Proper settings when Bouncing in Logic

[rbb]

I'm curious as to what the best settings are when mixing down your tracks for a mastering Engineer. Many settings to choose from.

[Strobian]

Out of the selections you have, I'd just make sure you are submitting 24 bit files, no dithering. I actually only use 44.1 sample rates so depends on what you are doing. I guess you could use WAV as a "file format" if needed as well.

[The Beatsmith]

no dithering, 24bit interleaved, whatever samplerate you're using, and keep it wav or aif. give the ME enough space before and after the track to work with (a bar or two, or whatever)

[Lagerfeldt]

·WAV (everybody can read WAV, not everybody can read AIFF)

·24 bit (always use the highest possible resolution for as long as possible)

·Interleaved (don't use split files, they're mostly used in ProTools, and not for mastering or CD Audio)

·No dithering (all three POW-r algorithms add noise shaping which you don't want at this point)

·Realtime (this saves you having to listen to the file again before sending it to mastering)

·Watch your master output 1-2 and make sure it doesn't peak above -3 dBFS, i.e. leave at least 3 dB of headroom for the mastering. Remove all plug-ins on the master output channel.

[peeder]

Originally Posted by Lagerfeldt

·WAV (everybody can read WAV, not everybody can read AIFF)

·24 bit (always use the highest possible resolution for as long as possible)

·Interleaved (don't use split files, they're mostly used in ProTools, and not for mastering or CD Audio)

·No dithering (all three POW-r algorithms add noise shaping which you don't want at this point)

·Realtime (this saves you having to listen to the file again before sending it to mastering)

·Watch your master output 1-2 and make sure it doesn't peak above -3 dBFS, i.e. leave at least 3 dB of headroom for the mastering. Remove all plug-ins on the master output channel.

I'm with you until the last sentence.

DO NOT REMOVE YOUR BUS PROCESSORS!

Your mix will fall apart and all the king's mastering engineers will NOT be able to put it back together again.

If you have a specific ME that wants to try to redo your bus processing, send them a version WITH as well as one without.

If you're truly clueless with bus processing then you should have a professional mix your song just as you have a professional master it.

[Lagerfeldt]

Okay, I partly agree.

But do send 2 versions then. One with, one without.

Getting a squashed or over-processed mix is almost impossible to work with.

I do think that it's quite possible to re-do if you have a preview, and also: even if it's *not* there, it's still possible to get a better result in most cases IMO.

So I don't agree on that part about all the king's mastering engineers. :-)

Realistically speaking most processed mixes I receive contain no esoteric stuff on the master: eq, compressor, stereo spread, limiter, and a few times multiband. It doesn't take me more than a couple of minutes to track down what's going on - or what's suppposed to be going on. And I must say, improve upon it radically.

[peeder]

Originally Posted by Lagerfeldt

Okay, I partly agree.

But do send 2 versions then. One with, one without.

Getting a squashed or over-processed mix is almost impossible to work with.

I do think that it's quite possible to re-do if you have a preview, and also: even if it's *not* there, it's still possible to get a better result in most cases IMO.

So I don't agree on that part about all the king's mastering engineers. :-)

Realistically speaking most processed mixes I receive contain no esoteric stuff on the master: eq, compressor, stereo spread, limiter, and a few times multiband. It doesn't take me more than a couple of minutes to track down what's going on - or what's suppposed to be going on. And I must say, improve upon it radically.

The way I mix, and the way some people I work with mix, every single mix decision is taken in light of the bus processing. Sometimes even the tracking decisions are taken in light of the bus processing. The bus processors are put on first, or at least very early. And there is no way to recover that, not with any set of equipment or ears or skills.

But then again most people put simply awful bus processing on their mixes, and in those cases, they need a professional mixer even more than a professional mastering engineer.

[Lagerfeldt]

I very rarely mix thru plug-ins on the master but I do occasionally mix thru a hardware SSL or SSL type bus compressor, 1-2 dB GR max.

But you're still ignoring that what most people use on the master bus is straightforward stuff, like mentioned above, and therefore fairly easy to replicate too.

Especially if you have a sample preview. And even if you don't, maybe YOU can't do it, but I certainly can get very near in most cases, and better it. Maybe my having extensive experience in "reverse engineering" sounds for sample CDs helps me out here too.

So I think you're describing the situation too bombastically by saying nobody can do it under any circumstances.

Naturally having both files is the best option, just in case, so I concur with that.

[rbb]

Originally Posted by Lagerfeldt

·WAV (everybody can read WAV, not everybody can read AIFF)

·24 bit (always use the highest possible resolution for as long as possible)

·Interleaved (don't use split files, they're mostly used in ProTools, and not for mastering or CD Audio)

·No dithering (all three POW-r algorithms add noise shaping which you don't want at this point)

·Realtime (this saves you having to listen to the file again before sending it to mastering)

·Watch your master output 1-2 and make sure it doesn't peak above -3 dBFS, i.e. leave at least 3 dB of headroom for the mastering. Remove all plug-ins on the master output channel.

Thanks and especially regarding headroom!

[peeder]

Originally Posted by rbb

Thanks and especially regarding headroom!

Actually you don't need any headroom and neither does the mastering engineer.

The only reason you might want, say, 0.3db of headroom is to go easier on your DAC, which might start distorting up there. Obviously if your mix clips the DAC and you mix to a fixed point format (e.g. 24 bit) you will have distorted transients which you might want to avoid.

Mastering engineers need to train themselves to say "leave us some dynamic range" instead of this "leave us some headroom" BS.

[Lagerfeldt]

We absolutely need dynamics, yes.

But there's no BS in leaving a bit of headroom, I think you'll find many or most ME's like a bit of headroom when receiving a file.

Not just to avoid 0dBFS+ signals at the D/A stage (which certainly can happen before -0.3 dBFS anyway) but to avoid unnecessary attenuation of the entire signal if the first step of processing is digital.

While you may be able to control the input stage in some digital processors or plug-ins, others will not allow you to do so. This might lead to problems, which is why a bit of headroom is generally recommended.

A peak level of somewhere between -6 dBFS and - 3 dBFS is plenty in a 24 bit file.

[Switchcraft]

Im with Lager...

Definitely leave atleast three db of headroom. it makes gain staging for a ME easier. Without it, they have to turn inputs down rather than left at unity. the less line amplification and/or attenuation to make room for processing, the better.

[Riccardo]

Originally Posted by Switchcraft

Im with Lager...

Definitely leave atleast three db of headroom. it makes gain staging for a ME easier. Without it, they have to turn inputs down rather than left at unity. the less line amplification and/or attenuation to make room for processing, the better.

At -3 dBfs it will inevitably have to be turned down ....................

[peeder]

Yeah there's no way EVER the mixer will be able to predict how hot you want to hit your first processor. No matter what I will ALWAYS have to trim what comes in to optimize that. It's no big deal, a bit of digital trim.

But when I'm mixing I want to be able to reference against commercial material OK, and I want to send an ME exactly what my client approved. I can also send a version with less squash etc. but that's risking a total loss of what was achieved in mixing.

If you get a competent MxE and ME together they will be able to get a great product done regardless of how hot the submitted mix is. If either or both of those people suck, the result will suck regardless too.

I don't know what the statistics are, but I'd bet most major label mixes are submitted hotter than my average of -0.3dbFS peak/-11dbFS RMS. Seems everyone mixes through a limiter these days. I'm sure there will be anecdata to the contrary but that is not a statistic.