The waveform

[inthecorner]

Hi, here comes another stupid question..... What are the main benefits from seeing the waveform when mastering?

[Dave Davis]

makes it easier to approximate zero crossings? makes it easier to see hyperlimiting damage?

the downside: People seem to think waveform displays represent actual analog waveforms, leading to many misconceptions. For instance, many people believe digital audio has "stair steps" based on fully-zoomed displays that accurately present quantized values. While those values are correct, the reconstructed waveform is created by analog devices that do not "sample and hold" any particular value for a particular increment of time, but constantly change, crossing through those values at those moments in time on their way to the next quantized value. Entire websites and articles in audiophiliac mags have been written about this false assumption.

Waveforms are a useful visual representation to aide in editing and processing, but they are not the same as sound, and just one way of representing the digits in an audio stream.

[inthecorner]

Originally Posted by Dave Davis

makes it easier to approximate zero crossings? makes it easier to see hyperlimiting damage?

the downside: People seem to think waveform displays represent actual analog waveforms, leading to many misconceptions. For instance, many people believe digital audio has "stair steps" based on fully-zoomed displays that accurately present quantized values. While those values are correct, the reconstructed waveform is created by analog devices that do not "sample and hold" any particular value for a particular increment of time, but constantly change, crossing through those values at those moments in time on their way to the next quantized value. Entire websites and articles in audiophiliac mags have been written about this false assumption.

Waveforms are a useful visual representation to aide in editing and processing, but they are not the same as sound, and just one way of representing the digits in an audio stream.

*bow* master Dave.....

[Virtalahde]

It's easier to edit when you don't have to work blindly.

[MASSIVE Master]

Originally Posted by Virtalahde

It's easier to edit when you don't have to work blindly.

For damn sure.

Otherwise, I'd almost go as far as to suggest turning them off -- Your listening skills will progress much faster without a lot of visual aid (IMO/E).

[lowland]

Originally Posted by Virtalahde

It's easier to edit when you don't have to work blindly.

+2. The majority of music edit work I do is a quick visual placement followed by a confirmatory listen and nudge if necessary. SADiE's great for editing, either directly in the playlist or in the trim editor, and when I do the occasional audiobook the edits are enjoyable, unlike the grind they could be!

[dcollins]

Originally Posted by Virtalahde

It's easier to edit when you don't have to work blindly.

That could be the only advantage. Everything else is more distraction than anything............


DC

[CJ Mastering]

Its also easier to do fades and its easier to set spacing for your tracks.

Remember thee wave form is only a representation of your actual wave file. Its not 100% accurate!
Cj

[inthecorner]

I ask cause I know some producer/engineers who will mix and master in the same session as the track, in other words produce the track and just apply the mastering fx on the master fader and bounce when done. They never actually see the waveform, just listen to the song. I personally also like this method, but was wondering what possibly I stand to gain by seeing the waveform while mastering. Of course once you've bounced u import to waveburner where u can see the waveform for things like fades and track cuts etc.

[Dave Davis]

Well in your example these engineers see the same thing the Mastering engineer would (the premixed waveforms). In fact they have some advantages: they don't have to look "through" a blobular chunk, but can see the actual arrangement underlying the waveform. Far more useful.

OTOH, throwing a bunch of plugs into the master section of some very popular DAWs (I won't name names) isn't necessarily the ideal environment for mastering. Most mastering DAWs run at higher precision, especially at the intersections - Sonic, Sadie (and probably Wavelab) and other dedicated mastering daws pass 48 or 64 bit words between plug-ins, and save the final rounding/truncation step for the very end, where you apply your dither of choice. Mixing/tracking DAWs tend to chop output to 24 or 32 bits at the output of each plug to preserve bandwidth (dsp). So sonically speaking, this can be a big compromise.

I've seen this practice done to intentionally tie the mastering engineers hands, and ensure some baseline "loudness" is achieved. I guess if it's done by the producer it's fine, but generally pretty bold. Whatever gets you through the night...

[misjah]

Originally Posted by inthecorner

Hi, here comes another stupid question..... What are the main benefits from seeing the waveform when mastering?

non...unless you're editing.