Mastering songs

[gen5020]

I am having a terrible time getting my tunes HOT! I have fairly good gear and I know what I'm doing for the most part but when I compare my tracks with others (doing mostly production music), mine sound wimpy and a few notches quieter than others. I know I can spend more money and get them mastered which will probably do the trick but I'm wondering if anyone has a secret piece of gear or trick up your sleeve that could help me. I have been in other forums where you wouldn't even bring this subject up, because they assume you will indeed, master your recordings. But most of us are plugging songs, doing rewrites and/or pumping out production music and we're trying to keep costs down to a minumum (at least I am). So here is the question: Care to share what you are doing in this department? I'd really like to hear what Matto and you other big shots are doing in the production field. Also, any tips on gear or technique?Thanks everyone.Dave

[ernstinen]

Hi Dave,I've been mastering since the analog days, and I used to rent a great EQ (Massenburg) and used a bit of stereo compression going to reel-to-reel tape. Man, there's nothing like analog tape to beef up levels.But, alas, those days are gone (some still mix to 1/2" analog tape), but I decided that maintaining a tape recorder didn't make much sense anymore.So now I run one analog pass into an Empirical Labs "Fatso Jr," which simulates analog tape, consoles, compressors etc. It's a marvelous piece of hardware, but it's (gulp) $2000.Well, through that, I go into an Alesis Masterlink and record at 24/96. Then I do a digital feed into Pro Tools LE and fool around with a T-Racks EQ. I try and keep the levels as high as possible, ignoring the LED meters unless I hear audible digital distortion.Once that sounds nice, I go back digitally into the Masterlink, and it automatically reduces the mix to the CD standard.____________________________________________I know this is a little more "hi-tech" answer than you're looking for, so here's what I would do on a budget: Use a "little" bit of stereo compression; Add a "little" bit of really high EQ and really low EQ (18k & 50hz or so ---); And use your ears on peak levels.BTW, alot of people really overdo it with "normalizing" and compression. Louder is not necessarily better. Make your masters sound warm and musical.My 2 cents,Ern

[koopaloop]

Hey Dave,Listened to your stuff. Only listened to a couple of tracks, but to be honest, from what I heard. THeir levels seem just fine to me. Im interested to hear what others think too.... And the T-racks unit I use is the whole thing. The T-racks 24, its got the EQ, Compression, Limiter, and Peak Lmt.Its a VST so it can be used like that or you can use the seperate parts seperatelly. Like Comp on one track, EQ on another, Limit on another, and then Comp/EQ/Limit, on the final mix. etc.Some great sounding tracks there by the way.Is that you on the sax? KK

[andreh]

Dave-You can approach it either way, but fixing an issue in the mix is usually preferable to doing it in mastering since you can better target the problem instrument or frequencies.Reducing a mix's bass content won't make the mix louder by itself, but it will often allow you to apply more peak limiting and overall gain before the signal starts to sound like poop. This can be afffected by other aspects of the mix, though, so you'll have play it "by ear."You should check with a music library before you assume they want superhot tracks. Some libraries want to do the mastering themselves (though this is mostly true with the higher-end ones), in which case they'll want you to leave some headroom in the mix.If your music sounds great, it's unlikely a library will choose not to accept it because it's marginally lower than other tracks in their stable...although they may ask for hotter versions at some point, so it doesn't hurt to be able to provide them. Your stuff isn't exactly "quiet" anyway. None of the libraries I've been accepted to (or ANY music recipient, for that matter, including game developers, TV/film producers, and advertisers) have ever made special requestes for ultra-hot levels in all my years of producing music. The exception, of course, is the mastering projects I've done for CD releases, but even then only the hiphopp guys seem overly concerned about a slammed signal.This is probably because in most contexts where music in not the spotlight there's plenty of headroom available in the medium (20dB's in film, 6dB's in most broadcast, variable in games), and there are other audio elements that need to be heard over the music so it ends up being turned down anyway.I"m interested to hear Matto's take on this, since he has lots of library experience; surely more than I do.Andre

[matto]

Quote:I have heard a engineer say that cutting frequencies below 45hz is a good practice becausethere is not much musical stuff going on down there.The fundamental of the low E on a regular 4 string bass guitar is around 41Hz.I would consider that "something musical"...well in most cases (insert bass player joke here ).Like Andre said it can be a good idea to use a variable lowpass filter on those individual tracks whose instruments don't contain meaningful low frequencies. But not globally on the mix, unless it's a LOT lower than 45Hz.

[ernstinen]

Hey Matto,Since you're now the regional manager of Hertz , what is the fundamental of the Wagner Bass Drum in EWQLSO Gold?Ern

[matto]

Quote:Hey Matto,Since you're now the regional manager of Hertz , what is the fundamental of the Wagner Bass Drum in EWQLSO Gold?I have no idea, but that thing kick serious butt...

[ernstinen]

Quote:Quote:Hey Matto,Since you're now the regional manager of Hertz , what is the fundamental of the Wagner Bass Drum in EWQLSO Gold?I have no idea, but that thing kick serious butt... LOL! That's for sure! I'm using it in a new symphonic piece, and I have to be VERY careful not to overdo it. I'd guess it's around 25Hz. HOW LOW CAN YOU GO!?Remember when they used to cut off all frequencies below about 60Hz because of stylus jumping? Now, with the rap stuff --- I'm not sure there IS any limit anymore. At least not in the cars in L.A. with their equalizers and subwoofers. Ern

[hephaluemp]

Quote:I have heard a engineer say that cutting frequencies below 45hz is a good practice becausethere is not much musical stuff going on down there and by cutting those frequencies youtake out a lot of energy that can now be replaced by the more musical frequencies giving you that much more room to work with when it comes time to sum.Any thoughts on this practice? Hi Kouly,It's quite common to do so, especially in the pop-music style.That way it is possible to get the song a little louder, and also, when people press that MegaGigaExtraBass setting on their ghetto blasters, it will still sound good - and it's easy (!)That said, if you do a frequency analyzes of current music, you will find that released music in other styles, like the chillout-style from the European very popular Buddha Bar cd's, don't do this, this music do their rolloff from around 30Hz, with usually a peak around 29-31 Hz.Also, pop-music played on radio will go through the radio stations own compressors and limiters and rolloffs, like an Orban 5 band leveller, so it will be "remastered" on the radio station, which is understandable if you want to play a 20 years old song mastered to -18 RMS after a modern song mastered to -10 RMS.They probably don't play the deepest frequencies anyways, - they don't play the highest - FM goes just to about 15 kHz. So, my advice would be: If you have very decent monitoring and maybe also a frequency analyzer, roll off from about 30Hz, if you don't, or just wants to be on the safe side, roll of from about 40-45, like you mentioned. Small speakers - like small radios, will not care if there's anything below 80, you will not here the difference (almost not) on such speakers.I myself thinks it's a shame many roll off the music as high as 45-50 - because then the music will not connect to me physically in the same way, I don't feel it in the guts - and I like to feel music - although I never play loud, always under like 85dB, and most of the time way under. Remember, be nice to you ears! And in reply to the original poster, I would recommend watching your RMS levels, a -12 RMS level would probably be loud enough without squashing to music to death, and that's easily within reach for most limiters these days.Hepha Luemp

[ernstinen]

Quote:Why do the numbers on the decibal scales of my Masterlink and HD24 all begin with a minus sign, while the scale on my board has both negative and positive numbers?When Ray Charles was asked how he mixed and mastered his hits, he replyed: "Man you gotta LISTEN! If you don't hear any distortion, then there is none. Use your ears, fool!"I use his advice whether it's analog or digital. Meters are a point of reference. If they're pegged in the red ALL THE TIME, you may have a problem. But I don't bother with LED meters in a Masterlink, ProTools etc. Learn how to shut off those damn peak meters! --- Why do radio studios still use VU meters!? Because they're more human. When things are slamming on VU's, be careful, but listen nevertheless. --- The answer is your ears.Ern