#224

Over the last few months I’ve switched to UAD for recording/mixing/mastering. Do you have a favourite mastering chain on the platform?

1 Like
#225

Just make it sound good, no need to put too much stress on the numbers. AFAIK Bandcamp doesn’t have a recommendation for loudness, and nor should it.

Every mix has its own loudness potential, beyond which things start to fall apart and sound really bad. It really is case by case. If you’re not getting “competitive loudness” with other tracks in your chosen genre, then it’s perhaps time to have a conversation with your mastering engineer. So called “DR” is a pretty bad measure of perceived loudness (along with peak and RMS, VU is slightly better). These days the integrated LUFS figure is the closest to perceived loudness, in my experience, but still not near perfect.

And DR5 is pretty crazy loud, whoever you ask, although I have done it for my Hip-Hop and Trap clients before. :slight_smile:

3 Likes
#226

This sounds like a great time for a volume curve drawn in by hand. Remember this is always an option and is the kind of “compression” least likely to damage the music.

I like @eesn’s idea about a little volume dip before the big jump in this scenario too. The audio equivalent of “forcing the edge” in a drawing: increasing contrast at a boundary.

I think about mastering like fitting a whole world into a box: you have to resort to illusions to do it, and our auditory systems are full of those already so it’s important to know what those are and work with them.

2 Likes
#227

Yes, I do.

Manley Massive Passive M/S
API 2500 occasionally Fairchild 670
Ampex ATR 102
Sony Oxford Limiter

I also sometimes use the Dangerous BAX EQ after the compressor.

For corrective surgical stuff, (pre compressor) very occasionally Sony Oxford Dynamic EQ. But if im having to do that, I know my mix wasn’t quite right in the first place

7 Likes
#228

the bigest thing that I realized lately that really helped with the volume difference between professional and personal tracks LFUs

use an LFU meter of some kind.

I don’t know all the technical science behind it but from my take it is the "appearance of loundness/distance between quietest and loudest points of your track.

getting higher LFUs usually ends up with a combination of saturation and upward compression in my experience, however being careful with your mix should always be the first step. any upwards compression on frequencies that are already standing out to you in a mix will only amplify these affects.

Always be careful never to overcompress too much to the point where there are audible artifacts in your mix. your goal is to get close to your reference tracks LFU levels while still maintaining as much of the overall quality of your track as possible.

remember control first, amplify second.

2 Likes
#229

Nice. Mine is similar

  • Chandler Curve Bender
  • Shadow Hills Comp (sometimes API or Neve bus comps instead or on top)
  • Ampex
  • Oxford Limiter

I use a number of others for tracking and mixing, but this is basically a permanent chain on my mastering template.

4 Likes
#230

Not for mastering, but for mixing I’ve come to rely upon approximations of the Neve 1073 Preamps, my current preference being Arturia’s 1973-Pre. Years ago when I first encountered 1073 Pres (in software form, alas!) I didn’t understand what it was that people seemed to love so much about them. I knew of Pres with much broader EQ ranges/options etc. and the '73s looked limited. These days I can’t remotely imagine being without it and use it on most channels. I’ve also embraced the joys of sidechaining lately, having eschewed it due to stupid misconceptions regarding it needing to sound “pumping” all the time. Locking the bass to the drums with a subtle sidechain is unbelievably powerful stuff in terms of mix-glue (as is adding something like a 5% reverb to the drums - not so much that you actually notice it as such, but enough so that you notice it isn’t there when you bypass it).

2 Likes
#231

I used the 1073 extensively in the studio and it was quite a surprising experience. I remember running pretty random stuff through it (synth, cheap samplers, folk) at the recording stage (+ we were making the raw edit / mix on a neve console…) it was mostly because we were lucky enough to work on our demos in super big studios during the off hours at the time. And everytime I was going back to the home studio, using exactly the same source material, it just sounded dull compared to the neve rough mix, even with tons of afterward mixing adjustments and post prod tricks it lacked this cohesion I later heard people call “glue”, and also that so called neve / API warmth. It made me mad that something like a hardware pre could have such a huge impact on my music. Now I use the UAD 1073 version to record stuff, maybe not as night and day sounding but really good still. I completely understand putting one on every channel.

2 Likes
#232

I also use the UAD 1073 a lot. It’s surprisingly good with the Unison preamps, where you get the impedance and other electrical aspects emulated as well. I use it for mic sources, but also for DI instead of the straight line inputs. It adds a lot!

My favourite go-to channel strip for my UAD stuff now is the Neve 88RS. It is so good on everything I’ve put into it. When I first got the Apollo I wasn’t sure how I would choose between the Neve, API, and SSL channel strip and mic pre emulations, but after trying them all the Neve 88RS was the clear winner for me. (I’d still love to have them all at some point)

4 Likes
#233

I’m finding my mastering chain good for recording and mixing too. The analogue pres and comps really do add an extra special something. The chain has ten transformers and it’s very easy to route anything through it before or after recording. They are hardwired in this order:

2 x Chandler Germanium compressors
Thermionic Culture Pullet passive EQ
Chandler TG2 stereo preamp
Dangerous Music Bax EQ

That’s with the Crookwood converters on either side.

Just running analogue synths and drum machines through the TG2, cranking the input gain just to before distortion, then backing off the output, creates a really nice fat sound that I have never been able to achieve with plugins. Having said that, things are getting better all the time there.

2 Likes
#234

That sounds really nice. The plugins are getting better, and IMO, UAD and Softube make some stuff that really does sound and behave close enough to the hardware equivalent that I’d be hard pressed to tell the difference in practical applications.

That said, I also have a vintage Soundcraft console with some upgrades that I use for all my recording and mixing. It adds some depth and separation that I still don’t get as easily recording straight into the UAD Apollos. I also find that the tactility of it encourages me to do things I wouldn’t do on a computer interface… I tend to be more open to pushing it harder, and going deeper with the EQ, since it’s all by ear.

My general workflow is:

  • Instruments into the Soundcraft console line inputs
  • Direct outs are wired to a patchbay normalized to the Apollo inputs (24 channels total)
  • Do some tracking EQ on the console
  • Tracking compression or other inserts in UAD
  • Record multitrack to Logic
  • Editing if necessary
  • Add any inserts and pre-insert EQ as plugins in Logic (mostly UAD plugins)
  • Send outputs (up to 16 tracks) back to console for mix and post-plugin EQ
  • Record stereo mix, or sometimes 8 groups, back to Logic as the mix down. Here I use UAD plugins as the 2 bus inserts for the most part, though I do use a PCM81 for stereo reverb on the stereo bus sometimes
  • Either master the stereo mix myself, or send it for mastering when the time comes

(Edit to add) A note about why I like the UAD system — The plugins sound really good and the hardware converters, analog path, and mic pres are really top notch. In my workflow and budget the plugins let me do things I could never afford to do with hardware, like have 24 channels of 1073’s, or have 8 instances of a compressor where if I bought the hardware I could afford only one.

Also about he console — It’s a Soundcraft Spirit Studio 16/8/2 from about 1994. I upgraded all the opamps to OPA2134’s and replaced some old capacitors, and it sounds fantastic. The best thing about it is that it’s an inline console… meaning that it has direct outs on all 16 channels as well as all 8 busses, and “tape” inputs on all 16 channels for mixing. A really useful setup and not common in most mixers…

13 Likes
#235

last weekend I saw a Soundcraft Spirit FX16 with onboard Lexicon effects at a thrift store for $100. passed on it but now I’m wondering if I should go back and grab it, though the 16/8/2 seems to be a decent step up.

#236

That’s a really different thing, might not be worth it.

The Spirit Studio is an all analog high quality console that they packaged up for project studios. It’s very similar circuitry to the Delta and Ghost consoles, and is a large format recording console rather than a mixer.

The Spirit Studio has modular channels on the inside, and with a few minor updates sounds easily as good as a lot of more expensive consoles, and with more major updates can rival high end gear like MCI and Toft… I’m hoping to have the time/budget to get there eventually.

2 Likes
#237

a few minor updates sounds easily as good as a lot of more expensive consoles

Sounds like an interesting project! Any particular resources you are using to figure out what modifications to make?

#238

A mix of threads on the internet, mostly on GS, and the help of a local studio tech who’s been in the business for 40 years and knows consoles inside and out.

There are a few basic things for any console of this age:

  1. Check the opamp ICs and see if they are good quality, or if there are better drop in replacements
  2. Upgrade the power supply
  3. Clean all controls, check wiring, clean all jacks
  4. Replace and upgrade all capacitors in the audio path
  5. Replace jacks with more robust options if needed

That’s sort of in order of quick job to bigger job… I’ve done 1, 2, and 3 and already I’m really happy with the results.

6 Likes
#239

one aspect that bears comment is context.
Mixing and mastering your own work is tricky because you are 100% familiar with it, you know every element and therefore objectivity can be difficult. The first time I got some of my music mastered I did so partly because of insecurity - I didnt trust my setup & perception 100% and wanted a totally external opinion about it… Turned out there were no major issues and the master came back sounding richer & more detailed… and I started to trust my instincts more…

Two valuable things to try with regards to context, apart from listening on other speakers (mono, car stereo etc) I think it can also be very revealing to listen to your mix barely audible. You should always be working at a calibrated & notated monitor level, but occasionally turn your monitor level down so much that you can only hear the loudest elements - does the music still work? If something is standing out on its own too much then it will be revealed by this method…

Another similar idea is to listen from another room. That way your mind can drift away from sitting in a studio critically listening, and get more of a feel as to how the music is working as a whole…

Back when we used recorded to multitrack a good friend of mine & session player used to mildly freak me out by switching the multitrack to varispeed and listening at different speeds. Amazing how much the feel can change with relatively small changes in speed…

8 Likes
#240

Anybody have “one weird trick” to get your ears accustomed to new listening source? Or techniques to “reset” your ears when changing sources?

I got a Worng SoundStage, and between my two sets of headphones, my phone, and my very average speakers, I got sonically “lost” on where things could/should sit.

I just use vanilla Apple earbuds most of the time for casual listening - like a heathan. I pulled out my “nice” headphones (old Senheiser 280 HD’s), which I haven’t used in a spell, and they have much less low end response. At a blush, they sounded very airy, and it was hard to re-orient my ears.

I’m normally mixing to my speakers and to what I hear, but usually on other sources it sounds “terrible”. I’m not recording for posterity at this point, still learning my system, but I’m getting much closer to the point of needing to clean my master mix up - SoundStage is a hopefully a tool to assist in this regard.

Listening advice welcome.

#241

No tricks, but have found consistently working with one set of high quality monitors to be extremely beneficial. All my recording, mixing and mastering work, as well as all of my home pleasure listening, is done through the same pair of ATCs. Out and about I use a Fiio X5 with Etymotic ER-4XRs, but that’s only cos I cant carry the 60kg of ATCs around with me. :slight_smile:

2 Likes
#243

Interesting topic, something I’ve thought a lot about recently.

It’s pretty common for audio engineers to switch back and forth between different sets of speakers/mono summed or quieter/louder versions of the mix/headphones/“crappy” references like cheap computer speakers or mixcubes. Keeping their ears fresh and switching as they work in order to hear how things translate across different playback systems, as well as spot things like phase issues.

If you listen to things on the apple earbuds and still enjoy them (I do that too), it can be interesting to try to analyze the differences between that and your “nice” full-range setup. All playback systems (except maybe extremely expensive ones in very treated/specially-built environments) have a certain characteristics to them that you can learn and utilize to your advantage. For example, I know that my Sony mdr-7506 are a bit treble heavy to my ears, so if I listen on those, I kind of know when they are getting too intense, and can correct.

If you are having trouble figuring out where to fit things, the issue might be too many sounds either in the general arrangement or in the same frequency range fighting/masking each other. Try rearranging so that it still gets your point across but is less (voices, reverb, etc.)

1 Like
#244

For quick mastering (level, eq) the brainworx stuff is pretty good. I don’t like it for final masters though, it’s fine for a quick pass to make something loud enough to listen to or share.

I’ve built up a small set of mastering plugins that I like including the Shadow Hills compressor, chandler curve bender, and oxford limiter.

I always use compression on the mix and master, but never so heavy that it’s obvious unless that’s the sound I want for the piece.

1 Like