Your ITB Mastering chain. Facts only.

[greggybud]

Originally Posted by ultra171

Yeah, it's apparently the VT-747SP, which is stereo. I'd choose this over the TC Phoenix any day, which I really wanted to like, but what was quite a disappointment for me (these are Nebula versions of course, not exactly the hardware).

Gosh...I apologize. I have the 737sp hence you and no one else got my joke about using 2 of them. I was thinking Nebula magically turned the 737 into a stereo unit. Good to hear the Nebula 747 works for you!

[Filthrill]

For whatever its worth i wanted to give my experiences w the Avalon 737sp (i know this thread is just about plugins tho so my bad). I was working @ a studio here in L.A. & there was a great engineer there that used 2 purple-knob 737s for mastering a lot. Mainly just the EQ part of it & relied on a Manley Vari-Mu compressor for compression (always used comp before EQ. That & just the Waves L1 limter in computer & its still to this day some of the best mastering i've heard & some of my favorite albums.

Sent from my HTC Sensation 4G using Gearslutz App

[ultra171]

Originally Posted by Filthrill

For whatever its worth i wanted to give my experiences w the Avalon 737sp (i know this thread is just about plugins tho so my bad). I was working @ a studio here in L.A. & there was a great engineer there that used 2 purple-knob 737s for mastering a lot. Mainly just the EQ part of it & relied on a Manley Vari-Mu compressor for compression (always used comp before EQ. That & just the Waves L1 limter in computer & its still to this day some of the best mastering i've heard & some of my favorite albums.

Sent from my HTC Sensation 4G using Gearslutz App

Manley Vari-Mu is absolutely gorgeous sounding, but it's so colored (1-2dB boost @ both ends) that it doesn't fit everything. Works great on slower stuff, like acoustic and material with no drums etc.

[Filthrill]

Originally Posted by ultra171

Manley Vari-Mu is absolutely gorgeous sounding, but it's so colored (1-2dB boost @ both ends) that it doesn't fit everything. Works great on slower stuff, like acoustic and material with no drums etc.

Very true. Let's not forget that there's a modified version of the Vari-Mu specifically w/ mastering in mind. I was told u basically send your unit back to Manley & they do the modification. I believe they do something that slopes the high end down starting from 11k. Would make sense & I'd bet that version would work a wider range of material. Certainly there's something on Gearslutz about this.

[Elvis Gotta Gun]

Originally Posted by ultra171

Manley Vari-Mu is absolutely gorgeous sounding, but it's so colored (1-2dB boost @ both ends) that it doesn't fit everything. Works great on slower stuff, like acoustic and material with no drums etc.

VMcomp is not derived from the Manley.

HCL Varis.

[thedigitalgod]

Originally Posted by greggybud

yes!

Blame this on the power of marketing. And now more recently user disclaimers saying something to the effect of 'this is for demos' or 'i realize this isn't pro mastering.'

There is nothing wrong with a home brew. But a lot of these ingredients have a much greater potential to screw things up as opposed to making them better. I'm a true believer this parallels user experience.

Question: For anyone using anything 'multiband' on a regular basis, why do ME's normally not use multiband? Is the answer because they got "the good hardware, monitoring and audio environment?" Since a home brew is all or mostly software does multiband somehow magically make up for the lack of good hardware?

I know a lot of commercial ME's that are using some of this same software when they have over 100k in hardware and equivalent high end tools at their disposal. Most of them however tend to use what they are comfortable with and have learned to know over many years.

Bruce uses a Harrison. Bob, Greg, Brian, Doug...if they ever thought a Harrison was needed, they would call someone like Bruce. It's a mix issue, not mastering.

I apologize for sounding pious, but some of these lists are comical.

i was referring to Laurend making the comment about "real mastering solutions" after having visited the link in his sig, lol

[ultra171]

Originally Posted by Elvis Gotta Gun

VMcomp is not derived from the Manley.

HCL Varis.

Really? I always thought it was the Manley. I've never even heard of the HCL. Anyway, whatever it is, it sounds good.

[SoundHouse]

For ITB masters:
(in no order)

VCC->Brit 4k
FG-X
UAD Pultec Pro
UAD Massive Passive
UAD Ampex ATR 102

I have lately been messing around with having to FG-Xs in the mastering chain with varying attack and release times. The second FG-X in the chain, I put after the ATR 102 and adjust the FG Level. It's actually worked out great for me. As far as the Pultec and Massive Passive, I usually interchange between them to see which one will benefit the material best. I tried both in the chain and it was too much work .

[Scott003]

Anybody get worried when applying more than 4 or so processors? (assuming the mix isn't complete sh*t lol). Not gonna lie, if I keep adding to the chain, after a while I take a break and start over, I feel like (as taught/ reinforced by prof/ pro ME) less is definitely more, and the conscience decisions youre trying to make should be realized pretty simply (broad statement of course, but yknow)

[The Listener]

Originally Posted by superwack

The BEST, simplest, and most effective ITB mastering chain I've ever used was...

DAW > FTP > PRO Mastering Engineer

So true!!

But UAD Massive Passive can make miracles for a quick ITB self-mastering job... my jaw = dropped

[fito_88]

Originally Posted by audio ergo sum

My drive to the bakery is
out of the drive way
turn left
turn right
wait on stop sign, turn left
cross the bridge
second exit in the roundabout.
turn right on the traffic light.
...

works every time for any bakery I know.

we have a comedian here .. FAIL

[Rudiger]

Originally Posted by fito_88

we have a comedian here .. FAIL

My mastering chain is what holds my keys together.

He is right - there are no general formulas. If there were formulas, I'd create a mastering plugin with just an on/off switch. In fact, it seems like a very good business idea.

[Twerk]

Originally Posted by fito_88

we have a comedian here .. FAIL

Despite whether or not you liked their joke, they made a pretty good point.

[Scott003]

Originally Posted by Twerk

Despite whether or not you liked their joke, they made a pretty good point.

+1

[fito_88]

Originally Posted by Rudiger

My mastering chain is what holds my keys together.

He is right - there are no general formulas. If there were formulas, I'd create a mastering plugin with just an on/off switch. In fact, it seems like a very good business idea.

i know that there are no formulas and each project takes different approaches, im just saying that he failed in making a good joke

[Jerrick]

Ive been using Limiter6 for a little now and really enjoying the results I get with it. Mainly I like to just use an eq, compressor and limiter. DMG is good, same with Maag. Something ssl flavored is my go-to for compression, like the Glue.

Last song I worked on I actually added some saturation from around 300hz-2khz and put that in parallel. Really really helped the track. Cant remember what I used, but theres so many ways to do it, Decapitator, Ozone, LSR, daTube. They can all lift a song out of the grave. Not something I have to do regularly though.

[cuebism]

My work-flow often looks like this:

ITB - quick check if anything surgical needs to be done first, then sending OTB through the EQ that works best for the material and maaaaaybe a bit of compression.

Then back ITB I do eventual surgical EQ corrections with the DMG eq - minimum phase mode. Any eventual MS treatment is done using the DMG as well.

For selective compression or dessing I solely use the Oxford supressor.

For (if needed) tape saturation/warmth/distortion my favourite tool is SKnote roundtone in either the 7ips or 15ips "dirty"setting (eeeek!), but in parallel mode GENTLY dialled in using the dry/wet
knob.

Limiting: psp xenon, or for heavier stuff first the oxford limiter followed by the xenon, both gently...

I NEVER limit more than 2dB, as I prefer to achieve loudness before the limiting stage.

[Filthrill]

Question for my fellow Slutz:

How many of u use more than 1 limiter in your mastering process & exactly where are you putting them in your chain?

I happen to use 2 limiters in my process & have to wonder if I'm the only weirdo here.

All responses welcome. It would be nice to hear from some really big pros on this one also.

[Scott003]

Originally Posted by Filthrill

Question for my fellow Slutz:

How many of u use more than 1 limiter in your mastering process & exactly where are you putting them in your chain?

I happen to use 2 limiters in my process & have to wonder if I'm the only weirdo here.

All responses welcome. It would be nice to hear from some really big pros on this one also.

For what purpose?

[Filthrill]

Originally Posted by Scott003

For what purpose?

Huh? For the purpose of making songs competitively loud, what else?

Styles of music: mainly Hip Hop, Pop, & Rock.

I use 2 limiters back to back at the end of my mastering chain (in computer) after going thru my analog gear. So at end of my chain is the T-Racks Brickwall Limiter followed by the Sonnox Limiter for just about everything. I find 2 limiters used in a serial chain like this help produce a smoother sound & the Sonnox doesn't have to do as much heavy lifting.

I was just wondering if anyone else on here is using 2 (or more) limiters & how.

[greggybud]

Originally Posted by Filthrill

Huh? For the purpose of making songs competitively loud, what else?

Styles of music: mainly Hip Hop, Pop, & Rock.

I use 1 limiter and it is not responsible for the majority of gain in my "mastering chain." Imagine that. The majority of dB's is obtained before the signal even hits the limiter.

And this is pop and rock...typically in the -8dbRMS realm.

Maybe it's time to re-think the use of your limiter?

[Scott003]

Chaining dynamics usually makes good sense, two limiters seems kinda odd tho. If it works it works, but I find myself rounding off gently with a comp and then hitting at limiter. But then again I also am not too concerned with gross loudness.

[bryan k]

actually, more than 1 limiter makes ALOT of sense. Its usually best to let 2-3 limiters do the work instead of one. We all know what happens when we only use 1 limiter and try to get to -10RMS right? Its distorted as hell....and the gain reduction is probably like Wayyyyyy too much GR.

Instead, let the work be distributed into 2-3 limiters, so ONE is not working so hard.

I personally like to use 3 (in direct order) in such a manor:

-1st one is set to act like a clipper, but only brings the volume up to about 0dbfs, with NO gain reduction happening (maybe one or two instances of gr happening, but threshold set to try to not have any happen)
-2nd one is set again to act like a soft clipper, but now i allow gain reduction to happen. Shoot for your target loudness with this one.
-3rd one is my ACTUAL LIMITER, setting it up so its not so aggressive and catching any over shoots and making sure nothing surpasses -.3 Dbfs


Did you notice what i did there? The first 2 limiters are not being uses as limiters, they are set to be my "volumizers" while the last one is acting more like a limiter.

try it......

[Filthrill]

Originally Posted by greggybud

I use 1 limiter and it is not responsible for the majority of gain in my "mastering chain." Imagine that. The majority of dB's is obtained before the signal even hits the limiter.

And this is pop and rock...typically in the -8dbRMS realm.

Maybe it's time to re-think the use of your limiter?

I forgot to mention that I also use Waves L2 at the very very end just for the dither since to me it sounds best. It's inserted on the Master Track in Pro Tools. I don't use it for loudness at all & it's output ceiling is set to 0 also.

Back to the loudness thing tho. I never said I was really cranking on the 2 limiters. The T-Racks just a lil & then I will admit I hit the Sonnox a lil harder tho. With a trim plug (after everything else in chain) I make sure I'm at least a dB or so from 0 full scale or 0dBFS on my last aux track where those 2 limiters sit. Sometimes I even let it peak & go over for some edge if it sounds good & I make sure I don't really hear anything negative happening to the sound but I try not to make a habit of it. So how are u getting most of your dBs like u say before hitting the limiter? Given this, I'm still pulling down on threshold about 5-6dB on Sonnox & probably less than a dB on the T-Racks.

[greggybud]

Originally Posted by bryan k

actually, more than 1 limiter makes ALOT of sense. Its usually best to let 2-3 limiters do the work instead of one. We all know what happens when we only use 1 limiter and try to get to -10RMS right? Its distorted as hell....and the gain reduction is probably like Wayyyyyy too much GR.

Just out of curiosity have you ever tried series compression before anything ever hits a limiter? And by this I mean proper settings for each threshold, ratio, and attack..all dependent on the order of each compressor?

If so, what were your results?

[bryan k]

Originally Posted by greggybud

Just out of curiosity have you ever tried series compression before anything ever hits a limiter? And by this I mean proper settings for each threshold, ratio, and attack..all dependent on the order of each compressor?

If so, what were your results?

No sir, I generally wont use more than one compressor if were trying to use it in a "mastering" sense. When i compress (before the limiter or any volumizing), its generally one compressor set to 2:1 and i start with the attack/release at 12:00 noon, and adjust them from there according to what the song needs. I keep it as transparent as possible and gain reduction shouldnt be alot (less than 1.5db-2db at most, but usually less).

However, if there is a need for 2 compressors, i can see that happening. I would use one for "character and vibe", and the other for transparent messaging/leveling.

its all really dependent on what the song calls for. But for the most part....all the songs ive dealt with never had the need for more than one compressor

[greggybud]

Originally Posted by bryan k

No sir, I generally wont use more than one compressor if were trying to use it in a "mastering" sense. When i compress (before the limiter or any volumizing), its generally one compressor set to 2:1 and i start with the attack/release at 12:00 noon, and adjust them from there according to what the song needs. I keep it as transparent as possible and gain reduction shouldnt be alot (less than 1.5db-2db at most, but usually less).

However, if there is a need for 2 compressors, i can see that happening. I would use one for "character and vibe", and the other for transparent messaging/leveling.

its all really dependent on what the song calls for. But for the most part....all the songs ive dealt with never had the need for more than one compressor

It has nothing to do with character, vibe, or leveling. It's a mastering technique widely known for making loud masters.

Series compression for mastering has been in use for many years. The technique has been responsible for some very loud commercial records for many years. Sometimes it's the ticket. Other times it simply isn't the route to take. It's all audio dependent. The important thing is to understand the theory of why you are using more than 1 compressor, and understand there is a 'proper' way to make the individual compressor settings so it will feed a nice thick signal to your ONE limiter that is going to just contribute a little bit more.

Just the same way a ME likes receiving a mix from a commercial mix engineer, your limiter will thank you for receiving a good solid signal ready to be boosted just a tiny bit more...trust me.

I don't know of any ME's who use more than one limiter on a regular basis. Some use a separate limiter..right and left, but even that I think is pretty uncommon.

[bryan k]

Originally Posted by greggybud

It has nothing to do with character, vibe, or leveling. It's a mastering technique widely known for making loud masters.

Series compression for mastering has been in use for many years. The technique has been responsible for some very loud commercial records for many years. Sometimes it's the ticket. Other times it simply isn't the route to take. It's all audio dependent. The important thing is to understand the theory of why you are using more than 1 compressor, and understand there is a 'proper' way to make the individual compressor settings so it will feed a nice thick signal to your ONE limiter that is going to just contribute a little bit more.

Just the same way a ME likes receiving a mix from a commercial mix engineer, your limiter will thank you for receiving a good solid signal ready to be boosted just a tiny bit more...trust me.

I don't know of any ME's who use more than one limiter on a regular basis. Some use a separate limiter..right and left, but even that I think is pretty uncommon.

Sounds to me like the theory of using multiple compressors is no different than using multiple limiters. The desired end result is the same (more volume)

Compressors and limiters are similar in ways. Most of them have the same controls of attack, release, input/output, threshold, etc etc etc. I set my multiple Limiter's a little but different than the next so they all work together.

Before you ditch the theory of using multiple limiters in mastering, you should think about why you are using multiple compressors in series, .......and use that same theory with limiters and apply it there. All im saying is.....try it.....

Staking multiple limiters/soft clippers/etc I thought was common enough.......maybe im the only one who does this then.

[huejahfink]

Originally Posted by bryan k

maybe im the only one who does this then.

No you are not.

While I will usually employ just one, it's certainly not uncommon for me to use two.

One example - one soft clipper to catch a particularly pokey snare without losing too much edge, followed by a regular limiter to get another bit of gain.

Another example - one softer type limiter with fairly relaxed time settings doing some regular reduction peak reduction, followed by another limiter just literally setting the ceiling and handling ISPs.... a few tenths of a dB.

Sometimes it's none! It really just depends on the project. In the same way that different compression settings can be used to tackle slightly different tasks, the same goes with limiters.

[Filthrill]

Of course u r not the only one! Oh & Scott, from ur post above, there is nothing "gentle" about some of these modern-sounding pop & rock songs I have to master. Sorry but 1 comp & 1 limiter just doesn't cut it for most jobs. The song need a lot of juice & practically have to be a lil "in-your-face". I use a virtual comp early on in my chain to give a lil push. Then out to an analog EQ followed by analog comp w/ another lil push. Back into computer then finally the 2 serial limiters. W/o at least this chain I could not get near the competitive loudness on most of these big records nowadays. Not in a way that sounds good.

Sent from my HTC Sensation 4G using Gearslutz App