Mastering Your Tracks In FL Studio
- Thread starter dacalion
- Start date
paradigmshifter
Beatmaker
ill o.g.
my two cents:
Mastering signal chain is always dependent on what you are mastering... EQ > compressor... or ... Compressor > EQ
Also, I recommend using a linear-phase EQ and a multi-band compressor for mastering tasks... and if you are mastering your own tracks, it's better to get the mix on point before even considering putting any processing on the master, if your mix is shit, mastering it will not make a goddamn difference...
The signal analysis tools available out there are a great way to visually see how the sound is being affected, but the main tool a mastering engineer needs to rely on is his/her EARS... always let your ears make the final decision, but this is a skill that requires A LOT of practice.
I would recommend staying away from stereo enhancement processing on the mastering process, because what you do to the stereo signal at this stage will affect all the frequencies, and phasing issues that you don't notice during the process will become noticeable when you listen to your master in different speakers/rooms... phasing can boost or cut levels in certain frequencies, usually in the bottom end... instead, apply stereo enhancement effects to the individual elements of your mix, and fill the stereo spectrum as much as possible... then master it...
Reference, reference, reference... pick a track "commercially" mastered in the same genre you are working on, and constantly reference back to it to make sure you are making the right adjustments to get your tune where you want it to...
I use iZotope's Ozone to do my own mastering, but I always try to get my mixes to the point where mastering is only the cheery on top, not the banana...
Keep up,
PS
Mastering signal chain is always dependent on what you are mastering... EQ > compressor... or ... Compressor > EQ
Also, I recommend using a linear-phase EQ and a multi-band compressor for mastering tasks... and if you are mastering your own tracks, it's better to get the mix on point before even considering putting any processing on the master, if your mix is shit, mastering it will not make a goddamn difference...
The signal analysis tools available out there are a great way to visually see how the sound is being affected, but the main tool a mastering engineer needs to rely on is his/her EARS... always let your ears make the final decision, but this is a skill that requires A LOT of practice.
I would recommend staying away from stereo enhancement processing on the mastering process, because what you do to the stereo signal at this stage will affect all the frequencies, and phasing issues that you don't notice during the process will become noticeable when you listen to your master in different speakers/rooms... phasing can boost or cut levels in certain frequencies, usually in the bottom end... instead, apply stereo enhancement effects to the individual elements of your mix, and fill the stereo spectrum as much as possible... then master it...
Reference, reference, reference... pick a track "commercially" mastered in the same genre you are working on, and constantly reference back to it to make sure you are making the right adjustments to get your tune where you want it to...
I use iZotope's Ozone to do my own mastering, but I always try to get my mixes to the point where mastering is only the cheery on top, not the banana...
Keep up,
PS
Here's the thing... you do have to depend on your ears, your ears are the key factor. The problem is, every bodies ears aren't the same, therefore every bodies interpretations won't be the same. Imagine trying to hit a moving bullseye at 50yds, it's not impossible but it is improbable. Ofcorse, the best shooters will come the closest and the worst will be the farthest away, so theoretically, the idea is to hit the target where the largest group is or better. In Mastering, that translates in to having a sound that falls somewhere in between a "good sound" and an "exceptional sound".
There are many other key factors involved that I'm sure "others" will add so I'm gonna leave room for them...lol. My suggestion to anyone who wants to learn the art of mastering is... take your time, read and learn the ins and outs, ups and downs, and most importantly - experiment. Make a CD, listen and compare it to what you consider your best sounding Professionally Mastered CD. Then take them both out to your ride and compare them, then play them in your nifty clock/radio/CD player and compare them. Take notes, write down what needs to be changed then go back, make your changes and do it all over again.
With time you will start to develop an ear for whats "good" and whats "exceptional" and it will start to reflect what you've learned in your music. Good luck and NEVER let anybody tell you that you can't do it or anything for that matter.
holla back
There are many other key factors involved that I'm sure "others" will add so I'm gonna leave room for them...lol. My suggestion to anyone who wants to learn the art of mastering is... take your time, read and learn the ins and outs, ups and downs, and most importantly - experiment. Make a CD, listen and compare it to what you consider your best sounding Professionally Mastered CD. Then take them both out to your ride and compare them, then play them in your nifty clock/radio/CD player and compare them. Take notes, write down what needs to be changed then go back, make your changes and do it all over again.
With time you will start to develop an ear for whats "good" and whats "exceptional" and it will start to reflect what you've learned in your music. Good luck and NEVER let anybody tell you that you can't do it or anything for that matter.
holla back
paradigmshifter
Beatmaker
ill o.g.
--- I don't agree with you on this Dac, it doesn't matter if your ears are different, bigger, smaller, etc... every person with a normal hearing range (20hz to 20khz) can detect the same variations in decibels, pitch, etc (the only factor that affects that is age)... anyone with normal hearing will receive the same information, no matter how your ear is shaped... for example, while passing through the pinna (visible part of the ear that resides outside of the head), sound goes through a filtering process in which sounds in the frequency range where human speech is normally found are enhanced. Finally, the filtering process also adds directional information to the sound. This happens regardless of how your ear looks, the psychoacoustics only change from person to person in how their brain processes the information... thats where ear training, musical training, etc, comes in...
--- That's it, training and practice is what makes the difference... in everything! just like you said about hitting a moving target at 50 yards, only the best shooters will have a chance, but that is not because their eyes or their trigger fingers are different than others, just that they have been practicing their shooting skills for longer, no?... but then you kind of contradicted yourself... just saying for the sake of keeping this discussion going
much respect. PS
Krazyfingaz
ILLIEN
ill o.g.
Battle Points: 2
Dope and very informative post Dac.
--- I don't agree with you on this Dac, it doesn't matter if your ears are different, bigger, smaller, etc... every person with a normal hearing range (20hz to 20khz) can detect the same variations in decibels, pitch, etc (the only factor that affects that is age)... anyone with normal hearing will receive the same information, no matter how your ear is shaped... for example, while passing through the pinna (visible part of the ear that resides outside of the head), sound goes through a filtering process in which sounds in the frequency range where human speech is normally found are enhanced. Finally, the filtering process also adds directional information to the sound. This happens regardless of how your ear looks, the psychoacoustics only change from person to person in how their brain processes the information... thats where ear training, musical training, etc, comes in...
--- That's it, training and practice is what makes the difference... in everything! just like you said about hitting a moving target at 50 yards, only the best shooters will have a chance, but that is not because their eyes or their trigger fingers are different than others, just that they have been practicing their shooting skills for longer, no?... but then you kind of contradicted yourself... just saying for the sake of keeping this discussion going
much respect. PS
anyone with normal hearing will receive the same information, 100% correct! but the fun comes in when it's time to interput that information into "what sounds good or exceptional" (which btw is an opinion) but i'll get back to that... Let's go back to the normal hearing person... normal hearing is attached to a hearing test like seeing is to a visual test. A person can have 20/20 vision and be color blind at the same time. Thats because his vision is considered perfect by the visual test yet his brain can't interput colors. A person can have perfect hearing but may not be able to translate that into good or exceptional mastering.
Now back to "what sounds good or exceptional". In Mastering, it's really an opinion, it's not a set standard (per ce), if that were the case, every Mastering Suite would have one preset called "Perfect Mastering"...lol. I've seen one "Professional Master" say that another "Professional Master" could have done this better or that better, not suggesting that he was better or it was a bad job, but suggesting certain parts would have translated into more feelings, or more drama or whatever emotion that they were looking for...so - good or exceptional mastering isn't limited to the ability to hear well, but a ton of other factors. Even the Mastering Process isn't written in gold, thats why there's sooo much debate over it.
All that in mind, the key is to aim for the bullseye but try to atleast hit in the "good or exceptional" areas.
*I missed where I contradicted myself* but good point on the hearing part. =)
EDIT: I just went back a read my post, I think you're refering to me saying...The problem is, every bodies ears aren't the same, therefore every bodies interpretations won't be the same. Lol, I didn't mean size or shape. I meant the entire process of hearing...
LOL Thanks.
The thing is with a lot of producers....that I've come across in my travels:
All these people know all the frequencies and the technology like they read from a book...
"yeah it's high in this range and should be cancelled out in this range" Put a this and that on it and use all these technical terms...
And a lot of those people's mixes are average at best......
I would love to learn all the jargon, but to me it isn't necessary to know all of it.......When I really mix my music down it sounds good to me...sounds good in the car, sounds good on monitors and sounds good in my ipod.... Sounds good to other people... And when the same people ask me....I just tell them I just tweak it until it sounds right...
I don't master, nor do I attempt to master.... I've seen countless videos on what I call "faux" mastering, using a lot of techniques people use in real mastering studios....But of course you can't use those "presets" to get that sound....But you can get an awesome mix....I do know a lot of us here have awesome mixes on their music...and I can tell the ones that put time into their mix.....
It's all about you knowing how it's supposed to sound and to have that ear for all nuances in the track that can be brought up/eliminated...
This post isn't geared towards anyone in this forum...Mostly towards those people who think they know it all because they spent $60k to go to Full Sail and they took a few classes for two years.
I like Dac's post because it shows how much time he spends and it works well with his music....and he's sharing knowledge that he doesn't have to share....his mix sounds pretty good to me....so he must be doing something right...but i don't think it's worthy of the "master" title (no offense), but a really good mix in my opinion.
The thing is with a lot of producers....that I've come across in my travels:
All these people know all the frequencies and the technology like they read from a book...
"yeah it's high in this range and should be cancelled out in this range" Put a this and that on it and use all these technical terms...
And a lot of those people's mixes are average at best......
I would love to learn all the jargon, but to me it isn't necessary to know all of it.......When I really mix my music down it sounds good to me...sounds good in the car, sounds good on monitors and sounds good in my ipod.... Sounds good to other people... And when the same people ask me....I just tell them I just tweak it until it sounds right...
I don't master, nor do I attempt to master.... I've seen countless videos on what I call "faux" mastering, using a lot of techniques people use in real mastering studios....But of course you can't use those "presets" to get that sound....But you can get an awesome mix....I do know a lot of us here have awesome mixes on their music...and I can tell the ones that put time into their mix.....
It's all about you knowing how it's supposed to sound and to have that ear for all nuances in the track that can be brought up/eliminated...
This post isn't geared towards anyone in this forum...Mostly towards those people who think they know it all because they spent $60k to go to Full Sail and they took a few classes for two years.
I like Dac's post because it shows how much time he spends and it works well with his music....and he's sharing knowledge that he doesn't have to share....his mix sounds pretty good to me....so he must be doing something right...but i don't think it's worthy of the "master" title (no offense), but a really good mix in my opinion.