Mixing and mastering.

[la-yinn]

Well I think a topic on it's own is a more suited place to talk about this than in the lounge, so I figured I'd open one. If by any reason this breaks some sort of rule, feel free to close it Mr. moderator.

Basically, mixing is everything you do whilst creating your music. Tweaking the volume knobs, Equalising frequencies, editting effects onto different channels and compressing. Professional mixing makes sure everything in the track is balanced and flows well together.

Mastering everything done post-rendering. The objective of mastering your tracks is basically getting the track to sound as loud and crisp as possible without it getting distorted or making the balance of frequencies go off. People tend to compress their tracks on the Master Channel in their mixer before rendering their finished work. By the strict term, this is not mastering, but mixing. (Although opinions vary on this.)

Discuss? Also, to make this topic slightly more relevant in the long term, I guess you could ask questions on mastering and mixing in here.

[amaterasu]

Mastering at its core is preparing your track to be balanced enough so you can place it on recorded media and have it played on a variety of sound systems.

[Calamaistr]

At 10/22/09 06:19 PM, la-yinn wrote:

Basically, mixing is everything you do whilst creating your music. Tweaking the volume knobs, Equalising frequencies, editting effects onto different channels and compressing. Professional mixing makes sure everything in the track is balanced and flows well together.

Volume knob tweaking is mixing? I thought that was 'under effects.

Mastering everything done post-rendering. The objective of mastering your tracks is basically getting the track to sound as loud and crisp as possible without it getting distorted or making the balance of frequencies go off. People tend to compress their tracks on the Master Channel in their mixer before rendering their finished work. By the strict term, this is not mastering, but mixing. (Although opinions vary on this.)

What is crisp? And sometimes distortion is also an effect.. ive used it (as in 'manually created it, i dont have it under a button or anything) in Dor mirage and in a few other tracks not uploaded yet, i dont see how you can 'debalance' a frequency either, this must all be some kind of 'complete table' kind of talk cause i dont have those option on console.

Discuss? Also, to make this topic slightly more relevant in the long term, I guess you could ask questions on mastering and mixing in here.

Anyway, why is it called mixing for just placing notes? Or dont you place notes? Is this for a dance style? Is there even 'mixing' at all in the classical and vg music scene (not incorporated vg genre's included)

[Rawmin]

Mastering for me really just means making the track as loud as possible, without clipping. I have yet to delve into any other aspects.
Mixing for me is the process of adding all the right effects to my sounds, to make sure nothing interferes or clips.

And for those certain individuals who think neither is important: good luck.

[la-yinn]

At 10/22/09 06:57 PM, Calamaistr wrote:

Volume knob tweaking is mixing? I thought that was 'under effects.

It is the most pure form of mixing. Making sure certain elements of the track are not overpowered is very important in getting the flow into a track.

What is crisp? And sometimes distortion is also an effect.. ive used it (as in 'manually created it, i dont have it under a button or anything) in Dor mirage and in a few other tracks not uploaded yet, i dont see how you can 'debalance' a frequency either, this must all be some kind of 'complete table' kind of talk cause i dont have those option on console.

Crisp is making sure certain frequencies aren't to dominant. If they are, it becomes clear very soon and it'll sound a bit mashed up. Distortion is caused by going beyond the maximum output of the sound generator. The sound generator can't handle the power of certain frequencies and it'll cut off at it's max, leaving a clear 'cracking' sound where it cuts off. This is also known as clipping. Balancing frequencies isn't an option by the way, it is the result of carefully equalising and compressing all aspects of the track.

Anyway, why is it called mixing for just placing notes? Or dont you place notes? Is this for a dance style? Is there even 'mixing' at all in the classical and vg music scene (not incorporated vg genre's included)

You don't place notes. You create your music through placing notes on some sort of step sequencer. You add VST's, samples or any other plugin to a plugin channel, on which you primarily create your melodies. These plugin channels can then be linked to a mixer channel, on which the mixing begins. Here you can add effects such as reverb and delay (but also equalisers and compressors) to the corresponding channel. That is called mixing.

[amaterasu]

At 10/22/09 06:57 PM, Calamaistr wrote: Anyway, why is it called mixing for just placing notes? Or dont you place notes? Is this for a dance style? Is there even 'mixing' at all in the classical and vg music scene (not incorporated vg genre's included)

Mixing is pertinant in all forms of music, from classical to dance to rock to vg to whatever.

What you are doing is determining the optimal sonic positions for each track. This includes panning (L & R), volume (Front to Back), and equalization, so that the tracks fit together well.

And to my understanding neither mixing nor mastering really have much to do with effects. You might use effects to polish up something but most of that goes in the design/composition process.

[amaterasu]

At 10/22/09 07:14 PM, la-yinn wrote: It is the most pure form of mixing. Making sure certain elements of the track are not overpowered is very important in getting the flow into a track.

Fair enough way to look at it. But position is more important than power. Power, i.e. what drives the track, is normally determined before mixing.

Crisp is making sure certain frequencies aren't to dominant. If they are, it becomes clear very soon and it'll sound a bit mashed up. Distortion is caused by going beyond the maximum output of the sound generator. The sound generator can't handle the power of certain frequencies and it'll cut off at it's max, leaving a clear 'cracking' sound where it cuts off. This is also known as clipping. Balancing frequencies isn't an option by the way, it is the result of carefully equalising and compressing all aspects of the track.

Clipping has more to do with overloading, i.e. passing the threshold, of an input to a mixer.

You don't place notes. You create your music through placing notes on some sort of step sequencer. You add VST's, samples or any other plugin to a plugin channel, on which you primarily create your melodies. These plugin channels can then be linked to a mixer channel, on which the mixing begins. Here you can add effects such as reverb and delay (but also equalisers and compressors) to the corresponding channel. That is called mixing.

No, that is called composing. Mixing has less to do with timbre and more to do with sonic position.

[Calamaistr]

At 10/22/09 07:14 PM, la-yinn wrote:

Crisp is making sure certain frequencies aren't to dominant. If they are, it becomes clear very soon and it'll sound a bit mashed up. Distortion is caused by going beyond the maximum output of the sound generator. The sound generator can't handle the power of certain frequencies and it'll cut off at it's max, leaving a clear 'cracking' sound where it cuts off. This is also known as clipping. Balancing frequencies isn't an option by the way, it is the result of carefully equalising and compressing all aspects of the track.

a cracking sound is called clipping or you mean crisp is called clipping? oh i get it you mean a certain individual sound was to hard, i never have that though.. i dont see a reason to make all sounds as loud as they can possibly get without ruining them, i cant see why that would make your track better, well maybe in some dance scene to have a louder bass or something.. its really not an issue in my genre's.

You don't place notes. You create your music through placing notes on some sort of step sequencer. You add VST's, samples or any other plugin to a plugin channel, on which you primarily create your melodies. These plugin channels can then be linked to a mixer channel, on which the mixing begins. Here you can add effects such as reverb and delay (but also equalisers and compressors) to the corresponding channel. That is called mixing.

You dont place notes? What do you mean with step sequencer you mean the fruityloops8 thing? I used to make music with part-blocks, wich i can copy and paste at will on the board, in side these blocks are individual musicsheets. Its not literally placing notes no but pretty close. VST are sound samples right? I also use soundsamples but i tweak em alot, not all of em ofcourse though, that isnt always necaserry, sometimes the sound i want to have is sufficient with certain default instruments, afterall instruments play music, not necaserilly the other way around.

I think you áre talking about fruityloops i recognice some things, so the mixer is that board with all the knobs you can turn right? And some button (atleast depending on the soundbank, in this case vanguard, wich i always use to make bit music because it has the most fitting analog sound for it) that can make some kind of trance pattern or something and another button can make you have automatic echo, but i always make my echos manually cause then you can change their appearances, like if you want a 8 or a 3 for instance.

I dont know what half of em does really i just keep turning at everything untill i reach what i like, wich is kinda what i find tedious because on console i know every little detail about every little tweak.

[Calamaistr]

At 10/22/09 07:19 PM, amaterasu wrote:

Mixing is pertinant in all forms of music, from classical to dance to rock to vg to whatever.

What you are doing is determining the optimal sonic positions for each track. This includes panning (L & R), volume (Front to Back), and equalization, so that the tracks fit together well.

Yea i know panning, had some difficulties with that on the conversion from console to pc, its always mono-fied, on 2 of my tracks that had MAD surround effects i had to manually re-pan everything to R because otherwise it had either loss of sound or no sound at all. That really pissed me off but what can i do about it, redo the whole tracks on fl? no thanks, i cant copy paste individual 2 block riffs on it without getting seisures for the duration.

I dont get the equalization, please explain that one.

And to my understanding neither mixing nor mastering really have much to do with effects. You might use effects to polish up something but most of that goes in the design/composition process.

Volume can be used to put some emotion, making the music more aggressive or kinder but thats probably the most you can do with it on classical music as far as i know. Naturally im talking about actual piano here, im not familiar with high fidelity violins and other orchestral instruments for that matter, i mostly make bell beeps out of flutes too, and violins become some kind of sharp sine in my hands.

[Rawmin]

At 10/22/09 07:37 PM, Calamaistr wrote: Volume can be used to put some emotion, making the music more aggressive or kinder but thats probably the most you can do with it on classical music as far as i know. Naturally im talking about actual piano here, im not familiar with high fidelity violins and other orchestral instruments for that matter, i mostly make bell beeps out of flutes too, and violins become some kind of sharp sine in my hands.

Realistically, the use of volume in the mastering sense, is to bring the volume up to the same level, or higher than other professional tracks. For more about this, take a look at the 'Loudness War'

[amaterasu]

At 10/22/09 07:37 PM, Calamaistr wrote: I dont get the equalization, please explain that one.

In a nutshell, you want each timbre to occupy a specific frequency range so it doesn't interfere with other sounds in your peice. This is achieved by using an equalizer to lower the levels of different ranges of frequencies. You also use equalization to bump up certain frequencies that you want highlighted in a timbre.

An example is putting your bassline between 60 and 250hz and rolling off anything higher. This cleans up your mids to make more room for leads, pads, etc. But its really all relative and eq is somewhat of an art form in itself.

[Calamaistr]

At 10/22/09 07:47 PM, amaterasu wrote:

At 10/22/09 07:37 PM, Calamaistr wrote: I dont get the equalization, please explain that one.

In a nutshell, you want each timbre to occupy a specific frequency range so it doesn't interfere with other sounds in your peice. This is achieved by using an equalizer to lower the levels of different ranges of frequencies. You also use equalization to bump up certain frequencies that you want highlighted in a timbre.

An example is putting your bassline between 60 and 250hz and rolling off anything higher. This cleans up your mids to make more room for leads, pads, etc. But its really all relative and eq is somewhat of an art form in itself.

Im sorry i really never understood what all this was about, i never tampered with frequencies on seperates, its all gonna be either 432hz as far as im concerned.. not that i had the option on console in the first place. I used to set it to 432 in audacity tbh.

at rawmin; That explains a lot now, i didnt know about that.. i guess im still in the 80s, im not gonna join that sillyness.

[Dj-Fanta5t1c]

i rarely will master any tracks i have =D I LIKE IT RAW

[InGenius]

At 10/22/09 06:19 PM, la-yinn wrote: Mastering everything done post-rendering. The objective of mastering your tracks is basically getting the track to sound as loud and crisp as possible without it getting distorted or making the balance of frequencies go off. People tend to compress their tracks on the Master Channel in their mixer before rendering their finished work. By the strict term, this is not mastering, but mixing. (Although opinions vary on this.)

I do have the opinion that Master Channel/Buss compression is a) stupid if you don't know what you're doing, b) annoying to a Mastering engineer trying to help you out with his services, c) not Mastering but, rather post-production work. We master in-house at my studio but only because we are releasing locally and not on a national, big label. If we were attached to a major or had national distribution then we would pay the money (or better yet, the label would pay) and we'd be professionally mastered and would NOT be slapping compression or even limiting across our Main.

That said, I do throw two layers of compression/limiting on my Mains when mixing down either an instrumental or a finished track mostly to give the artist recording on the track a rough of what it will sound like when I'm done mastering it. Artists like to hear these incremental steps so that they can input their own opinions, good and bad, and feel liek a part of their own music rather than on the outside looking in as a producer or engineer reinterprets everything they wrote. If an artist is trying to force me to kill the mix with their vocals, I will refuse and point them to the door with the raw tracks and a bill for my hours as well as a list of other studios who will probably do the same for them, though. I don't compromise because the quality of the mixes coming out of MNSP studios reflects on myself and the studio as a whole.

As for the Mastering side of things, I keep it simple. EQ for clarity and punch, adjust Stereo Width if needed, hit it with Multi-Limiting to bring the frequency bands in line and give a generally needed boost to 12kHz+ (the Air), finish with a good brickwall and maybe warmth if it's needed. Beyond that, I coordinate with the artist on track layout, then balance the tracks and get a Master burnt for them. Not every artist wants this service, nor ar most willing to pay for the extra shine mastering can give them, so alot of artist leave with mixed tracks but not mastered ones.

As for trying to get tracks to sound as loud and crisp as possible, it depends on the genre. Pop, Rock, Electronic and Urban music, for the most part, does fit this mold of "Loudness Wars" candidates, but Orchestral, Ambient, World music, and softer styles of Jazz, Pop and Rock do not. In fact, depending on genre, a Mastering Engineer may find themselves doing little to no compression to save the precious dynamics of a track. Mastering is many more things than we generally think of it to be.

[TwilightNecrosis]

At 10/22/09 06:19 PM, la-yinn wrote: People tend to compress their tracks on the Master Channel in their mixer before rendering their finished work. By the strict term, this is not mastering, but mixing. (Although opinions vary on this.)

My opinion varies...
I think of 'mixing' as anything done to the individual tracks to make them mesh together properly as a unit ('the mix').
I.E. compression, EQ, reverbs, delays, etc.
Conversely, 'mastering', to me, is anything done to the master track/mix to alter the sound of the song as a whole, to make it louder and more appealing to the ear.
I.E. multiband maximizing, brickwalling, more EQ, etc.

At 10/24/09 06:45 PM, InGenius wrote: I do have the opinion that Master Channel/Buss compression is a) stupid if you don't know what you're doing, b) annoying to a Mastering engineer trying to help you out with his services

This is why I call anything on the Master channel 'mastering'... because if you're sending your mix to an engineer to be professionally mastered, you should take anything you have on the Master channel off so that the engineer has most headroom to do his work. I would never send off a track that had a brickwall on the master channel... that's retarded (on the scale of stupid, it's Metallica).
However, while I don't think post-production and mastering are the same thing, they are similar in that the purpose is to make the recording sound as good as it possibly can.
The way I see it, post-production is anything done between tracking and mastering that cleans up the mix.
I.E. delaying/advancing tracks to prevent harmful phase cancellation, cleaning up punch ins/outs, automating fadeins/outs, etc.

[nathanallenpinard]

I do have the opinion that Master Channel/Buss compression is a) stupid if you don't know what you're doing, b) annoying to a Mastering engineer trying to help you out with his services, c) not Mastering but, rather post-production work.

I usually don't do it, but I consider it fine if you are the one doing the entirely of the work.

Usually orchestral music only requires a limiter. Anything more than that can mess up the mix.

Most music I just EQ a tad, and limit. I prefer to get it right in the mix entirely before mastering.

[btriangle]

At 10/25/09 02:03 PM, nathanallenpinard wrote:

I do have the opinion that Master Channel/Buss compression is a) stupid if you don't know what you're doing, b) annoying to a Mastering engineer trying to help you out with his services, c) not Mastering but, rather post-production work.

I usually don't do it, but I consider it fine if you are the one doing the entirely of the work.

Usually orchestral music only requires a limiter. Anything more than that can mess up the mix.

Most music I just EQ a tad, and limit. I prefer to get it right in the mix entirely before mastering.

Its really quite interesting to see the mass difference in production between a standard classical composer, and a standard electronic composer.

Mainly because Classical is all strict in the panning, and the way you mix and master it.

And electronic you can basically go all out. I think thats why many people enjoy electronic more at first, since its, in a way, kind of more fun XD.

[Calamaistr]

what i dont understand is now that its been said what the reason for all this 'mastering' is why you people keep doing it? Why keep being in some silly race for the hardest sound.. why not concentrate more on composition?

[amaterasu]

At 10/25/09 02:57 PM, Calamaistr wrote: what i dont understand is now that its been said what the reason for all this 'mastering' is why you people keep doing it? Why keep being in some silly race for the hardest sound.. why not concentrate more on composition?

Maybe because proper mastering can make an already great track even more stunning? I fail to see your logic here.

[nathanallenpinard]

At 10/25/09 02:57 PM, Calamaistr wrote: what i dont understand is now that its been said what the reason for all this 'mastering' is why you people keep doing it? Why keep being in some silly race for the hardest sound.. why not concentrate more on composition?

Your composition doesn't mean jack if it's mixed badly. Bad mix can make the composition sound not as intended.

Mastering adds that "polish" that you want in a finished product. And allows anyone to listen to it on any system if done right.

[Calamaistr]

At 10/25/09 03:13 PM, amaterasu wrote:

At 10/25/09 02:57 PM, Calamaistr wrote: what i dont understand is now that its been said what the reason for all this 'mastering' is why you people keep doing it? Why keep being in some silly race for the hardest sound.. why not concentrate more on composition?

Maybe because proper mastering can make an already great track even more stunning? I fail to see your logic here.

My logic is that people spend to much time on trying to make their music louder and not on making original compositions, who cares what the sound quality is. Music is music.

[nathanallenpinard]

My logic is that people spend to much time on trying to make their music louder and not on making original compositions, who cares what the sound quality is. Music is music.

From a hobby standpoint ok sure, yeah, you're partially right. But on a pro standpoint, no. Mastering is important in everyway, due to the media devices that people use. The loudness war applies.

Examples:

Flash game music at low levels the compression makes the music sound worse.
Crappy ipod speakers or headphones that don't have enough gain, won't play your music at nominal levels.
Crappy computer speakers, same problem.

But it's not just loudness you know, it's also the fact that if you don't master your mix those above devices won't play the EQ spectrum equally. Too much bass, too much treble, etc.

You could even apply these rules to old world music long before any production equipment came out. Each instrument in an orchestra is instructed to blend with each other (mixing) and the orchestra is placed in an idea venue to limit any artifacts that may occur via the wrong type of sound reflection (mastering..in a way)

Not the best analogy, but it is the train of thought when I mix orchestral music.

[InGenius]

At 10/25/09 04:45 PM, Calamaistr wrote:

At 10/25/09 03:13 PM, amaterasu wrote:

At 10/25/09 02:57 PM, Calamaistr wrote: what i dont understand is now that its been said what the reason for all this 'mastering' is why you people keep doing it? Why keep being in some silly race for the hardest sound.. why not concentrate more on composition?

Maybe because proper mastering can make an already great track even more stunning? I fail to see your logic here.

My logic is that people spend to much time on trying to make their music louder and not on making original compositions, who cares what the sound quality is. Music is music.

I think maybe you only read one post in this entire thread because I already stated Mastering is NOT a description of the Loudness Wars idealism of making everything louder, it is properly balancing a series of tracks against one another, EQ'ing for clarity, ensuring their is no clipping, and massaging a track(s) for the best possible sound, volume, and overall punch dependent on genre. As for "who cares what the sound quality is", you've got to be kidding, right? Quality is everything, even if you're intentionally downsampling/bitcrushing for poorer quality, the quality of the music is another aspect, like melody, harmony, counter-melody, rhythm, composition, etc. It's all important, every aspect.

[joshhunsaker]

Keep in mind that the best mixes require the least mastering.

[Calamaistr]

At 10/25/09 05:22 PM, InGenius wrote:

Quality is everything

Well i take a crackling record or a hissy tape over a knife sharp digital sound any day.

[xKore]

At 10/25/09 08:47 PM, Calamaistr wrote:

At 10/25/09 05:22 PM, InGenius wrote:

Quality is everything

Well i take a crackling record or a hissy tape over a knife sharp digital sound any day.

Running a track through analog equipment can be an element of mastering too.

[itsfoxhall]

What's the best way to master for cd production if you're doing it yourself and using reason 4.0? Usually my old band just let the studio handle all of the mastering side, but seeing as im doing my own music and can't afford to send it to the studios to mix it whats the best?

[djInTheDark]

It all kinda depends on what your doing and/or talking about...

Think of them like this:

Mixing is when you take two components or things and put them together in some way (side-by-side, intertwined, ect.) This applies to most anything in life to.

In terms of audio, you could be taking about things from biggest to smallest.

For instance;

If you a DJ you could be talking about mixing two or more songs together, making (ironically), a mix.

If your a producer, you could be talking about mixing sounds (samples, vst's, effects, ect.) together to make a song.

And if your a sound artist, you could be talking about mixing frequencies of sounds together, thus to make a complete sound.

Mastering is very different, but it has some of the same rules...

Mastering isn't always improving something though, it could be to downsize it in some ways to (quality, size, amount of components, types of components, ect.)

An example of improving quality would be something like trying to removing clipping.

Clipping is when the stream of audio is not connected to the Apex (mid-line) of the stream in some way.
Start and End clipping (Image no.2) is when the audio stream is cut off at the start or the end of the stream before (or after) it reaches the Apex. To fix that I usually minimize the stream to a very small margin and add a fade in or out (depending on which side of the steam your on) to normalize it.
Mid clipping (Image no.3)is when the audio stream is cut off during the stream from the Apex or from the stream itself. To fix this you must align the incoming audio with the audio that has already played to connect the stream back to a constant flow. However, depending on the frequency of the sound and what the sound is based prominently on (bass, mid, treble, or noise) the connection may remove any clipping, but the sound may still jump from frequency to frequency.

Hope this helped,
DJ InTheDark

[InGenius]

At 10/25/09 08:47 PM, Calamaistr wrote:

At 10/25/09 05:22 PM, InGenius wrote:

Quality is everything

Well i take a crackling record or a hissy tape over a knife sharp digital sound any day.

Again you didn't bother reading. I addressed downsampling and bitcrushing, two lowered audio quality additions to music. Did I need to address vinyl and analog tape as well? Now I know you're native language isn't english, but you're handling yourself fairly well so try reading a whole post every once in awhile. Again, Quality is one of the core components of a track, EVEN IF THE QUALITY OF THE TRACK ISN'T BEING IMPROVED BECAUSE THE SOURCE MATERIAL OR STYLE OF MUSIC DICTATES A 'LOWERED' QUALITY BY CHOICE. Is that clear enough for you? Seriously, you're making an ass of yourself by fighting about whether quality is important, whether mastering is needed, and whether you know all there is to know about music and have more experience than we could ever HOPE to have. Slow down, take your time, breathe, and stop being a git.

[Calamaistr]

At 10/26/09 12:00 PM, InGenius wrote:

At 10/25/09 08:47 PM, Calamaistr wrote:

At 10/25/09 05:22 PM, InGenius wrote:

Quality is everything

Well i take a crackling record or a hissy tape over a knife sharp digital sound any day.

Again you didn't bother reading. I addressed downsampling and bitcrushing, two lowered audio quality additions to music. Did I need to address vinyl and analog tape as well? Now I know you're native language isn't english, but you're handling yourself fairly well so try reading a whole post every once in awhile. Again, Quality is one of the core components of a track, EVEN IF THE QUALITY OF THE TRACK ISN'T BEING IMPROVED BECAUSE THE SOURCE MATERIAL OR STYLE OF MUSIC DICTATES A 'LOWERED' QUALITY BY CHOICE. Is that clear enough for you? Seriously, you're making an ass of yourself by fighting about whether quality is important, whether mastering is needed, and whether you know all there is to know about music and have more experience than we could ever HOPE to have. Slow down, take your time, breathe, and stop being a git.

Actually you're making an ass out of yourself for trying to get the right here with your bullshit about 'by choice' im not talking about the luxioury of it im talking about the goddamn records and tapes themselves, i dont need to 'reproduce' this or 'keep' this for a reason.
Youve had your head in the computer for to long man.. have you even once in your life heard an actual record play from a horn? jesus christ you're being difficult.