Mastering's worst enemies?

[Roach]

Hello, i'm a project studio owner. As of right now i'm helping some
local bands do simple demos. I'm using Logic Platinum 5 and it's worked
great. I used to use Cool Edit 2.0 and it was good as well. I've worked a
lot with tunes with big huge arrangements (live horn sections, soloists,
strings, etc), and the mixes have come out sounding nice. I can boost
perceived volume and space by some degree using such plug-ins as Waves L2
and LinMB but never reach the same high perceived volume as industry
mastered CD's. It seems like i'm still off by about 3 to 6db (perceived).

What i need a little help with is determining the ENEMIES of a good
mix/master. I know that sub-bass frequencies are usually unwanted and eat
away at compressors needed for mastering and boosting perceived volume. Do
high frequencies also do the same? (20,000kHz+?). Is the trick just
generally getting a very flat reading from analyzing the frequency spectrum
of a mix? Is it that "simple"? or are there specific techniques that apply
to specificities such as attack/release/hold/thresh settings for each band
of a multiband compressor, and anomalies such as "masking".?

Thus far i have a bunch of reference songs (from purchased cd's) that i
use as a frequency starting point. I try to mimick my mix to sound like a
particular song or songs. This has got me far, but i seem to be stuck.

Thanks for the help!

mike

[LeBaron & Alrich]

Roach wrote:

> What i need a little help with is determining the ENEMIES of a good
> mix/master.

The desire to be louder than is sensible, compressing the music until it
isn't music anymore.

--
hank alrich * secret mountain
audio recording * music production * sound reinforcement
"If laughter is the best medicine let's take a double dose"

[LeBaron & Alrich]

Roach wrote:

> What i need a little help with is determining the ENEMIES of a good
> mix/master.

The desire to be louder than is sensible, compressing the music until it
isn't music anymore.

--
hank alrich * secret mountain
audio recording * music production * sound reinforcement
"If laughter is the best medicine let's take a double dose"

[Bob Olhsson]

In article
gers.com>, Roach
> wrote:

>I can boost
>perceived volume and space by some degree using such plug-ins as Waves L2
>and LinMB but never reach the same high perceived volume as industry
>mastered CD's. It seems like i'm still off by about 3 to 6db (perceived).

You probably need to work on the balance and the perspective of the
individual elements in your mixes. I've always been amazed by how
little limiting a really good mix of a really great musical arrangement
needs in order to reach a "commercial" level of loudness.

--
Bob Olhsson Audio Mastery, Nashville TN 615.385.8051
Mastering, Audio for Picture, Mix Evaluation and Quality Control
http://www.hyperback.com/olhsson.html
Over 40 years making people sound better than they ever imagined!

[Bob Olhsson]

In article
gers.com>, Roach
> wrote:

>I can boost
>perceived volume and space by some degree using such plug-ins as Waves L2
>and LinMB but never reach the same high perceived volume as industry
>mastered CD's. It seems like i'm still off by about 3 to 6db (perceived).

You probably need to work on the balance and the perspective of the
individual elements in your mixes. I've always been amazed by how
little limiting a really good mix of a really great musical arrangement
needs in order to reach a "commercial" level of loudness.

--
Bob Olhsson Audio Mastery, Nashville TN 615.385.8051
Mastering, Audio for Picture, Mix Evaluation and Quality Control
http://www.hyperback.com/olhsson.html
Over 40 years making people sound better than they ever imagined!

[Wayne]

>Bob Olhsson Audio Mastery wrote,


>You probably need to work on the balance and the perspective of the
>individual elements in your mixes. I've always been amazed by how
>little limiting a really good mix of a really great musical arrangement
>needs in order to reach a "commercial" level of loudness.
>
>
>
That oughta be in the FAQ somewhere. Maybe that's why Bob gets the big bucks.

One of the greatest lessons I ever learned in this business was "The knobs turn
in both directions". That's why it's called mixing, otherwise we would call it
adding.


--Wayne

-"sounded good to me"-

[Wayne]

>Bob Olhsson Audio Mastery wrote,


>You probably need to work on the balance and the perspective of the
>individual elements in your mixes. I've always been amazed by how
>little limiting a really good mix of a really great musical arrangement
>needs in order to reach a "commercial" level of loudness.
>
>
>
That oughta be in the FAQ somewhere. Maybe that's why Bob gets the big bucks.

One of the greatest lessons I ever learned in this business was "The knobs turn
in both directions". That's why it's called mixing, otherwise we would call it
adding.


--Wayne

-"sounded good to me"-

[Fill X]

>That oughta be in the FAQ somewhere. Maybe that's why Bob gets the big
>bucks.

Bob makes it sound like he gets the big bucks but he's actually surprisingly
affordable. I've been working with him lately, having him master a number of
projects and I'm delighted with the results. Among other things, his attention
to detail and lack of ego in the process separate him from the pack.


P h i l i p

______________________________

"I'm too ****ing busy and vice-versa"

- Dorothy Parker

[Fill X]

>That oughta be in the FAQ somewhere. Maybe that's why Bob gets the big
>bucks.

Bob makes it sound like he gets the big bucks but he's actually surprisingly
affordable. I've been working with him lately, having him master a number of
projects and I'm delighted with the results. Among other things, his attention
to detail and lack of ego in the process separate him from the pack.


P h i l i p

______________________________

"I'm too ****ing busy and vice-versa"

- Dorothy Parker

[ThePaulThomas]

(Wayne) wrote in message >...
> One of the greatest lessons I ever learned in this business was "The knobs turn in both directions". That's why it's called mixing, otherwise we would call it adding.
> --Wayne

LOL! :D

[ThePaulThomas]

(Wayne) wrote in message >...
> One of the greatest lessons I ever learned in this business was "The knobs turn in both directions". That's why it's called mixing, otherwise we would call it adding.
> --Wayne

LOL! :D

[ThePaulThomas]

(Wayne) wrote in message >...
> One of the greatest lessons I ever learned in this business was "The knobs turn in both directions". That's why it's called mixing, otherwise we would call it adding.
> --Wayne

LOL! :D

[Sugarite]

> Hello, i'm a project studio owner. As of right now i'm helping some
> local bands do simple demos. I'm using Logic Platinum 5 and it's worked
> great. I used to use Cool Edit 2.0 and it was good as well. I've worked a
> lot with tunes with big huge arrangements (live horn sections, soloists,
> strings, etc), and the mixes have come out sounding nice. I can boost
> perceived volume and space by some degree using such plug-ins as Waves L2
> and LinMB but never reach the same high perceived volume as industry
> mastered CD's. It seems like i'm still off by about 3 to 6db (perceived).

That's about right. Unless your recordings are slated for mass radio
rotation, don't bother trying to compete with saturation-maximized radio
fodder. It's intended to get the best out of pitiful sound systems like
ghetto blasters and factory car stereos.

> What i need a little help with is determining the ENEMIES of a good
> mix/master. I know that sub-bass frequencies are usually unwanted and eat
> away at compressors needed for mastering and boosting perceived volume. Do
> high frequencies also do the same? (20,000kHz+?). Is the trick just
> generally getting a very flat reading from analyzing the frequency
spectrum
> of a mix? Is it that "simple"? or are there specific techniques that apply
> to specificities such as attack/release/hold/thresh settings for each band
> of a multiband compressor, and anomalies such as "masking".?

High treble won't push a compressor like subs do. Getting a flat reading is
a commercial objective, not an artistic one. If you're using a multiband
comp, then the varying attack/release/threshold settings are the reason
you're using it (no use for hold on programme material). Getting a good
understanding of those is an art unto itself, but at the same time I
recommend renting a decent dual tube preamp that has a line input, and
experiment with saturating it where you'd normally use a multiband comp,
you'll be pleasantly surprised.

> Thus far i have a bunch of reference songs (from purchased cd's) that
i
> use as a frequency starting point. I try to mimick my mix to sound like a
> particular song or songs. This has got me far, but i seem to be stuck.

Then they've taken you as far as they can go. Time to play!

[Sugarite]

> Hello, i'm a project studio owner. As of right now i'm helping some
> local bands do simple demos. I'm using Logic Platinum 5 and it's worked
> great. I used to use Cool Edit 2.0 and it was good as well. I've worked a
> lot with tunes with big huge arrangements (live horn sections, soloists,
> strings, etc), and the mixes have come out sounding nice. I can boost
> perceived volume and space by some degree using such plug-ins as Waves L2
> and LinMB but never reach the same high perceived volume as industry
> mastered CD's. It seems like i'm still off by about 3 to 6db (perceived).

That's about right. Unless your recordings are slated for mass radio
rotation, don't bother trying to compete with saturation-maximized radio
fodder. It's intended to get the best out of pitiful sound systems like
ghetto blasters and factory car stereos.

> What i need a little help with is determining the ENEMIES of a good
> mix/master. I know that sub-bass frequencies are usually unwanted and eat
> away at compressors needed for mastering and boosting perceived volume. Do
> high frequencies also do the same? (20,000kHz+?). Is the trick just
> generally getting a very flat reading from analyzing the frequency
spectrum
> of a mix? Is it that "simple"? or are there specific techniques that apply
> to specificities such as attack/release/hold/thresh settings for each band
> of a multiband compressor, and anomalies such as "masking".?

High treble won't push a compressor like subs do. Getting a flat reading is
a commercial objective, not an artistic one. If you're using a multiband
comp, then the varying attack/release/threshold settings are the reason
you're using it (no use for hold on programme material). Getting a good
understanding of those is an art unto itself, but at the same time I
recommend renting a decent dual tube preamp that has a line input, and
experiment with saturating it where you'd normally use a multiband comp,
you'll be pleasantly surprised.

> Thus far i have a bunch of reference songs (from purchased cd's) that
i
> use as a frequency starting point. I try to mimick my mix to sound like a
> particular song or songs. This has got me far, but i seem to be stuck.

Then they've taken you as far as they can go. Time to play!

[Sugarite]

> Hello, i'm a project studio owner. As of right now i'm helping some
> local bands do simple demos. I'm using Logic Platinum 5 and it's worked
> great. I used to use Cool Edit 2.0 and it was good as well. I've worked a
> lot with tunes with big huge arrangements (live horn sections, soloists,
> strings, etc), and the mixes have come out sounding nice. I can boost
> perceived volume and space by some degree using such plug-ins as Waves L2
> and LinMB but never reach the same high perceived volume as industry
> mastered CD's. It seems like i'm still off by about 3 to 6db (perceived).

That's about right. Unless your recordings are slated for mass radio
rotation, don't bother trying to compete with saturation-maximized radio
fodder. It's intended to get the best out of pitiful sound systems like
ghetto blasters and factory car stereos.

> What i need a little help with is determining the ENEMIES of a good
> mix/master. I know that sub-bass frequencies are usually unwanted and eat
> away at compressors needed for mastering and boosting perceived volume. Do
> high frequencies also do the same? (20,000kHz+?). Is the trick just
> generally getting a very flat reading from analyzing the frequency
spectrum
> of a mix? Is it that "simple"? or are there specific techniques that apply
> to specificities such as attack/release/hold/thresh settings for each band
> of a multiband compressor, and anomalies such as "masking".?

High treble won't push a compressor like subs do. Getting a flat reading is
a commercial objective, not an artistic one. If you're using a multiband
comp, then the varying attack/release/threshold settings are the reason
you're using it (no use for hold on programme material). Getting a good
understanding of those is an art unto itself, but at the same time I
recommend renting a decent dual tube preamp that has a line input, and
experiment with saturating it where you'd normally use a multiband comp,
you'll be pleasantly surprised.

> Thus far i have a bunch of reference songs (from purchased cd's) that
i
> use as a frequency starting point. I try to mimick my mix to sound like a
> particular song or songs. This has got me far, but i seem to be stuck.

Then they've taken you as far as they can go. Time to play!

[Andy Eng]

On Tue, 7 Oct 2003 03:10:40 -0400, "Sugarite" > wrote:

>> Hello, i'm a project studio owner. As of right now i'm helping some
>> local bands do simple demos. I'm using Logic Platinum 5 and it's worked
>> great. I used to use Cool Edit 2.0 and it was good as well. I've worked a
>> lot with tunes with big huge arrangements (live horn sections, soloists,
>> strings, etc), and the mixes have come out sounding nice. I can boost
>> perceived volume and space by some degree using such plug-ins as Waves L2
>> and LinMB but never reach the same high perceived volume as industry
>> mastered CD's. It seems like i'm still off by about 3 to 6db (perceived).
>
>That's about right. Unless your recordings are slated for mass radio
>rotation, don't bother trying to compete with saturation-maximized radio
>fodder. It's intended to get the best out of pitiful sound systems like
>ghetto blasters and factory car stereos.

LOL...

Finishing up a project (targeted for a boom box group) and nearly come
to the conclusion that my Sony SD-7506 headphones were my worst
enemy--a raunchy muddy sounding set of headphones would've been more
appropriate !@#$%^& :-)

Andy


>> What i need a little help with is determining the ENEMIES of a good
>> mix/master. I know that sub-bass frequencies are usually unwanted and eat
>> away at compressors needed for mastering and boosting perceived volume. Do
>> high frequencies also do the same? (20,000kHz+?). Is the trick just
>> generally getting a very flat reading from analyzing the frequency
>spectrum
>> of a mix? Is it that "simple"? or are there specific techniques that apply
>> to specificities such as attack/release/hold/thresh settings for each band
>> of a multiband compressor, and anomalies such as "masking".?
>
>High treble won't push a compressor like subs do. Getting a flat reading is
>a commercial objective, not an artistic one. If you're using a multiband
>comp, then the varying attack/release/threshold settings are the reason
>you're using it (no use for hold on programme material). Getting a good
>understanding of those is an art unto itself, but at the same time I
>recommend renting a decent dual tube preamp that has a line input, and
>experiment with saturating it where you'd normally use a multiband comp,
>you'll be pleasantly surprised.
>
>> Thus far i have a bunch of reference songs (from purchased cd's) that
>i
>> use as a frequency starting point. I try to mimick my mix to sound like a
>> particular song or songs. This has got me far, but i seem to be stuck.
>
>Then they've taken you as far as they can go. Time to play!

[Andy Eng]

On Tue, 7 Oct 2003 03:10:40 -0400, "Sugarite" > wrote:

>> Hello, i'm a project studio owner. As of right now i'm helping some
>> local bands do simple demos. I'm using Logic Platinum 5 and it's worked
>> great. I used to use Cool Edit 2.0 and it was good as well. I've worked a
>> lot with tunes with big huge arrangements (live horn sections, soloists,
>> strings, etc), and the mixes have come out sounding nice. I can boost
>> perceived volume and space by some degree using such plug-ins as Waves L2
>> and LinMB but never reach the same high perceived volume as industry
>> mastered CD's. It seems like i'm still off by about 3 to 6db (perceived).
>
>That's about right. Unless your recordings are slated for mass radio
>rotation, don't bother trying to compete with saturation-maximized radio
>fodder. It's intended to get the best out of pitiful sound systems like
>ghetto blasters and factory car stereos.

LOL...

Finishing up a project (targeted for a boom box group) and nearly come
to the conclusion that my Sony SD-7506 headphones were my worst
enemy--a raunchy muddy sounding set of headphones would've been more
appropriate !@#$%^& :-)

Andy


>> What i need a little help with is determining the ENEMIES of a good
>> mix/master. I know that sub-bass frequencies are usually unwanted and eat
>> away at compressors needed for mastering and boosting perceived volume. Do
>> high frequencies also do the same? (20,000kHz+?). Is the trick just
>> generally getting a very flat reading from analyzing the frequency
>spectrum
>> of a mix? Is it that "simple"? or are there specific techniques that apply
>> to specificities such as attack/release/hold/thresh settings for each band
>> of a multiband compressor, and anomalies such as "masking".?
>
>High treble won't push a compressor like subs do. Getting a flat reading is
>a commercial objective, not an artistic one. If you're using a multiband
>comp, then the varying attack/release/threshold settings are the reason
>you're using it (no use for hold on programme material). Getting a good
>understanding of those is an art unto itself, but at the same time I
>recommend renting a decent dual tube preamp that has a line input, and
>experiment with saturating it where you'd normally use a multiband comp,
>you'll be pleasantly surprised.
>
>> Thus far i have a bunch of reference songs (from purchased cd's) that
>i
>> use as a frequency starting point. I try to mimick my mix to sound like a
>> particular song or songs. This has got me far, but i seem to be stuck.
>
>Then they've taken you as far as they can go. Time to play!

[Ricky W. Hunt]

"ThePaulThomas" > wrote in message
m...
> (Wayne) wrote in message
>...
> > One of the greatest lessons I ever learned in this business was "The
knobs turn in both directions". That's why it's called mixing, otherwise we
would call it adding.
> > --Wayne
>
> LOL! :D

That's so sad but true. It took me a long time to realize EQ's could cut as
well as boost.

[Ricky W. Hunt]

"ThePaulThomas" > wrote in message
m...
> (Wayne) wrote in message
>...
> > One of the greatest lessons I ever learned in this business was "The
knobs turn in both directions". That's why it's called mixing, otherwise we
would call it adding.
> > --Wayne
>
> LOL! :D

That's so sad but true. It took me a long time to realize EQ's could cut as
well as boost.

[O_Zean]

(Andy Eng) wrote in message >...
> On Tue, 7 Oct 2003 03:10:40 -0400, "Sugarite" > wrote:
>
> >> Hello, i'm a project studio owner. As of right now i'm helping some
> >> local bands do simple demos. I'm using Logic Platinum 5 and it's worked
> >> great. I used to use Cool Edit 2.0 and it was good as well. I've worked a
> >> lot with tunes with big huge arrangements (live horn sections, soloists,
> >> strings, etc), and the mixes have come out sounding nice. I can boost
> >> perceived volume and space by some degree using such plug-ins as Waves L2
> >> and LinMB but never reach the same high perceived volume as industry
> >> mastered CD's. It seems like i'm still off by about 3 to 6db (perceived).
> >
> >That's about right. Unless your recordings are slated for mass radio
> >rotation, don't bother trying to compete with saturation-maximized radio
> >fodder. It's intended to get the best out of pitiful sound systems like
> >ghetto blasters and factory car stereos.
>
> LOL...
>
> Finishing up a project (targeted for a boom box group) and nearly come
> to the conclusion that my Sony SD-7506 headphones were my worst
> enemy--a raunchy muddy sounding set of headphones would've been more
> appropriate !@#$%^& :-)
>
> Andy
>
>
> >> What i need a little help with is determining the ENEMIES of a good
> >> mix/master. I know that sub-bass frequencies are usually unwanted and eat
> >> away at compressors needed for mastering and boosting perceived volume. Do
> >> high frequencies also do the same? (20,000kHz+?). Is the trick just
> >> generally getting a very flat reading from analyzing the frequency
> spectrum
> >> of a mix? Is it that "simple"? or are there specific techniques that apply
> >> to specificities such as attack/release/hold/thresh settings for each band
> >> of a multiband compressor, and anomalies such as "masking".?
> >
> >High treble won't push a compressor like subs do. Getting a flat reading is
> >a commercial objective, not an artistic one. If you're using a multiband
> >comp, then the varying attack/release/threshold settings are the reason
> >you're using it (no use for hold on programme material). Getting a good
> >understanding of those is an art unto itself, but at the same time I
> >recommend renting a decent dual tube preamp that has a line input, and
> >experiment with saturating it where you'd normally use a multiband comp,
> >you'll be pleasantly surprised.
>

treble really pusshes up your compressor. Check out the high hats fro
example. They are clear, loud and have tons of high freq. But why not
decrease your volume of the highs or descrease you high EQ's a bit and
pan them correctly. You don't wanna be as loud a spossible. you wanna
achieve good dynamics. and try out a limiter on your final master.

[O_Zean]

(Andy Eng) wrote in message >...
> On Tue, 7 Oct 2003 03:10:40 -0400, "Sugarite" > wrote:
>
> >> Hello, i'm a project studio owner. As of right now i'm helping some
> >> local bands do simple demos. I'm using Logic Platinum 5 and it's worked
> >> great. I used to use Cool Edit 2.0 and it was good as well. I've worked a
> >> lot with tunes with big huge arrangements (live horn sections, soloists,
> >> strings, etc), and the mixes have come out sounding nice. I can boost
> >> perceived volume and space by some degree using such plug-ins as Waves L2
> >> and LinMB but never reach the same high perceived volume as industry
> >> mastered CD's. It seems like i'm still off by about 3 to 6db (perceived).
> >
> >That's about right. Unless your recordings are slated for mass radio
> >rotation, don't bother trying to compete with saturation-maximized radio
> >fodder. It's intended to get the best out of pitiful sound systems like
> >ghetto blasters and factory car stereos.
>
> LOL...
>
> Finishing up a project (targeted for a boom box group) and nearly come
> to the conclusion that my Sony SD-7506 headphones were my worst
> enemy--a raunchy muddy sounding set of headphones would've been more
> appropriate !@#$%^& :-)
>
> Andy
>
>
> >> What i need a little help with is determining the ENEMIES of a good
> >> mix/master. I know that sub-bass frequencies are usually unwanted and eat
> >> away at compressors needed for mastering and boosting perceived volume. Do
> >> high frequencies also do the same? (20,000kHz+?). Is the trick just
> >> generally getting a very flat reading from analyzing the frequency
> spectrum
> >> of a mix? Is it that "simple"? or are there specific techniques that apply
> >> to specificities such as attack/release/hold/thresh settings for each band
> >> of a multiband compressor, and anomalies such as "masking".?
> >
> >High treble won't push a compressor like subs do. Getting a flat reading is
> >a commercial objective, not an artistic one. If you're using a multiband
> >comp, then the varying attack/release/threshold settings are the reason
> >you're using it (no use for hold on programme material). Getting a good
> >understanding of those is an art unto itself, but at the same time I
> >recommend renting a decent dual tube preamp that has a line input, and
> >experiment with saturating it where you'd normally use a multiband comp,
> >you'll be pleasantly surprised.
>

treble really pusshes up your compressor. Check out the high hats fro
example. They are clear, loud and have tons of high freq. But why not
decrease your volume of the highs or descrease you high EQ's a bit and
pan them correctly. You don't wanna be as loud a spossible. you wanna
achieve good dynamics. and try out a limiter on your final master.