Modern Rock Sound - How much Gain Reduction in Pseudo-Mastering?

[Rockman]

Hi everyone,

Wanted to get your opinion on this topic. I'll get right to the point and ask a simple question.

When doing your own "pseudo" mastering (i.e. for those who have no budget for pro mastering)... and when using a Waves L2 on the master buss (with a Renn Comp just before it)... what's the ballpark amount of Gain Reduction that you guys seem to use on the L2? (for a modern pop/rock type of sound)...

Once again, keep in mind that we all know that generally speaking, everything nowadays seems to be overly squashed to death... My intention on this thread is to avoid discussing whether we like that sound or not... but rather... just how severe of a setting on the L2 plug-in you allow yourself to use?

Does anybody here ever limit as much as 5 dB? or even more?

Thanks.

[SRS]

Sometimes 5-6

[not_so_new]

Great thread! I was just thinking about this the other day myself while mixing a tune that will not ge going to mastering.

Because I would never (well never say never but) go more than 1 or 2 db worth of compression when mixing for a client that was going to get mastering done I have a hard time pushing beyond that.

For the folks who say "well use your ears" .. yeah that is the point. My ears tell me that anything more than 1 or 2 db at the most is too much. My ears also tell me that I really don't like today's "modern sound" so I guess I have to force myself to do it from time to time and the only thing I can trust at that point is my eyes on the meter.

Sucks but that is the world us little guys live in, you can close your eyes to it but it will still be there when you open them back up again.

[PhilE]

If I don't like it I don't do it- easily said but hard to stick to!! BUT... If I don't like it I only do it if the client hears what I DO like and chooses the other way.

[severe]

This could be like asking how many donuts you can put down in the Weight Watchers forum.

[PhilE]

Originally Posted by severe

This could be like asking how many donuts you can put down in the Weight Watchers forum.

[not_so_new]

Originally Posted by severe

This could be like asking how many donuts you can put down in the Weight Watchers forum.

LOL Great analogy.

[Rockman]

I think I recall reading an old "preview" on the hardware version of the L2, by Bob Katz... I think that was way back when it first came out (before the plug-in version)... and I vaguely recall that Bob was giving the L2 a big thumbs up, at least with regard to how much more gain reduction you could use with it (up to 6 or 7 dB)... , without any noticeable distortion... as opposed to say the L1, which starts to distort and "pump" after a mere 2 or 3 dB or so of gain reduction.

Obviously.. just because you CAN get away with 7 dB of gain reduction, doesn't necessarily means that it's gonna sound particularly musically pleasing... That's a given.

Anyway... once again, I was just wondering whether using that much gain reduction was common practice with today's modern rock sound.

I'm off to buy 2 dozen donoughts... to test the above mentioned analogy.

Thanks for your input... keep it coming.

[bob katz]

Originally Posted by Rockman

I think I recall reading an old "preview" on the hardware version of the L2, by Bob Katz... I think that was way back when it first came out (before the plug-in version)... and I vaguely recall that Bob was giving the L2 a big thumbs up, at least with regard to how much more gain reduction you could use with it (up to 6 or 7 dB)... , without any noticeable distortion... as opposed to say the L1, which starts to distort and "pump" after a mere 2 or 3 dB or so of gain reduction.

My god... that was in the days (and I hope those days are still here) where I might receive a very conservatively mixed jazz record and maybe there were 1 or 2 isolated peaks, and the record was so well recorded that you just couldn't hear the L2 operating. But the more you start using the L2 into frequent gain reduction and the more you start trying to raise the level and the limiter is starting to act on the RMS levels and not just the peaks, the harsher it sounds and the more artifacts you hear.

On modern rock which has come in mixed aggressively and you're then trying to push it further (god forbid) I doubt you can tolerate more than 1 to 3 dB from the L2!

Now, back to the topic of "pseudo mastering." I'm a bit confused. I guess you're talking about using some plugins or hardware to make a master in the mix room for clients who cannot afford real mastering?

Because there's another use for the term "pseudo mastering". That's when the mix engineer gives the client a "pseudo-mastered" CD so they won't feel inadequate when they take it home. I feel this is one of the most dangerous and abused current practices. It makes it REAL hard for the mastering engineer. Whatever you do, iuf you feel you must do this practice, whether for political or other reasons, please carefully consider the level you are sending the CD to the client and make it at least 3-4 dB lower (in perceived level) than Radiohead...... please!

To avoid painting the mastering engineer into a corner, or just to reduce the whole spinning wheels of explanation that can ensue.

I just mastered an excellent alternative rock group which does not play like Radiohead but Radiohead is one of their heroes, but neither their mix nor the playing nor the arrangement was suitable to "become radiohead", and this group is a very acoustically-oriented rock band. I wasted at least an hour just going through the whole "competitive" game because of a pseudo-mastered CD that was too hot for its own good and screwing up this band's sound, but you know, you put two CDs in the player, and for the first 20 seconds, the louder one often wins, dammit.

When I brought them up to Radiohead level, the harsh edge from the processing was obnoxious. The group doesn't have any "power guitars" so the message just did not suit the music. Fortunately, saner heads prevailed and they listened to my advice and we cut back, sweetened it up and all is now well. But what a waste of time, all because of a pseudo-mastered CD.

BK

[not_so_new]

Originally Posted by bob katz

My god... that was in the days (and I hope those days are still here) where I might receive a very conservatively mixed jazz record and maybe there were 1 or 2 isolated peaks, and the record was so well recorded that you just couldn't hear the L2 operating. But the more you start using the L2 into frequent gain reduction and the more you start trying to raise the level and the limiter is starting to act on the RMS levels and not just the peaks, the harsher it sounds and the more artifacts you hear.

On modern rock which has come in mixed aggressively and you're then trying to push it further (god forbid) I doubt you can tolerate more than 1 to 3 dB from the L2!

Now, back to the topic of "pseudo mastering." I'm a bit confused. I guess you're talking about using some plugins or hardware to make a master in the mix room for clients who cannot afford real mastering?

Because there's another use for the term "pseudo mastering". That's when the mix engineer gives the client a "pseudo-mastered" CD so they won't feel inadequate when they take it home. I feel this is one of the most dangerous and abused current practices. It makes it REAL hard for the mastering engineer. Whatever you do, iuf you feel you must do this practice, whether for political or other reasons, please carefully consider the level you are sending the CD to the client and make it at least 3-4 dB lower (in perceived level) than Radiohead...... please!

To avoid painting the mastering engineer into a corner, or just to reduce the whole spinning wheels of explanation that can ensue.

I just mastered an excellent alternative rock group which does not play like Radiohead but Radiohead is one of their heroes, but neither their mix nor the playing nor the arrangement was suitable to "become radiohead", and this group is a very acoustically-oriented rock band. I wasted at least an hour just going through the whole "competitive" game because of a pseudo-mastered CD that was too hot for its own good and screwing up this band's sound, but you know, you put two CDs in the player, and for the first 20 seconds, the louder one often wins, dammit.

When I brought them up to Radiohead level, the harsh edge from the processing was obnoxious. The group doesn't have any "power guitars" so the message just did not suit the music. Fortunately, saner heads prevailed and they listened to my advice and we cut back, sweetened it up and all is now well. But what a waste of time, all because of a pseudo-mastered CD.

BK

Hey Bob... I COMPLETELY agree with you on this.. most all of us here are on the same page when it comes to today's loud recordings. As I said above, it sucks but that is the world us little guys live in. You can close your eyes to it but it will still be there when you open them back up again.

A comment then a question if I may.

The comment is that my usual mode of operation is to cut a CD with mashed up levels if the client's eyes glaze over when I tell them about the importance of mastering. If I don't do a mashed up cut it is my reputation on the line. BUT I always also cut a clean version so I do have the option to give to a good ME if I can talk the client into it (I don't mean "talk the client into it" in a negative way... you know).

Anyway the question is, since I have to do this from time to time and I know that I have a safety sitting around in my hip pocket how hard can I push the L2?

I am not kidding myself, I am not an ME and I would not use the L2 at all if my ears had any say in the matter. Because I like it better without the L2 I need to use my eyes and forget what my ears tell me... How much on the L2 do you think is safe? I mean I can't even get up to the point where most nation stuff is with an L2 before it craps out on me so what is a good safe bet if I have to fake it?

Thanks!!

[u b k]

i use the uad precision limiter, hitting 3db on the peaks, occasionally it'll smack a kick or snare back 5db.

it is not lit all the time, it gets back to zero in between the transients. this is on mixes that received 0-3db of api compression and another hint o'squeeze from the studer, the finest limiter in the world.

this gives me mixes that are comparable to anything reasonably well mastered up until about 2000. in other words, it's plenty loud and sounds very open.


gregoire
del
ubk
.

[Rockman]

Originally Posted by bob katz

My god... that was in the days (and I hope those days are still here) where I might receive a very conservatively mixed jazz record and maybe there were 1 or 2 isolated peaks, and the record was so well recorded that you just couldn't hear the L2 operating. But the more you start using the L2 into frequent gain reduction and the more you start trying to raise the level and the limiter is starting to act on the RMS levels and not just the peaks, the harsher it sounds and the more artifacts you hear.

On modern rock which has come in mixed aggressively and you're then trying to push it further (god forbid) I doubt you can tolerate more than 1 to 3 dB from the L2!

Now, back to the topic of "pseudo mastering." I'm a bit confused. I guess you're talking about using some plugins or hardware to make a master in the mix room for clients who cannot afford real mastering?

Because there's another use for the term "pseudo mastering". That's when the mix engineer gives the client a "pseudo-mastered" CD so they won't feel inadequate when they take it home. I feel this is one of the most dangerous and abused current practices. It makes it REAL hard for the mastering engineer. Whatever you do, iuf you feel you must do this practice, whether for political or other reasons, please carefully consider the level you are sending the CD to the client and make it at least 3-4 dB lower (in perceived level) than Radiohead...... please!

To avoid painting the mastering engineer into a corner, or just to reduce the whole spinning wheels of explanation that can ensue.

I just mastered an excellent alternative rock group which does not play like Radiohead but Radiohead is one of their heroes, but neither their mix nor the playing nor the arrangement was suitable to "become radiohead", and this group is a very acoustically-oriented rock band. I wasted at least an hour just going through the whole "competitive" game because of a pseudo-mastered CD that was too hot for its own good and screwing up this band's sound, but you know, you put two CDs in the player, and for the first 20 seconds, the louder one often wins, dammit.

When I brought them up to Radiohead level, the harsh edge from the processing was obnoxious. The group doesn't have any "power guitars" so the message just did not suit the music. Fortunately, saner heads prevailed and they listened to my advice and we cut back, sweetened it up and all is now well. But what a waste of time, all because of a pseudo-mastered CD.

BK

Hi Bob,

Thanks for the kind reply. Yea, I figured that "preview" of the L2 that I was referring to was a very old one...

Sorry for the confusion... but yes, when I was loosely (and probably mistakenly) using the term "pseudo-mastering"... I basically was referring to a situation where a client definitely had no pro mastering budget, but still wanted to go home with a mix that sounded a little more competitive (and yes, louder) than what they might otherwise leave with. I'm sure we've all gone through this, as engineers... clients asking us "can you make it a little louder?"

Thanks for your insight on this topic. I completely understand the dangerous aspect of bringing in a "pseudo-mastered" mix to a mastering engineer. That would be counter-productive, to say the least... and make the job of the ME much more difficult.

Just out of curiosity Bob... would you agree that the L2 is a little more transparent (and less grainy) than the L1 ? if nothing else, because of the Automatic Release feature on the L2? I was just wondering....

Thanks again.

[Rockman]

Any one else have any info to share about this topic? (how much Gain Reduction do you set the L2 for)... how far do you go these days, for the modern rock sound?