|
Post by M57 on May 4, 2022 7:53:54 GMT -6
I started to write this for the "should I limit my mixes" thread but then thought it might deserve its own thread.
I mix/master as I go, and usually end up with various comps/limiters, board/tape emulators, EQs, etc on the 2-buss in the course of my efforts. but I always wonder how I might submit these mixes when/if I ever decide to get them professionally mastered. Of course I've read about numerous approaches. Most of them boil down to "get it sounding the best you can and the way you like it." ..and maybe leave a little bit of headroom for the ME to play with. But it occurs to me that, for better or worse and in numerous ways, you force the ME's hand when you do this, which begs the question..
Why not take EVERYTHING off the 2-buss and hand it over? Of course, this is extreme but it represents the other side of the continuum. I'm tempted to think that the best option lies somewhere in between, and should slide incrementally toward one side or the other depending on my relationship with the ME. Also, there might be a few ways to facilitate this. For instance, I could include my"psuedo-mastered" mix for reference. Thoughts on this line of thinking?
|
|
|
Post by phdamage on May 4, 2022 8:17:51 GMT -6
I have a friend who has nothing on his 2 bus and it just blows my mind. his mixes sound great, but i cannot imagine working like this. in my early days (analog and not much outboard), I just slammed the hell out of my 2 bus, but that wasn't a conscious decision - just me not knowing what I was doing.
|
|
|
Post by svart on May 4, 2022 8:43:40 GMT -6
I get what you mean by the question, but I never understood why a mix engineer would expect the mastering engineer to "finish" the mix for you. Mastering guys were originally around to get tracks prepared for records. They had to be fairly uniform in tone so that the RIAA filters could work well enough so that vinyl grooves were within operational standards. Too much bass and the needles would hop out of the groove and/or the record time would be reduced.. Too much top end and it wouldn't sound balanced.
I mean think about it.. You expect them to add some EQ and some compression and/or limiting to the mix, right? If you go into mastering expecting them to boost a little top or bottom, trim some freqs here and there, and then do a bit of limiting to get the level up..
Why couldn't you just do those things yourself?
I know a lot of folks who get the mix "right" and then remove all the 2-bus processing and then send it for mastering, only to have it come back not quite like they wanted. So they then ask the mastering guy to make some tweaks and changes and then they get it back exactly how they wanted..
And it sounds 99.999% the same as their 2-bus faux master.
So why'd you send it to be mastered if you were going to ask the mastering guy to make the tweaks that end up sounding how you had it to begin with?
|
|
|
Post by tkaitkai on May 4, 2022 8:45:40 GMT -6
I occasionally do mixes with zero plugins on the master track, but if I've been mixing into a stereo bus chain from the beginning, I consider that to be part of the mix and leave it on. Only scenario where I'd take off all the processing and send to mastering is if it was just "pseudo-mastering," like you mentioned.
Either approach works. In general, I find that zero stereo bus processing tends to result in mixes that sound more natural and breathe a little more, whereas lots of stereo bus processing tends to make things more compact/cohesive, and in some cases, mushier.
|
|
|
Post by Blackdawg on May 4, 2022 8:49:04 GMT -6
As someone that master's others works. I don't care at all what you have on the mix bus. Long as it isn't crushed or pumping in a bad way. If it's already loud as hell, then Im not going to be making it much louder. But I might still be able to clean it and polish it.
That said, I would try it out with near nothing or nothing at all on your mix bus. You might be surprised with the results. I do find that the people that send me stuff that at least appears to not have anything on the master bus (nice low levels, not too quiet, but meters are great and obviously not crushing it with a limiter) I can do more to make it even better.
But I wouldn't let that stop you from thinking it's "not masterable" or something because you are mixing it how you want it to sound. Just be aware if it's all ready loud as hell, it probably won't come back louder. But should come back better than you sent it. Thats the whole point.
In some ways if you do a mix into a lot of stuff on your master, then just turn it off all the sudden. Well, your mix is gone. Its not the same thing anymore. Especially if you have saturation and EQ on it. You'll almost be setting yourself up for more disappointment when you send it to a mastering engineer. BUT there is another way to do this:
Let's say you are mixing and have a Tape emulator, some EQ, a Compressor, and a Limiter on you master and you want to send it to be mastered. If it were me, I'd ask for a reference of what it sounded like with all your master bus stuff on. Then I'd also ask you to probably take the limiter off and turn the gain down on the compressor so that it isn't peaking and send me that. Then I have an idea of how loud it was when you last heard it, how the limit was being pushed and changing the sound, and I have a "clean" version to limit myself and lots of headroom. That would be an ideal situation for me personally. Doesn't always go that way and if I got an already limited track, I can still work with it.
This is why communication with a mastering engineer is important. And your relationship with them.
|
|
|
Post by svart on May 4, 2022 8:50:44 GMT -6
I have a friend who has nothing on his 2 bus and it just blows my mind. his mixes sound great, but i cannot imagine working like this. in my early days (analog and not much outboard), I just slammed the hell out of my 2 bus, but that wasn't a conscious decision - just me not knowing what I was doing. I have a bus emulator (Slate VMR) that gives a little analog vibe. I then go through an SSL comp for a little spank (about 3dB compression but it's all about the attack/release settings) and then through a Pultec emulator (Ruletec) because the top end sounds smoothest I've heard in a plugin EQ and I can boost a bit more here (4-5dB) after some compression for brightness without graininess or crispyness. Finally a limiter (L1) that is just barely limiting to -0.2dB for safety. No more than maybe 1-2dB on the strongest peaks. I really don't think those things are doing that much. Turning off my bus plugins sounds a bit lower in volume and punch but doesn't appreciably change the tone at all. It really only changes the vibe slightly, mostly due to the SSL comp.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on May 4, 2022 9:22:28 GMT -6
Yeah. Only thing I leave off is the limiting.
|
|
|
Post by nick8801 on May 4, 2022 9:31:25 GMT -6
I think of this in two ways....One is, what am I using the master processing for? Is the mix thin? Does it need glue? Gain? Is it a character piece that I like? Then I like to look at my mix and see if any of that can be achieved on individual tracks or group busses. If I've taken my mix as far as I can and I'm still looking for a little something, I'll usually tackle that on the master. One exception is that I always like to mix into a limiter. Even if it's not doing much for level, I find that limiters can really change the balance of a mix especially in the bass region. Usually I'll leave my limiter on when sending it to mastering. Like mixing into anything, it becomes part of the character of the mix, so I feel it should stay. But I definitely don't use it to get to -10 LUFS or something like that.
|
|
|
Post by drbill on May 4, 2022 9:48:29 GMT -6
Why couldn't you just do those things yourself? You certainly can. (And most of the time I do as well). But a lot of album projects get tracks from a half dozen different producers, mixed at a half dozen different studios by a half dozen different engineers - or more. The mastering engineer can pull them all together into a cohesive sounding album at that point. Also, some engineers prefer a "second opinion" at the tail end of a project. Over the years, I've come to realize that there is no right or wrong - only what gets you to the finish line.
|
|
|
Post by svart on May 4, 2022 9:56:03 GMT -6
Why couldn't you just do those things yourself? You certainly can. (And most of the time I do as well). But a lot of album projects get tracks from a half dozen different producers, mixed at a half dozen different studios by a half dozen different engineers - or more. The mastering engineer can pull them all together into a cohesive sounding album at that point. Also, some engineers prefer a "second opinion" at the tail end of a project. Over the years, I've come to realize that there is no right or wrong - only what gets you to the finish line. Ok, that's a good point to make. I can see needing to do this in the situation you've described.
|
|
|
Post by tahoebrian5 on May 4, 2022 9:59:21 GMT -6
The one thing I’ve read about this that makes the most sense to me is send the mastering engineer two versions.. one that is as good as you can get it as if you were not sending it to anyone, and a second version without anything on the 2bus that affects dynamics. That way you are giving them a pretty big indication of what you are looking for but also not painting them into a corner. Now that being said I don’t know anything about this first hand but when I read that it rang true to me.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 4, 2022 10:45:05 GMT -6
You certainly can. (And most of the time I do as well). But a lot of album projects get tracks from a half dozen different producers, mixed at a half dozen different studios by a half dozen different engineers - or more. The mastering engineer can pull them all together into a cohesive sounding album at that point. Also, some engineers prefer a "second opinion" at the tail end of a project. Over the years, I've come to realize that there is no right or wrong - only what gets you to the finish line. Album? Sounds retro ..
|
|
|
Post by Ward on May 4, 2022 10:47:06 GMT -6
That was the great thing about mixing to 2-track tape. The tape would compress and the limitations of the tape formulation would help control your transients.
|
|
|
Post by bossanova on May 4, 2022 11:23:03 GMT -6
I use a digital VU meter at the end of the 2-bus to “see” if there are any wild jumps that my ears aren’t picking up on, and find and treat the offending source. By doing that, I can keep the mix pretty well controlled at the individual track level, and then I might put Kotelnikov on for an extra bit of glue, but really my goal is to have control over the whole mix before it hits the mix bus.
In practice, it's a lot of putting a fast compressor (also usually Kotelnikov) on individual tracks that's set to catch just the errant peaks rather than having a compressor or limiter doing it at the end of the chain.
|
|
|
Post by jmoose on May 4, 2022 14:11:02 GMT -6
I started to write this for the "should I limit my mixes" thread but then thought it might deserve its own thread. I mix/master as I go, and usually end up with various comps/limiters, board/tape emulators, EQs, etc on the 2-buss in the course of my efforts. but I always wonder how I might submit these mixes when/if I ever decide to get them professionally mastered. Of course I've read about numerous approaches. Most of them boil down to "get it sounding the best you can and the way you like it." ..and maybe leave a little bit of headroom for the ME to play with. But it occurs to me that, for better or worse and in numerous ways, you force the ME's hand when you do this, which begs the question.. Well upfront about 95% of what comes though here goes to a dedicated mastering engineer. With some very rare exceptions I never mix into a brickwall limiter. And overall I probably have much less across my 2 mix then most... often just a compressor for some tone. Its always about tone never level. Making things loud takes 30 seconds. That's an easy trick, and not a very good one either. Mixing & mastering are separate processes with very different goals. If I'm mixing then my gig is to make songs as good as they can within that framework. What's not part of the gig is to get into a competition with the mastering engineer. Mastering is really the first step of replication... possibly old school thought but its more technical then creative. Sending different revisions to mastering? There are a handful of guys I work with and none of them enjoy the multiple version shootout trip they would much rather have one set of mixes to work from. And if they do go down the other path... whenever they have a "match/beat this" scenario they're going to charge for every minute spent listening. That's when we hear stories like - Oh mastering took weeks & endless revisions... cost a fortune and we're not sure what really happened or if it was worth it. Sitting at a modern DAW & working ITB its very easy to blur the lines between mixing & mastering. Pop on a brickwall & some other psychoacoustic enhancer... NOW we're mastering! But right louder is better. Take that stuff away and now the mix is wimpy. We're doomed. Typically I'm mixing on a desk and so all the fancy pants digital inflation tools aren't an option. Mixing ITB I have a limiter but its not doing anything... threshold & output set at -.5 only to keep the converter clean. Hit bypass and there should be no level change. Since there's no level bump there are always two copies of each mix. Artist gets a 24 bit hi-res... the actual print with no limting and for the less then critical listeners? There's an mp3 version that's turned up a few dB. Just enough to be competitive but (hopefully) not to the point where I'm competing with whoever is cutting the masters.
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on May 4, 2022 14:36:42 GMT -6
As much as I might push a mix (rarely), it's always limited by the point at which it no longer sounds good, too many artifacts, whatever. I've yet to see a good mastering guy who couldn't get it twice as loud and much better sounding. If I do it....they can't. Most of us are assuming a lot about our monitoring, a good mastering guy has a calibrated playback chain that tells no lies, and allows accurate dynamics and EQ decisions we would be somewhat guessing at. Example; I can print a mix through 2 variations of the same comp, make them seem about the same, take both, let them pick. Every time I do that, it's pretty obvious in the mastering room which sounds better, and I can't tell that on my own even after listening on my 8 different systems in 6 different locations. As soon as they push it further, those hidden qualities come out more. I frequently leave a mastering session with new insight into the equipment I'm using; that second opinion and different idealized listening location has value to me.
A good mastering guy can also usually dump it to something like a 1/2" Ampex ATR-102, set it aside a week, and copy it back for mastering, if I want tape sound. I definitely don't want any limiting on a mix that might get that treatment, as it won't 'do the thing' as much.....and I don't have to maintain a tape machine.
|
|
|
Post by Bat Lanyard on May 4, 2022 22:35:08 GMT -6
The one thing I’ve read about this that makes the most sense to me is send the mastering engineer two versions.. one that is as good as you can get it as if you were not sending it to anyone, and a second version without anything on the 2bus that affects dynamics. That way you are giving them a pretty big indication of what you are looking for but also not painting them into a corner. Now that being said I don’t know anything about this first hand but when I read that it rang true to me. Some engineers book by the second (total running time) which would double the bill. But I get what you're saying.
|
|
|
Post by thehightenor on May 5, 2022 2:19:41 GMT -6
For me the starting point is what is and what isn’t “mastering” here in 2022 - a time when it’s doubtful your releasing on vinyl or CD and your goal is files for a streaming service. I master my own music and it’s the last part of my creative process where very little further processing takes place. The only compression and EQ moves I make are technical not artistic. My thinking and workflow of recent years has been I mix my music to the point the sound coming out of my monitors sounds exactly the way I want it to sound. All the vibe, magic, depth and wow factor is right there baked into my mix, trying to add those elements to a stereo mix at the mastering stage is a huge compromise and makes zero sense to me. I know I got a mix 100% spot on when it gets a flat transfer at the mastering stage (no further EQ) and occasionally it happens I do leave limiting for the mastering stage though. That’s my approach anyway.
|
|
|
Post by christophert on May 5, 2022 4:19:18 GMT -6
I'm chasing energy and vibe, and like EmRR pointed out - I would prefer one of my mastering experts to treat the stereo mix. So I never want a limiter on my mix bus, it leads me into an inferior world where my judgements are based on a plug in - not a pro mastering chain. Great recorded music is a mixture of musicians, recording engineers, mixers and mastering guru's all working together.
I master lots of mixes I do, but given the chance, I would much prefer to defer to my mastering experts to complete the story. Yet each one of them is a master in different genres. Some mixes I send to Greg Calbi at Sterling - others to my local guru's / or The Exchange in UK.
We can ALWAYS learn from the mastering masters.
|
|
|
Post by M57 on May 5, 2022 7:23:52 GMT -6
The one thing I’ve read about this that makes the most sense to me is send the mastering engineer two versions.. one that is as good as you can get it as if you were not sending it to anyone, and a second version without anything on the 2bus that affects dynamics. That way you are giving them a pretty big indication of what you are looking for but also not painting them into a corner. Now that being said I don’t know anything about this first hand but when I read that it rang true to me. Some engineers book by the second (total running time) which would double the bill. But I get what you're saying. OP here.. tahoebrian5 is pretty much suggesting one of my considerations (though he omits compressors only). So I don't understand why it would be double-billed. The 'best you can' mix is not a revision." Rather, it's simply a reference track - though I suppose the ME could listen to it and decide to run with the reference instead of the raw track. It wouldn't matter to me. That said, I'm realizing that I don't fully have an appreciation for what ME's bring to the game. Folks here seem to talk more about their technical value (as opposed to their musical contribution). I'm also concerned about which format(s) I should ask the ME to prepare the track for, but I'll save that question for a different thread.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on May 5, 2022 9:02:16 GMT -6
I've seen great mastering engineers polish up messy mixes beautifully that I did in a studio with an engineer. But I've recently had a well known major league mastering engineer work on a track that I wasn't happy with. Two revisions didn't fix it. I swear, I put the mix through the ARIA online mastering service, mastering type "D", and it was way better, and was used on the album I was mixing.
I just posted this on another thread, "To me, it's all about finding the tone you want. I've often used the UAD ATR-102 for adding some level, and then used the Black Box for tone and a little compression and two compressors further down the 2 bus. I've never used the limiter setting though.
Lately, I've gotten more adept at hearing the tonal differences compressors make more than the volume change. My last final mix only had one compressor after the ATR-102 and Black box, and I used less than 2 db of compression.
I"m working on a mix right now with just the ATR-102 and the Black box on the 2 bus. I tried a half dozen compressors and every one changed the tone of the track in such a way that I preferred the sound with no compression. It's a mostly acoustic track, nothing big or bold, no drums, no bass. I decided to leave well enough alone and let mastering bring this one up to proper levels.
So, I no longer automatically compress for volume, I compress for tone only.
Now, that might change if I had some hardware compression down the road."
So, where I'm at now is get your mixes sounding the way you like and let mastering deal with it as is. When I've left tracks to the mastering engineer with no compression, they came back still kind of shitty sounding. When I sent it the way I like it, it came back fine, just louder.
Compressors change tone. Use them for the tone you like, and mastering will be easier.
|
|
|
Post by jmoose on May 5, 2022 12:27:40 GMT -6
For me the starting point is what is and what isn’t “mastering” here in 2022 - a time when it’s doubtful your releasing on vinyl or CD and your goal is files for a streaming service. I master my own music and it’s the last part of my creative process where very little further processing takes place. The only compression and EQ moves I make are technical not artistic. Like I said above working in a modern DAW the line between mixing & mastering is certainly ill defined & much depends on where your standing... not to mention overall intent. Totally agree if the main goal is simply to put some music into streaming... like the OP has a soundcloud link? Then you probably don't need to hire outside services. Tacking on some brickwall level is likely good enough. Call it a day & move on. But some people are releasing vinyl & other product... touring & doing SXSW showcases & festivals etc. And for those hiring out legit mastering is essential and part of the process. One group I mastered an album for... between what was spent on recording & label investments in physical & publicity? They spent nearly $25k front to back. And so the $500 odd bucks they paid me for mastering barely registers. Probably spent more then that on take out food... mastering is just another line item in the budget.
|
|
|
Post by jmoose on May 5, 2022 12:30:17 GMT -6
Some engineers book by the second (total running time) which would double the bill. But I get what you're saying. OP here.. tahoebrian5 is pretty much suggesting one of my considerations (though he omits compressors only). So I don't understand why it would be double-billed. The 'best you can' mix is not a revision." Rather, it's simply a reference track - though I suppose the ME could listen to it and decide to run with the reference instead of the raw track. It wouldn't matter to me. That said, I'm realizing that I don't fully have an appreciation for what ME's bring to the game. Folks here seem to talk more about their technical value (as opposed to their musical contribution). I'm also concerned about which format(s) I should ask the ME to prepare the track for, but I'll save that question for a different thread. Potentially much to unpack here. Since it seems to be going in the direction of mastering vs mix processing... what have been your previous experiences with mastering? Have you sent things out before or would this be something like a first time shot?
|
|
|
Post by bgrotto on May 5, 2022 12:42:21 GMT -6
Nothing on the mix buss? Heresy!!
I mix to sound like a record, by whatever means necessary. Buss compression is used 99.99% of the time, and EQ is used 90%. Sometimes, I go full faux-master, and if it makes the mix work, it stays. I don't want to rely on mastering or anything, and more importantly, I don't want to make a bunch of mix decisions (including client input / revisions) only to have those nuances upset by an aggressive mastering job.
|
|
|
Post by christopher on May 5, 2022 13:37:53 GMT -6
Accessanalog.com …edit: actually I used Mix:analog.com .. I don’t have a $$,$$$ mastering chain, and that’s partly why I’d use an ME. I’ve tried it only once, (must use Firefox browser) but using this site I’m able to do my 2bus plugin/mastering moves in hardware so it’s still got some openness to it.
I think maybe I’ll try using this before I send to mastering? I just got done trying to give a major ME some instructions on how to rebuild the 2bus, felt like he didn’t care just did his thing, didn’t even bother to pickup the phone :/
|
|