I suck at mastering what is the best Multiband Compressor ==> Ozone vs Fabfilter vs Bitwig Compressor+

[_leras]

I am a mastering engineer but I suck at dentistry, that's how it goes.

Why anyone would think that they can do the same job as someone who has spent very large sums of money on equipment, room and has decades of experience is beyond me.

An ME may have 100 tools, you choose specifically what and how much and what order from years and years of accumulated knowledge.

It is ridiculous to think this can be DIY'd

With practice anyone being objective can 'crack the code' and figure out how to make their tracks sound better.

Better equipment and room can certainly help spot errors in a mix, but so can listening to a mix on multiple systems if a system is not perfect.

You'd hope a good ME could make corrections, but it's also possible that an ME doesn't quite catch the vibe or intention, or just masters too cleanly, or does more pop than electro.

I've had great masters, ok masters and not so good masters. These days I master for myself and others, and what I might lose in corrective preciseness, I think I more than make up for by having the creative control over saturation, compression, and being able to tweak mixes if the mastering highlights an issue.

The caveat is that I do have good monitoring and a great set of tools, including wavelab.

The caveat to the caveat though is that I also mastered and album in the past year with just headphones as studio was out of action, and was able to get very good results. The key to this was headphone correction curves, diligence with A/B and as much listening on different speakers and systems as I could manage.

I wouldn't necessarily that people starting out should self master, but if they do.... I would 100% say this should be a separate process AFTER mixing, and that even if you mixed into a compressor/limiter/whatever to consider rebuilding your master chain from scratch to get better result.

Mixing is most important, but the mastering step can really elevate a mix of done well.

[El°HYM]

Sir Bones is Mixing Hit Records on a small Yacht. The Idea here is to just narrow the Stereo Field / Triangle and use smaller Monitors, thus trying to avoid early reflections and to get a more direct Signal.

[Jac459]

Sir Bones is Mixing Hit Records on a small Yacht. The Idea here is to just narrow the Stereo Field / Triangle and use smaller Monitors, thus trying to avoid early reflections and to get a more direct Signal.

I am generally renting a big house with a lot of friends for summer.
One of our friends is a professional cook.
He started in Maxim' London, had his own restaurant and is now working for a big group of food.

It is crazy how when cooking for us, he is faster, more efficient, there is no loss of food.
We can clearly see he is a professional and we are not.

Yet, he is not necessarily the one doing always the food I prefer. I have other friends who can cook very well. Slower, more waste and all. But as good if not better.

I think this can translate quite well in our discussion.

[Synthman2000]

@Synthman2000

How would you go about Ambient - Mastering, which EQ or Compressor, add some analog Mojo or just keeping it clean ITB?

Honest Question, as I indeed once came here to learn something new, learn from the Greats. Actually my first Years on KVR were spent in read - only Mode.

So if you have some nifty Tip & Tricks, you are more than Welcome.

I would listen to everything that I had to work with for a single EP or LP and consider carefully what tools to use on a per piece and possibly global basis. There is no specific approach to any job as every piece of music and combination of pieces of music are different.

No ambient artists music is likely to sound like the next ambient artists music. In fact one artists track versus the next track on an album might not sound similar at all.

Mastering is not cookie cutting work. It is reactive work to what is heard in accuracy guided by experienced ears that know specifically what to listen for in all manner of genres and instrumentation types versus goals of person producing.

There are just no easy replies, and that is not a dodge.

I could say.. I would use X for this and Y for that but it would be unlikely in reality.

Not to mention tools change, improve and get upgraded or deprecated, twice a year I test most of what exists digitally, not all gets changed, but it is important to find out what is doing a job best. There are no qualms about this. If something sounds or is better it is purchased without a second thought irrelevant of it not being $29.00. If it's a $450 package and sounds best you buy it. Nothing compared to dumping many multiple $$$$ on hardware which I have done.

Ambient music as one example of a genre comes in a vast number of different styles, and with differing abilities to produce and mix it.

The tool might be... advice in an email to rectify something that will make a big difference that has been missed. Maybe one of the best tools of all, I used responsive emails all over mastering that track

Anything could be used on ambient music, whatever makes it sound as good as possible
for the end listener on as many system as it may be reproduced on.

Pretty general and non - technical Advise here, could have also come straight from the FAQ of some professional Mastering - Service, though.

So many thanks for that.

If you know what you are doing, do it.

Real answers are learnt though applying basic knowledge and built upon, not fed and applied verbatim. In the modern world of Youtube, pictures, demos, pink back lights, the irrelevant is being touted as the essential.

Because the irrelevant is quick and easy and the fundamental very difficult.

Enjoy your life.

[El°HYM]

Enjoy your life.

Each1Teach1.

[donkey tugger]

You'd hope a good ME could make corrections, but it's also possible that an ME doesn't quite catch the vibe or intention, or just masters too cleanly, or does more pop than electro.

I've had great masters, ok masters and not so good masters. These days I master for myself and others, and what I might lose in corrective preciseness, I think I more than make up for by having the creative control over saturation, compression, and being able to tweak mixes if the mastering highlights an issue.

I think that's a good observation, particularly the highlighted bit. Speaking from experience, I've had people do mixes and masters of some of my songs (for mixing competitions, for inclusion in other things, to get experience etc), and whilst most of them have been technically 'good', clear mixes, they always seem to lack liveliness and power, and seem a bit sterile. Possibly down to not being au fait with the material and style as much, or also an unwillingness to 'take risks'?

Who knows? Interesting stuff.

[El°HYM]

Talking about sophisticated Ambient Mastering; can highly recommend Stephan Mathieu, Schwebung - Mastering.

https://www.schwebung-mastering.com/sm

My studio is my instrument. The combination of cutting-edge digital tools and the best historical valve and transformer technology allows me to play it with ease. My digital /analog /digital loop is kept short and minimal to provide maximum accuracy. Digital tools allow for meticulous corrections and to-the-point automation, while my hand-built mastering console offers the kind of 3-D depth that analog does best.

[_leras]

I think that's a good observation, particularly the highlighted bit. Speaking from experience, I've had people do mixes and masters of some of my songs (for mixing competitions, for inclusion in other things, to get experience etc), and whilst most of them have been technically 'good', clear mixes, they always seem to lack liveliness and power, and seem a bit sterile. Possibly down to not being au fait with the material and style as much, or also an unwillingness to 'take risks'?

Who knows? Interesting stuff.

Catching the vibe is probably even more important for when people do a mix.

Definitely the better the mix the less the mastering engineer has to do.

I'm sure mastering engineers receive a lot of bad mixes, that they improve significantly through their process.

So I would say if people want to self master they should be very happy with their mix first.

I'd also say that people should be honest with themselves and perhaps start their self mastering journey by making 'rough masters' to send along with a mix. Also, they probably need to really enjoy the 2 bus audio process and be able to listen well.

There's tons of advice out there for mixing and mastering, from process to tools, it's easier to learn than ever. Hands on practice is still pretty essential though.

[stoopicus]

Those bass lines are sneaky bad ass. Also interesting to see that Lennon was cringe even before Yoko.

Yoko gets a bad rap. That band was completely dysfunctional without her being a contributor to it.

Mastering is not cookie cutting work. It is reactive work to what is heard in accuracy guided by experienced ears that know specifically what to listen for in all manner of genres and instrumentation types versus goals of person producing.

I think in the end this is the most important and arguably the only important consideration here. I think early in the thread people got bogged down a bit by terminology (and the lack of need to master for physical media now) and this loses the abstract but important question of simply "what can I do on the master bus to make the mix coming in sound better overall, for the target audience of this music?"

Can something like Ozone help there? Sure, why not, it has a nice limiter and some good controls around overall mix loudness and balance. Do you absolutely need something like this? No of course not, just use a regular limiter and maybe some other multiband stuff on the master bus if you like. Or less. Or just handle all of this trackwise in the mix. All that matters is the end result, not how you get there.