|
|
|
04-25-2012, 05:17 PM
|
#1
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 189
|
newb question on mastering
When mastering a song, why is it important to render all your tracks to a master .wav?
Why can't the engineer simply apply my mastering effects on the master track?
I haven't been able to find a direct answer to this on the internets
__________________
Registered Reaper User
|
|
|
04-25-2012, 05:23 PM
|
#2
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Unwired (probably in the proximity of Amsterdam)
Posts: 4,868
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by marcus82
When mastering a song, why is it important to render all your tracks to a master .wav?
Why can't the engineer simply apply my mastering effects on the master track?
I haven't been able to find a direct answer to this on the internets
|
Because the engineers think (y)our mixes suck.
__________________
˙lɐd 'ʎɐʍ ƃuoɹʍ ǝɥʇ ǝɔıʌǝp ʇɐɥʇ ƃuıploɥ ǝɹ,noʎ
|
|
|
04-25-2012, 05:27 PM
|
#3
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 797
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by marcus82
When mastering a song, why is it important to render all your tracks to a master .wav?
Why can't the engineer simply apply my mastering effects on the master track?
I haven't been able to find a direct answer to this on the internets
|
When you send a song to be mastered, you don't send your entire Reaper project. In fact, your mastering engineer is likely to be using another DAW entirely and cannot use your Reaper project. Also, many mastering engineers use analog gear in the mastering process, they are not simply adding plugins to a master track.
__________________
My Music
Reaper(x64) 4.72 - Studio One Pro (x64) 2.6.3
i7-3630QM 2.4GHz - 8Gb RAM - 256Gb SSD - RME Babyface - Eve Audio SC204 - Windows 8.1
|
|
|
04-25-2012, 05:44 PM
|
#4
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,162
|
If you just want to master one song, then you probably could send someone multiple tracks with some notes or something.
But if you want to master several songs all as an album, then I can see why this would not be efficient.
But a mastering fx chain could get pretty involved, so it might be not as convenient to just do it all on the master track.
Also, they might want to have parallel tracks.
My opinion is to just use reference tracks and analysis tools to get better results, or else experimenting a lot. There may be principles as well to apply based on the information gathered from different metering tools and displays.
|
|
|
04-25-2012, 06:14 PM
|
#5
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 189
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banned
Because the engineers think (y)our mixes suck.
|
Hey man, dem's fightin' words. ;-)
Quote:
Originally Posted by pattste
When you send a song to be mastered, you don't send your entire Reaper project. In fact, your mastering engineer is likely to be using another DAW entirely and cannot use your Reaper project. Also, many mastering engineers use analog gear in the mastering process, they are not simply adding plugins to a master track.
|
Reaper or not, I guess my question is a general question for the mixing and mastering process. It seems that I technically could go from the mixing stage to the mastering stage without rendering in between. I could technically master a song on the mastering track, alongside my individual tracks.
Is it just a cleaner approach to "lock in" a mix by rendering to a single track for mastering?
__________________
Registered Reaper User
|
|
|
04-25-2012, 06:27 PM
|
#6
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Unwired (probably in the proximity of Amsterdam)
Posts: 4,868
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by marcus82
Hey man, dem's fightin' words. ;-) [...]
|
Oh, sorry. I meant "golden ears" there instead of "engineers", of course.
__________________
˙lɐd 'ʎɐʍ ƃuoɹʍ ǝɥʇ ǝɔıʌǝp ʇɐɥʇ ƃuıploɥ ǝɹ,noʎ
|
|
|
04-25-2012, 07:26 PM
|
#7
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Toronto, Ontario Canada
Posts: 825
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by marcus82
When mastering a song, why is it important to render all your tracks to a master .wav?
Why can't the engineer simply apply my mastering effects on the master track?
I haven't been able to find a direct answer to this on the internets
|
Because the mastering engineer won't have all your tracks and wouldn't want them.
The whole point of mixing a song is to mix it down to two tracks. Left and right.
|
|
|
04-25-2012, 07:27 PM
|
#8
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Toronto, Ontario Canada
Posts: 825
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by marcus82
Hey man, dem's fightin' words. ;-)
Reaper or not, I guess my question is a general question for the mixing and mastering process. It seems that I technically could go from the mixing stage to the mastering stage without rendering in between. I could technically master a song on the mastering track, alongside my individual tracks.
Is it just a cleaner approach to "lock in" a mix by rendering to a single track for mastering?
|
If you're the mix engineer and the mastering engineer then by all means you could this if your computer can handle it.
|
|
|
04-25-2012, 08:51 PM
|
#9
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 9,090
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guncho
If you're the mix engineer and the mastering engineer then by all means you could this if your computer can handle it.
|
But if you are doing some serious stuff, and maybe have a small budget, I suggest NOT being both the Mixing and Mastering engineer. Fresh and objective ears are awesome during mastering, you are too attached and familiar with your own music to make objective decisions (In my opinion, of course). Also, it is beneficial to mix down to the 2 track mix first to have some decisions made. it is very easy to constantly second guess so much nothing gets done.
__________________
The Sounds of the Hear and Now.
|
|
|
04-25-2012, 09:10 PM
|
#10
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Miami
Posts: 2,298
|
Even if you're going to be the mix and mastering engineer, it really, really helps to take a HUGE break (days or weeks) to lose your sense of familiarity. It will help you approach the product with fresh ears and make better (less biased based on your mixing) decisions in the mastering process.
Also what Richie said: if you have stem tracks you're far too likely to resume remixing it as you master which is not really the point at all. Remember that mastering is supposed to be a pre-delivery process not a new mix phase.
|
|
|
04-25-2012, 10:32 PM
|
#11
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 189
|
I can see the advantages to mixing down to a single track before you begin the mastering process. I was looking at Studio One and they make such a huge deal out of the "mastering suite" or whatever. In fact you have to pay an additional $200 for that capability. From what I'm seeing you could master just fine within the basic mixing console of any DAW.
__________________
Registered Reaper User
|
|
|
04-26-2012, 10:59 AM
|
#12
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Right Hear
Posts: 15,618
|
you are sort of right and sort of not ...all at the same time
you can do it that way... but then think about some of these guys that have hundreds of tracks in a project... messy, eh?
also... sure.. you can do what your idea is.... but if you are going to do it yourself... why not just do a comparison of both methods?
also... consider that for a final master, one might prefef to use a diff DAW [though surely reaper is lovely] ...like Samplitude for instance. Why... well you'd have to try it to really see... but let's just say 'noise reduction' potential for one thing. yes, there are 'noise' vst fx around, but they are not nearly the same...
... of course, then some people want to add noise... LOL
so it's gonna also depend on what the project actually is..
don't ya love it when a question just don't have one simple clear answer?
|
|
|
04-26-2012, 11:30 AM
|
#13
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Illinois
Posts: 1,203
|
Mixing and mastering are creative processes. As such, there are no set rules. Whatever process gets you to where you want to be is valid.
That being said, IMO, the two are very different and require a different focus. Mixing is about defining and combining elements that set together effectively in a given audio space. Mastering is about adding that final sheen of cohesive glue that pulls everything together. For me, mixing is a much more intense process. Of the two, I would say 95% is in mixing. A really good mix needs very little mastering. I believe rendering the final mix for mastering just facilitates the separation of focus the two require.
But that's just me. What works for you is equally as valid.
DB
|
|
|
05-01-2012, 02:22 PM
|
#14
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 25
|
In the words of an audio engineer/masterer I know, "Mastering is sortof the 'dark arts' of audio engineering". meaning that you won't actually find that much on it on the internet, because its not that specific of a job. Some prefer not to have anything mastered. Many people won't allow you to watch the process of mastering or they charge extra for you to sit in because sometimes they do relatively little, not always, but sometimes . I wouldn't stress about it too much, it is what it is...which is a mystery to an extent.
|
|
|
05-03-2012, 09:55 AM
|
#15
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: London UK
Posts: 125
|
Hi there allow me to clear a few things up and remove some mystery.
Mastering historically came from the fact that specific processes had to be applied in order to get material to reproduce well on the vinyl format/cassettes etc. and to sound good on radio and other reproduction systems. In addition it ironed out the different tone of tracks recorded and mixed in different studios and leveled the volumes so they produced a nice listening experience (not to mention musically sympathetic track spacing) Now of course we have CD's and many file formats including compressed formats.
Mixing and mastering are 2 words often seen together online but the fact is they are completely different processes in the audio production chain. This has been blurred by the mass of plug in 'mastering software'. pre requisites to mastering are :
1)Accurate, full range monitors and amplification.
(includes DA/AD conversion/ loudpseakers/ amps)
2)Highly tuned and linear acoustics.
3)Competent and experienced mastering engineer.
4)A mix of the finest digital and analogue equipment money can buy.
After these criteria have been met then there is a basis for action. Professional mastering can then result. Anyone who is charging for this service must have the above in place. All else is "online chancers" at work, lol. I suggest a good term for DIY is self finalizing.
Ultimately the mastering engineers job is to ensure the mix will sound as good as it can on many playback systems.These days there is both a technical and subjective enhancement aspect to the job of the mastering engineer. So the engineer will do what is technically required in terms of shaping tone and dynamic range but also has an inventory of euphonic equipment to enhance the music as well, add space, clarity, warmth etc, if required. Loudness, often wrongly understood as the main goal of mastering is a single but interdependent part of the whole chain of events. Then of course committing the music to a medium which can be replicated whether that is physical such as CD-R or a file format such as .wav or DDP. This needs to be error free and subject to quality control systems and listens.
Mastering is normally undertaken on 2 track stereo mixes that the client is largely happy with. (not always) A variation on this is stem mastering where you prepare 24 bit interleaved grouped instrument files such as drums, bass, vocals, synths guitars etc. This allows some additional targetted enhancement/problem correction to take place.
Please remember mastering engineers are (or should be) very highly experienced in many areas of audio engineering and have very accute listening skills and very fine equipment, they will hear things you do not even know are there. Small layers of improvement add up and can make a big difference to a good mix down. Many of my clients appreciate my offer of mix feedback (if they ask for it), this can be very illuminating for them to understand more about their mixes.
Mastering is not slapping on some processors without reason or understanding why or what they are doing. It is to specifically correct and enhance the mix and take it up one more level before it reaches listeners. Without accuracy it tends to be hit and miss and mastering is not a time for guess work.
Whilst you are self finalizing bounce out a 24 bit file and work with that, you will not get many of the benefits of professional mastering including objectivity. (a second pair of experienced ears) However it will prepare you a little for the different listening techniques required for mastering 2 track stereo audio.
cheers
Last edited by SafeandSound; 10-08-2013 at 12:52 PM.
|
|
|
05-06-2012, 02:55 PM
|
#16
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 25
|
^^ Thats good stuff! Thanks for the info man!
|
|
|
05-06-2012, 04:41 PM
|
#17
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Online
Posts: 4,896
|
Still though..many's the party has been rocked with self finalised mixes.
__________________
it aint worth a bop,if it dont got that pop
|
|
|
05-06-2012, 05:45 PM
|
#18
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 6,290
|
Go ahead, you know you want to...........
While I totally think that SafeandSound's post is accurate and right on the money, also be aware there are truly "no" hard and fast rules in this creative game.
Many advances in the dual arts of mixing and mastering have come about by experimentation and pure chance discovery. If it sounds good, it is good. If people like it, they are probably not going to ask about the mastering procedure? (Unless your on The Reaper Forum.)
My advice: Have fun!
In the words of the Jamstix phrase: Just play with it!
__________________
"F" off.
|
|
|
05-07-2012, 05:30 AM
|
#19
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: London UK
Posts: 125
|
Getting creative is great and there is an aperture for taste, thats for sure.However, if you get the technical aspect wrong through being ill equipped or not knowledgeable, this defines the difference between ignorance and employing creative choices.
SafeandSound Mastering
music mastering
|
|
|
05-07-2012, 08:26 AM
|
#20
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 6,290
|
Whoopee!!!
Another great point about experimentation and thinking outside the box, is that you become, through learning and real world experience, someone who knows how to get the technical aspect right, how not to be ill equipped, and if your "paying attention", you automatically become knowledgeable.
On top of that, it's interesting and fun!
__________________
"F" off.
|
|
|
05-08-2012, 04:54 AM
|
#21
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: London UK
Posts: 125
|
The fun is undeniable when you self finalize. However most artists know when they need professional mastering, there simply comes a time in your music making pursuits when it matters, that is a natural progression.
Sure, enjoy your DIY mastering, thats cool and fun. However whilst DIY music culture which has brought about many, many good factors has unfortunately left whacking great holes in knowledge.It is naive to think you have the experience of a professional who has worked in the the industry for decades. I can put a few pipes together in my kitchen but can I do it as well as a plumber ?
Mastering music is not a time for experimentation or guess work, the 100's of thousands of bands, musicians, labels and artists getting their tracks professionally mastered speaks volumes. (if you pardon the unintentional pun)
Ultimately an artist will judge how critical it is as to whether to choose pro mastering or not.
SafeandSound Mastering
music mastering
|
|
|
05-08-2012, 06:35 AM
|
#22
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Online
Posts: 4,896
|
If given the choice between having no professional mastering(due to the fact that you're skint)and just finishing a mix and letting it languish on your hard drive or self finalising and getting your music out to the world..you gotta do the DIY dog.
Absolutely no point in creating music and leaving it to gather dust because like 99% of musicians you can't afford to have a pro do the mastering job right.No one benefits from that.
If one is planning on doing a cd,well then you'd really have to factor in pro mastering into the budget.Thankfully,its not prohibitvely expensive if you find the right person for the gig,who is sympathetic to your cause.
__________________
it aint worth a bop,if it dont got that pop
|
|
|
05-08-2012, 07:14 AM
|
#23
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 17
|
Interesting thread. So do those of you that self master / self finalize do it in Reaper but just with the stereo renders loaded? Or do you do it in another app like Audition or even the stand-alones of Ozone or T-Racks?
|
|
|
05-08-2012, 07:18 AM
|
#24
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Online
Posts: 4,896
|
I do everything in Reaper.If I'm self finalising I'll have all the gubbins on the Master and mix into it.If I'm getting the mastering done pro I'll mix without.
__________________
it aint worth a bop,if it dont got that pop
|
|
|
05-08-2012, 02:19 PM
|
#25
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 6,290
|
Self-mastering.....
..using the stereo two-track, then Ozone or T-Racks, or whatever, with Har-Bal thrown in there, too.
I love experimenting with new ways of achieving the sound in my head. If I was making huge amount of money selling my own music, a pro mastering house would be on the list as a "need".
I am not making huge amounts of money on my own music, so I opt to enjoy myself.
__________________
"F" off.
|
|
|
05-08-2012, 02:25 PM
|
#26
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Rhode Island, New England
Posts: 1,665
|
^^^^ my sentiment entirely!
|
|
|
05-11-2012, 06:48 AM
|
#27
|
Human being with feelings
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: London UK
Posts: 125
|
I don't really agree, there are 10's of thousands of excellent musicians who do a day job and their pursuits in music completely understandably, means a lot to them. I understand this as a professional mastering engineer in the day (and a not so great guitarist at home) and they enhance their lives by serious focus of man/woman hours and serious investment of time and money in their craft, that is not a small market.
When I started out I took a £2,000.00 loan for an AKAI S3000, just an example and personal perspective and with mastering at the lowest price point than ever before. Well you see my point. I had £10,000.00 in my bedroom when I was 20 cause I ploughed every penny I worked for into it.
Music is one of the most important life enhancing arts, it means so much to so many people and that is never to be underestimated.
As I say you come to mastering when you are ready for it, no rights or wrongs.
cheers
SafeandSound Mastering
music mastering
Last edited by SafeandSound; 05-12-2012 at 12:55 PM.
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:15 PM.
|