Always remember to treat each recording as an individual experience, constant repetition in practice will develop problem-solving habits, and you’ll have a trick up your sleeve for anything that arises before you know it.
sound (audio) is so much more related to silence than visuals are related to the abscence of a visual perception. thats why its always a trip into the unknown. i think a perfect master guides the listener into the sound experience
genre specific (mainly modern House music and derivatives) but if you're aiming for -14LUFS you're missing the extra glue /pump/energy that comes with pushing the limiter ..yes you will need to adjust the mix(e.g turn down certain higher freq sounds) but you really need to push your mixes harder to get that sound...even if streaming platforms do turn it down.
Nik Plus, if you’re making any music that will be played in a club, loudness is still very relevant, regardless of what happens on streaming services. No house/techno DJ is going to play your track if it’s hitting at -14LUFS
I think this kind of applies to every genre. Obviously, house music likes their tracks louder than rock. But even with rock, you're better off aiming way higher than -14. If you master a track to -9 and the streaming services turn it down to -14, it's going to sound louder than if you master it to -14. I know this from personal experience. I'm not sure exactly what causes this, but it may have something to do with the reducing of the dynamic range that happens when you master loud. When you master to -9, to pick a random number, you're inevitably squashing your peaks and raising your low-level signal at the same time. So when it's turned down to -14, you still have a track that's at a more consistent volume than if you mastered "quiet.". Now, I'm not saying that you should completely get rid of the dynamics in your mix. I'm just saying that if they're well controlled, the song is going to sound louder even after it's turned down. There are a few genres where this probably isn't the right move -- jazz, classical, etc. -- but even in rock the audience will expect a certain dynamic consistency. And it's not a recent phenomenon either.
"correct" is not only a funny word but a funny state of mind. Nothing but an illusion in the end. A master or sound in general is "good" if you like the acoustic result. After all, sound is nothing else than sonic waves. All your ears can recieve are sonic waves, ergo energy. The rest is made up by your mind, what you where trained for, what you learned, ergo your preferences. Nothing but limitations. A creative person shouldn't limit him or herself within the non existing self defined borders of "wrong" or "rights". Have joy and be sound. You said many thoughtful things and I like that you are going a step deeper with your thoughts. Very interesting to listen to that.
Your kinda right, I loathe people that say you should EQ like this or this is the right reverb etc etc, however, the questions was about technical levels, nothing to do with being a good mix, it can be shite mix at -14lufs, a near-perfect dynamic range for streaming but it's still a shite mix/crap song etc etc
It's not though. Anything other than streaming will still benefit from loudness, and DJs won't bother with your tracks if they're 7 dBs below the mean.
@@MiDnYTe25 yes I know. It's sad that even though we have normalization processing in the streaming service, people are still mastering their songs to be compressed as shit, and thing them at the drums' transients have to be clipped to sound good and "not to poke through the mix"...
@@hithere4289 that's a matter of preferences. I genuinely like music not to be super compressed, even electronic and dance. That said, just my 2 cents.
I think it’s more of a consistency thing, when all tracks are more or less the same dB range they blend together nicely without you having to worry about the overall volume, plus everyone’s got glue compressors and vintage compression emulators built into their Daws so why tf not
The worst thing is when your label doesn't even allow you to communicate with your mastering engineer. I've been in a situation where I felt the master butchered the song by squeezing it too much (really didn't fit the track and it killed a lot of the punch for the sake of loudness) but the label told me that's just how the mastering will be and that's that. This has never happened to me before. Usually the engineer with get in touch and tell me to make some changes if needed, or if the first master isn't to my liking he/she will make whatever revision I wanted and we're all good. I mean they are responsible for the final touches on my work of art, so I'm not gonna accept something that isn't good. Subjective or not, a mastering engineer should respect the song and talk to the client before working on it. If you build a house and pay someone to paint it, you wouldn't accept it if they changed the color you wanted, you know?
Cherubs - Short of Popular (1996). I was at Terra Nova in Austin and asked if the rumors were true that Cherubs asked him to push the levels until his board broke and he said Yes. That the mixes they brought sounded great but the band just wanted to continue to be excessive with loudness and ugly. I forgot what broke, something that only affected one channel. It resulted in a record that makes your stereo sound broken too. I love Car Jack Fairy th-cam.com/video/AOmtTotDcVA/w-d-xo.html
Adding a signature is kind of optional and a bit of a grey area. Some clients want as little of a signature as possible, others want as much of a signature as possible. Ultimately, it often comes down to how good the mix is.. an exceptional recording is rarely made better with colouration, but most recordings aren’t exceptional 🙂
15:40 in fact they do matter. I know a ghost producer, no lable wants to release his music. Then he selled his music to a big name in the EDM scene, and suddenly all big labels want to release the verry same track. So dont say Names doesnt matter. If u have no big name u need friend with big name. No matter how good your music is, u need friends to open some doors for you.
record labels, film studios and so on often have mostly business type people and not artistic type, so they always need someone to co-sign the art to know that it's 'good'
Couldn't agree more. I was a DJ first and politics in a music scene are everything... I can't speak for all genres but in electronic genres - particularly club based music like house etc its definitely a big thing... I know guys who can out mix(DJ context), out scratch, out produce, out mix(productiin context), out master the bigger names but don't get much of a second look because they aren't brown nosers.
Its not about loud anymore, the question is "how squeezed do you want it" ? And i dont think you risk clipping if you have 0 penalty on spotify, the 0 point is not absolute, the 0 is -14 lufs dbfs if i undarstand it correctly, and then a limiter if you are way below 14 lufs
Mastering in general is getting a greater sound out of all the sound systems your music will get played from, becoming a master of mastering means knowing how and where to add that last 5% of effects that all may happen to be doing on about 5-15%. Keep your low sub mono, Dynamics diverse, And stereo image smooth Loudness can come last, because the mix should sound as good as possible so it can be easier to just add a good limiter to the master. ;D balance is key Personally I like the default limiters in different daws, and plus a bit of saturation, but Ozone 5, 8, 9 and Pro-L are awesome!
I'm falling in love with elysia's alpha master. I don't even have the UAD version, and it sounds amazing. Have you tried it? Don't get me wrong. I make good use of Pro-L, the UAD LA-2A, both of Klanghelm's compressors (which are really 7 different compressors that all work well as limiters), and the ever-so-sexy sounding Fairchild 670 from UAD, and others that sometimes are just what the doctor ordered, but elysia have really hit a home run with their 2 buss and master compressors.
@@artysanmobile Man, we got a real life sad boy on the loose. Have you considered therapy or lifestyle changes? Your lame attitude and expression of discontentment is exceptionally troubling in this case as it was so unprovoked and out of place. I mean, do you not have conversations with people that aren't expressly purpose driven? Recreation communication is not always highly devised or original. I mean I hear people repeat the same stories within a few month time frame sometimes; phrases within hours/days/weeks and for extended periods of time. To be completely unaware and/or unengaged in this kind of behavior is indicative of a narcissistic or antisocial personality traits. Maybe it's just that you have a sheltered sense of subjective superiority? Indeed those who look down on others from a standpoint of "superior" behavior patterns and interests are most likely to have low levels of emotional intelligence (self control) meaning they get triggered easily and constantly react to things with disapproval are some of the most disliked people in existence. Not just by other people but by themselves. It's a low self esteem that drives people toward putting others down...
I stopped looking at analysers a long time ago, but the checking of the low end and eq balance really is a neat trick for the "fake" or "mockup" masters that i do
I think you could have explained how distortion also effects our perception of loudness. It’s not just the mastering engineers style , clip distortion also makes us think things are louder and saturation will obviously create extra harmonics (useful for sub). Should all be said i think.
I have this simple rule that kinda helped me a lot while mixing and mastering. Use any tool only when you hear a problem that tool can fix. I can see bunchload of people throwing an unnecessary amount of compression just because "it should sound better glued" or adding bunchload of exciters just because "it should make it more bright and colorful". I think the trick is not in learning the supposed effect of 100 magic boxes to choose from. I think it's in learning of what sound is, how it works, how it gets transfered and how an ear precieves it. I bet I can get a louder mix with a knowledge of fletcher-munson curves, simple EQ and a barebone limiter than anyone who slaps fifteen compressors and exciters in a cascade.
Making perfect sense. Hear. Feel. Master. Simple, thanks. I want another hour or three of this type of soliloquy (about mixing and mastering and how to learn to 'HEAR'.) Please.
Great video! We'll never have 100% agreement and I agree with how subjective all of this is. I've been doing home recording for decades and I feel like my recordings are getting better but I still have a lot to learn. I appreciate each and every one of these videos.
Hello! As you rightly state in the video "Tonal Balance" is key to a good track experience for the listener... But this is often hard to HEAR for the budding audio Engineer. A tool that has helped me greatly is the "Tonal Balance Analyzer" that is a part of the iZotope package... This doesn't do anything except show you where your song sits in each of the important frequency bands... This can be very helpful when you are trying to understand why your track sounds the way it does and also shows you areas of deficiencies and excesses in each band when you might need to go back to the mix to make adjustments...Hope this helps! Cheers!!!
i intenionally clip the pro-c on the masterbus with up to 2db at most for the occasional peak. i think it sounds good, and it also eases some of the work from the final limiters; i tend to use two, one for gain and one for TP limiting. Merry Christmas
Listening at very low volumes on calibrated headphones can tell you if the eq balance is right and if the track is too hyped/squashed, or if things are getting lost. When you feel you get it right at low volumes, turn it way up and you will immediately know if you get it right. If not, turn it way down and try again. I notice that commercial released songs that dont sound good to me, sound very mispleasing and sometimes downright horrible at very low volumes.
I do believe that a good Mastering gives the Mix the final glue. There are a lot of Mastering Styles out there - and it is very important to do the Master based on the genre it is for. You should not Master Psytrance oder Progressive Trance like "Rock", "Klassik" or a "Irish Folk" Song. So some things yes they are routine. BUT if you ask a DJ - he may say: I want that Track to have a Powerfull lowend when it comes to the Club. So what that means is - it needs to fit for where the song is played. Others say i dont need that it need to sound great on Readio or TV - so there is more to a great Master then just the way he is hearing stuff. It is experience WHAT the mix will Sound like when it is played to the audience. You can have best of best Stuff and fuck up everything becourse the mix is not as Loud and powerfull masterd like the "modern" Hits. That is one point - the Master can smash the Track and it could be great selling to the audience. Other side it is destruktiv masterd and from quality point of view hard to understand but in some Genres you hust need to run it in to the Maximizer after the Equing and M/S Control is done and it will be ready. And there we are back by "Shit in shit out" even the best Mastering cannot make a Track great - but it can make it sound best possible. But its no garantie for success! Think about Elvis or Beatles. They had die for what we could reach on Recording and Mixing now days. Success has everything done with how the industrie sell the product. And if you dont believe watch "casting shows" - it is only marketing what brings the Success. You could produce genius wet dreams but if no one knows you, no one will hear the musik. And we all spend millions into Producing gear - without concept how to sell the product. So normaly we go to a label that does the marketing and so on. But in that way - if youre out, youre done! And your musik will lost in time. So the Master need to FIT in to that prozess, makes the Song shine. And be cheap enogh to get the money to what realy eats our Money - the Way to reach the audience. That point is mostly underrated. :)
There is a very interesting topic that noone seems to talk about when it comes to "mastering engineer not doing anything". Actually the correct sentence should be "Ideally, a master should come as identical to the mix as possible but louder". These are two different things, let me explain why. The first one sounds like mastering is really a very easy process, just put a limiter and thats it, you didn't intervene the mix. But what people don't talk about is when you put a limiter (and especially try to get a louder master), the frequency balance, the vocal balance, dynamics and everything else changes! The art of mastering is not "DOING NOTHING", It is "BEING ABLE TO MAKE IT SOUND LOUD YET CONSERVE THE TONAL BALANCE, MIX BALANCE and DYNAMICS" or even enhance these a little. Two vastly different things. Just my 2 cent on the subject :)
hell yeah! Being comfortable with your work is really what creates the illusion of perfection, at least gives you a reason for what moves you make. Thanks White Sea! Bye-bye
It's not just about compression on those 2 tracks. Clearly the exciter is doing things with the high end of the 2nd track. That makes the first track sound duller. Thank you for talking about what you can see from a waveform and to use your ears. I did around 400 mixes on 24 track sessions and I never saw a waveform from any of them. "Names do not matter. At all." Well spoken.
Assuming your mix sounds great where it’s at, don’t ever mess with your limiter because your loudness plugin is telling you that your true peak levels are above 0. If it sounds fantastic, just leave it. That’s what loudness normalization is for and if your client doesn’t understand that then respect their wishes but use a trim plugin or something to reduce the volume after the limiter so at least the dynamics stay mostly intact the way you have them. Great video! Definitely one of my favorite channels and helps me stay sharp. 🤘
The audio engineer for Flaming Lips' "At War With The Mystics" album won a Grammy for his engineering. I have that CD and loaded the song "It Over Takes Me" in Audacity with clipping indicator on. IT's full of RETS! or RED color (clipped waveforms over 0db). Sounds AMAZING in my car with two 10in. sealed subwoofers in the trunk.
Hi, nice you bring this subject up ! About True Peaks in the red : My work ethic as far as mastering is concerned is that what comes out of my studio should sound the same - ie. no surprises - whatever the context, and in this case in particular, whatever the converter. The problem with going in the red is that you take the risk that it may sound terrible on certain systems because the converter will distort in a bad way (or even horribly). But if the clients wants it, I will give him both, with and without the peaks. As for the artistic side of things, if your track does not sound distorted enough, or clipped enough, fine, then go for some more distortion with one of the gazilion plugins or boxes that do just that, they comme in ALL flavours But to me, counting on the random amount of clipping that random converters to give you that extra thing is just... unprofessional (I tried to stay polite). So I absolutely refuse to do that without providing ALSO a properly configured audio with it. After all my client might even prefer that one day 🙂
Clip over 0 db is just wrong because intersamples peaks just sound bad... Anyway what I look for, for judge a mastering engineer, is the DC Offset.. if is not 0,000% that mastering engineer is just a clown. Same thing for the center of the stereo image....
Hi! Would you be able to record a video and explain why the compressed and saturated sound may seem MUCH louder though the peak volume might be much less? For example, I took a drum loop that was peaking at zero if not even more, I threw a compressor and totape5 on it, and it was peaking at like -7db, though it seemed MUCH louder (like twice or around that). What are also the downsides of making the sound louder through compression and saturation? Would be make it harder to mix (because the sound will be fatter) or not? Please, would be very thankful for this and I'm sure I'm the only one ;)
This is a great point that belongs in any video on this subject. I've try to remember that using saturation before a compressor at every stage of a mix usually gives tremendous results. I've found that using different saturation tools on tracks not only does a great job of handling the first stage of compression, it easily creates a very natural sounding separation while fattening things up at the same time. All of the vintage UAD emulations are good for this, but SATIN and Klanghelm's SDRR offer such a wide range of saturation types and so much control that they can take mix through the roof. Warren Huartt did a great video where he took a "finished" mix and just added different instances of SATIN on some of the tracks, and the difference was remarkable. Thank you for bringing this up!
Great video, the talk about different eq db's was very eye opening for me, I keep my mixes very very quiet and try to have a peaceful vibe, and don't even try to master myself, but keeping your tips in mind arms me to keep my ears open for what will work best
I've been told clipping up to even +3 dBFS is okay for club masters... to make it more loud. But, I was told that back in like 2012. I think that nowadays, its possible to stay at 0 dBFS and still have it as loud. However, some clipping can sound "good," in some rooms/clubs. It really depends on the room and the speakers. I'm not really sure, but I'd rather stay safe at 0 dBFS, even for club masters... in 2019, nowadays. I could be wrong. My opinion.
Subjective versus technical. Art versus science. This is the challenge in that final phase of finishing a song. I'm glad you pointed out that louder always seems to equal better, even when it is not. Ultimately, the final mastering step needs to ensure that the listener can just enjoy the song without any burden of "feeling" that something is off or out of whack. I think most listeners inherently recognize poor quality, which gets in the way of an otherwise good song.
And to me without a doubt... It comes down to punch stereo width, and a psychoacoustically pleasant EQ curve that allows for blasting the track over any speaker. I don't think that stuff is so SOO subjective as every engineer claims.. There definitely are 'targets' and 'recipies' even if they change according to the input material.
I've alway felt that "going loud" is like going from 3D to 2D. It's just a wall of dullness. It's like looking at a curtained window instead of out the window.
@ 5:45 - Even if Spotify is lowering the volume of the track the digital clipping/distortion is still audible in the track. That usually sounds good to some people and they want that 'harsch'-ness on let's say, the drums. It's still going to be there even if Spotify is lowering to whole track. That's why you turn it up to the "red" imo.
The M.E. prepares a "production master" that, in the 1st instance, addresses the audio in terms of the reproduction format, (mastering to LP being the best example becasue of the specific needs of a stereo LP cutting lathe and the playback device), and then addressing "problems" or genre specifics as requested IF the mix engineer failed to do so. As stated, the compromises of the "fix it in the mix" mentality are compounded when it's left to the M/E. to repair things. Good vid.
I try to master my own music, but I've heard from a few other Music Producers that you shouldn't do that, because you're not getting some other ear for validation that it sounds ok. I think you can master your own music though, if you just learn to balance the mix, and compare it to similar music; you can be confident in knowing others will agree and like your master.
A lot of of the more extreme electronic music is self mastered! Totally do-able, keep at it man :) (I don't know what kind of music you are making but I'm sure you can master yourself)
@@yzmikh4570 Name a genre, I've probably dabbled in it... As for mastering, there's a LOT to learn, and I'm constantly not surprised that I have to learn something new in music. I just need to find the right mastering technique for all of my music to keep it consistent. Respect!
Another great video, Wytse. Your insights are great. This really helped me understand how the term "mastering" means something so different today than when I was an artist, and I still divide the processes the way they used to be done. Back then, the mastering phase was primarily about getting what the producer and mix engineer had done to translate to the different mediums properly. I had one album that was done in a year when it had to be mastered for vinyl, cassette, and CD. These required vastly different masters. Vinyl required the encoding that stripped the bass and boosted treble which was EQed exactly the opposite on playback so that the sound information could fit into the grooves. Cassette was a sonic nightmare in retrospect, but I was so excited when my second album was released on cassette that I didn't realize how shitty they sounded until CDs came out, and mastering for them was almost like voodoo at first. I don't understand why the mastering step is so different today, to be honest. I would want the producer and mixer to create the "flavour" and I would expect the mastering engineer to make sure there was consistency across tracks on an album, make sure the meta data is applied properly, and, like in days gone by, make versions of the music that are optimised for each streaming service so that iTunes, TH-cam, Spotify, or whichever would not touch the song at all because I doubt they are only adjusting gain to meet their loudness criteria. I would think that if they have to adjust loudness, they are using a compressor/limiter of some sort. And then possibly using another layer of file size compression. (You've said you upload your TH-cam videos at the highest quality possible, and I don't know if that means you're uploading lossless files and letting them use their file size compression, or you're doing that bit. I'd be curious to know more about how you do that because there are many quality choices for the user, so if you're uploading only one version of the file, TH-cam are at least re-rendering the other playback resolutions if not all of your files.) To me, if I'm mastering a song, I'm making a version that uses AAC for iTunes and meets Apple's loudness requirements. Likewise for each of the other distribution services. I think this is a "best practice" method that should be adopted from the days when a mastering engineer's primary purpose was to get the final output media to represent what they were given by the creative team (performers, producer, mixer) with the highest fidelity. Fidelity means faithfulness. The word is often misconstrued. The term Hi Fi got confused with "great sounding" when it actually meant the most accurate reproduction, and you can only do that if what you're giving to the distributor doesn't get altered by them at all, right?
I mix insane shit, usually clip by 12dB, totally rule over other tracks, ramp up the bass, ramp up the high, ramp up the mids, add reverb, plenty of reverb, makes everything sound epic, then phase that shit, then more reverb, saturation and stereo widening, make it fucking wide, then compress, usually use a few compressors, maybe 8, totally fucks the volume up to 60, also push the faders right up to the top, if you use a metal file you can file away some of the metal at the top of the fader's travel so you can push it even further, then add echo.
The DMG limiter has this function where by you link the threshold to the ceiling. The perceived loudness remains constant as you push the limiter. Kind of useful.
So just to make things clearer, it's better to make the track a little louder, so the platform will bring it down, then making it to quiet, and they have to bring it up?
As a listener / consumer of music I prefer a more dynamic end product then a very compressed one. In the mid 90’s when I was buying my first CD’s I noticed that newer productions of the time where louder then compared to ones from the late 80’s / early 90’s. But during the 1995-1998 era the loudness was still reasonble and comfortable compared to what happed in the early to mid 2000’s. When I create my own music I try to stay away from the red on the levels, for me as a structural engineer red means “error, somethings seriously wrong” like the load/stress is too much. I know it’s a weird comparison but seeing a peaked waveform (especially if it’s dense) makes me feel itchy🥶.
I’d think that the red that you are getting from client reference tracks is probably intersample peaks and a result of them downloading a compressed mp3. I think a wav master should never have ISP clipping.
Thank you for another quality video. You always make it clear an easy for me understand certain things. You should think about running courses (unless you already do of course) ;)
I think you covered this subject very well. It is subjective, it is genre specific, and if you don't feel confident in doing it yourself than you should get expert help. The same goes for mixing too. You need to know in advance what you are trying to achieve. So that highlights the importance of reference tracks to guide you and whoever might be needed to get your project radio ready or CD/digital/Vinyl/distributor platforms/consumer ready, etc. Most of us are ill equipped to master at home. Personally I would rather work with a qualified mastering engineer, same goes for mixing too. Yes, I would want to be hands on involved but to be willing to do whatever is required to get the best out of the process.
Clipping is important to specific genres, but here soft and hardclippers somewhere between -16 to - 6dB not the digital clipping because it is really awful. Most of the vst plugins work the best way at about the magical -20dB. The truth is plugins even don't work well with clipped content and usually have a limiter at the end of the chain. Analog clipping already active on about -6dB and the difference to digital is it turns the peaks to a more pleasing, saturated sound. You naturally will get a higher dynamic range if doing sort of classical or jazz mixes. For streaming it is plain simple turning the master fader down to not get caught by loudness penalties. would suggest looking at it from the perspective of Instruments and how to improve them - knowing what is crap on the dancefloor anyway(low rumble, hiss, dc offset, phase, you name it) knowing what works is a huge win. Knowing about the targets, energy and emotion. The other huge win is knowing how much compression to apply. Generally a 2:1 ratio will do its thing on masters, but for mixing for example it is nice to know that square waves are compressed already to the max and sometimes there is a choice to compress just the low end and leaving the tops alone or vice versa. Sometimes an upward expansion in the mid range does its magic. The mid range is important but for myself i prefer the right sweetspot between lows, mids and highs. Usually a smile curve with some cuts about 300 Hz - 500 Hz. Already slight volume automation on parts like verse and chorus does an energy shift if that is missing. The point here is to highlight the parts to the listener following the whole track. Also a slight i call it distortion and saturation layer is necessary to get low elements audible on tiny speakers. (Same like parallel compression) Here is really important just doing very minimal changes and starting over and over many times. Personally i think it is important to start with a positive mindset and mastering the music which you like at the end what sounds good is good shifting the technical knowledge aside. Doing many masters creating presets and having more choices. Dithering knowledge and watching out for intersample peaks is very technical and nerdy but necessary to not get artifacts at resampling. Sometimes it is an art to have some lofi glitch spectral and noise floor things going on but that is offtopic. Communication and knowledge transfer between the mixing and mastering process is important to get better results. Look at it as a raw image - you basically crop, resize and apply contrast and sharpen filters like on instagram. That is a better master but some people are just happy with the raw :)
Lol, this is why I offer a booking form, one of the tick boxes are, 1, commercial level, 2 loudness war • I got fed up of one wanting it super loud and others wanting it within 0dBTP . One of the main issues is that there's so many self mastering now and just raising the gain to achieve loudness
I know a few of your vids have pissed some folks off, this video is a great example of why I think there is value in hearing your thoughts. Good stuff and glad you are spreading such info becusee more need to understand how important this all is.
Great video... When I think of mastering I think of optimising the remaining sound space without altering artistic metric of the mix. As primarily a mechanical engineer (sound as my other more hobby) I sometimes likin things. Such as "standards" or standardisation which is good from a mass interaction perspective, but loses on some of the more creative aspects. I think for the most part if an Mastering engineer in todays music is given no input would shoot for industry standards as the assumed outcome... which is what you did with your client and they rejected it as being too in the red (albeit perhaps hard limited). For me both processes can be creative... although the mixing is much more time consuming and where bigger moves can be made incrementally. For me I am a musician so I mix as I go... As I add instruments I can sort of sculpt the mix to my liking, knowing what I can expect in mastering. When mixing for someone else you sort of get what you get , and it can take some creativity to get things to gel and pop in the mix. For me being able to master my mix while all is still (separate tracks) is also useful for me as sometimes in mastering something gets a little too saturated in the mix , I can adjust the mix while listening to the master simultaneously . I also tend to follow similar patters for achieving results that please me. Now adays its more important to a have a nice ambient spread, with a nice pressure in the low mids, if I do a izotope mastering assistant type thing generally I find the Maximizer/Limiting to be too extreme for my liking and seems to shoot for a -14 . I have generally shot for a -13 but this is just a reference. If the track still feels better at lower overall volume and I still percieve adequate volume to my ears I will defer to the ears. Just depends... eh too many words from me... enjoying this series.
The problem I found when trying to meet streaming loudness, at least with iTunes/AppleMusic, is that attenuation doesn’t get applied if the user doesn’t turn on the Sound Check feature. And no one turns that on and so you get different volume levels between tracks.
That's a really interesting video! If i can give my opinions: 1) As you well said a good master doesn't have to be LOUD! But nowadays, most of the clients want their tracks sound as loud as others do (maybe turning up the GAIN knob on their radio or mixer requires too many efforts??) 2) I got some tracks bought from Beatport that was clipping over 5 or even 6 dB !!!!! I WILL NEVER master a song on that way and if the client wants me to do that, better off going to another engineer ;)
So are you suggesting that when you want the sound of the limiter to just pull the volume down afterwards so streaming services won't limit/compress it again ? Would make sense
I don't think the loudness war is over. On TH-cam yes but on Spotify you can still turn off audio normalisation, then the louder tracks will automatically sound better. The best way is to make the track as loud as possible without hampering the dynamics a lot.
also, sometimes you can do something to make a track seem to be perceived as slightly louder, when it is in fact virtually the same loudness levels in measured dBFS. Thats a tricky one.
On your first point, regarding mastering in the red, I think all technical decisions will have a creative result. This is not just a technical thing. The difference between a track that is mastered in the red, versus one that is not, will sound different and we'll have subjective and creative preferences about this.
To make a track heard loud is a very good idea and causes ppl more like it BUT the way you do it is more important! Don't try to make your track louder with using maximizers or intensive compress! You will just make it terrible not louder by doing that! INSTEAD make your track louder by just good and balanced EQing!
Well ... about the loudness. Have dance in some electronic music have sense be so loud. Between -7.5 and - 8 ILUFT become standard, and for a DJ result appalling that all the tracks keep this “professional level” . And also this come from the develop in history of some electronic music like techno. Tks for the video , I would like to hear about your opinion :)
Back in the album days I was told that mastering was about making the album sound "consistent" from song to song. And I remember the loudness switch on my amp boosted the lows and highs at low volumes and that dissapeared when I turned up the amp. I'm not sure how that relates to today's approach. Perhaps it;s a matter of taste as well as level. I tend to like choruses to be louder than verses, but it depends on the song too. Squeezing everything together tends to become fatiguing to my ears.
A few things I have learned to avoid or to do: 1. We can fix it in the mix. 2. We can fix it in the master. 3. Practice 4. Practice 5. Practice Good musicianship will aid a lot in the mixing process, knowing and achieving that sound prior to studio, and knowing your own music prior will make the mixing process a lot easier and faster. The more people have to work hard to get a result for the same thing that could have been done with much less effort, breeds laziness. So, just pushing the work further down the line is not a good idea.
Hi there, question for you if you have time... The 2018 Smashing pumpkins album, Shiny and oh so bright..., is mastered like a total brick. Why would anyone do that in 2018?
And if a track is louder, we can hear low and high frequencies better, because humans hear the mids the best. So the louder it gets, the more balanced frequencies appear. On my old stereo there was a special loudness button to push bass and highs for playing music at low volumes.
Trust me, Spotify will not allow your track to clip if it is too low. They will, however, use an automated limiter to increase the perceived loudness. Witch could be detrimental to your track...
Also when it comes to albums with a good amount of dynamic range. I really like Devin Townsend's Empath. It does sound much quiter than most of the songs, on average, but the loud parts are at the same level. The album just is very dynamic, but being that dynamic makes us precieve the emotion in it way more, and makes the loud parts sound a lotore epic.
it feels like the more i learn about mixing and mastering the less i feel that i actually know
That will change when you learn about psychoacoutics and apply the lessons learnt with super basic processes.
Ahh the Dunning-Kruger effect
Me too...to the extent that I don't trust my ears anymore
Always remember to treat each recording as an individual experience, constant repetition in practice will develop problem-solving habits, and you’ll have a trick up your sleeve for anything that arises before you know it.
sound (audio) is so much more related to silence than visuals are related to the abscence of a visual perception. thats why its always a trip into the unknown. i think a perfect master guides the listener into the sound experience
9:28 "There's nothing we can do about it, we're just animals. " haha best part :D
genre specific (mainly modern House music and derivatives) but if you're aiming for -14LUFS you're missing the extra glue /pump/energy that comes with pushing the limiter ..yes you will need to adjust the mix(e.g turn down certain higher freq sounds) but you really need to push your mixes harder to get that sound...even if streaming platforms do turn it down.
Nik Plus, if you’re making any music that will be played in a club, loudness is still very relevant, regardless of what happens on streaming services. No house/techno DJ is going to play your track if it’s hitting at -14LUFS
@@TjMoon91 yep!
I think this kind of applies to every genre. Obviously, house music likes their tracks louder than rock. But even with rock, you're better off aiming way higher than -14. If you master a track to -9 and the streaming services turn it down to -14, it's going to sound louder than if you master it to -14. I know this from personal experience.
I'm not sure exactly what causes this, but it may have something to do with the reducing of the dynamic range that happens when you master loud. When you master to -9, to pick a random number, you're inevitably squashing your peaks and raising your low-level signal at the same time. So when it's turned down to -14, you still have a track that's at a more consistent volume than if you mastered "quiet.".
Now, I'm not saying that you should completely get rid of the dynamics in your mix. I'm just saying that if they're well controlled, the song is going to sound louder even after it's turned down. There are a few genres where this probably isn't the right move -- jazz, classical, etc. -- but even in rock the audience will expect a certain dynamic consistency. And it's not a recent phenomenon either.
"correct" is not only a funny word but a funny state of mind. Nothing but an illusion in the end. A master or sound in general is "good" if you like the acoustic result. After all, sound is nothing else than sonic waves. All your ears can recieve are sonic waves, ergo energy. The rest is made up by your mind, what you where trained for, what you learned, ergo your preferences. Nothing but limitations. A creative person shouldn't limit him or herself within the non existing self defined borders of "wrong" or "rights". Have joy and be sound.
You said many thoughtful things and I like that you are going a step deeper with your thoughts. Very interesting to listen to that.
Yes absolutely
Your kinda right, I loathe people that say you should EQ like this or this is the right reverb etc etc, however, the questions was about technical levels, nothing to do with being a good mix, it can be shite mix at -14lufs, a near-perfect dynamic range for streaming but it's still a shite mix/crap song etc etc
This was an amazing comment as well! Thank you for those truthful yet inspiring words.
@@magiusicgician4102 thank you. glad to hear :)
mastering involves many small moves, its engineering, but a specific discipline, but there is a right way to do it
I can't believe that we're living in an age where loudness war is considered vintage and a thing of the past...
It's not though. Anything other than streaming will still benefit from loudness, and DJs won't bother with your tracks if they're 7 dBs below the mean.
@@MiDnYTe25 yes I know. It's sad that even though we have normalization processing in the streaming service, people are still mastering their songs to be compressed as shit, and thing them at the drums' transients have to be clipped to sound good and "not to poke through the mix"...
mvyper how is it sad when a DJ is playing their music not at streaming services? its still necessary for electronic music to be super compressed
@@hithere4289 that's a matter of preferences. I genuinely like music not to be super compressed, even electronic and dance. That said, just my 2 cents.
I think it’s more of a consistency thing, when all tracks are more or less the same dB range they blend together nicely without you having to worry about the overall volume, plus everyone’s got glue compressors and vintage compression emulators built into their Daws so why tf not
The worst thing is when your label doesn't even allow you to communicate with your mastering engineer. I've been in a situation where I felt the master butchered the song by squeezing it too much (really didn't fit the track and it killed a lot of the punch for the sake of loudness) but the label told me that's just how the mastering will be and that's that. This has never happened to me before. Usually the engineer with get in touch and tell me to make some changes if needed, or if the first master isn't to my liking he/she will make whatever revision I wanted and we're all good. I mean they are responsible for the final touches on my work of art, so I'm not gonna accept something that isn't good. Subjective or not, a mastering engineer should respect the song and talk to the client before working on it. If you build a house and pay someone to paint it, you wouldn't accept it if they changed the color you wanted, you know?
Merry Christmas to that jean jacket ☃️
So... In the end it's just 3 things?
1. Don't destroy anything
2. Improve on what's there
3. Add signature
Right?
I feel that way as well to be honest.
Good!
Sounds good to me, though sometimes to "improve what's there" you need to destroy something, just not in an extreme way.
Cherubs - Short of Popular (1996). I was at Terra Nova in Austin and asked if the rumors were true that Cherubs asked him to push the levels until his board broke and he said Yes. That the mixes they brought sounded great but the band just wanted to continue to be excessive with loudness and ugly. I forgot what broke, something that only affected one channel. It resulted in a record that makes your stereo sound broken too. I love Car Jack Fairy
th-cam.com/video/AOmtTotDcVA/w-d-xo.html
Adding a signature is kind of optional and a bit of a grey area. Some clients want as little of a signature as possible, others want as much of a signature as possible. Ultimately, it often comes down to how good the mix is.. an exceptional recording is rarely made better with colouration, but most recordings aren’t exceptional 🙂
15:40 in fact they do matter. I know a ghost producer, no lable wants to release his music. Then he selled his music to a big name in the EDM scene, and suddenly all big labels want to release the verry same track. So dont say Names doesnt matter. If u have no big name u need friend with big name. No matter how good your music is, u need friends to open some doors for you.
record labels, film studios and so on often have mostly business type people and not artistic type, so they always need someone to co-sign the art to know that it's 'good'
Couldn't agree more. I was a DJ first and politics in a music scene are everything... I can't speak for all genres but in electronic genres - particularly club based music like house etc its definitely a big thing... I know guys who can out mix(DJ context), out scratch, out produce, out mix(productiin context), out master the bigger names but don't get much of a second look because they aren't brown nosers.
Its not about loud anymore, the question is "how squeezed do you want it" ?
And i dont think you risk clipping if you have 0 penalty on spotify, the 0 point is not absolute, the 0 is -14 lufs dbfs if i undarstand it correctly, and then a limiter if you are way below 14 lufs
the most difficult decision, as a mastering engineer, is when to not do anything (not even a limiter). Its a tough line to try to walk.
Mastering in general is getting a greater sound out of all the sound systems your music will get played from, becoming a master of mastering means knowing how and where to add that last 5% of effects that all may happen to be doing on about 5-15%.
Keep your low sub mono, Dynamics diverse,
And stereo image smooth
Loudness can come last, because the mix should sound as good as possible so it can be easier to just add a good limiter to the master. ;D balance is key
Personally I like the default limiters in different daws, and plus a bit of saturation, but Ozone 5, 8, 9 and Pro-L are awesome!
I'm falling in love with elysia's alpha master. I don't even have the UAD version, and it sounds amazing. Have you tried it? Don't get me wrong. I make good use of Pro-L, the UAD LA-2A, both of Klanghelm's compressors (which are really 7 different compressors that all work well as limiters), and the ever-so-sexy sounding Fairchild 670 from UAD, and others that sometimes are just what the doctor ordered, but elysia have really hit a home run with their 2 buss and master compressors.
I always put it like this:
"You can't polish a turd, but you can make it glitter!"
Great thoughts about it all! Love it! Merry Christmas as well!
Michael Larsen Which has absolutely nothing to do with the topic under discussion. Thanks so much for your valuable contribution.
Michael Larsen Ha! You are the very first to make this observation. How original.
@@artysanmobile did I say I was? Get a grip, and get a life outside being passive aggressive TH-cam user. Jesus.
good day.
@@artysanmobile Man, we got a real life sad boy on the loose. Have you considered therapy or lifestyle changes? Your lame attitude and expression of discontentment is exceptionally troubling in this case as it was so unprovoked and out of place. I mean, do you not have conversations with people that aren't expressly purpose driven? Recreation communication is not always highly devised or original. I mean I hear people repeat the same stories within a few month time frame sometimes; phrases within hours/days/weeks and for extended periods of time. To be completely unaware and/or unengaged in this kind of behavior is indicative of a narcissistic or antisocial personality traits. Maybe it's just that you have a sheltered sense of subjective superiority? Indeed those who look down on others from a standpoint of "superior" behavior patterns and interests are most likely to have low levels of emotional intelligence (self control) meaning they get triggered easily and constantly react to things with disapproval are some of the most disliked people in existence. Not just by other people but by themselves. It's a low self esteem that drives people toward putting others down...
a perfect master is when it sounds the same on at least 6 different sources (car audio, home audio, bluetooth speaker, headphones, etc..)
I stopped looking at analysers a long time ago, but the checking of the low end and eq balance really is a neat trick for the "fake" or "mockup" masters that i do
I think you could have explained how distortion also effects our perception of loudness. It’s not just the mastering engineers style , clip distortion also makes us think things are louder and saturation will obviously create extra harmonics (useful for sub). Should all be said i think.
Love this! Thanks, Wytse.
I have this simple rule that kinda helped me a lot while mixing and mastering. Use any tool only when you hear a problem that tool can fix. I can see bunchload of people throwing an unnecessary amount of compression just because "it should sound better glued" or adding bunchload of exciters just because "it should make it more bright and colorful". I think the trick is not in learning the supposed effect of 100 magic boxes to choose from. I think it's in learning of what sound is, how it works, how it gets transfered and how an ear precieves it. I bet I can get a louder mix with a knowledge of fletcher-munson curves, simple EQ and a barebone limiter than anyone who slaps fifteen compressors and exciters in a cascade.
Making perfect sense. Hear. Feel. Master. Simple, thanks. I want another hour or three of this type of soliloquy (about mixing and mastering and how to learn to 'HEAR'.) Please.
Great video! We'll never have 100% agreement and I agree with how subjective all of this is. I've been doing home recording for decades and I feel like my recordings are getting better but I still have a lot to learn. I appreciate each and every one of these videos.
Hello! As you rightly state in the video "Tonal Balance" is key to a good track experience for the listener... But this is often hard to HEAR for the budding audio Engineer. A tool that has helped me greatly is the "Tonal Balance Analyzer" that is a part of the iZotope package... This doesn't do anything except show you where your song sits in each of the important frequency bands... This can be very helpful when you are trying to understand why your track sounds the way it does and also shows you areas of deficiencies and excesses in each band when you might need to go back to the mix to make adjustments...Hope this helps! Cheers!!!
i intenionally clip the pro-c on the masterbus with up to 2db at most for the occasional peak. i think it sounds good, and it also eases some of the work from the final limiters; i tend to use two, one for gain and one for TP limiting. Merry Christmas
Listening at very low volumes on calibrated headphones can tell you if the eq balance is right and if the track is too hyped/squashed, or if things are getting lost. When you feel you get it right at low volumes, turn it way up and you will immediately know if you get it right. If not, turn it way down and try again.
I notice that commercial released songs that dont sound good to me, sound very mispleasing and sometimes downright horrible at very low volumes.
I do believe that a good Mastering gives the Mix the final glue. There are a lot of Mastering Styles out there - and it is very important to do the Master based on the genre it is for. You should not Master Psytrance oder Progressive Trance like "Rock", "Klassik" or a "Irish Folk" Song. So some things yes they are routine. BUT if you ask a DJ - he may say: I want that Track to have a Powerfull lowend when it comes to the Club. So what that means is - it needs to fit for where the song is played. Others say i dont need that it need to sound great on Readio or TV - so there is more to a great Master then just the way he is hearing stuff. It is experience WHAT the mix will Sound like when it is played to the audience. You can have best of best Stuff and fuck up everything becourse the mix is not as Loud and powerfull masterd like the "modern" Hits. That is one point - the Master can smash the Track and it could be great selling to the audience. Other side it is destruktiv masterd and from quality point of view hard to understand but in some Genres you hust need to run it in to the Maximizer after the Equing and M/S Control is done and it will be ready. And there we are back by "Shit in shit out" even the best Mastering cannot make a Track great - but it can make it sound best possible. But its no garantie for success! Think about Elvis or Beatles. They had die for what we could reach on Recording and Mixing now days. Success has everything done with how the industrie sell the product. And if you dont believe watch "casting shows" - it is only marketing what brings the Success. You could produce genius wet dreams but if no one knows you, no one will hear the musik. And we all spend millions into Producing gear - without concept how to sell the product. So normaly we go to a label that does the marketing and so on. But in that way - if youre out, youre done! And your musik will lost in time. So the Master need to FIT in to that prozess, makes the Song shine. And be cheap enogh to get the money to what realy eats our Money - the Way to reach the audience. That point is mostly underrated. :)
There is a very interesting topic that noone seems to talk about when it comes to "mastering engineer not doing anything". Actually the correct sentence should be "Ideally, a master should come as identical to the mix as possible but louder". These are two different things, let me explain why. The first one sounds like mastering is really a very easy process, just put a limiter and thats it, you didn't intervene the mix. But what people don't talk about is when you put a limiter (and especially try to get a louder master), the frequency balance, the vocal balance, dynamics and everything else changes! The art of mastering is not "DOING NOTHING", It is "BEING ABLE TO MAKE IT SOUND LOUD YET CONSERVE THE TONAL BALANCE, MIX BALANCE and DYNAMICS" or even enhance these a little. Two vastly different things. Just my 2 cent on the subject :)
Man... I really love your videos. Engineer nerdy, informative and enjoyable!
Thanks for these. I'm a new subscriber as of a couple of days ago.
You know what makes a master really perfect? A good sub 😇
hell yeah! Being comfortable with your work is really what creates the illusion of perfection, at least gives you a reason for what moves you make. Thanks White Sea! Bye-bye
this is my fav audio related channel, you bring real valuable knowledge stuff.
It's not just about compression on those 2 tracks. Clearly the exciter is doing things with the high end of the 2nd track. That makes the first track sound duller.
Thank you for talking about what you can see from a waveform and to use your ears. I did around 400 mixes on 24 track sessions and I never saw a waveform from any of them.
"Names do not matter. At all." Well spoken.
Fascinating insight into the secrets of mastering!
Assuming your mix sounds great where it’s at, don’t ever mess with your limiter because your loudness plugin is telling you that your true peak levels are above 0. If it sounds fantastic, just leave it. That’s what loudness normalization is for and if your client doesn’t understand that then respect their wishes but use a trim plugin or something to reduce the volume after the limiter so at least the dynamics stay mostly intact the way you have them.
Great video! Definitely one of my favorite channels and helps me stay sharp. 🤘
You’ve done a great job of explaining the overall points here, especially for the lay-person - nice one
The audio engineer for Flaming Lips' "At War With The Mystics" album won a Grammy for his engineering. I have that CD and loaded the song "It Over Takes Me" in Audacity with clipping indicator on. IT's full of RETS! or RED color (clipped waveforms over 0db). Sounds AMAZING in my car with two 10in. sealed subwoofers in the trunk.
CD's don't clip. Mastering engineers see to that.
You need to adjust your soundcard levels, etc.
Hi, nice you bring this subject up ! About True Peaks in the red : My work ethic as far as mastering is concerned is that what comes out of my studio should sound the same - ie. no surprises - whatever the context, and in this case in particular, whatever the converter. The problem with going in the red is that you take the risk that it may sound terrible on certain systems because the converter will distort in a bad way (or even horribly). But if the clients wants it, I will give him both, with and without the peaks.
As for the artistic side of things, if your track does not sound distorted enough, or clipped enough, fine, then go for some more distortion with one of the gazilion plugins or boxes that do just that, they comme in ALL flavours But to me, counting on the random amount of clipping that random converters to give you that extra thing is just... unprofessional (I tried to stay polite). So I absolutely refuse to do that without providing ALSO a properly configured audio with it. After all my client might even prefer that one day 🙂
Clip over 0 db is just wrong because intersamples peaks just sound bad... Anyway what I look for, for judge a mastering engineer, is the DC Offset.. if is not 0,000% that mastering engineer is just a clown. Same thing for the center of the stereo image....
Thank you for all your informative videos and for your passion at what you do. It really shows.
Very helpful. I’m just starting out and mastering seems a bit of a mysterious art.
I love mixing at about -23 LUFS and then master for different platforms. Waves makes a pretty cool LUFS meter, I use it all the time.
Hi! Would you be able to record a video and explain why the compressed and saturated sound may seem MUCH louder though the peak volume might be much less?
For example, I took a drum loop that was peaking at zero if not even more, I threw a compressor and totape5 on it, and it was peaking at like -7db, though it seemed MUCH louder (like twice or around that).
What are also the downsides of making the sound louder through compression and saturation? Would be make it harder to mix (because the sound will be fatter) or not?
Please, would be very thankful for this and I'm sure I'm the only one ;)
This is a great point that belongs in any video on this subject. I've try to remember that using saturation before a compressor at every stage of a mix usually gives tremendous results. I've found that using different saturation tools on tracks not only does a great job of handling the first stage of compression, it easily creates a very natural sounding separation while fattening things up at the same time. All of the vintage UAD emulations are good for this, but SATIN and Klanghelm's SDRR offer such a wide range of saturation types and so much control that they can take mix through the roof. Warren Huartt did a great video where he took a "finished" mix and just added different instances of SATIN on some of the tracks, and the difference was remarkable. Thank you for bringing this up!
Great video, the talk about different eq db's was very eye opening for me, I keep my mixes very very quiet and try to have a peaceful vibe, and don't even try to master myself, but keeping your tips in mind arms me to keep my ears open for what will work best
I've been told clipping up to even +3 dBFS is okay for club masters... to make it more loud. But, I was told that back in like 2012. I think that nowadays, its possible to stay at 0 dBFS and still have it as loud. However, some clipping can sound "good," in some rooms/clubs. It really depends on the room and the speakers. I'm not really sure, but I'd rather stay safe at 0 dBFS, even for club masters... in 2019, nowadays. I could be wrong. My opinion.
Subjective versus technical. Art versus science. This is the challenge in that final phase of finishing a song. I'm glad you pointed out that louder always seems to equal better, even when it is not. Ultimately, the final mastering step needs to ensure that the listener can just enjoy the song without any burden of "feeling" that something is off or out of whack. I think most listeners inherently recognize poor quality, which gets in the way of an otherwise good song.
And to me without a doubt... It comes down to punch stereo width, and a psychoacoustically pleasant EQ curve that allows for blasting the track over any speaker. I don't think that stuff is so SOO subjective as every engineer claims.. There definitely are 'targets' and 'recipies' even if they change according to the input material.
@@KOSMIKFEADRECORDS music is math. what should be subjectiv in math? they just dont want to share their tricks
Only a master engineer will understand a song. I learnt this and I stick by it.
I've alway felt that "going loud" is like going from 3D to 2D. It's just a wall of dullness. It's like looking at a curtained window instead of out the window.
@ 5:45 - Even if Spotify is lowering the volume of the track the digital clipping/distortion is still audible in the track. That usually sounds good to some people and they want that 'harsch'-ness on let's say, the drums. It's still going to be there even if Spotify is lowering to whole track. That's why you turn it up to the "red" imo.
The M.E. prepares a "production master" that, in the 1st instance, addresses the audio in terms of the reproduction format, (mastering to LP being the best example becasue of the specific needs of a stereo LP cutting lathe and the playback device), and then addressing "problems" or genre specifics as requested IF the mix engineer failed to do so. As stated, the compromises of the "fix it in the mix" mentality are compounded when it's left to the M/E. to repair things. Good vid.
I try to master my own music, but I've heard from a few other Music Producers that you shouldn't do that, because you're not getting some other ear for validation that it sounds ok.
I think you can master your own music though, if you just learn to balance the mix, and compare it to similar music; you can be confident in knowing others will agree and like your master.
A lot of of the more extreme electronic music is self mastered! Totally do-able, keep at it man :) (I don't know what kind of music you are making but I'm sure you can master yourself)
@@yzmikh4570 Name a genre, I've probably dabbled in it...
As for mastering, there's a LOT to learn, and I'm constantly not surprised that I have to learn something new in music. I just need to find the right mastering technique for all of my music to keep it consistent.
Respect!
Thanks for this video. It's very informative. Answering loads of questions.
My favourite part of mastering is the attack/release of a compressor. It's all about that.
Another great video, Wytse. Your insights are great. This really helped me understand how the term "mastering" means something so different today than when I was an artist, and I still divide the processes the way they used to be done. Back then, the mastering phase was primarily about getting what the producer and mix engineer had done to translate to the different mediums properly. I had one album that was done in a year when it had to be mastered for vinyl, cassette, and CD. These required vastly different masters. Vinyl required the encoding that stripped the bass and boosted treble which was EQed exactly the opposite on playback so that the sound information could fit into the grooves. Cassette was a sonic nightmare in retrospect, but I was so excited when my second album was released on cassette that I didn't realize how shitty they sounded until CDs came out, and mastering for them was almost like voodoo at first. I don't understand why the mastering step is so different today, to be honest. I would want the producer and mixer to create the "flavour" and I would expect the mastering engineer to make sure there was consistency across tracks on an album, make sure the meta data is applied properly, and, like in days gone by, make versions of the music that are optimised for each streaming service so that iTunes, TH-cam, Spotify, or whichever would not touch the song at all because I doubt they are only adjusting gain to meet their loudness criteria. I would think that if they have to adjust loudness, they are using a compressor/limiter of some sort. And then possibly using another layer of file size compression. (You've said you upload your TH-cam videos at the highest quality possible, and I don't know if that means you're uploading lossless files and letting them use their file size compression, or you're doing that bit. I'd be curious to know more about how you do that because there are many quality choices for the user, so if you're uploading only one version of the file, TH-cam are at least re-rendering the other playback resolutions if not all of your files.) To me, if I'm mastering a song, I'm making a version that uses AAC for iTunes and meets Apple's loudness requirements. Likewise for each of the other distribution services. I think this is a "best practice" method that should be adopted from the days when a mastering engineer's primary purpose was to get the final output media to represent what they were given by the creative team (performers, producer, mixer) with the highest fidelity. Fidelity means faithfulness. The word is often misconstrued. The term Hi Fi got confused with "great sounding" when it actually meant the most accurate reproduction, and you can only do that if what you're giving to the distributor doesn't get altered by them at all, right?
I mix insane shit, usually clip by 12dB, totally rule over other tracks, ramp up the bass, ramp up the high, ramp up the mids, add reverb, plenty of reverb, makes everything sound epic, then phase that shit, then more reverb, saturation and stereo widening, make it fucking wide, then compress, usually use a few compressors, maybe 8, totally fucks the volume up to 60, also push the faders right up to the top, if you use a metal file you can file away some of the metal at the top of the fader's travel so you can push it even further, then add echo.
'Metal file' .....that's a bit lame! Use an angle grinder if you really want to hit the spot!
When I'm mastering I like to retain a natural level of dynamics on acoustic instruments. High levels of compression is ugly as you rightly mentioned.
The DMG limiter has this function where by you link the threshold to the ceiling. The perceived loudness remains constant as you push the limiter.
Kind of useful.
Love your videos. Thanks
So just to make things clearer, it's better to make the track a little louder, so the platform will bring it down, then making it to quiet, and they have to bring it up?
"Imperfection is the key to artistic perfection"
As a listener / consumer of music I prefer a more dynamic end product then a very compressed one. In the mid 90’s when I was buying my first CD’s I noticed that newer productions of the time where louder then compared to ones from the late 80’s / early 90’s. But during the 1995-1998 era the loudness was still reasonble and comfortable compared to what happed in the early to mid 2000’s. When I create my own music I try to stay away from the red on the levels, for me as a structural engineer red means “error, somethings seriously wrong” like the load/stress is too much. I know it’s a weird comparison but seeing a peaked waveform (especially if it’s dense) makes me feel itchy🥶.
I’d think that the red that you are getting from client reference tracks is probably intersample peaks and a result of them downloading a compressed mp3. I think a wav master should never have ISP clipping.
Thank you for another quality video. You always make it clear an easy for me understand certain things. You should think about running courses (unless you already do of course) ;)
I think you covered this subject very well. It is subjective, it is genre specific, and if you don't feel confident in doing it yourself than you should get expert help. The same goes for mixing too. You need to know in advance what you are trying to achieve. So that highlights the importance of reference tracks to guide you and whoever might be needed to get your project radio ready or CD/digital/Vinyl/distributor platforms/consumer ready, etc. Most of us are ill equipped to master at home. Personally I would rather work with a qualified mastering engineer, same goes for mixing too. Yes, I would want to be hands on involved but to be willing to do whatever is required to get the best out of the process.
There is no such thing as a perfect master if it doesn't have at least one Soundgoodizer slapped on the last Master Out fx slot
..... or, perhaps you could learn how to properly use a multi-band compressor that has significantly more flexibility than just 4 presets.
@Joannes Ferrari Lowkey lol but I stopped doing it. Idk how or what but its sum dark magic lol
They are clipping +5db because the conversion to youtube most likely. (I put this here just in case someone doesn 't know.)
Great video, would love to see more videos like this :)
Hey Wytse, informative content as always. Could you do a video about room design(bass traps etc..). What makes a good sounding room perhaps? :)
Clipping is important to specific genres, but here soft and hardclippers somewhere between -16 to - 6dB not the digital clipping because it is really awful. Most of the vst plugins work the best way at about the magical -20dB. The truth is plugins even don't work well with clipped content and usually have a limiter at the end of the chain. Analog clipping already active on about -6dB and the difference to digital is it turns the peaks to a more pleasing, saturated sound. You naturally will get a higher dynamic range if doing sort of classical or jazz mixes. For streaming it is plain simple turning the master fader down to not get caught by loudness penalties. would suggest looking at it from the perspective of Instruments and how to improve them - knowing what is crap on the dancefloor anyway(low rumble, hiss, dc offset, phase, you name it) knowing what works is a huge win. Knowing about the targets, energy and emotion. The other huge win is knowing how much compression to apply. Generally a 2:1 ratio will do its thing on masters, but for mixing for example it is nice to know that square waves are compressed already to the max and sometimes there is a choice to compress just the low end and leaving the tops alone or vice versa. Sometimes an upward expansion in the mid range does its magic. The mid range is important but for myself i prefer the right sweetspot between lows, mids and highs. Usually a smile curve with some cuts about 300 Hz - 500 Hz. Already slight volume automation on parts like verse and chorus does an energy shift if that is missing. The point here is to highlight the parts to the listener following the whole track.
Also a slight i call it distortion and saturation layer is necessary to get low elements audible on tiny speakers. (Same like parallel compression) Here is really important just doing very minimal changes and starting over and over many times. Personally i think it is important to start with a positive mindset and mastering the music which you like at the end what sounds good is good shifting the technical knowledge aside. Doing many masters creating presets and having more choices. Dithering knowledge and watching out for intersample peaks is very technical and nerdy but necessary to not get artifacts at resampling. Sometimes it is an art to have some lofi glitch spectral and noise floor things going on but that is offtopic. Communication and knowledge transfer between the mixing and mastering process is important to get better results. Look at it as a raw image - you basically crop, resize and apply contrast and sharpen filters like on instagram. That is a better master but some people are just happy with the raw :)
Lol, this is why I offer a booking form, one of the tick boxes are, 1, commercial level, 2 loudness war • I got fed up of one wanting it super loud and others wanting it within 0dBTP .
One of the main issues is that there's so many self mastering now and just raising the gain to achieve loudness
Thank you really enjoyed the video
I know a few of your vids have pissed some folks off, this video is a great example of why I think there is value in hearing your thoughts.
Good stuff and glad you are spreading such info becusee more need to understand how important this all is.
Great video... When I think of mastering I think of optimising the remaining sound space without altering artistic metric of the mix. As primarily a mechanical engineer (sound as my other more hobby) I sometimes likin things. Such as "standards" or standardisation which is good from a mass interaction perspective, but loses on some of the more creative aspects. I think for the most part if an Mastering engineer in todays music is given no input would shoot for industry standards as the assumed outcome... which is what you did with your client and they rejected it as being too in the red (albeit perhaps hard limited).
For me both processes can be creative... although the mixing is much more time consuming and where bigger moves can be made incrementally. For me I am a musician so I mix as I go... As I add instruments I can sort of sculpt the mix to my liking, knowing what I can expect in mastering. When mixing for someone else you sort of get what you get , and it can take some creativity to get things to gel and pop in the mix.
For me being able to master my mix while all is still (separate tracks) is also useful for me as sometimes in mastering something gets a little too saturated in the mix , I can adjust the mix while listening to the master simultaneously . I also tend to follow similar patters for achieving results that please me. Now adays its more important to a have a nice ambient spread, with a nice pressure in the low mids, if I do a izotope mastering assistant type thing generally I find the Maximizer/Limiting to be too extreme for my liking and seems to shoot for a -14 . I have generally shot for a -13 but this is just a reference. If the track still feels better at lower overall volume and I still percieve adequate volume to my ears I will defer to the ears. Just depends... eh too many words from me... enjoying this series.
The problem I found when trying to meet streaming loudness, at least with iTunes/AppleMusic, is that attenuation doesn’t get applied if the user doesn’t turn on the Sound Check feature. And no one turns that on and so you get different volume levels between tracks.
Thanks for this video, im always in a struggle when i get to master my tracks ;D
That's a really interesting video! If i can give my opinions:
1) As you well said a good master doesn't have to be LOUD! But nowadays, most of the clients want their tracks sound as loud as others do (maybe turning up the GAIN knob on their radio or mixer requires too many efforts??)
2) I got some tracks bought from Beatport that was clipping over 5 or even 6 dB !!!!! I WILL NEVER master a song on that way and if the client wants me to do that, better off going to another engineer ;)
More kudos headed your way.
So are you suggesting that when you want the sound of the limiter to just pull the volume down afterwards so streaming services won't limit/compress it again ? Would make sense
I don't think the loudness war is over. On TH-cam yes but on Spotify you can still turn off audio normalisation, then the louder tracks will automatically sound better. The best way is to make the track as loud as possible without hampering the dynamics a lot.
also, sometimes you can do something to make a track seem to be perceived as slightly louder, when it is in fact virtually the same loudness levels in measured dBFS. Thats a tricky one.
15:57 Hi-Fi ish. For example a guitar cabinet speaker that is very accurate and distorts the sound very little is said to sound too Hi-Fi ish.
On your first point, regarding mastering in the red, I think all technical decisions will have a creative result. This is not just a technical thing. The difference between a track that is mastered in the red, versus one that is not, will sound different and we'll have subjective and creative preferences about this.
Good job dude, you certainly got some serious view points being aired. Keep up the great work and have a very Merry Christmas ✌️😎👍
THIS ... might be your best video, hopefully so far! :D
Often engineers were taking out sub to give more available loudness?
Great job, thanks for sharing!
To make a track heard loud is a very good idea and causes ppl more like it BUT the way you do it is more important! Don't try to make your track louder with using maximizers or intensive compress! You will just make it terrible not louder by doing that! INSTEAD make your track louder by just good and balanced EQing!
FLUX is the coolest lava lamp one can buy for the studio, by the way
Is there any trend for dual mastering? EG one for 0dBFS reference and one for floating reference such as streaming services and distribute accordingly
you should make a propper class, I feel like I learn more from these videos than from my college audio production program smh
0:19 if you like it it's good, if not it's bad
We are just animals... :) Love it.
Why is the purpose that a client whants a +5 db master for ex.? Because spotify gone take down the loudness anyway or why?
Well ... about the loudness. Have dance in some electronic music have sense be so loud. Between -7.5 and - 8 ILUFT become standard, and for a DJ result appalling that all the tracks keep this “professional level” . And also this come from the develop in history of some electronic music like techno.
Tks for the video , I would like to hear about your opinion :)
Back in the album days I was told that mastering was about making the album sound "consistent" from song to song. And I remember the loudness switch on my amp boosted the lows and highs at low volumes and that dissapeared when I turned up the amp. I'm not sure how that relates to today's approach. Perhaps it;s a matter of taste as well as level. I tend to like choruses to be louder than verses, but it depends on the song too. Squeezing everything together tends to become fatiguing to my ears.
A few things I have learned to avoid or to do:
1. We can fix it in the mix.
2. We can fix it in the master.
3. Practice
4. Practice
5. Practice
Good musicianship will aid a lot in the mixing process, knowing and achieving that sound prior to studio, and knowing your own music prior will make the mixing process a lot easier and faster. The more people have to work hard to get a result for the same thing that could have been done with much less effort, breeds laziness. So, just pushing the work further down the line is not a good idea.
Hi there, question for you if you have time... The 2018 Smashing pumpkins album, Shiny and oh so bright..., is mastered like a total brick. Why would anyone do that in 2018?
I never see one of your videos without learning something new. Oh, and Happy Solstice!
Master Darude on Har-Bal....I'm serious.
Good one!!
And if a track is louder, we can hear low and high frequencies better, because humans hear the mids the best. So the louder it gets, the more balanced frequencies appear. On my old stereo there was a special loudness button to push bass and highs for playing music at low volumes.
Trust me, Spotify will not allow your track to clip if it is too low. They will, however, use an automated limiter to increase the perceived loudness. Witch could be detrimental to your track...
Also when it comes to albums with a good amount of dynamic range. I really like Devin Townsend's Empath. It does sound much quiter than most of the songs, on average, but the loud parts are at the same level. The album just is very dynamic, but being that dynamic makes us precieve the emotion in it way more, and makes the loud parts sound a lotore epic.