HI CAN ANY 1 GIVE ME ANY TIPS ON HOW 2 MASTER A MIX ? WHAT KIND OF PROGRAME I NEED ? IF ANY .... THANKZ

depending on what DAW you use to mix with, you can still use that too....( SONAR, nuendo, wavelab, cubase, etc...). Export your mix to a stereo wave file, then open it in a new DAW session. You should have only one stero wave track open now.........and here is where the magic begins.....

Youll need esential plugins/effects to master with. Some of the mains ones are Compression (multiband is better), EQ (again, multiband parametric is better), Maximiser/limiter.

some other effects that are not neccesary, but usefull are Stereo widening, and maybe a aural exciter of some sort. Maybe a reverb effect too (depending on if you mixed real dry, or not).

EQ tips-- if your mix is muddy sounding, cut about 2-3 db of 400hz with a "Q" of 2. Add some 14-16k to give some "air" and clarity to the over all mix.

Compression tips-- use the multiband compressor one band at a time. focus alot of the 2-7k region to smooth out transistants. try and use compression on each band lightly, around ratios of 2-4:1 are good, try and keep the compression as transapart as possible. The key to compression in mastering is getting the whole stereo mix leveld and balanced without anything jumping out in your face.

Limiter/maximizer--Boost overall volume so your mix gets at -.02 db, but never exceed that amount so it doesnt clip/distort. Dont allow the limiter to compress the mix by 5-6 db or more.....if it is, your using too much of it....and your stereo signal will look squishd and croped.

stereo widening-- add some width to the mix, if needed. focus on widening frequencies of 8-15k, higher frequencies are easily spread more, and more natural sounding.

.
.
.thats a start..........and it takes alot of practice to get it right. every mix will be differnt, so every mastering session will require differnt ways to do it.

I have to come at this from a different point of view --

Several things that are very rarely ever used in mastering are maul-the-band (multi-band) compression, stereo widening plugs, reverb and aural exciters. I couldn't tell you the last time I used any of them.

Okay - I used a MBC not long ago on a project that was pretty messed up and I couldn't get a remix... Otherwise...

But no one can tell you "how to master" - You (1) listen objectively, you (2) realistically assess what the mix's potential is and you (3) do what it takes to get it there. You do what it asks. If you're not hearing what it's asking for, you should send it off to someone else.

When a mix asks me for MBC or stereo widening plugs, I call the mix engineer... I'm not going to put a band-aid on a broken leg unless there's no other recourse.

But there's a bigger question here I'm sure - You don't want to know "how to master" - You want to know how to master your own mixes. There are several problems with that right off the top -

If the mix isn't finished, it's your mix - Finish it. Putting on a hat that says "Mastering" on it isn't going to change your hearing. Without that all-necessary objectivity, you're simply second-guessing your own work. If you're not sure what you're listening for (you wouldn't have asked if you did) you're second-guessing blind also.

hi guys thanks for the tips but i can tell u i no what im listing 4 when it cumz 2 music im a dj so i do no but I AM new 2 this mastering your mix thing and im a lil confused im not sure what half the terms u guys use mean no bs all i no is im using the dps 16 and i wanna master mix so need 2 tranfer it 2 my pc thats all i no is there any1 that can make it simple 4 me .. any prog or sumthing that helps

thanks all

quote:

Originally posted by chuck taylor:
hi guys thanks for the tips but i can tell u i no what im listing 4

No offense chuck taylor, but looks like you have no idea.

Point -

quote:

im a lil confused im not sure what half the terms u guys use mean no bs all i no is im using the dps 16 and i wanna master mix

Let's cut to that - What do you mean by "master" your mix?

I don't mean that in any other way than that. With some genres, "Producer" means something completely different from the entire rest of the industry. So does "mastering" to some extent.

you make an excellent point John. I personal dont like using an exciter, or reverb. Maybe ill dab a little widening plug....but ill use it only on the upper most frequencies (10k and above) just to give it a splash of something.........but keep it light, almost not audible.

But why wouldnt you use a Multiband compressor, over a single band? Every time ive used a single band....i find myself pulling my hair out, cause if i notice one particular frequncy or instrument that needs some more taming.....other instruments are effected as well, depending on how far the Threshold you go.

but with a multi band......i can narrow down to that troublesome frequency that can use some compression, apply it,...without anyhting else being effected by the compressor.

is there a reason why you choose single band, versus the multiband?

quote:

But why wouldnt you use a Multiband compressor, over a single band?

Why would you use multiband compressor? It's been 10 years that I've been recording now & I don't remember one time that I would need it. I'm sure there will be applications for it too, but probably very seldom.

i just find it "safer' to use..........i like single band compressors, but i find that it may squish a certain frequency singal too much, before reaching to another frequency signal that im trying to tame.....

i just feel you have more control over dynamics by using a multi band. You can "pump" the lower bands, without it effecting or 'pumping' the upper bands.......where as a single band compressor, whould pump the whole stereo mix. You can do certain things to your mix more accuratly, and not have to woory about it affecting other regions of the mix, where you might have wanted to do somthing differently.

i like to use it in a sence where....i can 'pump' the lower band (like 20-120hz), and tame the transistants in the upper band (800-5k), and then smooth out the sound of the upper most frequencies (like 7-15k, to make hi-hat and cymbal work glue together).

things like that. I just feel i have more control over the overall mix by using mutiband. I can adjust the ratios/attack/realese differntly and accordingly to each differnt band. And what i love most....is adjusting the threshold accordingly to each band.......

For those who like to have more control during mastering process I recommend group mixdowns vs any multi-band compression.
1 track - bass & kick
2 track - hat, overheads
3 track - sound effects if there is any
4 track - everything else

Now import these into your software or whatever else you use & be happy with single band compressors & eqs.
For good mixes this won't be necessary.

"Pumping" certain instruments should be worked out *in the mix* - The usual task of the mastering engineer (and the mastering process in general) is to make the mixes work well together and translate to the widest possible arena of playback options while changing the balance as little as possible.

It's not my job to change the mixing engineer's (and producer's and artist's) vision of the mix. To enhance it to some extent, to make minor corrective adjustments, to "polish" it, perhaps.

But MBC is an awfully radical tool to use when you're trying to hold the integrity of the mix... "Safe" isn't exactly a word I'd use to describe it - All of the things you're (bkk) talking about are anomalies of a bad mix. They shouldn't be handed off to the mastering engineer in the first place. They should be fixed in the mix. Granted, if a whisker is needed on something, that's all fine. But I still assume the original poster is talking about his *own* mixes.

I can't even imagine a scenario where that would happen.

quote:

Originally posted by John Scrip:
"Pumping" certain instruments should be worked out *in the mix* - The usual task of the mastering engineer (and the mastering process in general) is to make the mixes work well together and translate to the widest possible arena of playback options while changing the balance as little as possible.

It's not my job to change the mixing engineer's (and producer's and artist's) vision of the mix. To enhance it to some extent, to make minor corrective adjustments, to "polish" it, perhaps.

But MBC is an awfully radical tool to use when you're trying to hold the integrity of the mix... "Safe" isn't exactly a word I'd use to describe it - All of the things you're (bkk) talking about are anomalies of a bad mix. They shouldn't be handed off to the mastering engineer in the first place. They should be fixed in the mix. Granted, if a whisker is needed on something, that's all fine. But I still assume the original poster is talking about his *own* mixes.

I can't even imagine a scenario where that would happen.

well said john.......well said.

not to sound "off topic",....well.....actually it would be very usefull to the topic starter.........

in what order do you place your effects when mastering?

do you EQ first, then compress, then limit?

or do you compress, then EQ, then limit?

Totally dependent on the mix. But the same "rules of thumb" apply as with anything else (corrective EQ before any dynamics processing, etc.).

In another post I listed the C4 as a plug in I used when mastering my own things. Now that I think of it I always try it and never use it. Mastering your own mixes is something that is always discouraged on here and I agree but then you face the reality of customers like a lot of us deal with that wont pay for it or cant.So it comes down to this. Why would you need to re eq your own work. Get it right in the mix. You are not going to hear anything later you didnt at first. I think what it boils down to if you are in the situation where you have to master you own mix is that you just need to get it loud enough in my case to play on the radio. So actually all I have been using is the L3 to bring up the volume because I have brought my mixes down to about -15 to -12. Im sure if I sent my mix to a real mastering house they make other changes but they will hear things different. Things I never heard the first time. But then again I wont hear it the second time either. So when we say we are mastering are own mixes the only thing that really makes sense to me is to use a L3 or something similar to bring up the volume

Let's say you're a DIY'er that's mixing, mastering and burning your own disks.

How are you differentiating mixing from mastering? If you want more volume, why wouldn't you do that through the mix? Much better ways to get there than adding a bunch of gain through a brickwall limiter. If you tonal balance is off, why wouldn't you fix that in the mix? If song #3 is too loud, why not back it off in the mix?

If it's the same ear and the same gear, where's the transition from mixing to mastering?

Maybe when you bounce and dither down? Or when you add track markers?

There sure are a lot of variations as to what many of us consider mastering, isn't there? We're all generally on the same page when discussing mixing.

Steve

I seem to be a little bit confused in this posters question. But if he's using a multiband compressor in the mix stage of his project perhaps it would be best for him to go back and repair those instruments or frequencies that are causing him the problems. Putting on a multiband compressor just to fix something may degrade the quality he is looking for in his mix. Remember, it's the ear, not the gear that gets the sound right.

actually your not better off bringing up your volume in the mix. Your better of the leave you mix level down then use something like the L3 in my opinion