I'm re-thinking how I Mix/Master

[_leras]

I don't think you should worry too much about that type of thing. No ones making different mixes for different platforms.

This is true, although the various tools out there should be able to analyze for clipping, which is a big deal. Hopefully it’s an automated process that can analyze the audio without you having to listen.

-0.3db on the limiter should still catch everything?

[Uncle E]

-0.1dB doesn’t always work because of how some algorithms change the frequency balance. But you’re right that there’s probably a number that will be safe everywhere, maybe -0.3dB is enough.

[rosenfeldt]

Reference tracks - can't stress that out enough. Find 2-3 tracks you like to match your track to. Personally I use the ADPTR AUDIO Metric AB from Plugin Alliance (https://www.plugin-alliance.com/en/prod ... ricab.html). It's easy to use, and you will hear / and see the good and the bads.

I use the iZotope Ozone 10 as my primary mastering-tool, and before this plugin I insert the Fresh Air plugin from Slate Digital (https://slatedigital.com/fresh-air/) - it's really give some nice air to your track! After this, I use the bx_solo plugin from Plugin Alliance (https://www.plugin-alliance.com/en/prod ... _solo.html) - and this plugin can really spread your mix. I set this to 150% spread, but you have to make sure that the heavy stuff like the bassdrum and bass is mono / or low-cut the side on your EQ. At the end of my mastering-chain, I use the FabFilter L2 Limiter (https://www.fabfilter.com/products/pro- ... r-plug-in) - but I don't overuse this one, and mostly let it have a gain reduction of -1 to -2db.

In Logic Pro X I use the MultiMeter plugin (stock in LPX), and aim for about LUFS -8db.

[catamorphism]

I think nowadays the purpose of mastering is for someone with high-end, full-range monitoring (speakers and room) to check your work and do the final technical interventions on your music before it goes out and you can't change it any more. This is why I send my stuff to other people. Other people sometimes send their stuff to me to master (I have very good, full-range speakers but not an ideal room).

I don't really care if they are doing it in the analog or the digital domain. Arguably digital will degrade the signal less since there's no conversion nor noise from the gear.

[mjolnir]

ever since downloads became an option, I gave up on albums.
i like how we can cherrypick which tunes to download and ignore everything else.
after so many decades as a listener, I realised that even my most all time favorite musicians make sour lemons frequently.
so instead of spoil the flow of a playlist, i skip whichever tunes suck and only include the good ones.

but what does this say about the "album" as a cohesive whole?
personally, i prefer to ditch the whole "album" storytelling paradigm and try to make every tune a one-hit wonder.

i'm not very good at making tunes anymore, but each tune to me is it's own ship, it's own realm, it's own process.
if you optimize to make every tune great in every way, then there's no need to dock (in amplitude or whatever) any other tunes to "make them fit"
if it sounds good or great, then it fits--in this paradigm.

i know it doesn't work for everybody, but most storyline albums i ever heard were a pain in the listener's ass/ear.
i'm a snob about it, but i can't help how i feel about it after about 40 years as a listener.

[mjolnir]

i used to have a technique where every time i made a tune i'd take apart and rebuild my entire studio configuration to get different sounds and effects.
back then, i also would try and make each tune entirely unique and just plain good.

these days i don't have hardware so it's not as easy as that, but maybe it's helpful for somebody else to think about.
today, i'm thinking about creating DAW track mixing templates something like this:

1) mono bass only - bass boosted synth lead
2) ping pong auto pan - synth arpeggio accompanyment
3) reverbed pulse pad synth or piano
4) long ethereal pad with centre cancelled out (mid side trick)
5) high passed extra percussion
6) multiband compressed acoustic drums
7) synth kick
8 ) synth snare

etcetera.
it's hard to explain, but essentially, i want to preplan the FX / panning before I even put any notes down.
probably the instrument varieties would be pre-chosen also.

[_leras]

ever since downloads became an option, I gave up on albums.

but what does this say about the "album" as a cohesive whole?
personally, i prefer to ditch the whole "album" storytelling paradigm and try to make every tune a one-hit wonder.

i'm not very good at making tunes anymore, but each tune to me is it's own ship, it's own realm, it's own process.

One track at a time is a valid approach so don't sweat it.

I can't make one track at a time, so end up with many in play at a time, and at some point select and finish a batch. This could be an album or an EP. I do usually group these into a project with some ideas, concepts, limitations or aims when I'm starting though.

i.e. main project for my band I'm finishing off is an album, but have another project which is an evolution of that in play with ideas and half done tracks that are mainly waiting for arrangement and that get dipped into and added to.

I have playlists if individual tracks and also like listening to albums. Albums can have a selection of tracks related by artist mindset at that time and I like the cohesiveness.

There's no fixed way.

[_leras]

My 'mate' Ryan has some great articulations on this process.

[mjolnir]

ever since downloads became an option, I gave up on albums.

but what does this say about the "album" as a cohesive whole?
personally, i prefer to ditch the whole "album" storytelling paradigm and try to make every tune a one-hit wonder.

i'm not very good at making tunes anymore, but each tune to me is it's own ship, it's own realm, it's own process.

One track at a time is a valid approach so don't sweat it.

...

There's no fixed way.

true, true.

[Uncle E]

My 'mate' Ryan has some great articulations on this process.

Thank you. That was excellent. Wish I could see him perform in Bergen this weekend.

[mjolnir]

If you anybody here feels like sharing their personal tracks that'd be great since there's really nice advice in here.
Mine are in my signature, and aren't superfab, but at least they're real. And sometimes people like my tunes (quantity greater than zero LOL )

It can be nice to match the advice to the music or match the music to the advice if we know the output of the advisor(s).
Or maybe that's too much?

[bmanic]

ever since downloads became an option, I gave up on albums.

but what does this say about the "album" as a cohesive whole?
personally, i prefer to ditch the whole "album" storytelling paradigm and try to make every tune a one-hit wonder.

i'm not very good at making tunes anymore, but each tune to me is it's own ship, it's own realm, it's own process.

One track at a time is a valid approach so don't sweat it.

Over the years I've come to the realisation that "the album sound / cohesion" happens sort of automatically simply due to my own sound aesthetic. Very seldomly do I have to consciously make decisions to alter a tracks vibe or tonality to fit within a full album, even if the various tracks come from different producers/mixers.

The sonic fingerprint that creates the cohesion is almost completely the result of how I hear things + my monitoring and to a slight degree by keeping the processing chain very similar.. but I've noticed that even if I change the processing chain drastically, the results will still sound similar and fit within "the album".

So yeah, that was a long winded response basically saying exactly what leras already said. Don't sweat it! Work whichever way you want. The results will inevitably be coherent sort of automatically.. at least in broad terms.

[Opaque]

I don't think it's advisable to just slap Ozone on the master, run the mastering assistant, and leave the settings as recommended. The results will almost always be too extreme and will transform the track too much.

Also, as others have noted above, these things are genre dependant - not all genres should be equally loud, or dynamic, nor adhere to the wall of sound and fill up the entire frequency spectrum if there are only a few instruments/elements active during the main part, otherwise stuff like Ozone will boost a lot of "trash frequencies" where they are ostensibly lacking (so the gaps that might consist of mostly reverb tails or background noise, effects, etc.), in turn making the track muddier instead.

For me, the most useful part of such software seems to be the graph itself (the tonal balance of various genres) so one can see even during mixing how a specific section that might be the closest to a pop, electronic, or rock song stacks against the average in terms of its frequency distribution. That way corrections can be performed on individual tracks if needed prior to mastering, and then a dynamic frequency shaper, like stabilizer, clarity, or gullfoss, can be useful to slightly shape the track further.
But, this is just my experience, I'm not a professional mixing or mastering engineer.

[Uncle E]

Ozone Mastering Assistant provides a great starting point most of the time, IME, but I agree it's not optimal to just set and forget. A little tweaking on the Maximizer and Dynamic EQ thresholds goes a long way. Instead of taking 20-30 minutes for me to master a track, it now takes <5 minutes.