KVR Audio

randygo · Post by **randygo** » Tue Oct 04, 2005 9:06 pm

OMU wrote:Not what one would expect from a mastering (lin-phase) eq. Sounds a bit cheap to my ears. Comparing it with Waves LinEq this thing is obvious for me.

Well, you may be right, but LinEq is part of the $900 Waves Masters bundle and Harbal is only $99, so I'm not sure they are competing in the same league.

Hopefully, the Harbal developers will improve any quality that may be lacking. Maybe its something as simple as oversampling techniques, most of the math is pretty well understood nowadays, I'm sure they will address any deficiencies before too long.

I only ever use Harbal in minimal-phase mode. I will have to A/B again with the linear-phase mode to determine why I prefer it. What did you think of the minimal-phase mode?

Randy

OMU · Post by **OMU** » Tue Oct 04, 2005 10:10 pm

Well, I have to master my music (and some other artists from Romania) cause we don't have mastering engineers here so I have no other choice

I'm working hard on learning to do as good as I can this job and I have high aspirations about this. Soon we will have a mastering studio in Romania if everything goes well. Not something that can compete with the big houses but certainly something that would offer us what's necessary to sound to the interntional standards.

stash98 · Post by **stash98** » Tue Oct 04, 2005 10:20 pm

If you want to get really good at mastering it obviously can be done. I didn't mean to insinuate that only super guys with golden ears can do it, but please understand that it is a whole different art form just as crucial as mixing itself.

a good way to start..get wavelab..pull out the spectrum analyzer on your mix. You should see drop off after 5k or so. then get out your EQ and just mess with it and listen to the changes..same with your multiband comp and limiter.

while this is hapening, have a CD in that you like and frequently go back and forth and A/B it.

I really think a program like Ozone Izotope is a better option if you are mastering your own stuff. The manual is great for the non pro. It is a powerful program that can really do great work on a master.

My whole point..by ABing and using a program like Izotope you will get very good at mastering in much quicker time then studying EQs and trying to match them up.

Im sure most people realize this, but it is very important.

It is quite cool to have a mix that AB with your refernce and still hold up. Thats when you know you have done a great job.

OMU · Post by **OMU** » Tue Oct 04, 2005 10:29 pm

stash98 wrote:If you want to get really good at mastering it obviously can be done. I didn't mean to insinuate that only super guys with golden ears can do it, but please understand that it is a whole different art form just as crucial as mixing itself.

a good way to start..get wavelab..pull out the spectrum analyzer on your mix. You should see drop off after 5k or so. then get out your EQ and just mess with it and listen to the changes..same with your multiband comp and limiter.

while this is hapening, have a CD in that you like and frequently go back and forth and A/B it.

I really think a program like Ozone Izotope is a better option if you are mastering your own stuff. The manual is great for the non pro. It is a powerful program that can really do great work on a master.

My whole point..by ABing and using a program like Izotope you will get very good at mastering in much quicker time then studying EQs and trying to match them up.

Im sure most people realize this, but it is very important.

It is quite cool to have a mix that AB with your refernce and still hold up. Thats when you know you have done a great job.

ok.
probably this is your way of working.
Only one thing:
When A/B-ing your track with already mastered tracks you have to somehow compensate (mentally) the compression and limiting that is added to your reference tracks. This thing is, however, something you need to go into training not to abuse eq-ing your track for matching some completely different processes that were added to he reference track.
Cheers.

bduffy · Post by **bduffy** » Tue Oct 04, 2005 10:37 pm

I agree, it's a great idea to reference commercial CDs during mixing. A very common practice with engineers and a good idea (I don't do it much, but hey) for sure. As for me, I have no ambition to become a mastering engineer and frankly, the finer aspects of it bore me, it's not my reason for being here, so I welcome some help from good programmers.

I do my best to keep my mixes under control (and they general hold up well in hi-fi scenarios), but considering I mix on total budget crap, there isn't much point in pretending I can master! I'd much rather rely on Har-Bal or AAMS to help me pep it enough so at least I won't cry when it's played on someone else's stereo or TV. And I can vouch that AAMS at least gets me that far.

Anyway, to each his own, as always.

stash98 · Post by **stash98** » Wed Oct 05, 2005 12:16 am

OMU wrote: When A/B-ing your track with already mastered tracks you have to somehow compensate (mentally) the compression and limiting that is added to your reference tracks. This thing is, however, something you need to go into training not to abuse eq-ing your track for matching some completely different processes that were added to he reference track.
Cheers.

I dont understand what you said. You are in training right now if you are working on any mix at all. You ears are developing and you will get better and better.

The point of A/Bing is so you dont abuse your EQ, and get a nice balanced master. You wont know that from looking at graphics.

But to each his own. I just wouldnt reccomend usin your eyes to master if you intend on doing production for a living.

anyway...my 2 cents.. and here is another alternative for those of you who need to get your stuff quasi mastered..

get your mix, and A/B it with the Cd at a lower volume to check frequencies..then put it through a waves L3 to get it louder.

OMU · Post by **OMU** » Wed Oct 05, 2005 1:29 am

sorry for my English.
Anyway you probably got the idea.
But regarding on "using your eyes" for "doing production for living" I think you're into graphics or something else but not music.

Lagrange · Post by **Lagrange** » Wed Oct 05, 2005 3:50 am

You guys still squabeling over this???

Ok ok I was able to load a nicely mastered song from into aams and I noticed that my mastering is not too far off (balance wise). I'm using firium to get wav/track/master balance and waves transx to reup my punch... The really cool thing about this is that I can use this setup (on the fly) in at any point of my song (pre/post). Plus I can copy the spectral value of lets say my grouped drums to my bass, use this to blend both together nicely save the setting and use it again for vocals etc. This keeps the premaster together nicely and instead of killing my head room I can just punch up some flat freqs with transx. I can now use AAMS as a final step to shore up balance.

Look I've been recording for ever but honestly this is 1st time I've ever gotten this nice of a sound in a digital domain. AAMS and harbal are icing and give great validation of good sound... my only beef is that niether are plugins..

c

stash98 · Post by **stash98** » Wed Oct 05, 2005 4:07 am

OMU wrote: But regarding on "using your eyes" for "doing production for living" I think you're into graphics or something else but not music.

you misunderstood what I said..its ok though langage and all can be confusing.

bduffy · Post by **bduffy** » Wed Oct 05, 2005 4:20 am

cdunkeroo wrote:You guys still squabeling over this???

Ok ok I was able to load a nicely mastered song from into aams and I noticed that my mastering is not too far off (balance wise). I'm using firium to get wav/track/master balance and waves transx to reup my punch... The really cool thing about this is that I can use this setup (on the fly) in at any point of my song (pre/post). Plus I can copy the spectral value of lets say my grouped drums to my bass, use this to blend both together nicely save the setting and use it again for vocals etc. This keeps the premaster together nicely and instead of killing my head room I can just punch up some flat freqs with transx. I can now use AAMS as a final step to shore up balance.

Look I've been recording for ever but honestly this is 1st time I've ever gotten this nice of a sound in a digital domain. AAMS and harbal are icing and give great validation of good sound... my only beef is that niether are plugins..

c

Yep! We're still squabling, waiting for someone like you to come along with a new perspective!

I'm glad you're getting something out of those apps. These can be very handy tools to get perspective on your mixes.

I'm curious, cdunkeroo: why do you want to copy the spectral value of the drums to the bass? I don't quite understand what the benefit of that is? Aren't we usually trying to poke holes in the other's freqnuencies to make room? Just wondering.

Lunch Money · Post by **Lunch Money** » Wed Oct 05, 2005 4:37 am

Maybe he meant that he copied the one to use as a reference point in order to tweak the other one to be out of the way...?

I just use Space Boy to sort out drum vs. bass issues.

Greg

Frippertronix · Post by **Frippertronix** » Wed Oct 05, 2005 4:59 am

Two questions:

1. re: HarBal (I keep hearing that as someone from Alabama saying "hairball"

). I tried the demo and it will only play back at 8 bit. I ran what I think was a 32 bit wav file through it and the output was full of crackles---not the kind I'm used to hearing, though, from digital clipping or buffer overload. Is this inherent in trying to play a 32 bit file at 8 bits? If so, it's going to make evaluating it pretty tough, unless dithering to 16 bit will clear up the issue.

Also, HarBal couldn't deal with the ASIO drivers on my M-Audio 24/96. Any specualtion as to why?

Re: AAMS---I haven't run the demo yet because I don't have too many mixes ready to test, but I was wondering if this thing requires that you process through it's internal EQ, or if it will offer the option of just getting data back so you can take it and adjust another EQ with those settings. Also, what kind of "suggestions" does it make---i.e. is it good at evaluating a wide range of material and are its suggestions fairly helpful and "on"?

Thanks for the info,
Dave

simmy · Post by **simmy** » Wed Oct 05, 2005 2:25 pm

I can't and don;t try to master myself. My mixes did not stand up well in other systems except my own. I used AAMS which does not use internal EQ. It gives you 50 bandEQ and multiband comp suggestions from your reference. So you can use any EQ and multicomp. If you do decide to use Firium EQ. it is somewhat simpler since it will save a preset 50 band EQ from your reference material.It worked great for me, really people did notice improvement.

kylen · Post by **kylen** » Wed Oct 05, 2005 2:49 pm

Which MB comps are you guys using with AAMS settings recommendation ?

cptgone · Post by **cptgone** » Wed Oct 05, 2005 3:01 pm

OMU wrote:Well, I have to master my music (and some other artists from Romania) cause we don't have mastering engineers here so I have no other choice

You could send your music to a mastering engineer like XARC (a mastering engineer that used to hang out here, haven't seen him in a while though)... a while ago ToTC offered to do people's mastering, but I'm afraid he's got enough to do right now with the Katrina CD...

Har Bal Version 2