Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old 05-30-2011, 05:24 PM   #781
ares
Expirator
 
ares's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Chapel Hill, NC
Posts: 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moseph View Post
Hold up, what about the Sabine Equation (as referenced in my copy of Kinsler*)? That's not a linear description. I was always under the impression that the "relatively" linear behavior was because most descriptions knocked out the higher-order behaviors on purpose to give a general idea of what the room would do (i.e., the non-linear stuff is actually important).

*Fundamentals of Acoustics, 4th Edition. Kinsler, et al. Wiley: 2004. My understanding is that this is the standard intro survey text (in one form or another), and that this has been the case for roughly 50 years or so.
I'm familiar with this equation, I actually use a modified version (Eyring) to calculate the reverb times in my simulation system.

The point that I'm getting at is that in most cases, the response of a room/source/listener configuration can be described by an impulse response: convolve this IR with source audio of any amplitude and you're going to get the same result times the input audio gain coefficient. The response is linear with respect to the energy of the sound source in most cases.

There are certain non-linearities w.r.t. energy that deal with how the sound interacts with air as it travels as well the interactions with materials in the room, but these are probably so small that they wouldn't have any effect when mixing at different volumes.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Moseph View Post
I'd be inclined to give him a little more credit than that. That's all stuff that gets considered in the first week of reverberation calculation. I was worrying about that stuff in my Acoustics class and we only talked about it for about 3 class days (as would be expected in a general overview of acoustic phenomenon).
Yes, my simulation system can use arbitrary geometry and every surface has material properties that specify the absorption at different frequencies. If you'd like to read about it, here is a paper I presented earlier this year at the 41st AES conference in London:
http://gamma.cs.unc.edu/GSOUND/
ares is offline  
Old 05-30-2011, 05:36 PM   #782
ares
Expirator
 
ares's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Chapel Hill, NC
Posts: 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xomblies View Post
also your mix sounds really isolated, use more gates on your close mics and automate them so when the drummer does a roll it's disabled etc, ESPECIALLY on the toms. More room mics/ overheads would glue your drums together and make them sound more natural. Guitars sound really crushed and Fake. Your entire mix kinda sounds crushed as well but not in a good way, your release is set to crackhead speed making it sound jittery, if you have the ssl comp plugin, try setting your release to auto instead of turning the release time all the way down.
I listened to my mix with your critique in mind. I definitely get the crushed feeling from the whole mix, this is mostly because the recording is really dense and I had just thrown a compressor on everything but drums grouped together. I mixed it all in one session, so I might have caught this if I'd taken a break and come back with fresh ears.

The guitar sound is not really fixable, the recording itself is 2 years old and lackluster and I was just trying to breath some life into it by adding some soft clipping.

The drum sound is actually pretty much what I'm going for. I could maybe add some more overheads/reverb to tie it together, but I'm pretty happy with it as it is. Also, I'm using Superior Drummer 2.0 triggered by an E-kit, so your comment about tom mics doesn't apply.

As for the mixes that you linked earlier, they sound pretty good but seriously lack bass guitar. Try boosting 100-200Hz and compressing the fuck out of it, especially with a compressor that can add some soft clipping.
ares is offline  
Old 05-30-2011, 07:13 PM   #783
Moseph
search for MGWAFTNAF
 
Moseph's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,875
Quote:
Originally Posted by ares View Post
I'm familiar with this equation, I actually use a modified version (Eyring) to calculate the reverb times in my simulation system.

The point that I'm getting at is that in most cases, the response of a room/source/listener configuration can be described by an impulse response: convolve this IR with source audio of any amplitude and you're going to get the same result times the input audio gain coefficient. The response is linear with respect to the energy of the sound source in most cases.

There are certain non-linearities w.r.t. energy that deal with how the sound interacts with air as it travels as well the interactions with materials in the room, but these are probably so small that they wouldn't have any effect when mixing at different volumes.
I'll see if I can't dig up something about the Eyring model in books/journals. This is one of my weakest areas regarding the physics/math of the situation. Admittedly, it's kind of rough in general to learn this stuff just because so much is happening in the math domain that it's hard to follow without sitting down and working through derivation yourself (and who wants to do that in their free-time?).

Refresh my memory: convolution (in the time-domain) is linear with respect to energy/frequency response, but non-linear with respect to transient response, correct?

I also can't remember the other properties that comprise linearity (if memory serves, it's more than just scalability), but I'm willing to take your word on it.



Quote:
Originally Posted by ares View Post
Yes, my simulation system can use arbitrary geometry and every surface has material properties that specify the absorption at different frequencies. If you'd like to read about it, here is a paper I presented earlier this year at the 41st AES conference in London:
http://gamma.cs.unc.edu/GSOUND/
Cool beans, man. I'll take a look at this when I have some free time.

Last edited by Moseph; 05-31-2011 at 07:12 AM. Reason: Spelling Error
Moseph is offline  
Old 05-31-2011, 01:22 AM   #784
Convectuoso
MX Zoom Hater #1
 
Convectuoso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Nuu Zeelund
Posts: 5,752
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moseph View Post

**SNIP**



Off the top of my head: very common on jazz records, very common on orchestral/symphonic/brass recordings, can be used to "sweeten" an album recorded in a dead acoustic space, often done with live recordings, often done to maintain cohesion through edits, can be used as a short-term special effect, and is very standard when you want to put the performance in a single virtual space. Keep in mind that "reverb" doesn't always just mean "artificial reverb."
Yeah but my point is why the fuck would anyone leave that till the master? Are you for real?
Convectuoso is offline  
Old 05-31-2011, 03:57 AM   #785
Sad But True
The New Krup
 
Sad But True's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Procrasterbating
Posts: 13,060
Dude you seem very uptight about your views on mixing and refuse to accept that other people do things differently. I'm not knocking you or anything, I'm just wondering why.
Sad But True is offline  
Old 05-31-2011, 04:05 AM   #786
Convectuoso
MX Zoom Hater #1
 
Convectuoso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Nuu Zeelund
Posts: 5,752
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sad But True View Post
Dude you seem very uptight about your views on mixing and refuse to accept that other people do things differently. I'm not knocking you or anything, I'm just wondering why.
You mistake uptight for confused and unwilling to let false misinformation be taken as legitimate fact.
Convectuoso is offline  
Old 05-31-2011, 04:07 AM   #787
Sad But True
The New Krup
 
Sad But True's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Procrasterbating
Posts: 13,060
Yeah but from an outside viewpoint (ie mine) who can say if yours is indeed to 'correct' viewpoint? TBH on something like the global reverb issue, it comes down to taste and preference, so I don't really see how it's false information.
Sad But True is offline  
Old 05-31-2011, 04:20 AM   #788
Convectuoso
MX Zoom Hater #1
 
Convectuoso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Nuu Zeelund
Posts: 5,752
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sad But True View Post
Yeah but from an outside viewpoint (ie mine) who can say if yours is indeed to 'correct' viewpoint? TBH on something like the global reverb issue, it comes down to taste and preference, so I don't really see how it's false information.
Is everyone illiterate?

My argument was towards Mop's idea that a global reverb **@ THE MASTERING STAGE** would help glue things together that were recorded from different sources or whatever.

All that should've been done at the mix.
Convectuoso is offline  
Old 05-31-2011, 06:43 AM   #789
Moss
Registered User
 
Moss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Trapped in the eighties.
Posts: 807
You know this is a "Home recording thread"?
I often find that when I slam my master at the "Mastering Stage", the reverb changes it's characteristics due to the compression of the signal. You can re-add the sparkle at the top end by using reverb at the mastering stage. Works for me, even if it's not the "correct" way of doing things.
As this is a Home recording thread, I reckon pretty much anything goes if it helps to make your mix sound better.
Moss is offline  
Old 05-31-2011, 06:46 AM   #790
The_Mop
Mx UK Night Invasion Club
 
The_Mop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: In the lod past 00:00
Posts: 7,928
Quote:
Originally Posted by Convectuoso View Post
Is everyone illiterate?

My argument was towards Mop's idea that a global reverb **@ THE MASTERING STAGE** would help glue things together that were recorded from different sources or whatever.

All that should've been done at the mix.
Whoa hang on, when did I come into this? Last thing I posted here was about monitors o.O
The_Mop is offline  
Old 05-31-2011, 07:11 AM   #791
Moseph
search for MGWAFTNAF
 
Moseph's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,875
Quote:
Originally Posted by Convectuoso View Post
Yeah but my point is why the fuck would anyone leave that till the master? Are you for real?

I am. In fact, there's a couple of sections in Bob Katz's book about why you might use some reverb in the Mastering phase. Check it out.
Moseph is offline  
Old 05-31-2011, 02:23 PM   #792
Convectuoso
MX Zoom Hater #1
 
Convectuoso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Nuu Zeelund
Posts: 5,752
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Mop View Post
Whoa hang on, when did I come into this? Last thing I posted here was about monitors o.O
Lmao sorry dude I meant Moss. Mind slip.
Quote:
I am. In fact, there's a couple of sections in Bob Katz's book about why you might use some reverb in the Mastering phase. Check it out.
I'm sorry Mo', but you need to stop reading books and start mixing more. Not only should most creative decisions be done at the mixing stage for artistic reasons, it's also easier and you have more control of what you actually put on into the reverb auxiliary.

I mean, have you actually tried to put reverb on a kick drum? 9/10 it sounds like dog shit and you take it off immediately.

Just because Ozone has a reverb in it, shouldn't think you need a global reverb to master.

A good mix should only need a bit of EQ tweak if that and level management depending on the genre and the eventual goal of the product. So to answer SBT'S question with a realistic answer:

Buy the Massey L2007, it;s like 89 dollars or something.

And buy a half decent digital EQ. Get a Linear phase one if you can.

Buuuuuut.

If you're wise,you'll find a friend who has a better setup than you do.

Mastering isn't about what plug ins or gear you have. It's how good your monitors are and how neutral your listening environment is.

Example: We have probably three top of the lines studios in NZ. My favourite, Roundhead Studios (owned by Neil Finn) has a Neve desk that recorded Quadrophenia and Grace, outboard that would blow your mind (Pultecs, API stuff, Urei, Neve 1073's (in their B room!) etc etc) a Studer A827. Microphones:

(that's just over half of them)

And guess what? Their head engineer said to me they don't pretend that they have the facilities to master. They send their mixes over to New York to Sterling etc etc.

So enter mastering with caution, you can easily fuck things up thinking louder is better. It's not how loud it is, it's how you make it loud, and if you even go down that road.
Convectuoso is offline  
Old 05-31-2011, 02:48 PM   #793
Moseph
search for MGWAFTNAF
 
Moseph's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,875
Quote:
Originally Posted by Convectuoso View Post
I'm sorry Mo', but you need to stop reading books and start mixing more. Not only should most creative decisions be done at the mixing stage for artistic reasons, it's also easier and you have more control of what you actually put on into the reverb auxiliary.
Check. Note to self: Convectuoso knows more about the mastering process than Bob Katz. Therefore, there cannot possibly be any legitimate use of reverb during mastering, because Convectuoso says so.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Convectuoso View Post
I mean, have you actually tried to put reverb on a kick drum? 9/10 it sounds like dog shit and you take it off immediately.
I have (granted, it was during the mixing process). For most styles of rock, I'm inclined to agree with you. But it's very much a stylistic thing.

I've done a bit of work in gypsy jazz and Americana/bluegrass where the kick had a bit of reverb and it was completely appropriate. I also did a live outdoor recording of big band swing where the whole mix got treated with reverb: not only appropriate, but in my opinion necessary on that one.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Convectuoso View Post
Just because Ozone has a reverb in it, shouldn't think you need a global reverb to master.
I don't recall mentioning Ozone; or saying that reverb was a necessary part of the mastering process. Only that there were scenarios where it could be used. Don't confuse my posts with someone else'.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Convectuoso View Post
Mastering isn't about what plug ins or gear you have. It's how good your monitors are and how neutral your listening environment is.

...

[bunch of gear stuff]

...

And guess what? Their head engineer said to me they don't pretend that they have the facilities to master. They send their mixes over to New York to Sterling etc etc.

Don't forget that this thread is about home recording. The whole point is that, for whatever reason, you won't be shipping things off to be handled by a specialist.
Moseph is offline  
Old 05-31-2011, 03:08 PM   #794
Convectuoso
MX Zoom Hater #1
 
Convectuoso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Nuu Zeelund
Posts: 5,752
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moseph View Post
Check. Note to self: Convectuoso knows more about the mastering process than Bob Katz. Therefore, there cannot possibly be any legitimate use of reverb during mastering, because Convectuoso says so.
No, my point is, Bob Katz knows how to master, he will no when it is a appropriate to add reverb to the whole fucking 2 bus and when it is not. Telling someone who has never properly mastered to get a global reverb is just stupid and will end up with the person wasting whole bunch of timing and wrecking a mix.




Quote:

I have (granted, it was during the mixing process). For most styles of rock, I'm inclined to agree with you. But it's very much a stylistic thing.

I've done a bit of work in gypsy jazz and Americana/bluegrass where the kick had a bit of reverb and it was completely appropriate. I also did a live outdoor recording of big band swing where the whole mix got treated with reverb: not only appropriate, but in my opinion necessary on that one.
Yes, buuuuuuut, IT SHOULD ALL BE DONE AT THE MIX STAGE.

Quote:
I don't recall mentioning Ozone; or saying that reverb was a necessary part of the mastering process. Only that there were scenarios where it could be used. Don't confuse my posts with someone else'.
I think Moss did, and all the things he was mentioned are in Ozone so I was just assuming he was just reading from the GUI of Ozone. Soon I think most forums will make Ozone and Mastering have the same definition. "Great, the mix is all done, now all we have to do is send it off to someone to Ozone it. I hope he puts a global reverb on the mix because I certainly couldn't be assed gluing the mix together myself."

Quote:
Don't forget that this thread is about home recording. The whole point is that, for whatever reason, you won't be shipping things off to be handled by a specialist.
Yeah okay so I can't use anecdotes to illustrate a point (that you so clearly missed) but you can quote from a 15 year old book aimed at people with some serious technical understanding?
Convectuoso is offline  
Old 05-31-2011, 03:25 PM   #795
Moseph
search for MGWAFTNAF
 
Moseph's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,875
Enhance your calm, John Spartan...


Quote:
Originally Posted by Convectuoso View Post
No, my point is, Bob Katz knows how to master, he will no when it is a appropriate to add reverb to the whole fucking 2 bus and when it is not. Telling someone who has never properly mastered to get a global reverb is just stupid and will end up with the person wasting whole bunch of timing and wrecking a mix.
(01) The issue is whether it's ever appropriate or not. Sometimes it is. Saying otherwise is bad information. Making exceptions doesn't work, and it doesn't change the fact that sometimes you want to do it.

(02) Wrecking a mix is part of the learning process. You suck when you start out. Everything has a learning curve. There's a reason I always recommend freeware plugins (when I make recommendations).


Quote:
Originally Posted by Convectuoso View Post
Yes, buuuuuuut, IT SHOULD ALL BE DONE AT THE MIX STAGE.
Again, not always the case. The biggest reason Katz recommends adding reverb is actually to help mask discontinuities with edits of finished mixes (for instance, re-splicing consecutive tracks during reverb tails).


Quote:
Originally Posted by Convectuoso View Post
I think Moss did, and all the things he was mentioned are in Ozone so I was just assuming he was just reading from the GUI of Ozone...
It was in fact Moss that brought it up. A quick read through the thread reveals this. That's not particularly relevant. I'm not Moss. My thoughts are distinct from his.

Part of this issue is that a lot of folks do recommend the Ozone Manual as a handy "cheat sheet" for the mastering process. Their laziness in the matter is on them.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Convectuoso View Post
Yeah okay so I can't use anecdotes to illustrate a point (that you so clearly missed) but you can quote from a 15 year old book aimed at people with some serious technical understanding?
You can say whatever you want. But the point of your anecdote was "don't do it yourself", which is the opposite of contributing when the thread is about "do it yourself."

Also note that the age of a book is a poor indicator of the validity of its content. Sometimes an old book isn't helpful (a manual for Sound Tools), sometimes it is (Kinsler). For the record, Katz's book had its first pressing in 2002, and my copy isn't from the first pressing.
Moseph is offline  
Old 05-31-2011, 04:03 PM   #796
Sad But True
The New Krup
 
Sad But True's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Procrasterbating
Posts: 13,060
Quote:
Originally Posted by Convectuoso View Post
So to answer SBT'S question with a realistic answer:

Buy the Massey L2007, it;s like 89 dollars or something.

And buy a half decent digital EQ. Get a Linear phase one if you can.

Buuuuuut.

If you're wise,you'll find a friend who has a better setup than you do.
It may have answered my question but it doesn't help me. I don't have the money for it, I don't have the time for it, i was just wondering is there a basic mastering plugin that I can use to get to grips with it, and don't recommend I save money and buy something or go do it somewhere else.

This is the home recording thread you know, most people won't have money to splash on nice gear.

Last edited by Sad But True; 05-31-2011 at 04:06 PM.
Sad But True is offline  
Old 05-31-2011, 04:37 PM   #797
Moseph
search for MGWAFTNAF
 
Moseph's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,875
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sad But True View Post
i was just wondering is there a basic mastering plugin that I can use to get to grips with it

I don't use a single plugin for when I try my hand at mastering, but I do like these:

Variety of Sound's Density mk2 (compressor)
slim slow slider's LinearPhaseGraphicEQ2
Antress Modern Deathcore (compressor)
Buzzroom BuzzMaxi 3 (limiter)

Voxengo SPAN (analysis tool)
smartelectronix's dfx monomaker (stereo tool)
Voxengo MSED (Mid/Side tool)
Tobybear's BitViewer (meter to check on dithering)

I tend to use Density with a relatively long attack and long release (for more of a "steady state" or "fullness" compression). I like Deathcore for shorter attack/response to help maintain "punchy" transients. BuzzMaxi 3 is a pretty transparent brickwall limiter that I use to protect clipping on the DAC (I set it to -0.5 dB with no makeup). LPG2 I mostly use for small tweaks to help maintain spectral continuity between them.

monomaker is a super-convenient on/off switch to check your mono collapse. BitViewer lets you know what's going on in terms of bit-usage, so you can make a more informed decision about dithering. The Voxengo plugs are pretty self-explanatory.

Those are all VST plugins, and last I checked were still freely available from their respective developers.
Moseph is offline  
Old 05-31-2011, 05:56 PM   #798
Sad But True
The New Krup
 
Sad But True's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Procrasterbating
Posts: 13,060
I seriously need to do some homework on mastering.
Sad But True is offline  
Old 06-01-2011, 01:05 AM   #799
Convectuoso
MX Zoom Hater #1
 
Convectuoso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Nuu Zeelund
Posts: 5,752
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sad But True View Post
It may have answered my question but it doesn't help me. I don't have the money for it, I don't have the time for it, i was just wondering is there a basic mastering plugin that I can use to get to grips with it, and don't recommend I save money and buy something or go do it somewhere else.

This is the home recording thread you know, most people won't have money to splash on nice gear.
You can't afford $89?

Yeah just take Mo's freeware suggestions. I can't recommend anything that doesn't cost.
Convectuoso is offline  
Old 06-01-2011, 02:52 AM   #800
Sad But True
The New Krup
 
Sad But True's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Procrasterbating
Posts: 13,060
Quote:
Originally Posted by Convectuoso View Post
You can't afford $89?
No, I can't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Convectuoso View Post
I can't recommend anything that doesn't cost.
You might be in the wrong thread then.
Sad But True is offline  
Old 06-01-2011, 07:18 AM   #801
denboy
Unregistered User
 
denboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 14,137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Convectuoso View Post
You can't afford $89?
either you've never been a student or you're one spoiled brat

judging by your posting style i'm leaning towards the latter
denboy is offline  
Old 06-01-2011, 07:23 AM   #802
Moseph
search for MGWAFTNAF
 
Moseph's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 2,875
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sad But True View Post
I seriously need to do some homework on mastering.

If you haven't stumbled across these resources, they might help:

http://www.tweakheadz.com/mastering_your_audio.htm

TweakHeadz' guide to audio includes a mastering section. It's aimed at audio novices. There is a bit of stuff in there that I don't necessarily agree with, but it's an okay primer. Keep in mind that it's also a little bit out of date (Tweak died a couple of years ago, and while the site remains it's not going to be updated anymore).

http://www.massivemastering.com/html/faq.html

Massive Mastering (run by John Scripp) provides a pretty good blog about Mastering concepts, including this FAQ which gives you a general idea about the mindset of what makes a good finished mix for the process. It's not super-detailed, but can help you get started thinking about what the process is really about (handy hint: it's mostly NOT about how 1 track sounds).

As mentioned a couple of times, Bob Katz's book (Mastering Audio: The Art & The Science) is probably considered the home studio "standard" for this. It's common enough that you might be able to find it at a public library, but you might need to just cough up enough for a used copy from the Internet. Be forewarned, it assumes you have a pretty strong grasp of the fundamentals.

You could also check out the manual for Ozone, but as already mentioned it's not that great. Most of the ideas contained within are covered by the TweakHeadz guide.

Last edited by Moseph; 06-01-2011 at 07:26 AM.
Moseph is offline  
Old 06-01-2011, 03:32 PM   #803
Convectuoso
MX Zoom Hater #1
 
Convectuoso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Nuu Zeelund
Posts: 5,752
Quote:
Originally Posted by Knifeboy View Post
either you've never been a student or you're one spoiled brat

judging by your posting style i'm leaning towards the latter
Lmao I was a student for last the last two years, living on $160 a week (which I eventually have to pay back) in the city with highest rent in my country.

Then guess what, I got a job.

I also don't have a car because they kill your financial life the second you buy one. I also spend $60 on groceries (that's for two people) a week. I don't smoke, hardly drink and only spend my money on gear.

And lower middle class for life yo.

But nice try.
Convectuoso is offline  
Old 06-01-2011, 03:35 PM   #804
JoshIsNumber3
Banned
 
JoshIsNumber3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: JAMIE PRIDEMORE
Posts: 15,180
nah lfd is faggot extreme don't worry about him
JoshIsNumber3 is offline  
Old 06-01-2011, 03:37 PM   #805
Convectuoso
MX Zoom Hater #1
 
Convectuoso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Nuu Zeelund
Posts: 5,752
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moseph View Post
http://www.massivemastering.com/html/faq.html

Massive Mastering (run by John Scripp) provides a pretty good blog about Mastering concepts, including this FAQ which gives you a general idea about the mindset of what makes a good finished mix for the process. It's not super-detailed, but can help you get started thinking about what the process is really about (handy hint: it's mostly NOT about how 1 track sounds).
Finally, a mastering engineer that states the difference between mixing into a compressor and slapping one on at the end.

I was reading it thinking, not ANOTHER mastering engineer who is against mix bus compression, but then at the end he qualifies it by saying mixing into a compressor can actually be a good thing.
Convectuoso is offline  
Old 06-01-2011, 06:20 PM   #806
Sad But True
The New Krup
 
Sad But True's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Procrasterbating
Posts: 13,060
Josh lfd isn't here.

Also cheers for the links.

Also convectuoso your life sounds really boring.
Sad But True is offline  
Old 06-01-2011, 07:08 PM   #807
Convectuoso
MX Zoom Hater #1
 
Convectuoso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Nuu Zeelund
Posts: 5,752
Says the poor bastard who can't afford $89.
Convectuoso is offline  
Old 06-02-2011, 05:54 AM   #808
Sad But True
The New Krup
 
Sad But True's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Procrasterbating
Posts: 13,060
Quote:
Originally Posted by Convectuoso View Post
Says the poor bastard who can't afford $89.
...because I go out and enjoy my life. Great conclusion you jumped to there.
Sad But True is offline  
Old 06-02-2011, 11:06 AM   #810
Sad But True
The New Krup
 
Sad But True's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Procrasterbating
Posts: 13,060
Quote:
Originally Posted by I_am_the_one View Post
See vanwarp? Life's so much easier when we all get along. Thanks for the links.


So when mastering should I do it on the master bus of my mix session or render a mixdown and do it on that?


ACTUALLY,, could someone give me a rundown of their process for mixing, in a list of stages? ie, volume levelling, add compression, etc, etc, and so on , mastering.

Last edited by Sad But True; 06-02-2011 at 11:18 AM.
Sad But True is offline  
 


Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:09 AM.