Lets talk about audio.Only nerds need apply. (1 Viewer)

[GO]

I've no way of listening to that here Peter..but when I get home I'll be checking it out.

I'm like an information sponge..and getting my half baked theories proved wrong is something I honstly relish.

 

[lemonbravo]

Respectfully.This is incorrect.A great mix,self finalised has the same chance of competing as an unmastered great mix.
Good mastering after all should be transparent.



I have noticed,that anything I've gotten mastered,unfortunately wasnt mixed very well to start off with.And the difference mastering made was negligible.
But in reality,mastering should be transparent,and the translatability of a mix should be present before the ME does his thing.I was formally under the impression that mastering ensures good mix translation..but that is erroneous.Its not a panacea for poor mixing.

Speaking from experience..putting a limiter on the 2buss for anything other than catching intersample peaks pretty much wrecks the sound,and the more gain reduction applied..the softer and mushier it gets.Even .5 db.

Get the mix loud without that,but still only peaking at - 6db using individual track compression and saturation and eq wizardry..and if you're not getting it mastered..sure mix it as loud as you can make it..and use soft clipping to control them pesky peaks.

Also,Its entirely plausible and doable to finalise the mix for vinyl yourself too..the information regarding the process is freely available.

Having the information and knowing how to apply it are two different things. Not everyone wants to be a jack of all trades.
Plus if your have a seriously flawed listening environment, then you're not going to get great translation.

 

[GO]

Having the information and knowing how to apply it are two different things. Not everyone wants to be a jack of all trades.
Plus if your have a seriously flawed listening environment, then you're not going to get great translation.

Its not about being a jack of all trades.Not everybody has a choice about these things..so they do what they have to.

A seriously flawed listening enviroment can be somewhat compensated for by extensive usage of multiple playback dvices to check things.Its far from ideal..but again..you do what you need to

 

[GO]

Well..reading back over the thread..I've learned that,the next thing I submit for broadcast on FM radio..will be mixed as well as I can manage,with a healthy dynamic range and approx ..-3dbs headroom .And this should help ensure the programme material is not raped to death by the Optimod.

Looking for more of a Tom Selleck rather than Hitler moustache looking wav.

 

[peter]

as far as I know they compress your dynamics out and push nearly everything out of phase to get more volume, but I could be wrong never been asked for radio masters.

 

[GO]

I wouldn't worry about submitting your dynamic mix to radio Gaz they compress your dynamics out and push nearly everything out of phase to get more volume.

Y'know,I heard a mix of mine a couple weeks back on the Beeb(smirk)..was mixed loud peaking at -04.db...and it sounded bang on...

..but,,I listened back to the show online at a later date and the mix entirely fell apart when subjected to whatever mono codec they employ on their streams.

Thankfully,the vocals are nearly always in the middle on my stuff so they still sounded right.But the music was a bit gammy.

It was a mono compatabilty issue with the mix though.Nothing mastering would have helped.

I've pretty much given up checking thourougly for mono compatibilty since my stuff is all destined for the internet..but in future anything I have any aspirations for wider braodcast for will be checked out.I just forgot tbh and fired the file off without thinking about it.

 

[peter]

If the mix stays together when you upload online it is mono compatable. nearly all media players build their image from dual mono information. If the correlation is over +1 it will fall apart in mono. It could have been something they did on their end of things.

 

[GO]

Ohhh..now that is very interesting.

I'm gonna have to go googling for more of this information.

Hmmm.Very interesting indeed.

 

[lemonbravo]

TELL ME ABOUT IT! Try explaining this to someone that doesn't produce music! Like "Yeah, that guitar sounds all hissy and everything because that's exactly what that guitar sounded like coming out of the amp."

Question for masterers of the universe, bear with me here:

If at mixing track has been really well balanced EQ-wise, compressed so that everything comes through clear, etc., and then is boosted using a limiter on the output to bring overall volume up (I know, crude) so that max is around -2dB and there is around 6d B dynamic range between quieter and louder parts (louder parts also have about twice as many channels contributing to the stereo mix, so the sound really fills out then), would you bother having this track mastered? Aside from perhaps a specific mastering for vinyl release or something like that?

I mean, the track is already gonna be pretty damn loud, right, and if the EQs are well-balanced already, is there any point mastering it? Maybe just to add some warmth or whatever by using specific equipment perhaps?

Whaddya think about that?

Plenty of 'pros' master their own mixes, plenty don't, there's no rules. If it sounds good, and sounds good outside of your studio, and you're happy with it then then mastering may not give you anything much more positive.
It depends on what you're hoping to achieve, if you want more warmth, depth, then yes maybe sending it off to someone would help you with that. Depends on the mix, depends on the mastering engineer!

 

[lemonbravo]

Its not about being a jack of all trades.Not everybody has a choice about these things..so they do what they have to.

A seriously flawed listening enviroment can be somewhat compensated for by extensive usage of multiple playback dvices to check things.Its far from ideal..but again..you do what you need to

I know, I'm all for DIY learning, just not everyone has your tenacity, capacity!

 

[GO]

I know, I'm all for DIY learning, just not everyone has your tenacity, capacity!

I have a 12db boost on my neck.Thats for sure.

and me balls are heavily saturated

 

[GO]

And just to be clear..if I could afford it..I'd singlehandedly keep a ME in business.One day.

Right now I gotta go rock.I'll be back with more hairbrained shit after me gig.

 

[lemonbravo]

If the mix stays together when you upload online it is mono compatable. nearly all media players build their image from dual mono information.

I'm not sure i really understand this statement. If a mix has elements that are panned left and right, it has dual mono information. How will uploading it/streaming it change it?

 

[lemonbravo]

Y'know,I heard a mix of mine a couple weeks back on the Beeb(smirk)..was mixed loud peaking at -04.db...and it sounded bang on...

..but,,I listened back to the show online at a later date and the mix entirely fell apart when subjected to whatever mono codec they employ on their streams.

Thankfully,the vocals are nearly always in the middle on my stuff so they still sounded right.But the music was a bit gammy.

It was a mono compatabilty issue with the mix though.Nothing mastering would have helped.

I've pretty much given up checking thourougly for mono compatibilty since my stuff is all destined for the internet..but in future anything I have any aspirations for wider braodcast for will be checked out.I just forgot tbh and fired the file off without thinking about it.

Loads of M/S dohickey goes on in traditional radio broadcasting.

 

[shower another shower]

here, I'd say your old preamp is far superior to the maudio you have now. Whats better is your A>D convertor, assuming that that's built into your new box as well.

 

[peter]

I'm not sure i really understand this statement. If a mix has elements that are panned left and right, it has dual mono information. How will uploading it/streaming it change it?

It won't change it. When you collapse your stereo mix to mono you will loose stereo information that is out of phase. That's all it means, it's just an example of where things can fall apart in response to Gaz's post about things falling apart and not been too bothered checking mono compatibility.

 

[shower another shower]

from my own experience, the biggest degradation in a chain is converting wave's to 1's and 0's.

 

[GO]

here, I'd say your old preamp is far superior to the maudio you have now. Whats better is your A>D convertor, assuming that that's built into your new box as well.

Nah..I'm still using the same converters..the audiobuddy is just a preamp.

The Gap is undoubtedly a higher quality preamp..but to get the most from it I think it needs to be paired with the right mic..and I don't think my mic is the right one for it,its a toppy mic and the Gap is very bright..bordering on harsh with that mic.Whereas the audiobuddy is just a kinda utility job.

I'm only going by what please my ears mind you..I cant back any of this up with hard science.

 

[Cormcolash]

It won't change it. When you collapse your stereo mix to mono you will loose stereo information that is out of phase. That's all it means, it's just an example of where things can fall apart in response to Gaz's post about things falling apart and not been too bothered checking mono compatibility.

Surely if your track has been recorded properly, you should have as little out of phase stuff as possible anyway, no?

 

[GO]

Yeah,but you can whack things out of phase by shabby processing..injudicous use of eq and time based fx can screw up the phase relationships.

My mix fell apart more in regards that the levels of the panned elements went haywire.Combined with god knows what whacky Hass type technique I might have been loving that week.Also..I'd only just discovered m/s processing around then...think I balls up scooping the mids from the middle of the guitars in a misguided effort to make the vocals more seperate..when all they needed was turning up.

I was able to correct the inbalances etc in about 5 mins when I ran the mix through my horrortoneclone.