|
Mastering stuuuuuff... (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Emperor |
| You do not NEED a reference. Remember you are writing and producing your own song. Make it how you want. Not to match the same spectrum and other characteristics of another song. I'd recommend learning from other songs but don't make yours to match another song. Different songs have different notes, different harmonics etc. One thing i will say is club sound systems are bass-heavy. If a song sits well in the mid range at home, when you take it to the club it wont come out at you. mid/high adds alot of presence and the more mids/highs the better it will sound in a club....trust me. Detail your tune on a monitoring system with a sub. You want it to just punch right on a system with sub, because you can always take bass away. If it punhces on a system WITH a sub, when you add the sub at a club or car or whatever it will be pure mud. SO put on your rubber boots and get your mud wrestle on. |
|
|
| RiCo |
| quote: | Originally posted by AaroNoct
These aren't mastering issues. These are things that should be fixed in the mix. I don't think any of you truly know what mastering entails. You'll have less headaches if you get the sound you want from the get go. I can assure you 100% that it's in the mix. The people trying to "fix it in mastering" are doing themselves a great disservice by not applying that time to their mix (where the real problems exist).
I'm not against post mix processing, if armed with experience. Even then, that's not mastering for crying out loud.
Future reference: Don't go around abusing the "M" word please.
-Aaron |
We're discussing this issues here and honestly, nobody has asked for your opinion on the subject. We're not going all technical here...we're starting from the bottom. |
|
|
| Vizay |
referring back to the first post, when I listen to your samples right now I have a hard time hearing any difference at all. (although my ears are prolly way to tired right now due the time of the day :p)
what I can resemble is a bit of a pumping effect on the mastered version, was it meant to be like that or did you just forget to use a multiband compressor instead of a regular one? ;)
I'm gonna try a quick master of this one to see if I can come up with something, just for the fun of it ;)
[edit]
hmm is it just me or is it the same version of the track in the first post, they are both brickwalled like they've been run through an L2 or something similar :p |
|
|
| Derivative |
if you listen to them very closely you will notice quite a subtle difference. the master has a warmer but blurrier bass end. the kick is less sharp. the bass is blurred more but it sounds bigger. the lead in the master is also cleaner and it punches through but it mashes up with the hats.
owing to the way i write tunes i usually compress the living out of everything :O its something i need to stop doing so much of. but yea. the lead is compressed. the kick and bass are compressed several times. bass 3 times. kick twice. the hats are also compressed. oh and theres a limiter on the master channel.
i.e. 0 dynamic range :( i think im getting to the end of the 'loudest is best' phase and im gonna tone down the compression. havent had time to rework the track yet though. if you have stuff that needs mastering id be happy to attempt a master of one of your tracks as a thank you for trying out mine. same with rob and rico - any time. just drop a PM my way and ill give it a shot. |
|
|
| Axolotyl |
| quote: | Originally posted by Emperor
You do not NEED a reference. Remember you are writing and producing your own song. Make it how you want. Not to match the same spectrum and other characteristics of another song. I'd recommend learning from other songs but don't make yours to match another song. Different songs have different notes, different harmonics etc. One thing i will say is club sound systems are bass-heavy. If a song sits well in the mid range at home, when you take it to the club it wont come out at you. mid/high adds alot of presence and the more mids/highs the better it will sound in a club....trust me. Detail your tune on a monitoring system with a sub. You want it to just punch right on a system with sub, because you can always take bass away. If it punhces on a system WITH a sub, when you add the sub at a club or car or whatever it will be pure mud. SO put on your rubber boots and get your mud wrestle on. |
As I understand it, and I'm not a master masterer (hehe) by any stretch, the importance of a reference track is so that you can re-tune your ears to the desired effect you are after.
If you sit there listening to the same leads, bass or perc section for any longer than an hour, its going to start to sound good because your ears will adapt to the sound and you will in essence loose any form of perspective on it. Being able to go back to a 'correct' sound source helps you re-tune your ears to what you should be aiming for. By 'correct' I dont mean you should try and froce your track to sound the same as it, but rather, its something thats been professionally mastered and a damn sight closer to 'correctly' mastered than your ears will be after hours of fine tuning compressors.
Plus, its always good to have something to 'aim' for rather than just stabbing away in the dark so to speak, which is certainly what it feels like at the arse end of a mastering session sometimes. |
|
|
| Axolotyl |
Just listened to your samples Derivative and thought you might like another opinion on them.
It sounds like there is a lot of high end distortion going on. I think the hats are too compressed at the moment and generally too loud. It sounds like your squeezing the hell out of them at the moment and cutting off all their bottom end.
As for the comments about fixing some of the elements in the mix, I would tend to agree. Some low pass or band pass filters in the mix could eliminate some of the problems with the snare, which right now seems to be getting lost amongst the hihats. It could also fill out your mids a bit more, which I feel its lacking in. Also if you could get more click in your kick, then it might again fill our some of those midrange frequencies which in turn would mean you wouldn't need to turn up your bottom end so much, thus drowning out even more mids.
You might want to consider some more contrast in your choice of sounds too. If your made some of the other elements more 'standard', then it would really make the more psy elements stand out a lot more. That Tau acid line is killer but I think you could get the same effect with something a little less distorted and overdriven which in turn might leave you with some headroom on your audio file for compression without loosing too much dynamic range.
Neway.. gooooood luck. Mastering's a bitch... :whip: |
|
|
| Vizay |
| quote: | Originally posted by Derivative
oh and theres a limiter on the master channel.
|
that's the problem. the compression is something a ME can handle but a limiter is equal to deathsentence, never put a limiter on before mastering, it ruins the masteringprocess totally.
I think you'll see better results in your own mastering too if you stop limiting the track before the masteringprocess, it'll give you loads of room to work with compared to what you have right now.
just as an example of what I came up with in like 5 min when I sat down yesterday. Since your track was totally brickwalled I sat down and played with rico's example instead and here's the result (yeh, it's crappy and I can do much better with fresh ears :p) ohh and I didn't use a reference, I never do. It's just not a good way for me to work :p
My mastered version of ricos example
and in case you can find them earlier in the thread...
Ricos preprocessed & ricos postprocessed
[edit]
ohh and the chain was something like this (just recalling it from my memory):
Spectralizer
waves LinMB (Multiband compressor)
Waves LinEQ Broadband
Waves L2
Explanation: first of all I thought the mix sounded a bit muffled so I decided to be a bit bald and bring some more high end to it without overdoing it, the spectralizer works like a charm when you want to do stuff like that (although I should be way more clinical with it than I was yesterday :p).
The rest of the chain pretty much explains itself. The multiband compressor (LinMB) is used to level it out a bit and the Equalizer (LinEQ) is only used to cut everything below 40hz and above 16000khz. Why not more EQing you might ask, well I simply don't like to make big changes with an EQ in the masteringprocess, if I need to enhance small parts I use the spectralizer to bring a certain instrument a little bit forth, otherwise I tell the producer to go back to the mixingstage and redo the mixdown.
Well anyway, last i finished it with the L2, I usually load up the high res CD-master and work from that setting my own levels of things.
I hope this can help someone ;) |
|
|
| Rob |
Okay, now that I'm back to my accustomed monitors I can comment because things sound alot different here.
Derrivative: On my speakers, your kick and hihats are SEVERELY distorting. On my master they're not tho, and also to note is your dynamic range. There is none, yet in my master, there's around 3db. So much for not being able to undo compression in mastering:conf:
Rico: Too much top end, and I can hear the Hihats distorting and the bass/kick a bit too. I tried mastering it but wasn't happy with it because the lead was too quiet compared to the hihats.
Vizay: Your master is even hissier then Ricos master, and it distorts more. And how can you master without a referernce? That would be like driving in the dark without headlights: you can only squint and GUESS where you have to go/or pray that you're on the right track.
Remeber that mastering is not about trying to make something as loud as possible. It's about achieving a tonal and loudness balance against a set of references. If the reference(say a pro track) is really quiet, and YOURS IS TOO LOUD IT WILL BE IMPOSSIBLE TO LISTEN TO BECAUSE YOUR BRAIN CAN'T COPE WITH THE SEVERE DIFFERENCE IN LOUNDNESS. IN FACT, WHAT IF I JUST START WRITING LIKE THIS IN THE REST OF MY POSTS? DO I BECOME EASIER TO READ? NO, BECAUSE EVERYONE ELSE WRITES SMALL, AND I SOUND LIKE A ING IDIOT BECAUSE I'M TRYING TO BE LOUDER THEN A SET FONT REFERENCE WHICH I THINK IS AROUND SIZE 4. CURRENTLY I'M WRITING IN SIZE 20. |
|
|
| Derivative |
heyyyyy! you guys have been real helpful - which is why - ive taken on board your suggestions. ive reworked the mixdown on my track.
http://www.soundclick.us/fastk6/09/...gremastered.mp3
heres a list of changes and additions:
widened the lead instrument in stereo
lowered lead instrument treble frequency above 10,000hz by about 2 dB
lowered the hihat treble frequency range above 12,000hz by nearly 3 dB
lowered the overall level of the lead and all hihats by about 0.5 dB
changed the off hat to a different hat sample
repositioned backing hihats in the stereo field so that they dont clash so much with the lead.
tuned down the backing hihats so they take up less physical space in the treble frequency range
altered the LFO filter shape on the lead. it now oscillates properly and it loops correctly now! (this took me fecking ages but it was worth it)
removed the limiter on the master bus (as a result the track is a quieter but retains more dynamic. it now clips by about 0.5 dB. i do not hear as much audible distortion but my speakers are and fruity's dB meters are inaccurate - truth be told - i dont know how much it clips but the readout is slightly higher - wouldnt mind a second opinion on this one.)
removed the compressor on the lead synth.
removed the compressor on the hihats.
lowered the level of the kick VERY slightly
added a gate which filters out on the lead at the beginning of the track.
removed the tube distortion from the 303 line.
ill remaster the track from scratch with a reference tonight. it already sounds more dynamic. you guys are right - overcompression is . in the mean time, my ears are ready to do some criticism and mastering on your tracks - anyone feel free to post a sample and ill give it a shot - a thank you to all the peeps who contributed. my ears are feeling mighty right now - havent produced in 2 days! come on rob! lay a 2 minute unmastered demo on meh! im feeling the mastering vibe in this place! im gonna have a pop at mastering rico's tune right now. be prepared for the awesome sound of clipping noise and 0 dynamic range! |
|
|
| Derivative |
| oh, rico? do you want to specify a reference? im planning on using sunquest's memory mix of sunrise at palamos ;) i might reference it on your track too. overall thats a pretty shiny, squeaky peice of production and it RIPS when its all in. heheheh. i like my tunes to RIP all the time. its an undesired effect that it happens to rip all of your ears to shreds - ill try NOT to make rico's tune ear splittingly loud. |
|
|
| Rob |
You changed the kick too, because it's not distorting anymore. Still too much high end for my liking tho. I'd like to see how much you have to take off the top to get it sounding like the reference.
And you can try mastering a short sample of my tracks Derivative:p. I think it needs a 3db'ish boost in the 1000k region with a fairly wide Q, and a bit off the bass. HOWEVER, I think my lead's a bit too muddy and reverby, because it gets kinda droned out with the background synth.
DOWNLOAD |
|
|
| Vizay |
indeed my master is to hissy, I noticed that when I listened again and again but I'll defend myself and say that I did it with exhausted ears (5 hours in a car isn't nice to your ears :p)
I'm going to check it out again with some serious mastering tonight after work, untill then I cant say so much more about it :)
about the reference...well I dunno, mastering isn't about copying someone elses work, besides every track is totally different when it comes to dynamics and stuff like that, I simply don't see the meaning in using a reference BUT...I will try it tonight just because your'e talking so much about it ;) who knows, maybe it's worth it ;) |
|
|
|
|
