Dubstepforum.com

serox wrote:I still leave the master dry but I dont know if I should explore by putting things on the master.

I hear so many mixed comments about this so I am not sure what to do!

If anyone with real knowledge can give some advice that would be great. Ie, EQ on master after compressor etc

if sending to master keep it clean
self/dj renders you do learn some mastering techniques and go nuts
personally i do self masters before sending off to djs or for my sets
release wise i leave it to the pros with the gear and room setup i envy

deadly habit wrote:

serox wrote:I still leave the master dry but I dont know if I should explore by putting things on the master.

I hear so many mixed comments about this so I am not sure what to do!

If anyone with real knowledge can give some advice that would be great. Ie, EQ on master after compressor etc

if sending to master keep it clean
self/dj renders you do learn some mastering techniques and go nuts
personally i do self masters before sending off to djs or for my sets
release wise i leave it to the pros with the gear and room setup i envy

Yeah agreed, I ALWAYS keep the master track in Ableton clean these days though. After having a bad experience where I wanted to get a track mastered but realised I only had an already comressed wav file of it and the project file was corrupt! So these days I always keep uncompressed backup wavs of everything I make.

the only time i send off to master when i have stuff on my master is when i start from the get go mixing into a compressor for effect from the get go
still keep headroom though
ie: tune in my sig

If I send soemthing to be mastered I send multiple stems.

see i think you shouldn't have to send stems when it comes to mastering
if you're sending stems it should be going to a mixing engineer pre mastering

deadly habit wrote:see i think you shouldn't have to send stems when it comes to mastering
if you're sending stems it should be going to a mixing engineer pre mastering

+1

deadly habit wrote:see i think you shouldn't have to send stems when it comes to mastering
if you're sending stems it should be going to a mixing engineer pre mastering

Old school. Mastering houses are being forced to provide more functionality.

paravrais wrote:

nowaysj wrote:Why doesn't live render mp3 by the way? They always have some shit excuse for their deficiencies, what's this one?

God knows why, guess they just don't think it's important.

@thor beatz - You still really don't get what I'm saying. It's all ONE problem. I don't understand why this is so hard for you. I want to export a naked wav from ableton right? Done. Easy, no problem. Now because of that it doesn't make sense for me to do my limiting in Ableton because then I'd have to render another wav (my labelling system is fine but it takes LONGER to render an extra wav, then convert that to mp3 than to just convert the original wav).

So the EASIEST and SIMPLEST thing for me to do is to render that original wav from ableton, load it into audacity, apply limiting and then export as mp3. How is that making things harder for myself? That's literally the simplest way to do it and if you know of a much easier one then why haven't you mentioned it yet

ALL I WANTED TO KNOW WAS IF THERE WAS A PROGRAM LIKE AUDACITY THAT LET YOU APPLY VSTS IN REALTIME. THAT'S REALLY ALL. SERIOUSLY. NOTHING ELSE.

I don't have any problems with anything else, it just annoys me that in audacity it takes ages to apply the effect each time.

How is that hard to understand? I've tried to put it as simply as possible over and over again and still people are confused...I knew I should never have come here to ask a simple question *sigh*

haha, Well you keep altering your question tbh.

To answer your latest question: download wavosaur for free. Load your limiter, click on tools>vst>processing to have realtime preview. To adjust parameters go to tools>vst>vst rack>view.

Apply processing when ready. export to mp3.

I'm happy this thread has finally worked it's way into becoming an interesting discussion

deadly habit wrote:see i think you shouldn't have to send stems when it comes to mastering
if you're sending stems it should be going to a mixing engineer pre mastering

Good point.

Tbh I would always send a dry version to get mix/mastered and maybe include a version with the limiter to give an idea how I want it to end up. I would also try to send stems because it makes sense when it comes to making it all better!

nowaysj wrote:

deadly habit wrote:see i think you shouldn't have to send stems when it comes to mastering
if you're sending stems it should be going to a mixing engineer pre mastering

Old school. Mastering houses are being forced to provide more functionality.

indeed, most good mastering engineers will also mix it perfectly. Infact he can anticipate and overview the whole process throughout the stages. Besides, with electronic music, most mixes are pretty good to start with. It just gives the mastering engineer more freedom. Then again most people just want their mix to be brickwalled these days.

http://www.wavosaur.com/download.php


paravrais wrote:
nowaysj wrote:
Why doesn't live render mp3 by the way? They always have some shit excuse for their deficiencies, what's this one?


God knows why, guess they just don't think it's important.

@thor beatz - You still really don't get what I'm saying. It's all ONE problem. I don't understand why this is so hard for you. I want to export a naked wav from ableton right? Done. Easy, no problem. Now because of that it doesn't make sense for me to do my limiting in Ableton because then I'd have to render another wav (my labelling system is fine but it takes LONGER to render an extra wav, then convert that to mp3 than to just convert the original wav).

So the EASIEST and SIMPLEST thing for me to do is to render that original wav from ableton, load it into audacity, apply limiting and then export as mp3. How is that making things harder for myself? That's literally the simplest way to do it and if you know of a much easier one then why haven't you mentioned it yet

ALL I WANTED TO KNOW WAS IF THERE WAS A PROGRAM LIKE AUDACITY THAT LET YOU APPLY VSTS IN REALTIME. THAT'S REALLY ALL. SERIOUSLY. NOTHING ELSE.

I don't have any problems with anything else, it just annoys me that in audacity it takes ages to apply the effect each time.

How is that hard to understand? I've tried to put it as simply as possible over and over again and still people are confused...I knew I should never have come here to ask a simple question *sigh*


haha, Well you keep altering your question tbh.

To answer your latest question: download wavosaur for free. Load your limiter, click on tools>vst>processing to have realtime preview. To adjust parameters go to tools>vst>vst rack>view.

Apply processing when ready. export to mp3.

I really haven't altered my question a single time, I think you probably got confused because I originally gave the backstory to my problem and maybe you skimmed it without realising it was only the end bit I needed help with.

I know that's the only question I've asked because it's the only thing I need help with and the reason I made this thread XD I've edited my original post to make things more clear but I can assure you this is what I've said from the start and if you properly read my posts you will see this.

Cheers for the wavosaur link. Looks like that might do the job better than audacity.

paravrais wrote:People seem to be misunderstanding my problem here. I don't have any trouble converting to mp3 or using audacity or vsts XD I'm just asking if there are any programs that will let you see your waveform, have mp3/ogg export and easy + intuitive vst support for >100. That's all.

paravrais wrote:I just wanted to know if there was an easily available program that could combine the best features of exporting via Reaper and Audacity in one package.
As it seems like nobody knows of one I'm gonna simply keep exporting naked wavs then using audacity or reaper to limit and convert for playback on the web.
Dunno why so many people getting confused :s

paravrais wrote:ALL I WANTED TO KNOW WAS IF THERE WAS A PROGRAM LIKE AUDACITY THAT LET YOU APPLY VSTS IN REALTIME. THAT'S REALLY ALL. SERIOUSLY. NOTHING ELSE.
I don't have any problems with anything else, it just annoys me that in audacity it takes ages to apply the effect each time.
How is that hard to understand? I've tried to put it as simply as possible over and over again and still people are confused...I knew I should never have come here to ask a simple question *sigh*

^^^ Yeah cos it's not like I've been repeating the same thing OVER AND OVER.

thor_beatz wrote:the only problem you have is that if you want to export a mp3 in ableton you'll need to convert it. You dont need a finsishing/mastering program, you need fast converter i'd say.

I never said that, from the start I've said I need to apply limiting/mastering effects AFTER exporting a naked wav and want to be able to see my FINAL waveform before rendering.

thor_beatz wrote:(the problem was not being able to export mp3's and you end up wanting 2 different functions from 2 completely different programs)

You combine a bunch of things you dislike about different programs and present it as one problem. cluttering your folders, not seeing a waveform. not able to export a mp3. All your questions were already answered.

This is just rediculous. From the start I've kept the same question. You just couldn't be bothered to read what I said properly. I never said that I had no way of converting to mp3. I'm not a fucking idiot, I know itunes *can* do it but it's gonna sound like shit and if I just convert a naked wav then it will be peaking at -6db which is not what a I want as I detailed in my first posts. Just because a question has more than one parameter to it doesn't mean it's a different question. I know it's hard for you to understand that I wanted a program that has more than one function but do try to keep up...

The *root* of the problem is that Ableton doesn't support mp3 export but my question was never "Hw duz I convert 2 mp3 LoLzzzz"

nowaysj wrote:

deadly habit wrote:see i think you shouldn't have to send stems when it comes to mastering
if you're sending stems it should be going to a mixing engineer pre mastering

Old school. Mastering houses are being forced to provide more functionality.

I"ll gladly master from stems-- it'll just cost a lot more $, as it takes a whole lot more time.

It's easier for everyone-- and i've done this many, many times-- for me, or any ME, to request a re-mix. When i get sent things that peak at +2, w/ -4RMS, and a nice 5db bump at 6k... i'll tell the client, yes, I can go ahead and master this, but if you or the artist isn't completely pressed for time, you'll get a better result if you do X, Y, and Z in the mixdown. In the end, it costs them less $, and the artist's mixdowns get infintely better.

to answer paravais' Q... why not just mix into a a real-time analyzer? I presume all you want is info on level, balance, and clipping, right? In a mastering session, I keep analyzers on whatever inputs & outputs are relevant. It's really just for nerdy fun, to pat myself on the back and go "yay, i really did get an extra .8db out of doing X process," but if you want real-time feedback-- that's the way to go.

does anyone know of any realistically priced hardware metering gear by chance? (an oscilloscope source would be nice too)
also mastering guys, what do you think of the bob katz k system?

Sharmaji wrote:

nowaysj wrote:

deadly habit wrote:see i think you shouldn't have to send stems when it comes to mastering
if you're sending stems it should be going to a mixing engineer pre mastering

Old school. Mastering houses are being forced to provide more functionality.

I"ll gladly master from stems-- it'll just cost a lot more $, as it takes a whole lot more time.

It's easier for everyone-- and i've done this many, many times-- for me, or any ME, to request a re-mix. When i get sent things that peak at +2, w/ -4RMS, and a nice 5db bump at 6k... i'll tell the client, yes, I can go ahead and master this, but if you or the artist isn't completely pressed for time, you'll get a better result if you do X, Y, and Z in the mixdown. In the end, it costs them less $, and the artist's mixdowns get infintely better.

to answer paravais' Q... why not just mix into a a real-time analyzer? I presume all you want is info on level, balance, and clipping, right? In a mastering session, I keep analyzers on whatever inputs & outputs are relevant. It's really just for nerdy fun, to pat myself on the back and go "yay, i really did get an extra .8db out of doing X process," but if you want real-time feedback-- that's the way to go.

Well I use smexoscope and inspector whilst I'm mixing to keep an eye on everything, usually only look at them late in the day when my ears are tired to make sure I'm not missing things. But I've got an OCD thing where I need to *see* a waveform that final second before I render to share on the net. I dunno why, it's like it doesn't feel finished to me till I've loaded it up and had a good look at the waveform O.o

deadly habit wrote:does anyone know of any realistically priced hardware metering gear by chance? (an oscilloscope source would be nice too)
also mastering guys, what do you think of the bob katz k system?

I think it's handy, and i think using VU meters to correlate loudness rather than a particular digital # is a solid idea. However, I also think that we're talking about largely-imbalanced music when we're talking about dubstep-- too much bass, very bright highs, and not a ton of your standard 400hz-2khz info. Percieved loudness changes a ton when there's a big hole in the freq. range that the human ear is attuned to.

w/ that said, when it sounds good and balanced at 83-86db, it usually sounds good, regardless. I check on my m-audios at around 100db to see if things are awful, and i check in cans as well, but yeah-- if it sounds good, it IS good.

deadly, you can use your VLA as a meter. just calibrate it and turn the thresholds all the way up to +15 so that you're not inadvertently compressing something.

paravrais wrote:

paravrais wrote:People seem to be misunderstanding my problem here. I don't have any trouble converting to mp3 or using audacity or vsts XD I'm just asking if there are any programs that will let you see your waveform, have mp3/ogg export and easy + intuitive vst support for >100. That's all.

paravrais wrote:I just wanted to know if there was an easily available program that could combine the best features of exporting via Reaper and Audacity in one package.
As it seems like nobody knows of one I'm gonna simply keep exporting naked wavs then using audacity or reaper to limit and convert for playback on the web.
Dunno why so many people getting confused :s

paravrais wrote:ALL I WANTED TO KNOW WAS IF THERE WAS A PROGRAM LIKE AUDACITY THAT LET YOU APPLY VSTS IN REALTIME. THAT'S REALLY ALL. SERIOUSLY. NOTHING ELSE.
I don't have any problems with anything else, it just annoys me that in audacity it takes ages to apply the effect each time.
How is that hard to understand? I've tried to put it as simply as possible over and over again and still people are confused...I knew I should never have come here to ask a simple question *sigh*

^^^ Yeah cos it's not like I've been repeating the same thing OVER AND OVER.

thor_beatz wrote:the only problem you have is that if you want to export a mp3 in ableton you'll need to convert it. You dont need a finsishing/mastering program, you need fast converter i'd say.

I never said that, from the start I've said I need to apply limiting/mastering effects AFTER exporting a naked wav and want to be able to see my FINAL waveform before rendering.

thor_beatz wrote:(the problem was not being able to export mp3's and you end up wanting 2 different functions from 2 completely different programs)

You combine a bunch of things you dislike about different programs and present it as one problem. cluttering your folders, not seeing a waveform. not able to export a mp3. All your questions were already answered.

This is just rediculous. From the start I've kept the same question. You just couldn't be bothered to read what I said properly. I never said that I had no way of converting to mp3. I'm not a fucking idiot, I know itunes *can* do it but it's gonna sound like shit and if I just convert a naked wav then it will be peaking at -6db which is not what a I want as I detailed in my first posts. Just because a question has more than one parameter to it doesn't mean it's a different question. I know it's hard for you to understand that I wanted a program that has more than one function but do try to keep up...

The *root* of the problem is that Ableton doesn't support mp3 export but my question was never "Hw duz I convert 2 mp3 LoLzzzz"

Sorry for wanting to grasp why you work the way yo do. Because if your workflow would be different a lot of the unwanted "parameters" you speak of could be tackled. I just don't see the advantage of working that way, thats all.

once distilled I gave you an answer that covers all the parameters I believe

ALL I WANTED TO KNOW WAS IF THERE WAS A PROGRAM LIKE AUDACITY THAT LET YOU APPLY VSTS IN REALTIME. THAT'S REALLY ALL. SERIOUSLY. NOTHING ELSE.

wavosaur does exactly that. (pleased to help)

You keep mentioning this magical alternative workflow method I could use but without actually saying what it is *scratches head*. Pretty sure there isn't one.