How to center low freq. for vynil mastering?

[JohnyJoe]

Hi,
I've to mastering a LP to cut in vynil.
I'ts my first time and I know there are some guidelines to follow it but I'm not sure about.
RMS? Hi freqs? Low fase? How to center the lows?

Any one could guide me about?

Thanks bros

jj

[Thomas W. Bethe]

Best to let someone with years of vinyl experience do the mastering for vinyl.

Paul Gold would be my suggestion.

Salt Mastering - Mastering for CD and Vinyl - Brooklyn, NY

[24-96 Mastering]

Originally Posted by JohnyJoe

Hi,
I've to mastering a LP to cut in vynil.
I'ts my first time and I know there are some guidelines to follow it but I'm not sure about.
RMS? Hi freqs? Low fase? How to center the lows?

Any one could guide me about?

Thanks bros

jj

I don't do vinyl cutting, so my knowledge to this regard is limited. But that would usually be determined by groove width / playing time, i.e. practical cutting concerns rather than taste in sound. I.e. it is best done at the cutting stage.

When I prepare a master for vinyl cutting, I'll prepare a normal master without limiting / clipping (i.e. without any measure that's destructive in nature and only in place to gain level) and leave the rest up to whoever will cut the vinyl.

[Lagerfeldt]

Originally Posted by JohnyJoe

Hi,
I've to mastering a LP to cut in vynil.
I'ts my first time and I know there are some guidelines to follow it but I'm not sure about.
RMS? Hi freqs? Low fase? How to center the lows?

Any one could guide me about?

Thanks bros

jj

You should probably let the cutting place do that. You can center the lower freqs by using a plug-in such as Sonalksis StereoTools.

[JohnyJoe]

Great!
24bits or 16 with dither to the vynil masterer?

[Lagerfeldt]

24 bits

[StephenMarsh]

I often prep for vinyl with an elliptical filter, as I would assume most lacquer engineers might do. This will essentially 'mono out' the bottom end below a certain point and allow a proper cut.

[Kiljoy]

This may sound crude but I use a simple MS process for centering the bottom end. My chain goes something like this:

1> Waves S1 MS encoder

2> Waves REQ2 or Q1 (with an HPF on the right channel anywhere from 80 to 400 Hz)

3> Waves S1 Imager (set to decode MS back to stereo)

Is what I am doing wrong?

[Adam Dempsey]

Hi, no that will work. It's just that obviously you don't need to do it if you don't need to do it. I've been explaining elsewhere the importance of avoiding "we'll fix it in the mastering". And 400Hz might be considered a bit high.

[Ben F]

Originally Posted by Kiljoy

This may sound crude but I use a simple MS process for centering the bottom end. My chain goes something like this:

1> Waves S1 MS encoder

2> Waves REQ2 or Q1 (with an HPF on the right channel anywhere from 80 to 400 Hz)

3> Waves S1 Imager (set to decode MS back to stereo)

Is what I am doing wrong?

That would work, but 400Hz is too high. You really have to listen and notice if the filter effects the music too much- like say panned toms or reverb returns. 150-200Hz is generally ok.

You may want to throw a LPF on the on the sum and difference if required so there a no spikes above 15kHz. You can use a de-esser instead...otherwise they will come back sounding flat as a pancake because the cutter has used a severe de-esser. The Weiss DS-1 is good for this- I'm sure the Rdesser in Waves would be fine.

[Kiljoy]

Originally Posted by Ben F

That would work, but 400Hz is too high. You really have to listen and notice if the filter effects the music too much- like say panned toms or reverb returns. 150-200Hz is generally ok.

You may want to throw a LPF on the on the sum and difference if required so there a no spikes above 15kHz. You can use a de-esser instead...otherwise they will come back sounding flat as a pancake because the cutter has used a severe de-esser. The Weiss DS-1 is good for this- I'm sure the Rdesser in Waves would be fine.

Yeah I though 400Hz would be far too high also and you could really hear it changing the mix balance but one cutting house in Australia had spec'd lows mono'd up to 400Hz... I don't think the guy really knew what he was doing.

As for the de-esser I normally run the standard Waves DeEsser over all of my masters (CD, Digital and Vinyl) and barely working if at all sometimes. I usually run it in split-band mode but have used wideband proccess on occation.

[Bob Olhsson]

FWIW it's foolish to try and second guess a vinyl mastering engineer. The need for crutches like elliptical eq. depends on issues ranging from program length to the particular cutting system being employed.

[Ben F]

Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson

FWIW it's foolish to try and second guess a vinyl mastering engineer. The need for crutches like elliptical eq. depends on issues ranging from program length to the particular cutting system being employed.

I generally use Abbey Road or Dub Plates and they are both very consistent.

[filin]

Originally Posted by Kiljoy

Yeah I though 400Hz would be far too high

I remember seeing one pressing plants guidelines for submissions being all signal below 400hz to be mono...... And I've seen another recommending 450hz.


I have no knowledge of the reality of what's capable, just relaying info from the pressers.

[turtlerock]

like bob said the actual freq point depends on the speed of the cut the level of the cut and the length of the song (side) as much as the low freq phase content.
so your guessing what freq to use a bit blindly if you have not got a good grasp of why your doing it .

we use an analog custom ellipital eq on any vinyl premasters we do so then the client understands what will happen to the bottom end later down the line .
typically something low for a 33 1/3 rpm ( like 70 hz) and a bit higher for 45rpm maybe (150 -250 htz) but it just depends on the song the amount of bass and the amount of low freq panning information

i have cut a lot of sides in my time (6-7000!) and everytime i did not have to use the elliptal eq or a deesser i had a little smile on my face, so now when i send out a master for cutting
i try to give the guys something they can cut with a little smile on their face !

but yes 400hz is too high unless the cutting system is wonky !

[Bob Olhsson]

Elliptical eq. was quite simply not used very often at all by the folks doing major label releases during the '60s, '70s and '80s. A number of top rooms didn't even have it.

[masteringhouse]

Originally Posted by Kiljoy

This may sound crude but I use a simple MS process for centering the bottom end. My chain goes something like this:

1> Waves S1 MS encoder

2> Waves REQ2 or Q1 (with an HPF on the right channel anywhere from 80 to 400 Hz)

3> Waves S1 Imager (set to decode MS back to stereo)

Is what I am doing wrong?

Shouldn't the HPF be on the S with a proportional increase in the M?

Not sure how the S1 works exactly, just talking about the theory of processing.

[StephenMarsh]

Originally Posted by turtlerock

but yes 400hz is too high unless the cutting system is wonky !

Agreed - I'm talking more in the 30 to maybe 90 range on a 12" if the program dictated--S

[Odeon-Mastering]

Originally Posted by masteringhouse

Shouldn't the HPF be on the S with a proportional increase in the M?

HPF on the right channel after the MS encoding means HPF on the S
so I guess the previous chap was right. I do more or less the same only that I am using the free MS encoder/decoder from Voxengo and a Hardware EQ.

[leftright]

Brainworx bx_digital is also a great tool to mono LF and to adjust M/S..

[spleenless]

I second the Brainworx _control. Really great for centering low end and spatializing, it beats anything digital out there. Ideal for vinyl.

[kjg]

Originally Posted by spleenless

I second the Brainworx _control. Really great for centering low end and specializing, it beats anything digital out there. Ideal for vinyl.

yes, nice plugin. can't beat it at that price.
since it is a plugin it is very digital though, spleenless

and by specializing you mean spatializing? I guess you mean that it is good for widening or narrowing the stereo image?

regards,
kjg

[spleenless]

ha ha yes spatializing.. A word not in spell check;.)

Yeah, i think brainworx did a great job with this plugin. When compared to any other plugins by waves, or other m/s plugins, brainworx seems to have the least amount of artifacts. M/S, in theory seems simple enough to do digitally, but it never sounded that good, but brainworx seem to have pulled it off.
Though, i'm not as excited about they're m/s eq...