Mastering with Plug-ins only

[DrAudioBot]

Originally Posted by ChubbsMaloney

yes seems very obvious doesn't it.

So why do it (de-essing during mastering), if that is the way the producer and mix engineer like it?

...oh wait I got it...because you caused the insignifigant esses to become magnified and obtuse due to your mastering processing choices and now you (general you) must penalize the song/Artist/Mixer/Producer because of those bad choices...ones like always using converter clipping, unwarranted buss compression, boosting too much 4-10k and unmusical limiting..is that it? or is there some other reason to put such a destructive force over a mix?

maybe there's another reason I'm not thinking about though.

Why are you questioning it? Are you questioning general compression during mastering (Because it has been used in the mixing stage already)?

Are you questioning the use of an EQ during mastering, while the mix engineer had an EQ on his mixbuss?

You seem to be too confused with the term "de-essing" and that it has to do with vocals. If you look at it as "higher frequency compressor" you'll might be able to look at it more as a general tool.

Why use it in mastering? Because it may fix a problem (cymbal peaks, harsh guitars, vocals, you name it..). If all this would be already perfect in the mixing stage, mastering wouldn't be needed at all. The ME has a fresh pairs of ears, maybe better monitoring and knows what to do to make things right.

Besides that it would most likely be used gently and not like on a vocal track, compressing 10dB of esses!

Catching a few ringy cymbal hits with a compressor (Well, a de-esser is nothing else) or multiband compressor (just using an upper band)
can certainly be more transparent than a permanent dipping of that frequency range with an EQ.

[ChubbsMaloney]

Originally Posted by serious

... Lol ... Bad experience ?

ha!....how did you know?

Originally Posted by DrAudioBot

Why are you questioning it? Are you questioning general compression during mastering (Because it has been used in the mixing stage already)?

Are you questioning the use of an EQ during mastering, while the mix engineer had an EQ on his mixbuss?

You seem to be too confused with the term "de-essing" and that it has to do with vocals. If you look at it as "higher frequency compressor" you'll might be able to look at it more as a general tool.

Why use it in mastering? Because it may fix a problem (cymbal peaks, harsh guitars, vocals, you name it..). If all this would be already perfect in the mixing stage, mastering wouldn't be needed at all. The ME has a fresh pairs of ears, maybe better monitoring and knows what to do to make things right.

Besides that it would most likely be used gently and not like on a vocal track, compressing 10dB of esses!

Catching a few ringy cymbal hits with a compressor (Well, a de-esser is nothing else) or multiband compressor (just using an upper band)
can certainly be more transparent than a permanent dipping of that frequency range with an EQ.

ummm...I'll just point out that a de-esser generally works in the area between 2k and say 10k...I think there are some pretty important elements other than ringy cymbals and lisps in that range...but again, maybe this is me being past my prime and not realizing that we low pass everything except cymbals and vocals these days...is that what's happening?

[DrAudioBot]

I was pretty sure but now I know....

...happy trolling!

[ChubbsMaloney]

one of the reasons I now master my own work mostly.

[Waltz Mastering]

Originally Posted by ChubbsMaloney

So why do it (de-essing during mastering), if that is the way the producer and mix engineer like it?

...oh wait I got it...because you caused the insignifigant esses to become magnified and obtuse due to your mastering processing choices and now you (general you) must penalize the song/Artist/Mixer/Producer because of those bad choices...ones like always using converter clipping, unwarranted buss compression, boosting too much 4-10k and unmusical limiting..is that it? or is there some other reason to put such a destructive force over a mix?

maybe there's another reason I'm not thinking about though.

It's nothing new.

High frequency limiters have been used for decades to tame sibilance and other high frequency nasties when mastering for vinyl. De-essers are pretty much the same thing.. frequency dependent compressors/limiters. With software de-essers the advantage is that you can automate them to hit only the frequencies and spots you want.

[huejahfink]

Originally Posted by Waltz Mastering

It's nothing new.

High frequency limiters have been used for decades to tame sibilance and other high frequency nasties when mastering for vinyl. De-essers are pretty much the same thing.. frequency dependent compressors/limiters. With software de-essers the advantage is that you can automate them to hit only the frequencies and spots you want.

Yes, although presumably you could achieve similar results with hardware by doing a pass with and a pass without and comping them.

[MAzevedo]

Originally Posted by huejahfink

Yes, although presumably you could achieve similar results with hardware by doing a pass with and a pass without and comping them.

I've done that many times with a DS-1. For a spoken word album I worked on, it ended up being 8 hours of editing. One of the longest days of work I've had.

[electricthing]

I'm try to do a bit of finishing my songs and a couple of remixes myself since 2011, checked out quite some demo's and with every one of these plugs the stuff improved a lot, I'm happy now and hope that I stay that way a long time (half a year??);

Waves Q10
Flux StereoTool (a bit)
Waves C6
Flux pure Limiter 2 (appr-2.5)
Voxengo Varisaturator
Waves L1 (-2)

[Qiz]

Waves Maxxbass
Ozone 5 advanced

Genelec 8040

[Susceptor]

A lot of mastering setups here... do you use ALL of those plugins on ALL the tracks you master?

I think mastering should be simple and elegant, adding FX only when a problem needs correction. If you have no problem, don't add an effect just for the sake of it. Now let's get on with it.

First, you should EQ. For this I recommend a transparent parametric EQ, which ideally can work in M/S as well (EQuick, pro-Q, Ozone).
Correct any resonant frequencies, adjust overall tonal balance, make the bass mono (high pass the side channel at around 80 - 120Hz with a steep curve). That's it.

Specific problems: if some frequencies pose a problem but aren't there all the time (e.g. a hissing sound from some ear-rape high-hats, some weird bass the seems to go in and out, a string section that has way too much mids, but only appears on the chorus and bridge, etc), you might want to consider a dynamic EQ, but it would be better if those problems can be corrected in the mix; if not, see if you can get the stems and use a dynamic eq on the stems
If the problems are huge and EQ or a simple dynamic EQ can't correct them, use a multi band compressor (you can view it in some ways as multiple dynamic EQs), or Dynamic Spectrum Mapper.

Optional: some people like adding colouring EQ, such as Pultec clones and whatnot. I believe mastering should be transparent, and as such don't use these tools.

Secondly, you should limit. Use the limiter to gently rise the level while catching peaks. This is straight forward - just keep it transparent. If you hear distortion, or the track loses definition, you're probably doing something wrong. Suggestions: Ozone, Elephant, L2, Xenon, BX XL, Pro-L.

Third, add dithering. This is useful for making the fade-ins, fade-outs, and really quiet part more smooth sounding – I won't get into the details of why it's good to dither. This MUST be the last part of your chain, as it is also done when reducing to 16bit. I don't really have any preference in dithering, as I can't identify it in an ABX test, on normal listening levels.

Others. These are case specific plugins that you'll probably use once every 20-30 tracks:

Regular compressors. I don't see their point in a mastering chain – then again, I'm not a mastering engineer (however, I still think that using only EQ and limiting is enough in most cases. Maybe someone can explain to me what's the purpose of the comp on the 2buss?)

Stereo wideners. Rarely needed. Use them sparingly and only if you think the track isn't wide / 3D enough. The stereo widener in Ozone is nice because it's multiband, which can give you more options when controlling the width, while keeping mono compatibility.

Tape/Tube saturation. Can add some nice subtleties to a track, adding harmonics. Can ruin a track if overdone. Most of the time not required. If used, I recommend using them on stems (if you can get the stems), or on individual channels (i.e. WHILE MIXING), not on the 2buss.

MaxxBass and the like. Useful if a track contains only subs and you can't hear any of the bassline on normal speakers, ear buds, etc.

Any other shiny, bling-bling, all-in-one, single-knob, auto-master effects. Fugetaboutit.

TL;DR: just apply the steps mentioned in red. Also, make sure that the mix is top notch and has stellar production. Just hoping you can get it fixed in the mastering is dumb.

Mastering for vinyl: This is done in 2 easy steps.
1. Make it sound as good as you can.
2. Send it to someone who actually know how to master for vinyl - it's a whole different world.

[fortblower]

L2 + powR dither, to make listening refs.

Then off to the stud mastering engineer, who makes it sound better and louder for $150 a song.

[oweng]

i see like 3 or 4 compressors/limiters in there.... wow.

still amazes me - why complain - you don't know the settings-
if i use five compressors = each one compressing 0.5 db ( or whatever )
then thats ... ( do the math )
or maybe i'm not compressing - but expanding - which i do also..

i did a remix for the "Xxxxxxxxx" competition. today - the song was solid - just needed a proper mix - and a bump here and there.

waves c4
waves q10
waves L3
BX digital
waves S1
SPAN
---
i don't have a "chain" i just throw down whatever i can remember - and work with it.
i have some presets - but - i never use them - i like to change thing around and not get locked - in a " you gotta do this " attitude

2 compressors - 2 eq's -- this is because i am basically a useless noob and have no clue how to do stuff - so i will throw down multiple things and have them do one thing at a time

monitors - none- Bose in-ear buds - but i know how to read the SPAN meter
and I know how stuff ( how i like stuff ) to sound.

i am penniless - i can't pay my rent - and i get food from a foodbank
no one will hire me here - i live in a small town - there is nothing here.
rocks and trees and rocks - and a pack of smokes.

[Liam Judah]

Ozone.

[masteringdigital]

Tantan wrote :I'm also looking for a good digital coloring EQ which I'm afraid doesn't exist yet..

The equalizers are you talking about exists in UAD1/2 version:

Manley® Massive Passive EQ Plug-In

Pultec Pro EQ Plug-In