what's the best software to use for mastering???

[TLTD]

I think also the cost is going to be based on what you send. A DAT tape or a bunch of WAVs. Get in touch with the company and talk about it, they may even allow you to sit with them if it is a local place in driving distance. In my case, I couldn't make it and had someone else go for me but it is out of your control if they decide to make it sound like something that you hadn't planned. I guess I got lucky because since I wasn't there, it sounded almost exactly like the tape we had before it was mastered. Sort of "safe" mastering. They worked on increasing the volume and that was about it. It was very subtle, but who knows what someone does these days, there are so many more things that are faster to play with.

[EnSkorSang]

Originally Posted by String7th

Most "Mastering" software is simply wave-editing software.

Most of what we do after recording an initial track can be termed 'wave editing'
In fact, any program into which we record and manipulate wave files is wave editing software, ie cubase, protools etc etc, not just mastering software.
Wavelabs plugins may or may not be useless but this is not all mastering is. Wavelab and other software also has some nifty tricks which sequencers dont have in terms of preparing the audio into an album format, encoding, preparing for disc imprints, adding track start/end/split markers and a whole host of analytical tools to help you when doing your 'wave editing'

[MetalDave]

I haven't read all 12 pages of this so I may be repeating what someone else has said or making a fool of myself. The key to mastering is to have a consistant sound from the start. If you sit down and do the whole album without changing things in the middle, you will have an easier time of mastering. I used to run live sound. I had a manager saying I needed to get a morw consistant sound. All the musicians would start each night by changing their sound. Then as the night goes on they would turn things up etc. Musicians can't keep their hands of of knobs. The problem lies in the fact that as the night goes on they go deaf. Kindof like trying to read a really bright monitor. After a while your eyes get snowblind. Same with hearing. So they turn themselves up and make things worse. If you can keep the whole session consistant, the mastering is done from the start. As you do editting of sounds in the software of your choice, it may be a good idea to try the same things on each song. This doesn't always work but usually it does. Keep track of what you did on the individual songs so you can do the same things on the next song hence, consistancy. Tell the musicians "If you feel like you need to turn up, Take a break". Another thing that happens is the musicians go and do a live gig and take some of their stuff with them. They bring it back and everything is all different than it was when they left.

Basically I believe it is like Master as you go. this avoids taking so much time getting the album to sound like and album and not like you recorded 5 bands at 10 different studios.

[acoustic]

Musicians can't keep their hands of of knobs. you got that right what the fun in getting it right the first time we have got to screw the mix up so you can fix it right?------------------acoustic

[brandondrury]

The key to mastering is to have a consistant sound from the start.

This is 100% correct. Mastering is there to help compensate (however subtly) for these in consistencies. They say the hardest albums to master are the greatest hits records from tunes from all kinds of albums and even eras.

Basically I believe it is like Master as you go.

Sorta. I do believe that mastering is that process that occurs after mixing. However, I get your point. Every step along the way leads up to this final moment and if you've done your job properly the mastering engineer can be lazy.

Brandon

[lunaticpro]

Ditto on I might be repeating something mentioned before but just wanted to mention something. Ive used Waves Mercury (maximizer/ultra), Wave Arts (Final plug), Ozone Isotope 3, Magix Clean Lab and Nomad Factory Blue Mastering software with decent results. However, just recently, I got my hands on Yamaha's Final Plug - let me say that I have achived better results in less time with this software. The compression is super smooth and the clarity its added to my mixes is awesome. Compared in price, it is the cheapest of all mentioned except for Clean Lab which is super cheap but not exactly smooth/ or non clipping compression. I think it runs for $159 bones online - Final Master by Yamaha.

[Ibanez_shredder]

I think the answer to the originaly question (Whats the best software for mastering) is simple. NONE. if you're cutting an album your "sound" (to clearify I mean the tones you use to play the songs you written and practiced and can play in you sleep) should already be there, so if you organize your approach to the tracking process and deal with the wave editing you shouldn't have so many inconsistencies...

[richiebee]

Interesting perspective. Do you consider that to be a coverall approach or simply for the genre of music you perform?

[Ibanez_shredder]

well for the most part yes. As I have done orchestral recording and now I record at home with my PODxt Live. I see that being able to play the music is the most important thing. If I can play the piss out of the material i'm tracking I find that I can manage to get a good mix. since i'm not an audio engineer I figure that if I can get a good mix then I must have done something right with the "playing" part.

as for organization, the most success I've had is when all songs are very well prepared and I capture the sound I want in one or two tries. and then proceed to the next song. so when I can go from one track/song/ect to the next it makes the mastering very simple... (this applies especially when recording several parts on seperate tracks to be layered together for the complete mix) I think it's important to find the sound you want before attempting to record a track.... this is all of course IMHO

[brandondrury]

The deal is a great mix requires little to no altering in mastering. The general rule of them you read online is anything more than 2dB of EQ from the mastering engineer is too much.

So you are right. If you get the tracking right and the mixing right, there isn't a whole left for the mastering engineer to do. Of course, I've said this before. I don't believe that mastering engineer "fix" anything. The get all your individual (hopefully great) mixes to work together.

Brandon