Mastering Processes

rodos1979 · Post by **rodos1979** » Fri Mar 21, 2003 9:13 am

Hello to all!

I recently had a concert of my music recorded (live acoustic music) and I mastered the audio files and burned them on to 2 CDs. While doing it I came across a practical problem: ok, more or less, we all know the various processes when mastering audio...but in which order do we put them for maximum quality???
The Processes I had to use are:
1) DC Removal
2) Noise Reduction
3) EQing
4) Enhancing
5) Multiband Compression
6) Resampling down to 44.1KHz
7) Limiting/Maximizing
8 ) Bit Reduction down to 16bit
(the order I did it, was a bit different...this order was proposed by a guy at the Steinberg WaveLab forum, as being more logical/appropriate).

What I forgot to mention is 2 other processes I applied that I didnot place on the chain above: Stereo Expansion/Widening (my recordings were from the mixing console and were dual mono), and Time Compression/Pitch Shifting (sometimes in live you play songs either faster or slower from what they should be...) So, where would you place these 2 processes on the chain above? I think I would put the Stereo Expansion before the MultiBand Compression, and the Time Compression before the Resampling. What do you think? If you dont agree please state why.

Thank you

[ This Message was edited by: rodos1979 on 2003-03-21 09:15 ]

Immanuel · Post by **Immanuel** » Fri Mar 21, 2003 7:22 pm

I am very little experienced with mastering, but I have some thoughts to share:

1) Take a back up of your recording before doing any editing. If it is a good recording (sonically and/or a good performance), always keep a copy of the original recording with no processing. Later will come better soft/hard ware, and you may want to have an unspoiled copy to work with.

2) Be very discriminating with processing, that in any way enhances the sound (especially "natural" sounds recorded with at microphone). The may sound nice at first, but run a test to see, if it actually sounds better (better has many subparameters). In the case you describe above, it is mostly the enhancing and the stereo expansion, that I will warn you about, so you do not couse unintended side effects. If you have the time, I will recomend you to to the prosseing, and then the next day put it up against a copy without these 2 effects. Equing can be a trap too.

3) Be very carefull, that you do not destroy the performance with timestretching. Don't trust your eyes reading the manufacturers nice words about their perfect algorithms - trust your ears to tell you, if anything goes wrong when processing. If the soundspace diminishes you are most likely going in a bad direction with oher more subtle side effects also being introduced.

Just my thoghts as music lover and former Hi-Fi nerd.

Immanuel

Herr Voigt · Post by **Herr Voigt** » Fri Mar 21, 2003 8:37 pm

About timestretching: Check the difference between 1. hearing your music when you are fresh and awake (at the beginning of a mixing session) and 2. after a hard day, at 2 a.m., when you switch on your computer to hear only once to your music.
Seem to be 2 total different tracks. When you want to timestretch: think 10 x about it before processing!
Good mix, Thomas

rodos1979 · Post by **rodos1979** » Sat Mar 22, 2003 3:32 pm

Hello!

Thank you for replying and offering your valuable ideas/opinions.

You are both right in what you have said. I now keep always a backup of the unprocessed files (in the past I didnt because I was too lazy burning lots of CDs

). If my audiofiles sound fine, I never try to edit them just for editing them. But in this last case, the performances were OK but the live mix was horrible. That is why I am processing the files and I am trying to 'remix' them in a way through editing.
As far as Time Stretching is concerned I have found in many cases myself taking the wrong decision...that is why I keep now backups!

But still, I am wondering in which order would you apply all these effects? (if you were in a way obliged to use them all)

Thank you

[ This Message was edited by: rodos1979 on 2003-03-22 15:33 ]

visilia · Post by **visilia** » Sat Mar 22, 2003 4:28 pm

I'm not sure if you would really need Multiband Compression. It can be a very powerfull tool, but it can also easily destroy the sonic balance of a piece. Since you already planned to both use an EQ and an Exciter, I think a single band Compressor would do fine.

The order to apply these effects you suggest seems good to me, except that I would apply the exciter after the compression, since there will be some loss in the high frequencies because of the (single band) compression.

Good luck!

vincent

rodos1979 · Post by **rodos1979** » Sat Mar 22, 2003 6:15 pm

A multi-band compressor was the main way (that I know) in order to remix a stereo audio mix. As I told above, the mix that I took from the mixing console was not good at all. It sounded OK in there at the live, but when I got home the mix I had was crap. With simple band compression I would affect the whole mix, while with multi-band compression and wise EQing I can bring up in volume instruments that were burried before..
As far as the Enhancer/Excitener and the Compression is concerned, you may have a point there (that in a way, I am 'undoing' the Enhancing with the Compression)... I ll try the other way around and see what happens.

Thank you for sharing ideas!

sandrob · Post by **sandrob** » Sat Mar 22, 2003 6:29 pm

in the last time i also trieing not to use multiband compressors and in most casses if i have good mix i have much better results without mb. much natural, softer sound without harsh.
so, before you add mb in the line ask yourself "why i need this tool"?!

Grok · Post by **Grok** » Mon Mar 24, 2003 2:44 pm

1) DC Removal

2) Noise reduction (softly)

3) Multiband Compression (softly), adjustements of the frequencies band levels

4) Stereo Multiband Expansion/Widening with the lowest frequencies going to mono

5) Multiband enhancing if needed

6) Add one of the best available reverb for all the mix if needed for simulating a real room; listen and tweak it

7) Time compression/pitch shifting if needed

8 )EQing if needed (softly)

9)Limiting/Maximizing

10) Resampling down to 44,1 kHz with the best resampling algorythm available

11) Bit reduction down to 16bit with the best ditherer/noise shaper available (you should try what is the best for your audio material)

12) give me 10€

rodos1979 · Post by **rodos1979** » Wed Mar 26, 2003 6:39 am

Hello to all and thanks for replying!

Grok, thank you for sharing with us your idea of the mastering chain (I owe you 10euros

). However, there are one or two places in your chain that I have some concerns:
1) Why the Reverb to go before the time compression? A time compressed or pitch shifted reverb would sound very un-natural. I would put it after the time compression/pitch shifting (in case the latter was needed)
2) Why would you first maximize/limit and then resample? In the other way round, wouldnt that make more sense? (resample and then maximize according to the dynamics offered by the samplerate)
I would like to hear from more people as well, what they think about. How would you order the processes and why?

Thank you

[ This Message was edited by: rodos1979 on 2003-03-26 06:42 ]

Post by **garyb** » Wed Mar 26, 2003 12:18 pm

reverb for MASTERING?how about just using that in the mix process?if the stuff is mixed right you can probably drop about half those processes and get a much better sound......

visilia · Post by **visilia** » Wed Mar 26, 2003 1:08 pm

On 2003-03-26 12:18, garyb wrote:
..how about just using that in the mix process?

he's talking about a poorly mixed 2 track live recording, so I think it's too late for that.

cheers,
vincent

Immanuel · Post by **Immanuel** » Wed Mar 26, 2003 1:14 pm

On 2003-03-26 06:39, rodos1979 wrote:
... A time compressed or pitch shifted reverb would sound very un-natural. ...

Do you think the music will suffer less, than the reverb?

rodos1979 · Post by **rodos1979** » Wed Mar 26, 2003 1:15 pm

Well, you are not wrong but anyway I never pitch shift any recorded material. Sometimes though, I time compress if the performance was either too slow or too fast. And certainly a time compressed reverb does not sound good at all!

In order to avoid misunderstandings (@ garyb), I am talking about a crappy mixed 2-track live recording, directly recorded from the mixing console. So, I am trying to *save* things as much as I can (that is why there are so many processes mentioned, which otherwise -if the recording was properly mixed and recorded- would not be needed)

Thank you

[ This Message was edited by: rodos1979 on 2003-03-26 13:20 ]

[ This Message was edited by: rodos1979 on 2003-03-26 13:22 ]