self "mastering"

[joninc]

i am doing a mix and master for a band who has next to no cash and wants to sell some bsides etc... off the stage on a little ep.

normally i send all my stuff to a ME but once in a blue moon something comes through for which there really is no budget for mastering.

i am using the PSP vintage warmer on the setting "mix lite driven tape" - watch the bass bump - i pull it back a teeny bit.

then i hit the L2 for a tiny bit of limiting - barely moving the GR - threshold very low - just a little GR on loud bits with the ceiling just below zero. and i am using the L2 so i can dither it - the PSP won't do that.

seems to work well for me. i once had someone describe it to as - better to eq a little twice - than a lot once. i think the principle is true of compression as well. just pull back the peaks a little - round it out a little here and there - rather than being more heavy handed with 1 plug in etc... use 2 more gently.

have fun!

oh yeah - and be sure to compare your masters against other albums in the genre for overall level and tonality. it's easy to get used to a bright or dull mx when you are in a bubble - compare against a few records you love. i always find this a tremendously humbling but helpful tool.

[Snarl 12/8]

Try to do it in a different room, different speakers, etc. Worry most about how it will sound on all sorts of systems from mp3's on earbuds to car stereos, etc. not so much making it sound "perfect" on whatever system you're "mastering" on.

[joninc]

yeah - very good point as well.

i have a small set of minimus 7s to reference against my larger hifi speakers as well as headphone checks and the always revealing "car test".

[MoreSpaceEcho]

FWIW, my typical psuedo-mastering is mebbe a little low-pass reduction (often just a cuppla dB's starting at mebbe 5kHz) and a steeper high pass at mebbe 40Hz, and cuppla dB's peak limiting, which is generally addressing drums and/or crescendos.

f'realz? you put on a low pass filter at 5k?

[suppositron]

FWIW, my typical psuedo-mastering is mebbe a little low-pass reduction (often just a cuppla dB's starting at mebbe 5kHz) and a steeper high pass at mebbe 40Hz, and cuppla dB's peak limiting, which is generally addressing drums and/or crescendos.

f'realz? you put on a low pass filter at 5k?

I know! I was like "Does he mean a shelf?" but what the hell would you cut 5khz with a shelf for? He must mean boost at 5khz with a shelf.

[MoreSpaceEcho]

but here's the thing...and i'm having a hard time biting my tongue on this thread.....one song might well need a shelf cut at 5k. the next song might need a shelf boost at 5k. or 4k. or 8k. or maybe it needs a bell instead. maybe at 10k. or 12k. or 15k. maybe that bell needs to be an octave wide. maybe two octaves. maybe three. maybe the track doesn't need any eq at all. maybe it needs a notch cut in the low mids. perhaps a linear phase eq would be good for that. or perhaps a minimum phase would be better. or maybe one band on a multiband comp. etc etc etc.

tomb stock answer: it depends.

i know people are trying to help and that's superdupe, but saying "i typically do x, y or z" does no one any good at all. there isn't any "typically".

[Stevil]

i self "mastered" a bunch of early recordings. the best results came from listening to the mix on as many systems & in as many environments as possible, then going home, making some tweaks & trying it again, repeat... til i was sick to death of messing with it. the biggest hurdle for me was shaving off enough of the lows. the balance from track to track & overall mix would sound great in my room & then i'd get muddy warbley bass on other systems.

my last batch of tracks i took to a real mastering studio & spent a few hundred bucks to let someone whose sound i like do it. much faster, easier & better results.
good luck!

[vvv]

FWIW, my typical psuedo-mastering is mebbe a little low-pass reduction (often just a cuppla dB's starting at mebbe 5kHz) and a steeper high pass at mebbe 40Hz, and cuppla dB's peak limiting, which is generally addressing drums and/or crescendos.

f'realz? you put on a low pass filter at 5k?

I know! I was like "Does he mean a shelf?" but what the hell would you cut 5khz with a shelf for? He must mean boost at 5khz with a shelf.

I should know better than to multi-task in a hurry, sorry!

I use an FFT filter to high-pass at 40Hz, and the same filter to do a roll-off from 10kHz to reduce gradually to a cuppla dB's by 20kz, like so:



Obviously, this is just a little tweak to account for what I feel are general areas to address in many of my mixes, a sorta home-rolled pre-set ...

(You can see others listed in the white box.)

YMMV

[rwc]

a) Make sure you match levels between the pre and post mastered product as you listen to ensure you're not being hyped by the extra volume of the mastered product.

0.7 dB louder can be construed as "better", even if it is not. The meters & fader are the most powerful tools there.

b) If you have been mixing the material for a decent amount of time, chances are you will get bored with it, and at that point in time different sound might sound like better sound even if it isn't actually better! IMO this is the main reason having someone else master your work is critical.

I heard this altec lansing nearfield stereo today They were computer speakers, for ten seconds I actually preferred it to the Thiel CS 3.6 farfields I have at home. As I played more stuff on it I got to notice it was total crap. However, just because it was a change in room, in listening distance, and speaker combo(2.1, not 2.0), for a short while, I thought it was "better." It was different from what I had become accustomed to, what I grew bored of.

My belief is that it is because people grow bored of their mixes, they mutilate them in the process of self mastering.

c) Don't do ANYTHING "just because" or automatically or because you think you have to. Read around, it is almost every professional mastering engineer's wet dream to transfer a mix without doing anything to it(which means they received perfect material).

When engineers receive Grammys for mastering, they don't play the pre and post mastered track at the ceremony. No one gives a fuck. For all we know, the engineer did nothing. The end result is what matters, and for all you know, they printed the mix to CD and won a grammy for doing nothing.

I am sure people have won grammys with all their gear in bypass.

Don't sit there and think you HAVE to do anything because X person did it on the internet.

[dave-G]

Great posts by MoreSpaceEcho and rwc!

My 2?: mastering is far less about what processes or processors are used, and far more about decisions; about deciding what (if any) processes or processors to use, about what has informed those decisions, and about how those decisions improve the final presentation of the production.

I don't think that necessarily precludes DIYing, but it shouldn't be surprising that MEs with lots of experience, communication skills, great monitoring and great gear, are more prone to great results.

-dave

[@?,*???&?]

I've quoted with 13 different mastering houses (most from TapeOp's pages) and for a band with little cash and now a bunch a songs that will soon be "old" none of the prices were in the ballpark.

Oh, the plight of the unsigned, indie band! Barcode or bust!

[Waltz Mastering]

the best results came from listening to the mix on as many systems & in as many environments as possible, then going home, making some tweaks & trying it again, repeat... til i was sick to death of messing with it.

my last batch of tracks i took to a real mastering studio & spent a few hundred bucks to let someone whose sound i like do it. much faster, easier & better results.

I agree with this, that how your stuff translates to other sound systems is key. It should sound good on everything it's played on.

I haven't read through the whole lot, so I'm not sure if it was mentioned, but after your BW limiter you should have a 16 bit dither plug before you bounce or capture. It's important to have this.

Good luck.

[Jim_Boulter]

Here's my 1/2 cent worth:

If you are gigging and selling it there, spend the $250 for another set of ears. You owe it to the customer.

If you are gigging and giving this away to give people a sample, spend the $250. Otherwise, it may be an accidental deterrant to would-be-fans. You owe it to yourself.

If you are just giving away copies to club owners to get the gig, spend the $250 to better your chances of landing the gig. They hear lots of junk, and hire those that stand out. You owe it to your bandmates (and they, you).

If you just want to share it with the family, spend the $250. Otherwise, you'll look back one day with regret over not having given your art the best it deserved. (Only this last one is the least bit optional, IMO.)

If you're happy with the mixes, what are you going to do to master them? If you aren't yet happy with the mixes, why are you worried about mastering yet?

With all of that said, it's time to go start saving to get some of my work mastered when I get ready... Gotta go.

[MoreSpaceEcho]

i agree that $250 is extremely reasonable and money well spent...nevermind the whole fresh set of ears/more experience/better gear and room a good ME can offer (all super important), by the time i'm finished mixing i don't want to hear the songs ever again, i don't hear them as music, i hear them as decisions....i'm guessing this is not unique to me, right? this is about the worst frame of mind you could possibly have if you're sitting down to master the damn thing. i dunno about you, but at that point i wanna put my feet up, have a cup of coffee, hand someone else some money and say here, I'M done. YOU worry about it now.

that said, here's some random thoughts that may or may not help you if you're mastering your own stuff...i'm writing this for n00bs, so please no one take offense if i'm stating the obvious or insulting your intelligence here.

things you can do in mixing that will make your mastering life easier:

do a lot of listening to the mixes-in-progress in sequence. doesn't have to be the final sequence or anything, the point is just to reference all the mixes to each other. so you can see how your relative vocal levels, kick/bass balances, etc are shaping up.

err on the dull side. a dull mix almost always masters better than an overly bright one. it's ok if your mix sounds a little bit wooly, it's probably the easiest thing to fix in mastering, and the fix doesn't have too many consequences...everything in mastering is a trade-off, but generally, on a dull mix, a gentle cut in the low mids and/or a gentle boost in the high end will "make everything sound better" and won't hurt any of the good stuff. whereas with a bright mix, you're going to be continually fighting the clarity vs pain battle.

to that end, listen for any dramatic frequency imbalances in the mixes. mainly in the high end. i.e. a dull mix with a really bright hihat or sibilant vocal is going to be a pain in the ass, and invariably involve some sort of compromise. so fix that stuff in the mix, eq the hats down, de ess the vocals, whatever. you'll be happier later.

on the other end, try and get your kick/bass balance as good as you can. it's ok if they're both a little too loud or too soft (too loud is better), but a track with a booming kick and a wimpy bass or vice versa is a pain.

listen for any unintended distortions or other noises...mouth noises and tics on the vocals, sloppy edits, overloading plugins, amp hum, etc. all that stuff usually becomes more apparent after mastering, and it's all easily fixed during the mix.

stuff to do when you're mastering:

take a week off before you even start. don't listen to the mixes at all. go do something fun. preferably something involving the sun, because you probably need it. at some point listen to the mixes on any system you can find BESIDES the one you mixed/are going to be mastering on. get an idea on how the unmastered mixes are translating to various systems, and you'll have a better idea of what to work on in mastering.

during that time you're not listening to the mixes, listen to as much different stuff as you can on your studio monitors, and really try and learn how finished, legitimate, bar coded records sound on your system.

do whatever you need to do to trick yourself into thinking you've never heard these songs before, put all your mixes into one session, in the final sequence if possible, and spend a good while listening to all of them before you reach for a knob.

think about your eq in 4 basic frequency ranges: low, low mid, high mid, high. you oughta be able to get where you need to go with one cut or boost in each range. lots of times you don't even need that much, you might only need one band or none at all. but rather than looking at the eq as a billion choices between 20 and 20,000, it's easier to think in terms of ranges, and just finding the nice spots within them.

in general, wide Q boosts or cuts sound more musical than narrow ones. especially in the high end. however, a too-wide cut in the low mid or low end is a good way to take all the fun away. be especially conscious of low mid cuts. they're seductive. a cut ~2-300 will magically make everything "clearer and more hifi", but it's also where all the meat of your snare is. and a good bit of the vocal and everything else too. you gotta be tough on yourself, you can't just put on an eq and listen to the good things it does, you gotta listen for the bad stuff too. it's a bummer but that's the gig.

so, likewise, be real careful with the high mid/high end boosts. they're even more seductive...a little boost around 16k is all ooh la la, listen to the air and detail! but it can also get real fatiguing real fast, and i find it also can have the effect of shifting your attention away from the midrange. and all the good stuff is in the midrange. gratuitous high end boosts are a total rookie move. if you're a rookie, just heed the mistakes those before you have made, and no one will be the wiser.

don't put a high pass on by default. another rookie move. (please note that i've made every possible rookie move way too many times) lots of times you don't need it, and the low end problems are more in the 80-160 range than they are in the subs. if you're working on little nearfields that don't go lower than 60 or whatever, invest in a decent pair of headphones, as that will at least give you some kind of accurate perspective on the subs. not ideal but much better than nothing.

go easy on the compression. 1db gain reduction is usually plenty. fast attack is gonna kill your drums. maybe that's what you want. usually it's not, and you want a slower attack to let transients through.

a too fast release will be jumpy and weird sounding, a too slow one makes everything boring.

with the limiter, any more than 3db is really a lot. and 3db is generally 2db more than i like. listen to the kick drum, this is usually the first place where the limiting artifacts start to appear. but also pay attention to the stereo width, the definition of the instruments, the high end clarity...all that stuff starts to go south the more limiting is applied.

if you're trying to get your mixes as loud as whatever the current norm is, you're pretty much going to have to ruin them. i'm just sayin'.

if you insist on going for stupid loud, you're probably not going to get there by just beating the shit out of the limiter. try getting a bit from saturation, a little clipping, and then the limiter. it'll still probably suck compared to the mix, but it'll likely suck less than just hitting the limiter for 6db or whatever.

compare any processing you're doing with the original mix, at a matched level. it's real easy to fool yourself. this keeps you honest.

if you find yourself trying to fix some real specific problem, like say there's some occasional boomy or resonant bass notes, or the vocal's not loud enough and you're trying to 'bring it out', just stop and go back to the mix and fix it there. this is the one advantage you have when mastering your own stuff.

don't spend forever on a track. you'll just lose your perspective. go with your initial impression, turn some knobs, print it, and move on. usually the first track takes awhile, and that's fine, but after that just try and move through things at a comfortable pace. once you have the whole thing together, if you find that something doesn't fit, it's easy to go back and redo that one, and you'll have a much better perspective on how it works in context of the whole record.

if you're working on anything with vocals, do what's right for the vocal. i.e. if the vocal sounds perfect as is, but the snare's a little dull, you're probably better off leaving it than trying to make the snare perfect. of course there's tricks and workarounds to some extent, but as a general approach, try and focus on the most important thing. which, as a drummer, i would like it to be the snare, but most people don't walk around whistling backbeats.

working with a set monitor gain is good, almost essential. find a spot that's comfortable and mark it on your controller. not too quiet or loud...fwiw i mix really, really quietly most of the time, but i monitor considerably louder when mastering...if it's too quiet you will likely add too much compression and high end. of course if it's too loud you'll make different, but equally bad decisions, and go deaf, so don't do that either. it's fine to listen quieter and louder from time to time, but the idea is to have a fixed level to come back to, so you can master each track to work at that level, which helps in maintaining a consistent sound across the record.

the general idea is to do as little as possible. sometimes you have to get stupid, i did a track the other night where the amount of processing was comical, but most of the time a little goes a long way. and especially if you're a novice, keep it really simple and you won't be too likely to hang yourself.

[lotusstudio]

AN excellent post SpaceEcho - I'm adding that one to my favorites!