Dubstepforum.com

Cheers for comments.

Yeah as macc says its important to have the same for every mix. ive been doing this for some years now, and always use the same. Its always just a starting point, just a different starting point than flat! And with the UA stuff you know youre getting good quality and characterful (word?) sound.

I totally agree sticking master eqs etc on after youve mixed to fix a bad mix is a bad idea. I also think a limiter is a terrible idea on the master.

Im not trying to say this is the only, or even the best way to do things, just something ive found useful over the many years of learning off people like macc and scope at SC and plec on the UA forums (and others) and mixing. I used to have nothing on the master for years fwiw.

the dub lemon wrote:Often in the process of making a tune I decide to bounce it down to give it a listen, often for this purpose I'll stick and eq and limiter on the master to get it sounding a bit nicer and louder to compare with other tracks. Often a tiny bit of subtle eq on th master makes all the difference so what I'm wander is when I should at the point turn the eq off then go and try and eq and adjust the mix of the various elements to try and get it closer to the sound which I like with the eq on the master or is it standard practice to think that if that sound can be achieved with some eq on the master I'll leave that to the end of the mixdown/the mastering engineer?

I know that generally the mixdown should be as good as possible with out master processing but at the same time I'm thinking that eqing the whole sound together gives it that little but more cohesion by adjusting the sound as one rather than individual parts.

So what are your feelings on this, eq the master and listen to it then turn the eq off and try and recreate or if it can be eqed to sound nice then leave that to some master eqing at the end?

That all sounds a bit alien to me tbh.

I dont have anything on my master! if there is something spiking then I fix that noise, thats it.

nowaysj wrote:Can one of you fatso guys post up some A/B with a few different sources. I'd really like to hear the effect that thing is having. Are we speaking of uad's fatso, or the hardware unit?

ive not got the hardware but i can post up some A/Bs of the UAD Fatso if you want?

Id also strongly recommend everyone check out nebula.

Its a bit of a headfuck, weird website and hard to find all the libraries but worth all the effort. The preamps, reverbs and eqs are all stunning and even beat UAD imo.

http://www.acustica-audio.com/

macc wrote:It's not mastering or anything like that, just... how can you put it.... character building. Or something

I like to think of bus compression (on a group, or on the master bus) as something that creates interactions-- you know, kick pushes the hihat out of the way, etc. so yeah, character via creating deeper relationships between sounds.

Nice thread. I'll start playing around with this when I get home.

Sharmaji wrote:

macc wrote:It's not mastering or anything like that, just... how can you put it.... character building. Or something

I like to think of bus compression (on a group, or on the master bus) as something that creates interactions-- you know, kick pushes the hihat out of the way, etc. so yeah, character via creating deeper relationships between sounds.

Interactions between elements is one thing that I really love in a track. And I think dubstep has a lot of space for growth in that area, a lot of different ways to create these sorts of relationships. One reason is because the drum structure is more flexible than 4x4

On that point - things pushing things out of the way - I always preferred that to sidechaining, it just feels better to have them properly equalised (if necessary) and working together under one compressor, rather than one pushing the other out of the way. Hate that seasick oversidechained sound, at least, I don't want it in my stuff.

Personally I only do it on groups. Compressing everything together - for me, for my taste and IMO - robs too much space from a mix. Gelling things together at group level but letting each group have its space is the best of both for my taste. Put another way, if you mix into it, you generally tend to push against a compressor a bit more. then if you remove it, your mix falls apart. I can say for sure that mixing into a bus compressor vs how I use a comp in mastering are compleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeetely different.

And behind all this is the wonderful wonderful point that it's about leanring what you like to hear, and implementing it. Making music sound how you want. Some people like 'le squish', some people like it nice and open.... Isn't making music great?!

This has turned into a great thread, some much interesting stuff in here, nice one guys! I just wish I had more time to get experiment more.

I don't actually mix into a limiter or EQ and I never put anything on the master buss as I feel my ears aren't trained enough to make a decent enough decision to print a final shape to a track. All my friends who produce always run their tracks through Ozone or T-Racks at the end but I don't feel can I can make a decent enough judgment on whether I've made is sounds better or just squashed the fuck out of it.

I've got Bob Katz's mastering book to read even though I have no actually interest in becoming a mastering engineer of any sorts but I hope it might help me out a bit although there's only so much you can learn from a book.

What spawn this thread is the fact that while I never leave anything on the mastering buss (apart from maybe a dithering plugin) I do tend to stick an EQ on there just to see what I can do to make it sound better and generally a shelf boost at the top end and a little cut around 1000hz seems to make the world of difference (I think my lack of decent top end is my biggest problem). This makes me think that a decent mastering engineer could probably get a great sound from it if I can make is sound so much better with a touch of cubase's built in EQ but then that leaves me feeling that if thats the sound I'm wanting it should probably sound like that anyway. The idea of mixing into a pre-setup EQ sounds quite interesting as like I've said I always find the top end is lacking but I reckon I'll be always worrying that I've made the wrong decision, I will give it a go at some point though.

macc wrote:On that point - things pushing things out of the way - I always preferred that to sidechaining, it just feels better to have them properly equalised (if necessary) and working together under one compressor, rather than one pushing the other out of the way. Hate that seasick oversidechained sound, at least, I don't want it in my stuff.

Personally I only do it on groups. Compressing everything together - for me, for my taste and IMO - robs too much space from a mix. Gelling things together at group level but letting each group have its space is the best of both for my taste. Put another way, if you mix into it, you generally tend to push against a compressor a bit more. then if you remove it, your mix falls apart. I can say for sure that mixing into a bus compressor vs how I use a comp in mastering are compleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeetely different.

And behind all this is the wonderful wonderful point that it's about leanring what you like to hear, and implementing it. Making music sound how you want. Some people like 'le squish', some people like it nice and open.... Isn't making music great?!

Hmm

Must admit i went from nothing on the master to the whole kit and kaboodle... never tried individual elements. I used to use Pultec but prefer Helios now, the huge LF boost is great. Might try without the comp, but kind of happy how it is. The dBU doing 1-2dB @ 1:1.5/ 1:2 ish isnt that audible but noticeable, if that makes sense.

You hinted at it when i sent you "we both" ages ago and you sent back a eq preset with a broad boost at around 10k, until you pointed it out i never noticed how dull everything i did was.

I sometimes 'mix into the compressor' But i find at times without the right compressor attack/release settings i cant quite get it right.

My preferred comp for this job is the waves SSL Channel (not to be mistaken for the infamous SSL Buss comp). I dont know but the compressor on this lil plug adds so much character i cant find in other modern compressors like the elisia m-pressor or The Glue.

Am i right saying that you will need a fast attack and medium/fast release? otherwise i feel your going to artificially induce transients to the material at hand.
Any tips on this would be great.!

With the EQ on the master, are you guys doing this pre mixer or post mixer? Does it matter?

Depone wrote:
Am i right saying that you will need a fast attack and medium/fast release? otherwise i feel your going to artificially induce transients to the material at hand.
Any tips on this would be great.!

really it depends what you want-- those SSL G series emulations for the logic compressor have preset attacks around 10, 20, and 30ms and then the same choices in release, or auto-release, at 2,4, or 10:1 ratio. i'll choose my attack time based on how transient the program material is, and how much of that i want to keep. but yeah, in a mixdown stage, if i want to hear a compressor, i'll generally really let it work, 3-4 db or so (i'll rarely make a compressor work so hard in a serial setup in mastering). The idea isn't to change the characteristics of transient info in the tune, but enhance it-- make things 'dance' w/ each other.

or, you know, smack the shit out of the transients a lá ed banger.

That's one thing about a compressor set up by default. It's almost guaranteed that the attack/release time will be wrong, or rather, could be better. Change that, you change the mix. Unless it is a very good programme-dependent design, you will almost have to change it. Even if it is prog-dependent, there might be a more suitable setting, which will in turn change your mix.

[at this point I wish everyone reading could sit in my chair and play just with the attack and release on the Summit, it's impossible to put what I want to describe into words]

One point for the UAD VCU jobby there - no time constants to change, so you can just get on with it!

I'd certainly be inclined to leave the attack fairly open though, 20-30ms, but it is absolutely impossible to say as it will vary for every tune, your taste etc.

(trying to talk from a mixing POV and not mastering here btw, but it is tough!)

So its pretty much as i suspected, all down to the material at hand. Music so bloody subjective!

crytek wrote:Nice thread. I'll start playing around with this when I get home.

Depone wrote:So its pretty much as i suspected, all down to the material at hand. Music so bloody subjective!

Ok then, I'll let you into my secret;

+2dB high shelf at 10kHz
+2dB low shelf at 100Hz
-1dB gentle cut @ 1kHz

Ratio of 2.5:1
Threshold @ -6
Attack = 12ms
Release = 50ms

Limit 3 dB


Works on absolutely everything.

I am ready to charge 30$ a track!

macc wrote:

Depone wrote:So its pretty much as i suspected, all down to the material at hand. Music so bloody subjective!

Ok then, I'll let you into my secret;

+2dB high shelf at 10kHz
+2dB low shelf at 100Hz
-1dB gentle cut @ 1kHz

Ratio of 2.5:1
Threshold @ -6
Attack = 12ms
Release = 50ms

Limit 3 dB


Works on absolutely everything.

Macc, your giving me top secret info. Are you not scared im going to steal your clients now?
but yeah actually my 'leg up' audio service is doing better than i thought. i've made aprox £100 so far and now doing work for a label Good times

Depone wrote:i've made aprox £100 so far

hmmm... maybe micro transactions really are the future?

That's £80. I want my 20% for giving you TEH MAJIK SETTINZ