It’s a question we get all the time: what do you do when the mixes you receive are more… “challenged" than you might ideally like ? How much can you fix in mastering if you really need to, and how much should you do ? In this show we cover a range of strategies for dealing with some of the toughest challenges when you’re mastering tricky mixes, including:
- What is a crappy mix ?
- Should we even try to master one ?
- When not to master a crappy mix - and what you can learn
- Techniques for “digging in” - from subtle to aggressive
- A brand-new option for the very worst cases
- The Golden Rule
Links
Stereo width in mastering
TMS #25 - Stereo: width, depth and image – how to measure, monitor and master them
Centre that sub ! (A guide to mono-ing your low end) by Ian Stewart
iZotope RX
TMS #33 - BEFORE Mastering
I run a Radio Program on a Radio Station in Canberra Australia and Transfer Vinyl records to a Digital Format I'm Using A project Turntable and getting good results but I can always learn more.
I want you to run a segment on cabling, a lot of the information is about sales in HI FI SHOPS AND NOT VERY SCIENTIFIC THE CABLING BETWEEN THE TURNTABLE AND PREAMP WAS SUPPLIED BY PROJECT, IDEALLY I SHOULD BE NOT BE ALTERING THE RESISTANCE AND CAPACITANCE BETWEEN THE OUTPUT OF THE TURNTABLE TO THE INPUT OF THE TURNTABLE PREAMP THE CABLE WAS SUPPLIED BY Project from the Turntable to Preamp my other cable in the home studio is Hartland HC2101
Hi!
I have a question for your next Q&A.
I've heard an opinion from a mixing engineer that dynamic masters might not work so well on PA systems - that results in venues might be worse than if one would go for a very compressed master instead.
I'd love to know your opinion on this.
Thank you for your great work!
After hearing you talk about getting stems for a particular job, and talking about RX7 rebalancing, which is kind of like getting stems, I have to ask, wouldn't you prefer to get stems?
Since it's almost just as easy to deliver stems, and since a lot of mixers (media/post) are used to delivering stems anyway, it seems like you would be able to either deliver a much better master, or as good a master in less time.
I understand there is a legacy workflow and job delineation. I used to compose in Logic, render stems to mix in Reaper, and then render the final mix to master in Reaper. I would often master using a different UI theme just to get into a mastering mindset. But what I've found is that it is almost always faster, easier, and cleaner to be able to go in a fix an issue at its source rather than fix it in a way that can compromise other elements in the mix. I used to use FabFilter ProMB on the master to control some low end/LFE overlap gains. Then I used it on the stems in the mix. Now I just put it on the offending source track.
Although I know this wanders into the blurry line of where mixing ends and mastering begins, don't you think you could deliver a better product if you regularly could work with stems?
I’ve heard in a previous episode Ian mentioned plugins having an optimal input level, especially when the plugin is supposed to be emulating a real analogue unit.
I have several UAD and Waves plug-ins, and I use Studio One. From what I understand so far, Studio One uses a post fade measurement on each channel’s level meter. I’m considering putting a VU meter plugin on every channel. Is this a waste of time? I still don’t quite understand LUFS.. Ian seems to love VU Meters so would he use a VU Meter for every track if he were mixing/tracking instead of mastering?
Thanks for all the great content! I’m trying to digest it all as best I can