Mastering

[filofax]

Hey everyone

im new, i got orion platinum 5 (i think) got it off ebay,

im able to mix tarcks and what not export them and stuff but how do i master a track to give it some depth?

cheers guys

[suneel]

but how do i master a track to give it some depth?

hi mate, usually artists don't master, it is done by the mastering engineer. Also please note that mastering is not going to add depth, instead it is going to cut your track more. In other words the depth must be already present in your premaster.

if you really need to get into mastering, you need tools like hardware/software vsts, which are usually dynamics processors and stereo tools.

as an artist concentrate on premaster. if your premaster is good you can probably get away with mastering depending on the material.

[Dungeon Studio]

Short answer - Limiting. To stream your well mixed and sounding song to a audio editor with limiting capabilties, or using a VST/DX plug in within the editor. It simply pushes the volume up to 'proffesional levels' without distorting or clipping - when used properly. Many have also done this directly with OP's master volume, and consider it 'mastered' soon as they stream it to WAV. It's arguable if this is a sound method or not as 'mastering', but from what I've heard - it's passable.

Long answer - Google 'audio mastering' and/or take a 3 year course at a expensive Recording School.

[filofax]

but how do i master a track to give it some depth?

hi mate, usually artists don't master, it is done by the mastering engineer. Also please note that mastering is not going to add depth, instead it is going to cut your track more. In other words the depth must be already present in your premaster.

if you really need to get into mastering, you need tools like hardware/software vsts, which are usually dynamics processors and stereo tools.

as an artist concentrate on premaster. if your premaster is good you can probably get away with mastering depending on the material.

ah nice one ok mate!

its just that artists like Daft Punk for eg. there beats are so compressed and Amon tobin his beats and bass are so crisp and everything, i didnt know if there was a process on orion i can go through to get ths crispness

[suneel]

its just that artists like Daft Punk for eg. there beats are so compressed and Amon tobin his beats and bass are so crisp and everything, i didnt know if there was a process on orion i can go through to get ths crispness

filofax to get that level of crispness and firmness, its all to be worked in your mix. bass and drums typically are typically sampled for electronic music. But even if they are acoustic, the recorded samples must be of hi quality, crisp and uptight to begin with. Often with bass+ drums in your mix you will often use these tools
-EQ
-Limiter
-Stereo tools
-Reverb
So basically its tweaking the samples to sound like your desired source material. As you progress your ears will automatically identify a sample bass/drum sound and know instinctively that this sample is gonna rock. yeah so it takes time.....

[filofax]

ok sounds good!!

thanks for the advise!!

[crimsonwarlock]

Don't you just love these kinds of discussions

its just that artists like Daft Punk for eg. there beats are so compressed and Amon tobin his beats
and bass are so crisp and everything, i didnt know if there was a process on orion i can go through to get ths crispness

These artists sound good because they have years of perfecting their skills, loads of talent that does help a bit ... and then their tracks are recorded in a top-notch facility with a fortune in equipment and sound proofing. And after that it is mixed by an engineer who does it for it's job (if you know what that means) and then it's mastered by another guy with a whole bunch of years in experience together with probably a set of golden ears. So what you are actually hearing is decades of first grade experience bundled with just about the best in hardware and software that can be bought if you have a fortune.

However, it CAN be done with Orion.... but you have to be REALLY GOOD

[DaZoid]

filofox,

It's all about your skills. Producing professional music is a profession. Years and years of hard work. If you hope to get a tool that makes your (beginner) stuff sound good, stop trying.

You can get a CRISP sound if your skills tells you what to do. EQing is a key to success. Knowing which instruments you use is another. Generating a good sound is hard to learn. Deleting nice instruments that you threw into your track cause they sound cool, is experienced skill.

If you started to produce music just now, it takes you 3, 4 or 5 years to get a sound that is as good as Daft Punk's. There is NO shortcut. It's a long and hard way you have to go. There's no MAGIC tool that makes gold out of shit.

Welcome and have fun making music.


And. Yeah, mastering is a different story. I wouldn't try to master my own stuff. Only if I had enough time to get experienced.

[Dungeon Studio]

But there's enough tools to make LOUD shit. :rofl:

And just to point out as well Filofax, I think like the others said - Daft Punk and Tobin et al really concentrate for hours and/or days on beats and use oscilliscopes and lord knows what all. And that's cool when you're making dance music. And then it's all what goes in around it - or not, regarding instruments and melodies and what all.
Which can affect the inital drums or whatever that used to sound so good and 'in your face'. So EQ'ing them and/or other instruments tend to bring the focus back - but is pretty skillful.

Good mastering to me is a engineer that can pinpoint frequencies and emphasise or diminish them without colouring the overall song. And of course, this isn't done with some good 3 band EQ either. We're talking 32 or 48 bands or more, Spectrum analysers, knee monitors, and on and on. I was pissed when I got my first CD done, as I didn't think the guy was doing anything other than turning the volume up. It was so subtle and smooth, it blew my mind when I compared after. I thought I could do the same for my following CD's after, getting WaveLab and all the plugs. At best, I make good loud mixes still that are 'mastered' to the best of my abilities.

So as nice as it is to have our PC's and lappy's and oodles of synths and effects - we'll make good music for sure. But only 1% of us will actually make a good 'master' that's on par with pro-recordings and major label distribution quality. And anyone here that thinks they're already in that 1%, isn't.

[Eklectro]

yep +1

[HYPNAGOGIA]

As other guys pointed, a very long and hard process, and there are things that you can on your own, but...

As a general advice, don't bother with mastering and all those techicalities. Focus only on getting your mix in a best shape possible. The key in achieving that is to listen. By listening, you will begin to recognize when instruments/effects drown each other, and in time you will learn how to correct that. Usually, the main problem in a mix is a kick/bass balance, and they way they occupy the space in the low-end frequency spectrum.
A good mix is the one where you can hear everything nicely, and eventually, as the last process, bringing a volume just a notch up. Once you get the hang of how to do that, if you really get serious about your music, you can pitch it to a label, and usually they do the mastering for you.

Don't be like the guys I know, with just a few months into music production. I go to them and they play me some studio album of a band they like and say "That's how I want my songs to sound like. How do I get that?", and then disregard every single advice you throw at them, and just continue to do their things as usually, doing the same thing over and over every time I see them. Don't worry if your songs don't sound exactly like something you hear on a CD, but you can try to get as close as you can, and that's what matters. That means that you really gave your best to get your songs to sound like you wanted. Everything else falls in the place on its own.

And seriously... from eBay??? :confused:

[crimsonwarlock]

this isn't done with some good 3 band EQ either. We're talking 32 or 48 bands or more

I don't think any real mastering engineer uses graphic EQ's

[Dungeon Studio]

True. Lord know's what they use now. Super parabolic ADDA valve coupled pleated spectralizers or something. As long as I can make a synth squawk and a guitar twang, my job's done.

[bones]

its just that artists like Daft Punk for eg. there beats are so compressed and Amon tobin his beats and bass are so crisp and everything, i didnt know if there was a process on orion i can go through to get ths crispness

Mostly that comes down to having an excellent mix in the first place. Mastering just adds that final gloss, it isn't where the magic happens at all. You need to fine-tune every sound - what works as a synth preset almost never works in a mix - and should EQ every channel so that it all works together to create that sound. Once you have it 98% of the way there, mastering will add that final one or two percent.

[Dungeon Studio]

True. But good mastering that adds that shimmer properly can make ones track sound as good as Daft Punk's or whoever is on before or after... Or not, if the song was shite to begin with.

As well too - shop around. If you think you got a good song with a good mix, don't just call the first Mastering ad you see. See what their track record is and clientele. And check the work too. Just because they may have mastered Daft Punk - it might have been their crumby album (like Daft Punk would make one of those. ) But if you find a good place with a good track record, don't sneeze at whatever they're charging - it's worth it. Not only for skills, but as a extra set of ears as well. Even if the engineer isn't a fan of dance music, he or she will point out if the synths fit, the drums are too snappy, too much reverb, etc. There's only so much they can do to correct and mask, but gives you that last minute resort to remix before going to press. Not that they're always right either, if you like a lot of reverb let's say - tell them to go ahead then.