Mastering Tutorial Questions

[mtalavera]

I've just installed the demo of the mastering bundle and am I'm watching the matering tutorial on YouTube. I loaded the MStereoProcessor in Reaper on a track that has my stereo mix output. I've recorded the track in Pro Tools, bounced it down to a stereo wave file, and am using Reaper to do my own mastering. The YouTube video shows the MStereoProcessor with a nice wide oval shape to the audio in the 2D stereo field analyzer. When I ran my audio through MStereoProcessor, I have a very tall and much thinner oval shape. I have to basically crank up the windening value all the way up in order to get my 2D shape to look like the one in the video. Forgive me if this is more of a production technique question, but how do you go about expanding the overall stereo field so that there is "room" within that field initially? I'm wondering if there is someting I should be doing in my mix to get a better stereo field representation so that I don't have to do all that much widening using MStereoProcessor, or at least not have to turn the windening all the way up.

My second question is in regards to the Cubase session used for the demonstration. I understand the first track to be unprocessed and the second, or middle track, to be the one being processed, but what is the third track? It looks like there are peaks comming from the top and the bottom of the track instead of a audio wav.

[MeldaProduction]

Well, first I'd recommend reading my mastering tutorial.

Anyway to your questions: The last track in the session is for comparison. The idea is, that you don't want to "reinvent the wheel", so you take some track mixed by a professional (or done by you some other time) and try to make your new track have similar parameters - spectrum, stereo field etc. So you basically choose one or more songs in similar style you like to make your track sound like and then, in our case, check the width of the ellipse for that track using MStereoProcessor. Then use all features you have to make your track similar.

If the stereo field is too "tight", you may want to reconsider the mix or apply widening or use an additional reverb (which may however be a little tricky). Too much widening often results in kind of artificial sound, so generally the best idea is to work on the mix. There will be a mixing tutorial, for now let's just point out, that you shouldn't be too afraid to use extreme panoramas, things like doubling guitars, each one to extreme left/right, you may also use reverbs and delays on separate tracks. Well, mixing is not an easy task .

[Cooker]

I didn't want to create a new topic for this, do you plan to release a clipper to be used like a limiter? I have 1-2 ideas if needed I'll pm.

[MeldaProduction]

What do you mean? MLimiter is actually a clipper/soft saturator.

[Cooker]

oops missed that

[reax]

I've read your mastering tutorial, very interesting read. But I have some questions.
You say:

Always master at 96 kHz.
... Many low-end studios still record in 44 kHz. If this is the case, you should use your DAW (e.g. Wavelab) to increase the sampling rate of the mix to 96kHz for mastering, and then convert it back to 44 kHz after completion, ideally with some dithering applied.

I'm working in 24/44100 in logic pro and insert mastering plugins to a mastering chain then bounce my mastered project with dithering (pow-r1) to 16/44100. So as i understand you recommend to bounce at 96khz for mastering? but internal one in logic is 44100, are there any sense for increasing that sampling rate for mastering? Or you mean to change internal 44 to 96?

and lastly what do you think about using a Mtransient after limiter on master chain to avoid loosing peaks?

[The Chubu]

What do you mean? MLimiter is actually a clipper/soft saturator.

This. Really nice limiter. Going to read the mastering tutorial, its been a while since i read something "official" (books, articles, etc) for production...

[MeldaProduction]

I'm working in 24/44100 in logic pro and insert mastering plugins to a mastering chain then bounce my mastered project with dithering (pow-r1) to 16/44100. So as i understand you recommend to bounce at 96khz for mastering? but internal one in logic is 44100, are there any sense for increasing that sampling rate for mastering? Or you mean to change internal 44 to 96?

The thing is, lots of audio processing cause some aliasing. Working in 96kHz can reduce it a lot. You can also use upsampling in our plugins, but I recommend using it only if you actually hear the difference (and you don't care about latency).

If you already recorded your project in 44k, you can theoretically let Logic resample all files to 96k. The question is if it will actually help. As for me, when I have a project recorded in 44k, I leave it like that and just listen if a nonlinear processor (compressor for example) doesn't cause any artifacts and if so, then I use upsampling.
Anyway do NOT mix in 44k and then render in 96k as some processor may just sound different in different sampling rates, it may be subtle but still...

In general I'm a fan of recording in 96k. I think higher sampling rates are useless and even modern AD convertors just cannot do that well enough, so you just make your files bigger. But if it is possible, then 96k wins over 44k.

and lastly what do you think about using a Mtransient after limiter on master chain to avoid loosing peaks?

Absolutely NOT! Limiter must always be the last in the chain. There's nothing like "use limiter and then fix teh damages". The output of a limiter
"limits" the output range to say -0.2dB, and that's the reason we use them. If there were no range limitations, you could just use a volume fader to amplify the output. Unfortunately neigher digital audio nor playback technology allows that. You can use a saturator after the limiter though, but we have those equipped in our limiters already.