One of the worlds most renown mastering engineers once coined a phrase like: "Mastering is easy - only the first 10,000 albums might be hard." 

(Attention, I'm on my soap box now!   🎉 )

Mixing music is my main profession since more than 25 years now. Still I always try to avoid to master my own mixes (... in fact I would decline jobs which would oblige me to do so). Mastering is something that has to be done with a fresh approach, by a different set of ears in a different room, with a specialised set of tools, ideally by someone who has the experience from countless other recordings and their sound. Be aware that mastering is much more a technical procedure than mixing, where you can get by with trial and error to a certain degree, even if you have little technical knowledge. 

On top of it, there is little chance that a preset will really cover your actual mastering needs (... as someone who created several thousand presets for VSL's product I hope that I'm allowed to say so 😊 ...). Refining the sound of a mix is usually achieved by the combination of dozens of individual, sometimes minute adjustments of carefully selected equipment. 

In other words: You will have to train your ears for quite some time to grasp the Dos and Dont's of mastering. There's no real shortcut, sorry to say so. The best way to start is to do throrough "ref-checks", which means to make loudness-adjusted, gapless comparisons between the mix/master you're working on and a reference track (which you seem to have already when you're using match EQs). Try to put your finger on the actual differences. Try to differentiate between all the possible dimensions of sound (volume vs. loudness, frequency contrasts vs. melt, fundamentals vs. harmonics, transients vs. density, coherence vs. width vs. depth, etc. ... and all the constantly moving targets of "taste", "style" and "flavour of the month 😉 ...). Now you can start to reach out for the right tool to close this gap. 

(... and if it's really important: Ask a professional mastering engineer to work on your mix! 😉 There's nothing wrong with it.)

/off my soap box again 😊

Kind regards

Everything Dietz said is right. 😃

I think that clamping those presets over your entire mixes is probably doing your music more harm than good. Applying an "added presence" preset over a whole dense mix with lots of instruments, where no careful balancing and EQing has been done is most certainly going to end up being a painful experience. You don't want to excite, "hype" - or saturate or "fatten up" - an untreated mess of frequencies.

I would suggest concentrating much more on detailed and careful EQing of your tracks and groups. EQ will do much, much more for your mixes - in terms of clarity, power and perceived loudness - than dynamic processing will.

Most instruments will sound better and more the way you really want them to if you apply some subtractive EQ to them. The trick is to find out what frequencies you can carve out, and how much, to make the instrument sound just like it does on its own, only better. It's like digging up a gem from the soil and removing the dirt from the surface. Every instrument has those areas! It's like spring cleaning. After you're done with it, you realize how much better if feels to sit in the house. 😊

If you do this with all your tracks, it adds up tremendously! Remember that making things sound better, for the bigger part, is taking stuff away, not adding stuff. If you don't know where to start, try sweeping through the frequency range of a track - grab a single EQ band, set the "Q" value to something narrow (10 or so), push the band by 12 or ever 24 dB, and then move it across the spectrum. You'll notice that you will come across several resonances that are really really ugly. Remember those and try doing the opposite - does the instrument sound better if you reduce this range? How much does it need? -3 dB, -6 dB? At which point do you feel that you've taken away too much?

There truly is no shortcut to this. It's an ability that takes a lot of time to train. I'm learning new things about it all the time, basically with every new mix I attempt. This is really something you should strongly focus on, instead of trying to improve your music with mastering plug-in presets. Concentrate on achieving a sound that comes as close as possible to what you want to hear, relying only on EQ and volume adjustment. It has to sound good at this stage.

The tidier and clearer the mix, the more you can do in terms of compression, saturation, excitement, volume etc. But if there's a lot of litter in your mix, all these tools and their presets often do nothing more than to help the crap float to the surface.

If you tidy up your mix and set the volumes right, everything will sound clearer, tighter and more transparent, you will notice that you can go both wetter and louder and it's still gonna sound good ... added reverb will sound WAY better, more volume will sound more exciting, but not tiresome. This is where you can further enhance the sound with presence, compression, saturation, gentle limiting etc. It will all make so much more sense from there. Basically, you want to make great stuff a bit louder and a bit more exciting. But make sure it's great stuff first! And the most important part of that is getting rid of all the ballast that's always in there, but not really needed.

This is just guessing of course, but judging from the graph, there's an odd bump in the range from 500 Hz and upwards. Why is that? That's an area that often contains a lot of spectral information that we perceive as "muddy". Perhaps take a closer look at what is happening with your instruments in that range.

And then there's another noticeable bump at around 2k-5k. This could possible correlate to the sharp staccati you mentioned, especially if the dynamics are rather uniform. This area is something that contains "warmth" as well as "bite", but can also be very fatiguing. For me, it's a typical pain-in-the-ass range for high strings, brass (especially at higher dynamics), and oboe. There is almost always something beneficial that can be done at several points here.

Thank you Dietz for your detailed explanation! You are right, it is far more technical for sure, and I don't know a lot of those mastering concepts. Although, I have managed to master my tracks in which mastering engineers would tell me they were well done, but they were not classical pieces, but electronic dance music pieces. Classical music has a totally different approach I know.

Maybe what I am looking for is a pre-master(?). Where I can achieve comfortable loudness and clarity as I work. Also, I like my mastering to reside in the master bus - I don't like to separate my project to a different mastering project.

In any case, I have no problem hiring a person to do this for me so long they have similar tools as me (so I can reuse the settings in my project).

The tools I have: Vienna Suite, VE PRO 5, Cubase Pro 8, Ozone 6 Pro, Ozone Alloy 2, Waves LinMB, Waves Vitamin, Flux Full Pack.

The person who would end up mastering this for me, would a. have many of the above tools b. would give me the presets for the tools he used if they don't mind.

Thank you JimmyHellfire!

Very insightful! I think those noticeable dips you see is my use of a dynamic EQ from Ozone (acts like a compressor but is really an EQ which is triggered at certain thresholds). I was trying to "soften" the painful parts.

Also, when I matched the EQ, I got a tremendous improvement in clarity. I was shocked! I had no idea how cloudy my mix sounded in the first place!

I will follow your advice on EQing, and I think this will yield far better results to start with.

Thanks,

-Nektarios

@JimmyHellfire said:

Concentrate on achieving a sound that comes as close as possible to what you want to hear, relying only on EQ and volume adjustment. It has to sound good at this stage.

Very well said. Have you tried the Equalizer: Resonance Menu Presets of the Vienna Suite on your instruments? The presets are specifcaly designed to cut different frequencies. (You have to click on each freq. you want to cut, they are all turned off by default.) Also, the compressor presets when used on individual instruments (even subtely) can really make an instrument "pop" and stand out in a mix.

If you can hire a pro to master for you (who has a lot of experience mastering classical music) then I would do that. I've noticed at some point during the composing/ recording/ mixing process that I've become so familiar with the piece that I can no longer hear it objectively as compared to someone who has never heard it before. Bringing in a fresh set of ears is very helpful, especially if they have the knoweldege and tools to enhance your mix.

All the best,

Michael

Thank you Michael.

Yes, in all my instruments in VE PRO/MIR PRO, I use the Resonance EQ for all of them! Activating all individual resonance frequency cuts.. Maybe I should be more selective?

MIR PRO does a great job in making the piece sound natural, but because of the dynamic range, if the entire piece gets increased by a few db due to my "mastering", the loudest dynamic parts sound too loud. Maybe what I would have to do, probably, is decrease the volume slowly before reaching the loud parts...

@nektarios said:

MIR PRO does a great job in making the piece sound natural, but because of the dynamic range, if the entire piece gets increased by a few db due to my "mastering", the loudest dynamic parts sound too loud. Maybe what I would have to do, probably, is decrease the volume slowly before reaching the loud parts...

Hi Nektarios

I believe that the so called "STEM-Mastering" would be the best solution for your piece. Bounce all of those sections sparately for the Mastering Studio.... Or you mix them yourself until thy dynamic between all the sections is correct (with the volume track automation).

Send all the different instruments sections separately to the mastering studio. If they do nothing it should sound just it do now. But people there can now do a proper mix even in the dynamicly problematic parts. Further they would have the possibility to treat each instrument sections separately as well if it would be necessary.

Keep in mind, that sometimes a mastering engineer need to do something only in the side channel or that a certain EQs can add a sound to a section which isn' able with your tools. So if you limit (only your effects) your first mastering experience you probably not get the most out. Or order 2 versions. One with the effects of the studio and one with your limitation.

The Max-Curve you showed above is not very meaningful. If you want to use a curve I would choose an average curve...

If I can have a short soundexample I probably could give better/more/other hints.

All the best

Beat

Thank you Beat,

The problem I have with stem mastering is that I have to bounce things, and lets say later I want to make changes to my piece, the mastered piece is not useful anymore... This has happened twice already to me and money was wasted.

Personally, I think because computers are becoming so fast, real time mastering is possible, I believe.

Ideally, the service I'd say I am looking for, is where I can submit to the studio my Cubase 8 Pro Project, my VE-PR0 5/MIR PRO project and they do everything. From applying EQ to individual instruments, to eqing the wet signal, to applying effects in the master bus. Whatever it needs to create the finished product. If they want to use their own effects, fine, I may consider buying those too. My tools though are not bad at all. The dynamic EQ from Ozone is simply awesome.

Honestly, if VSL has service like this, I can certainly see me utilize it on many of my projects. In addition, another challenging task I find is adding convincing humanization.

I will post my piece later today.

Cheers,

-Nektarios

Hi Nektarios

Thanks for all your Infos.

Beside the "new ears of a mastering studio" (Dietz) you mentioned that the sound in your car isn't the one you whish but it is OK with the monitors...

So if you want to master your pieces yourself you probably need to check your situation first. You should have

• 1 - 3 references of pieces with music played in or close to your style. You can compare the sound over all, the pressure and all the matters of sound, timbre, colour, stereo width etc.
• 1 pair of a real good studio monitor which can clearly show you bad things in the mix and in the sound. I mean something like Neuman KH 310, Focal SM9 or something similar...
• 1 - 2 other speaker systems such as an average Hifi-System for simulating the average home user and a really poor sounding speakers so to say the worst case (Avatone MixCube?). If your mix still sounds good on those monitors your master is prepared for each mobile phone, tablet, earphone etc.
• Then you need to treat your listening room in such a good way, that the sound mainly depends on the speakers and not to the room...
• And of course a lot of experiences and practice in listening to music concerning mastering matters...

----------

😉 If you have solved all these preconditions - at the latest you will be no more happy with anything you ever produced and mixed until now...

Beat

Thank you Beat! Really appreciate the helpful advice from everyone here.

Funny you mentioned, because just yesterday I purchased new speakers - Audioengine 5+ and their Subwoofer the S8. So far so good... Before that purchase, I had some really bad computer speakers (Logitech, 13 years old lol), and Event monitors. But I found myself using the Events less and less as there was no subwoofer. Now that I got the new speakers, I may connect all my speakers to the new subwoofer. I also got some foams for my walls for sound absorbtion, but I think I will need more. :-)  

This is my studio where I usually work:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/33556625/Images/2015-07-22%2021.34.04%20HDR.jpg

Here is the piece I am working on -- the way I mastered it:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/33556625/Music/Nektarios%20-%20Eastern%20Dream%2034.mp3

Keep in mind, this version has some stacatto velocities "corrected" (as I kept revising few days back) so it's not as pronounced as some older versions.

The source track I used for the EQ is this:

@JimmyHellfire said:

...taking stuff away, not adding stuff....grab a single EQ band, set the "Q" value to something narrow (10 or so), push the band by 12 or ever 24 dB, and then move it across the spectrum. You'll notice that you will come across several resonances that are really really ugly. Remember those and try doing the opposite - does the instrument sound better if you reduce this range? How much does it need? -3 dB, -6 dB? At which point do you feel that you've taken away too much?

Beat also has great advice about the reference tracks...that is a must! Thre is no substitute for smart research. Regarding mastering orchestral music:

- pages 525-544 in The Guide to MIDI Orchestration by Paul Gilreath (4E) - check the library first

- use reference tracks to learn how your studio sounds with correctly mastered tracks

- less is more...try to avoid slapping on plug-iins galore

- be aware of the loudest parts of the track and work backwards from there

- use dynamic equalizers not bus compressors to soften the bad freq's

What better way to end a response than with a link to a video to watch, right? So, here is a video that provided a really good technique about multiband compression for vocals however, if you understand the point he's making, the techniques work well for strings, brass, and woods, in my opinion...very valuable information. Also, I noticed that he uses automation quite a bit to avoid having to compress (someone also commented on that too). I would strongly pay attention to the details in the video that may not be addressed as he is working on-the-fly with the track. This following time interval is the essential part of the video, although seeing the whole video would not take much more time: 2:38-8:39

It took me a bit to find the video after seeing it a while back. I tried his technique that he mentions, toward the end, and it really does make a difference for bringing out brightness and clarity. It's worth mentioning that you should run dynamic eq's on the individual instuments, not the whole mix.

Good luck with everything.

@nektarios said:

[...] Yes, in all my instruments in VE PRO/MIR PRO, I use the Resonance EQ for all of them! Activating all individual resonance frequency cuts.. Maybe I should be more selective? [...]

Yes, definitly. After all, these "Resonance Menus" are meant to be seen and used as - uhm - menus! 😊 You pick the ones you need, leaving all others alone.

When I invented those "menus" my intention was to give the user some meaningful hints, like "Hey, typically you would start here, here and here when you're looking for some obtrusive frequency build-ups!". These settings are _not_ meant to be used blindly, and in most cases you will overdo it quite a bit when you engage all the suggested frequency bands at once without further adjustments. Some frequencies will only get problematic in certain scales or playing ranges, other suggested settings will be useful only for certain styles or articulations (... yes, I went through all of them! 🕰️).

HTH,

@Mathematics said:

It took me a bit to find the video after seeing it a while back. I tried his technique that he mentions, toward the end, and it really does make a difference for bringing out brightness and clarity. It's worth mentioning that you should run dynamic eq's on the individual instuments, not the whole mix.

Good luck with everything.

Thank you Mathematics. Appreciate your helpful advice. I watched the video, and I have been using his technique for quite some time, but lately been doing it with a dynamic eq instead of a multiband compressor. I use the dynamic eq to reduce some piercing frequencies at high velocities, instead of EQing everything accross the board. I liked the tips the video gives. Thanks again!

@Dietz said:

Yes, definitly. After all, these "Resonance Menus" are meant to be seen and used as - uhm - menus! 😊 You pick the ones you need, leaving all others alone.

The million dollar question is, how do I identify what to activate from that menu? If I rely on my hearing I will fail. I can only identify overall quality of the mix, without knowing exactly why I have a problem. Only in the high frequencies can I identify something is bad (either too loud or too low). The rest is a challenge for me.

Maybe some advice as when to activate each would be useful. i.e. strong stacattos at C4, soft legato, etc... 

@nektarios said:

....Now that I got the new speakers, I may connect all my speakers to the new subwoofer. I also got some foams for my walls for sound absorbtion, but I think I will need more. 😊  

This is my studio where I usually work:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/33556625/Images/2015-07-22%2021.34.04%20HDR.jpg

Here is the piece I am working on -- the way I mastered it:

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/33556625/Music/Nektarios%20-%20Eastern%20Dream%2034.mp3

....

Hi Nektarios

Thanks for all your info about your workplace and the piece you are working on.

About your Workplace and Listening Situation

It looks nice and it seem pleasant to work here. Seen from the acoustically point of view it is far away from an optimized workplace for mastering tasks. Type in "mastering studio" at Google and see images... Your monitors should stand free in the room on speaker stands some centimeters away from each wall. Currently your monitors are within a "box" of a furniture (80cm x 60 cm = a resonance 300 - 500 Hz?)

Bass and Corners are enemies! Each corner blows up bass frequencies... So your Subwoover even if it is nice and new - should be placed anywher but not in a corner. And because the wave-length of 100Hz is 3.45m (50Hz = 6.9m) you can see that your actual acoustic treatment is useless for the subwoofer. You need to take " so called "bass traps" for deep tones... (see internet)

The cheapest way for an improvement and a big step foreward is probably to take the monitors out of the furniture and to replace the subwoofer - with the next move?

About your piece

A) One problem is the bass. It comes within a huge reverbtail which makes it very difficult to get more pressure, more clarity... So I wood filter the tail of the used reverb, that it touches the bass not so much. 

B) Your piece contains a sort of resonance (2.4kHz and others) which is annoying a bit.

Listen to this short sequence. I tried to remove it but only some short times, so that you can see what I mean. Here an example a bit later (first 12s resonance removed as good as possible also with a bit removed bass by an dyn EQ - second 12s your original).Unfortunately you always remove too much in a final mix. So you should "remove" it within the mix where it is produced and not in the master. BTW the resonace is so complex that a simple EQ - as I used it - does not fix the problem. This resonance somehow sits in the whole mix as I can see.  Unfortunately I don't know what it is. A phaser? a ringing EQ?, Vitamin or another effect? the venue of...

The mastering process beginns within the mix...

All the best

Beat

Wow, thank you Beat!!

Really appreciate your helpful advice and your great examples. It does sound better! Thanks so much for these examples!

I just got myself two bass traps and one more foam but will keep adding. Not sure I can move the speakers for now. I calibrate my speakers to what I feel sounds pleasant. In other words, the subwoofer has a significantly lower volume in relation to the other speakers. I also put the crossover to 85Hz. What I hear coming out is actually pleasant. Curious how it will sound with the bass traps.

Concerning my piece, it combines MIR PRO with MIRacle and used the preset to increase the tail of Grosser Saal. I also bumped up the seconds for the tail. Are you saying I should cut all low frequencies from algo the tail? Also the wet signal from MIR? How about just making the bass instruments mostly dry? 

I do hear the resonance on the mix that you mentioned, and it does baffles me. Don't know where it's coming from! I have my suspicions though. I am using this iZotope Alloy 2 preset (for the brass), which uses an exciter. I will post a screenshot of my VE PRO screen later.

Thanks again!

@nektarios said:

...I just got myself two bass traps and one more foam but will keep adding. Not sure I can move the speakers for now. I calibrate my speakers to what I feel sounds pleasant. In other words, the subwoofer has a significantly lower volume in relation to the other speakers. I also put the crossover to 85Hz. What I hear coming out is actually pleasant. Curious how it will sound with the bass traps...

Hi Nektarios

Of course you don't need to chang anything with your setup. Using Monitors in their best way means first that you keep away room- and other influences as much as you can. See this Image for the small monitors.If you are not able install your system in a better way it is not the end of the world. No problem. As I mentioned ... with the next move.

If you those lully bass sound is within a long tail as well you will have quite no possibility to treat anything within the bass range. How to differ the bass and the rythmic bassdrum in such a bass soup? So as long as all the bass matters are not done you should not add a lot of reverb within the bass. Have a look here at Breeze-Reverb (just as an example) The blue EQ-Lowshelf curve filters the low frequencies with the tail so that mainly higher frequencies will come with the tail. So yes if you have the possibility try to do something similar with all the reverbs you are using... less tail below 150Hz... 200Hz I would say.

Beat

Is there a VST plugin that will allow me to detect resonant frequencies reliably? I don't want to rely on my ears. Ideally, some tool that will visually tell me what frequencies are resonating. 

I was thinking, if I know what frequencies are resonating, I can add a dynamic EQ in those frequency ranges to dampen them. Any thoughts?

Thank you!

-Nektarios

Lots of great advice in this thread already, but here's my 2 cents.

1. Go to a mastering studio and master something, but first, make sure you find one that are ok with mastering digital only, and master in the software you use, and with plugins that you know. You can even request to use your own computer! Mastering is a buyer's market, unless you're going for top names, and there are many helpful people out there with great studios and great ears, that might accomodate such requests in a flexible way. That way you could bring your professional master home with you!

2. If the loud parts are simply "too loud" then that means that the soft parts arent loud enough. The piece simply is still too dynamic. Because "too loud" just refers to relative levels. If thats not the case, you have to look into certain frequencies that may poke out in an unpleasant way as the orchestra gets louder. That may well be the case, but then thats not really dependant on how loud the piece is. If you really want an even volume throughout the piece though, dont try to achive that with compressors and limiters, starts first with volume automation. You'll be in a better place when its time to master. 

It has been mentioned that "you shouldnt master classical stuff in that way", but that really depends on the usage. Sometimes you just need to have an even level, although it appears to be dynamic when it's not really. Games and even more so in commercials. That said, since your room isnt perfect, be vary of making those decision without some advice from other people in other rooms. Good luck!

@nektarios said:

 

Is there a VST plugin that will allow me to detect resonant frequencies reliably? I don't want to rely on my ears. Ideally, some tool that will visually tell me what frequencies are resonating. 

I was thinking, if I know what frequencies are resonating, I can add a dynamic EQ in those frequency ranges to dampen them. Any thoughts?

Thank you!

-Nektarios

Well, any good analyzer, like the one that's included in the Vienna Suite, will reliably show you a graphical representation of the frequency range. It shows what's happening in the audio. But it obviously won't start flashing and sound an alarm when a piece starts sounding "bad" ... 😊 A plugin can only show you that there's so-and-so much loudness in this-and-that range, that's something that can be visualised of course. But a computer program can't "know" what sounds good or bad. That's something the artist has to judge.

It's not the response you'd want to hear, but what you're asking for is exactly how not to do it. 😃 I mean, consider the humor of the statement: I don't want to rely on my ears. It's like a painter saying: I don't wanna rely on my eyes, or a cook stating that he'd rather not rely on his senses of smell and taste.

It gets better and makes more and more sense the more you read, research and practice. But if you think you can't, or don't want to do that, there really is no other option than to have someone else mix and master your music. A technical shortcut really doesn't exist, it can't.

And IMO, really just try to get better at mixing your own music. EQing stuff, making instruments sound good, setting levels, making instruments sit in the mix, not fighting or masking each other etc. I think you shouldn't really bother about the mastering thing. You can't really do it without a proper space, equipment and professional experience.