hi there,
I wanned to ask you guys if you could help me find the right software for mastering my tracks :D
I'm using now sound forge 6.0
what will You prefer me?!
thanx in advance
regardz
-->> Skarabex
Printable View
hi there,
I wanned to ask you guys if you could help me find the right software for mastering my tracks :D
I'm using now sound forge 6.0
what will You prefer me?!
thanx in advance
regardz
-->> Skarabex
wavelab
soundforge 6 is fine m8... wavelab is fine... it's whatever you're used to.. that's what i think...
I would go 4 wavelab just 4 the simple fact that u can hear yer track processed in realtime ... I think that's the main thing that got me 2 change over 2 wavelab from sf!
Z
Waves and UltraFuunk and a few boxes by dBx
you can hear the processes in real time with soundforge too????!!
I know m8 but unless things have changed a lot u can only hear one at a time...
In wavelab I can hear the final master in realtime passed thru eq, multicomp, comp, ultramax, stereo expander... I can go an change parameters n check which sounds sweetest... that's what I meant in the first place...
my bad I really didn't explain properly!!
Z
PS - also u can record a preset of yer mastering chain with they're parameters and all... so u can go back and change stuff, or compare stuff.. etc...
I often just do the processing in real time right as I'm writing the track. That way I can tweak things as I go. No matter how you do it...pre-mastering or post-mastering, soundforge or wavelab, I recommend Waves plug-ins HIGHLY.
yeah, i like to do a lot of the processing in real time too.
thanx everybody :D
as I'm using sf 6.0, will give a try to wavelab too
thanx again
regardz
->> Skarabex
Definitely Wavelab with mainly Waves plugins, although a lot of people like to finish off with T-Racks for the warm sound it gives to a mix.
Anyone got this to work well with XP? What versions?
Another advantage of Wavelab, of course, is the ability to use VST effects...
Tequila
There simply isn't "the best application" for mastering. And usually, mastering will take place in a well equipped studio (like for vinyl or cd mastering). Everything you want to do on your home or studio computer is premastering (even for mp3s if you plan to put them online).
A well produced track needs only a slight mastering, but you can also make a "not-so-good-sounding" track a killer. Usually, you want a compressor which has an analogue touch (I prefer T-Racks 24 by IK Multimedia), or another trick is to add a tube effect to your mixdown after it has been compressed. I usually leave a headroom of 1 or 2dB for future corrections. Remember that your mastering might sound very good on your own computer, but if you carry it to another place it might sound bad. So !always! listen to your track on many different audio systems (like on your computer with phones, with different kinds of speakers and even copied on tape on your crappy (or good) car audio). If the track sounds everywhere as you desired it, you are done.
Good points there...
However, my opinion is that if you're going to go to a professional studio for mastering, you should use no pre-mastering stage. That is, no global effects or processors over your mix.
It's far more likely that there will be more musical EQs, warmer compressors, gentler limiters, more atmospheric reverbs, etc. in the studio. You don't want to have to pay for someone to attempt to undo the work you've done.
If you must bring in a processed version, bring along a dry one as well, so if needs be, you can swap over to it.
And remember that the most important thing you're paying for is the decades of experience a good engineer will have. No amount of mails on a forum like this will give you that! ;)
For our most recent project, we took our tracks to the studio for a one-hour session to throw up any issues that could be fixed before the mastering stage proper. This way we got some blinding advice from a guy with tons of experience in our field... As well as ensuring we're not wasting our time when we're paying hundreds for whole days...
A good engineer will love this approach, as it means he's more likely to have a good result for his portfolio.
I'm guessing most of the rest of you want to master stuff at home to quickly get it up to a 'playable' standard so you can whack it on a big system,or slip it in a mix. In this case, the most important thing to look for is 'apparent' volume as opposed to level. Compressors and limiters will allow sound to appear louder for the same VU or PPM level. As DJs usually use this to guage relative levels of tracks, yours must be in line, or t'll sound flat and dead compared to the tracks around it.
Constantly a/b your master with a released piece that you know well, making sure they read the same level on a VU meter. Fiddle with the compressor and limiter in your mastering set-up until they sound on a level, volume-wise.
If you don't know how these units work, READ UP ON IT. I recommend 'Creative Recording 1: Effects and Processors' by Paul White.
As you get more confident, you'll add things like high-end excitement, multi-band compression and stereo expansion into the mix. Remember that you should find out how they work first, or you could be doing damage to the music.
And no mastering is going to fix a crappy mixdown. EQ each part of your track well to get good separation of layers, and you'll have far more to work with when it comes to multi-band compression and EQing.
Phew!
Tequila
Well Tequila, that might be correct for regular produced music, but in the techno scene i'm working it is important that you don't trust others so much. Usually, I want the track to sound it *my* way, as you might have heard in my track "serialized compressor rapers". A professional sound engineer of the "old school" would never ever let a compressor pump - but that's what my goal was. Also, I don't think music like Amok, Sven Wittekind, Umek, Chris Liebing and also my stuff wouldn't be possible if all those guys wouldn't use alot of effects. It's about where the effect becomes an essential part of the music. But like always: It's my opinion, but that's the experience of over 8 years of music production in the scene - not talking about stuff you hear on MTV or VIVA.
If the effect/process is part of the *music*, and your compressor does it the way you want, then of course it should be put on before mastering.
I take 'mastering' to mean a non-creative, engineering stage... If an engineer's telling you want to do creatively, it's probably time for a new engineer.
Good point though - I didn't make that clear.
Tequila
sure it's better when there's mastering in studio by someone that knows what he's doing :D :D :D
thanx guys 8)
wavelab 4 works great in XP. i like to do some multiband compression either with waves c4 or izotope ozone for the final mastering stage, and maybe coupled with waves l2 if i'm feeling nasty.Quote:
Originally Posted by djTequila
always use Cubase SX 1.0 and Acid 4.0b
before this up for "amature" mastering i use T-Racks....
Well, my professional sound engineer (of the "old school") left me with compressor pumping on my snare rolls.Quote:
Originally Posted by timo
The track sounds wicked now though! I can't stress too much how much your track will be improved by the dynamic processors, expensive reverbs and vintage analogue and valve gear that a good studio can muster. Especially if you have a simple, or even PC based project studio, and less than a few years of experience. Just make sure your engineer is sympathetic to your music!
:D
Tequila
Yeah, but my copy of T-Racks doesn't. It's a stand-alone program.Quote:
Originally Posted by tekture
Tequila