is to put very short, warm reverb (turn the high cut and decay way down), and put longer reverb on top. Mind you, you can get away using heavier short reverb (like 20 to 50%), but use moderation on long reverb (no more than 10 to 20% usually). Most drums can even be improved with short reverb. Short reverb will also give a more warm, analog sound to your synths, and is good for everything, including basses.

Saturation is another great way to beef up your instruments, especially when they're thin sounding or of low sample quality. Mind you, saturation will greatly increase chances of conflict with other instruments in the mix, so make sure to use EQ afterwards. Saturation is basically a clean/overdriven type of distortion (i.e. FL Blood Overdrive).

Compression/limiting can make drums sound bigger, but when using it on anything else, try to use it in moderation and only AFTER you've done all your other mixing. As for side chaining, it's good as an effect and not much else. Side chaining everything into the kick sounds awful. Same thing with Autotune, good as an effect (in moderation), not a substitute for good singing.

Over 90% of problems can be solved within the arrangement. If all of your instruments are playing in the same register/frequency range, then EQ is not going to solve all your problems. Also having good samples helps, but it is not an end-all, and being able to mix properly certainly helps.

[Brian]

Great tips!

I'm an amateur at production. I'm working on a 15 min orchestral arrangement, and so working on the production is extremely tedious. They say take breaks in between to refresh your mind. These ongoing breaks is fine for short arrangements, but this long arrangement has taken me 4 years now (on and off). Everytime I refresh my mind, I end up changing it over and over again. If I compare the beginning of the arrangement to the latter part of the song, it's too different and inconsistent production-wise (ie. the beginning is quieter, the latter is louder, which is unintentional). It's been plaguing me for years. With a shorter arrangement, everything is closer together thus fixing production issues is much easier. Not with this medley. I need to find an efficient way to make it sound well balanced and consistent throughout. An orchestral genre has a lot of dynamic variance. I need to make it sound "human." Note velocities are all over the place. I have over 20 channels and over 500 measures to work with :sleepdepriv:

Also this
I'm new here and to mastering audio, and I'm really bad at it, but I think I have a good tidbit of advice.

When making a song, I listen to it over and over for hours and start to get too used to it, making it harder for me to be more discerning. When it comes to mastering, I missed a lot of parts that I simply just got too used too. I found that an easy way to get a fresher look on things is to turn my headphones around backwards. It reverses all the panning and the song sounds familiar but new. Peculiarities jump out immediately. Of course, the best way to prevent fatigue is to take breaks and work on it in smaller chunks of time, but sometimes that's not an option.

I hope that helps.
I'm just getting no where :(

What should I do with an arrangement this size? I'm afraid of using the compressor on this kind of genre. Most of the time I adjust the note velocities, but going over 1000 notes individually is just too time-consuming. I need to come up with a standard to streamline this process on the entire medley, not just the individual subparts of the medley. Any suggestions?

[Moseph]

Great tips!

I'm an amateur at production. I'm working on a 15 min orchestral arrangement, and so working on the production is extremely tedious. They say take breaks in between to refresh your mind. These ongoing breaks is fine for short arrangements, but this long arrangement has taken me 4 years now (on and off). Everytime I refresh my mind, I end up changing it over and over again. If I compare the beginning of the arrangement to the latter part of the song, it's too different and inconsistent production-wise (ie. the beginning is quieter, the latter is louder, which is unintentional). It's been plaguing me for years. With a shorter arrangement, everything is closer together thus fixing production issues is much easier. Not with this medley. I need to find an efficient way to make it sound well balanced and consistent throughout. An orchestral genre has a lot of dynamic variance. I need to make it sound "human." Note velocities are all over the place. I have over 20 channels and over 500 measures to work with :sleepdepriv:

Also this

I'm just getting no where :(

What should I do with an arrangement this size? I'm afraid of using the compressor on this kind of genre. Most of the time I adjust the note velocities, but going over 1000 notes individually is just too time-consuming. I need to come up with a standard to streamline this process on the entire medley, not just the individual subparts of the medley. Any suggestions?

Usually a combination of note velocities and expression control (probably CC11, depending on your sample library) will be your best bet in getting natural sounding dynamics. Usually I use velocity to control basic level, but since velocity layers don't always transition smoothly, I use expression controller automation to fine-tune things and glue dynamics together on the phrase level rather than on the individual note level. I have a default value for the expression controller that I come back to after each phrase -- this helps me keep the overall level of the instrument in generally the same place so the dynamics don't vary too wildly.

Some libraries let you link a velocity crossfader to a MIDI CC so you can draw or record CC curves to change velocities instead of editing individual velocities (sometimes this sounds good, sometimes not, since crossfading velocities makes multiple samples play over top of each other -- basically bleeding the velocity layers over one another -- which can sound odd for solo instruments).

For achieving consistency in levels across the entire arrangement, it may be a good idea to come up with a rubric of sorts that tells you what different dynamic levels in the various instruments "look" like. For example, you may decide that mp in the strings is what you get when your velocities are around 20 and the expression controller is around 90 and p is when velocities are around 20 and expression is around 50. This may help you think more consistently about levels over the whole piece, because it will allow you to use objective values to determine dynamic levels rather than simply doing what kind of sounds right and then discovering that it sounds way different from something you did somewhere else.

The unfortunate truth, though, is that no matter how you go about handling dynamics and sample use, the editing process is extremely time consuming and usually involves some level of attention given to every single note in the piece. It helps to have a clear idea of how you're going to approach it so you don't end up wasting time redoing things, but ultimately you just have to decide how much effort you're willing to put into it and then bite the bullet and do it.

[Emperor Charlemagne]

A quick question, one I didn't want to make a thread for:


I am trying to upload some tracks for an album on my last.fm page.
I made all of these tracks on TFM Music Maker, and I think that it exports only in mono or something.

Now, the MP3s I have are recorded in Mono, but last.fm only takes stereo. Is there a way to use a program like Audacity to turn mono tracks into stereo?


EDIT:

Problem solved- figured out how to do so in Audacity ;0

[tschiefer]

I'm reading the topic slowly 'cause it has tons of great info... but I'd like to drop a question about hardware: what do you guys think about M-Audio's Fast Track Pro (http://www.m-audio.com/products/en_us/FastTrackPro.html)? Is it possible to do nice sounding mixes using that soundcard and pro headphones like AKG k702 (which I'm planning to buy soon)?

[Rozovian]

what do you guys think about M-Audio's Fast Track Pro (http://www.m-audio.com/products/en_us/FastTrackPro.html)? Is it possible to do nice sounding mixes using that soundcard and pro headphones like AKG k702 (which I'm planning to buy soon)?

Good headphones/monitors are vital, but unless your soundcard is a piece of crap you shouldn't need any other hardware. You do need your ears, tho. ;)

Also, an audio interface isn't the same thing as a sound card.

[Moseph]

Is it possible to do nice sounding mixes using that soundcard and pro headphones like AKG k702 (which I'm planning to buy soon)?
In a word, yes. I haven't used the Fast Track Pro, but as far as being able to get a good mix, an audio interface is an audio interface, and it will definitely get the job done.

I use an AKG K702 set and it's awesome. It will be easily the best set of headphones you've ever used. (Extremely long burn-in period, though, so if the bass seems like it's sort of weak, just keep using it for another few weeks.)

[tschiefer]

In a word, yes. I haven't used the Fast Track Pro, but as far as being able to get a good mix, an audio interface is an audio interface, and it will definitely get the job done.

I use an AKG K702 set and it's awesome. It will be easily the best set of headphones you've ever used. (Extremely long burn-in period, though, so if the bass seems like it's sort of weak, just keep using it for another few weeks.)

Good headphones/monitors are vital, but unless your soundcard is a piece of crap you shouldn't need any other hardware. You do need your ears, tho. ;)

Also, an audio interface isn't the same thing as a sound card.

Thanks! :D

[DarkDruid7]

I've had FL Studio 9 for over a year and have been making some songs using the program, however, I've always had problems with adding the final touches and tweaking parameters altogether to get better quality sound. I was hoping to get some helpful advice here so I can get past this frustrating step and start finishing songs instead of leaving them on file for months (years).

I've read the mastering/production guide from gamedev.net on the first page, and that helped give me somewhat of an idea of what I should be doing, but it also confused me to no end. I understood some of the sound synthesis concepts it talked about like ADSR, mostly because I've toyed around with parameters beforehand, but I didn't see the practical use of applying the concepts, like how I would know if I wanted a low pass filter as opposed to a high pass filter.

Something else that was new to me was where it talked about pitch frequencies, such as a certain number of kHz being considered bass and another interval considered treble and how you don't want the bass voice and kick drum on the same frequency. I'm sure that in some of my songs, the bass and kick drum would be inseparable by ear at some parts, but I didn't know how to fix it and still have trouble separating the two.

Anyway, on to the mastering problems. I'll be honest, the biggest problem I am having is making my songs not sound fuzzy and staticy in some parts when I upload them to Youtube or a song-hosting site. However, when I export my songs to MP3 in FL Studio, no problem seems to be heard when I play it in Windows Media Player. Is it my sound card? Some compression problem I caused in FL studio? The way I exported it in FL Studio? I don't know.

I guess I should talk about my sound setup and the way I master. To be blunt, my setup sucks. Here's a screenshot of my settings:

http://img62.imageshack.us/img62/1240/flstudiosettings.png

As you can see, my sound card is pretty bad. I tried running ASIO4all v2, but for some reason it gives me a lot of underruns and doesn't fully buffer my sounds. Although it says the output is through stereo speakers, I have my 20-dollar Sony MDR-XD100 headphones plugged into one of the speakers. That's pretty much it as far as my sound setup goes.

For most of my songs, I have Fruity Compressor and Maximus on the master track, though I don't tweak the parameters on Maximus at all (I know I probably should, but I'm afraid of messing something up). For the current song I am working on, a bossa nova piece, my compressor settings are as follows: threshold, -11db; ratio, 3.5:1 ; attack, 15 ms (unchanged); release, 200 ms (unchanged); and type, hard (unchanged). Like all of my other songs, this song suffers from quality problems after it's uploaded on the internet.

Other than adjusting the volume bars for individual tracks and toy with the EQ settings, that's all the mastering I do. When I'm done, I set the bitrate anywhere from 160-220 and export the song to MP3.

Although I'm sure this has been a long read for most, I'd really appreciate a helpful response. I'm in no way in a position to spend a fortune on hardware or software, but I can break my budget a little if it means that my music will sound better.

[Neblix]

Try lowering the volume. I think Windows Media Player has a limiter, whereas youtube doesn't.

[urdailywater]

A quick question.. I tried googling it, and I'm afraid I still don't completely understand. What does "processing" mean? I hear it everywhere on OCR, and I feel like I have a general idea of what it means, but I've never been completely sure for some reason. Like how halc said he used tons of processing on his last posted mix "The Great Blizzard of 9X."

[Rozovian]

Processing is everything you do to a sound. If there's reverb, eq, guitar amps, side-chaining, stretching, detuning, pitch correction... anything, there's processing.

If there's "a lot of" processing, there's either a lot of effects, or the effects are drastic. Or both.

[urdailywater]

Oh goody, that's what I thought it meant. Thank you.

[Neblix]

If there's "a lot of" processing, there's either a lot of effects, or the effects are drastic. Or both.

Or neither.

>_>
<_<

[SgtYayap]

I'm not a fan of too much processing, frankly, but at the same time, I like enough for it to sound professional. And even then, it's hard to make my pieces as loud as the music of most of the other music I hear without destroying the quality of the audio (i.e. clip distortions). :???:

[jnWake]

I've recently started learning how to do production and mastering and I have some questions.

1. I am working on a song and it is quite near the 0dB border, getting a bit past it in some notes. The thing is that when I listen to my song and then to a well mixed song, I notice the well mixed song sounds louder than mine.
From what I've read here, maybe removing some unused frequencies should help me, but I'm not sure. Am I right?
On another note, I've not used a compressor on the master track, but I think I should avoid that until the mixing sounds good by itself.

2. The other thing I've noticed is that other mixes sound very sharp, and even though mine doesn't sound muddy or anything, it is less sharp than other mixes (maybe using free samples works against me, but I think there's a better explanation :-P ). Any tips on that?

Any help is appreciated!

[Rozovian]

Unnecessary low frequencies tend to add up and push the whole mix without really adding anything musically. Everything except bass and bass drum, possible also pad and any other low instruments, should be high-passed to get rid of these lows. Then, depending on the style, instruments can be side-chained to go soft whenever the bass drum hits - which keeps the max level lower. These two tricks get you a fair amount of level.

You can also automate track levels, eg making the powerful intro pad a lot softer when the drums kick in, or pushing that first lead into the background when the second ones comes in. Then there's parallel compression and a slew of other tricks that you can do, depending on the track you're working with. All of this is done before the track hits the output channel, where I usually only have limiter while mixing, and add a light multiband compressor and possibly some eq when the track is getting close to finished.

As for sharpness, this is just a case of having more higher frequencies. You can reduce the lows of your bass and raise its level instead. That makes it brighter. EQing individual sounds to be a bit brighter does a lot, but you also need to separate tracks from each other using EQ. That makes the whole mix more clear. Background-foreground separation also does a lot, and it all builds on the plain old levels mixing.

Another trick is to use multiband compression on a single instrument, to make sure its lower frequencies stay about the same while raising the higher ones. It's not something I usually do, but it's a good technique to know to use when you need it. Usually, I add a touch of overdrive or other distortion to instruments that are too dark, this raises their highs a bit. This sounds terrible when you overdo it, so... don't overdo it.

I talk about this stuff in my remixing guide, in my sig.

[jnWake]

Thanks for the quick answer!

I'll try the tips you suggested. I don't really know how to do this sidechaining stuff but I have time to learn!

I'll check your guide too.

[Majiffy]

I'd like if it I can get some feedback on the mixes here:
http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL699C57A92EFC62B0&feature=plcp

All 3 were recorded without a click, so the feel may be a bit looser than you're used to. Apologies for the poor female vocalist in the American Boy cover, I don't have access to an autotune plugin.

[BeatAvenger]

YouTube has tons of videos on the subject.