Printable View
Prob a silly question.
How many people make their tracks with some master effects on? compression eq etc. Or should you leave all master fx till the very very end or (not at all) if you are sending it off?
Some times its a bit easy to just whack a bit of compression and eq on the whole mix to beef things up as you go along. But im thinking this is a no-no?
Any thoughts?
It's something I used to do but I found it lead to over compression and all kinds of nastyness , best thing to do is to try an leave the master channel as clear as possible and try for as good a mixdown as you can get without it. Will give you more headroom and dynamics to play with at the mastering stage if nothing else.
What he said.Quote:
Originally Posted by herman
I`m actually against self mastering altogether now.
The mastering stage is much better handled by a 3rd party who can be more objective.
I just don`t know who to send my stuff too, to do mastering swaps with.
itd have to be the McCormack man me thinks!!
ontopic: no master compression... if i want to cheat a little... i try some compression on submasters, like the main beat...
that way i can still get the dynamics from the other elements...
That sounds about right.
I can compress a bit with the sends for a bit of dynamics but I'll leave that master completely dry from now on.. no nothing. no eq/comp/spacial widening. Leave it to wavelab & the pros.
I have stupidly done this in the past. Short term gain long term pain I suppose. Thanks guys.
As much as I dig Chris`s stuff, I`d rather hand over my gear to someone totally not involved in the techno scene really.Quote:
Originally Posted by stjohn
I should probably get in touch with the guy who trained me really.
Interesting.Quote:
Originally Posted by dirty_bass
Not really, it makes more sense to me, rather than having someone master it to preconceptions of techno, I`d like someone who is purely a mastering engineer to handle it. Seeing as dance music is being listened to more and more outside of clubs, and more on ipods etc, I`d like a more universally translatable master.Quote:
Originally Posted by massplanck
I ALWAYS write to a compressor on the master from the get go.
And an EQ.
But the settings are slight, unless i want them to be. And my techno sounds a LOT better for it. IT also forces me to think about the dynamics processes more thoroughly.
for house, electro, ambient and any slower and more musically/dynamically complex music i dynamics process in the the post.
As for chris mcormack, when i spoke to him he said he wasnt mastering much techno these days, and preferd mastering other stuff. So you might want to consider him again.
i find it better to compress in groups rather than the master channel
Quote:
Originally Posted by dodgyedgy
No I`ve spoke to my old mentor.
I`m going for proper old school mastering.
chris is great at mastering but I`m looking for someone with more experience.
dirty, you are ever the perfectionist :laughing:
you know, i put whatever i fancy on the mix at the time. if you think it needs compression, well do it. if not, well dont. it's funny but when i first got into production i was finding a good master comp setting and leaving it on the same setttings all the time. well no wonder things start to sound the same after a while.
i think as long as you understand compression, reverb or delay completely, you should use then on the master during the music making process ONLY if you ever think 'shit i could do with this on the track exageratting' or 'damn this track is sounding empty'. there's no rules here.
the only rule i would say is use each effect to the limit and don't overdo..... ...that's when mastering becomes impossible..
hope this helps..
Good man Mark.Quote:
Originally Posted by MARK EG
i tend to fall into both camps here. IF you know what your doing with effects your using on your master channel then thats fine, compression, EQ are valuable tools in this instance, but alot of people seem to think a compressor and limiting tool such as the Vintage warmer running into the red on their master is a good thing, when it clearly isnt. Steer clear of effects that really colour the sound. Just because something makes a very audible difference, be it really emphasising the highs or the lows, or just seemingly making the mix louder and phatter as it were doesnt mean this is a good thing, as its simply sheening over a bad mix.
A little tip for checking just how much certain effects are colouring the mix is to go about one of your usual mixes, and then take all the master effects off one by one. See what the difference is on your track. If the track sounds notibly different, and not for the better, as you take the master effects off, then your mixes are being coloured over by the effects and thus makes for a bad mixdown.
I would personally use some EQ and compression on the master channel, but in fairness i know what im doing with both and can accomodate both to my needs, and over the past few years ive learnt to present an actual good mixdown which is by far and away, to me anyway, the most important aspect. Once youve got a mix down which sounds great with no master effects on, then you've cracked it in my opinion
the worst plugins ive found personally for colouring and masking the sound are the Nomad Blue Tubes bundle
Cheers Scott. Makes sense.
I think its useful sometimes to mix into a compressor as the compressor is going to completey alter the decisions your make.
I whack the master signal through an outboard compressor sometimes, to get a guage of what the track will sound like after someone more skilled than me gets their hands on it.
But I only do it for guidance and reference. Sometimes your mixdown sounds a little flat, and you need to have an idea of what it will sound like beefed up.
Just best to leave the beefing to the experts.
Another vote from me for Chris in this respect. Top quality service.