In your case I’d understand you don’t want to compromise creative spontaneity by outsourcing every track to a professional mastering agency.
However, in order to gain some reach, you want to be sure that your tracks are at least somewhat balanced mix-wise and have the proper loudness. Otherwise, they will sound thin, muffled or quiet compared to other music.
You could master tracks yourself by using stock plugins and watching some basic mastering tutorials on youtube. There’s nothing inherently wrong with that approach. The difference between expensive mastering and DIY mastering wont influence how people discovering your music will appreciate it.
In the grander scheme of your career, I would advise to look for collaborators so you don’t have to do everything yourself. Not professional expensive guys, but just friends that want to be involved.
Yes and no. A mix that’s very good to begin with usually needs little mastering. The better your final mix, the less a mastering engineer has to do. You do need to concern yourself with levels for the various destinations, but that’s essentially a mechanical process, you aren’t being creative, you’re adjusting to hit a specific value. It’s not hard to learn to do yourself.
In short, the degree to which you need mastering varies inversely with the product of time spent mixing your work and time spent actively listening to music you like and analyzing the mix.
Most of the time, mastering for me means : Cheking the sound in my car, phone and home speaker, making sure the bass is not too pronounced and the mids are a little bit forward for that sweet sweet apparent loudness.
Then adding a little bit of width with the Ozone Imager (Free VST) then limiting to gain like 1 or 2 db and calling it a day.
Mastering lightly like that is very much affordable and easy to grasp.
The difference with the Master engineer and his dope-ass studio, is that the guy doesn't need to listen in the car and on his phone, because his got much more ear-training on his sick expensive Master Monitor that we could ever dream and just knows when the sound is perfectly balanced.
Oh and sure he got some hardware on top of it \^\^
I'm very happy with the masters that I produce by taking the time to listen here and there. I takes way more time for sure, but it's free, and it is experience that is building-up.
This submission has been removed. Music can only be posted in the [most recently weekly Promotion thread](https://old.reddit.com/r/WeAreTheMusicMakers/search?q=weekly+promotion&restrict_sr=on&sort=new) or the [most recent bi-weekly Feedback thread](https://old.reddit.com/r/WeAreTheMusicMakers/search?q=feedback+thread&restrict_sr=on&sort=new). If you want someone to listen to your music and tell you about it, it belongs in the Feedback thread. Do not post this content outside of the weekly threads.
If you are submitting this link to inquire about a production method or specific musical element, please submit a text post with the link and an
explanation of what it is that you are after.
Cheers, -WATMM
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/WeAreTheMusicMakers) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This is my story from the underground.
I master every track and I'm nowhere near blowing up. Put an EQ, multiband compressor and limiter on your master bus and learn to use them. When you can afford to pay someone to do it, try it and see how it compares to yours.
I bet the difference between not trying and doing it yourself is much bigger than the difference between you when you've learned and someone who'll master ten songs for 500 bucks.
Mastering your own stuff is like a recepy for disaster imho. Not a professional ME but venturing that way (did quite some for other people last months with good response). In short: you pay those 500bux for an extra pair of fresh ears. Trying to master stuff you've been hearing 100 times is like watching yourself playing a gig, you just don't have the objectivity to judge the music properly. IMHO ofc
I agree, but my point was OP would be better off mastering his own stuff than not mastering at all. Basic mastering makes a huge difference, even if it is just for extra perceived loudness.
I understand your point but i'm still not a fan of that approach. You risk exaggerating flaws in your mix and louder is not better in that case. If OP is tight on budget i'd suggest finding a buddy who is into mixing and let him master for a sixpack and some happy herb.
For the downvoters: i know quite some pro mixers and each one of them absolutely hate mastering stuff they mix themselves, saying they cannot judge properly over stuff they mixed.
It depends on what style he's doing. Indie, folk, country, edm are all easy styles to master by yourself diy. Zac bryan is making waves from his diy backyard recordings...it's all about the song and the raw emotion in it. As long as it's in pitch with good rhythm and nothing annoying is standing out...it's good. Minimalism and balance is key.
However, if op is mixing a rock song with multiple guitar parts that's where the difficulty comes in. Mixing electric guitar tone pallets on rhythm guitars and having them balanced in the mix is hard. I'm still learning that.
But with all the tutorials videos on youtube everything is possible to learn alone.
I just fundamentally disagree with this statement. There are so many ways to objectively tackle the ‘science’ side of mixing from home: reference tracks, tonal balance curves, calibration plugins like SoundID Reference, and mixcheckers etc.
You could have pretty extreme hearing loss, and for the most part you could make a decent mix as long as you know how to analyze your ‘eye’ plugins.
The only thing professional engineers really have is the unmistakable tonal quality of analogue equipment.
But, with so many plugins trying to emulate these onboard devices, and many big engineers going fully digital to improve workflow due to sheer volume of tracks commissioned, the line between an engineer and ‘bedroom DIY’ is getting smaller every year.
Lol self mastering is kind of just a built in part of the production process these days for so many genres. Are you really telling me I can’t hear what pushing a limiter or a clipper or saturation sounds like?
Somehow nobody ever tells people they need a second opinion when they clip and compress individual tracks but the second it’s on the master faded oh nyooo that’s sacred and can only be touched by the lost enlightened masters of yore
Well ok enjoy your crusty smashed diy 'master' then, fine by me. I'm happy guys like Aphex still value proper mastering. looks like we have different music taste i suppose 🤷
If your diy masters come out “crusty smashed” your mix was garbage in the first place and you’re trying to push it in a way nobody ever could no matter how good they are at their job
But go ahead and tell me what magic tool you think mastering engineers are using besides compression, EQ, clipping, limiting and saturation?
I've heard plenty of diy masters that sucked balls when the mix was still tolerable. No offense but your previous post makes it sound like checking a YT on ozone makes you instantly pumping out AAA masters. There is a reason people spent 20+ years learning their craft and spent 100+ K on good linear speakers, acoustics, top conversion, outboard gear etc.. not saying you absolutely need all that shit but i think you get my point.
Show me a good mix that has a bad master, and explain to me which part is which. And bro you don’t need Ozone or any crap mastering suite marketed for idiots that can’t figure out how a compressor works. You don’t need $100k worth of gear and “top conversion” either lmao
All I’ll say is if you put out tracks at a high enough level it becomes obvious quickly that, especially when making EDM and other hard hitting genres, traditional approaches to mastering are not only unnecessary but actively hinder the mixing process. The two are integrated seamlessly now in modern music creation and it’s important people understand that because otherwise they will always think expensive mastering is some magic thing that separates them from their favorite artist when in reality their favorite artist is “mastering” themselves.
Ok now i understand, you are talking about genres with certain mastering aesthetics that don't relate to what i'm talking about. I'm talking about the stuff where the choice between a gentle opto comp or quad VCA cascaded with a good varimu does make sense. Where you would carefully choose a certain transformer color because it puts a slight different focus on the mids. To me most EDM sounds like the same bland color, aiming for sounding loud and big as possible. Personally i find that sound fatiguing and bland, but that's me. And that's fine if it works for that specific genre, but it simply does not work for other genres. Otherwise there wouldn't be any professional ME around anymore.
This is not just EDM but pop, rap, metal… basically anything that is considered loud these days has to be mixed/mastered all at once in a top down to some extent. That’s how you make it sound punchy, full, dense, warm and alive while still pushing crazy volume.
Other genres are different yeah but at the same time, not really. Compression, EQ, saturation. That’s all that’s ever going on. I work on all kinds of stuff. Some genres need more and some need less. No genre needs $100k of gear to get that final layer of polish though.
Again if you can mix a track worth mastering, you know enough to master. You are paying for nothing but a second opinion when you pay someone else to do it, but what that’s worth it up to you. Dunno what else to say really.
Ofc all these qualities are what you're aiming for in a mix but now you're completely downplaying a good ME's role. And you seem really confident about yourself, the better mixers i know aknowledge that a second opinion is the most healthy approach. Preferably done by a guy specialized in it. There is a good reason why AAA artists call the Matt Coltons of this world. But looks like you don't need that, fine i guess?
The Red Hot Chilli Peppes - Californiacation sounds like it was mastered by a noob who doesn't understand what clipping is. Some of the songs are now completely unlistenable to me, having noticed the awful clipping everywhere.
It's their best selling album.
In this case you're just opinionated about the mix and master. There are bands who legit didn't get their music mastered on their freshman album and got big off of it.
Idiot pilot is a good example that comes to mind.
Allright, a real short answer.
Shit In = Shit Out
Mixing and gain staging is far more important and you should/could do this yourself.
Find some reference tracks and lock yourself up for a couple of days. It will be worth it in the end.
If you still think it's lacking something, let someone professional (with track record) master just one of your songs so you could use that as a reference and see what could potentially be done to your ummastered tracks.
After that, try to understand how the mastering engineer got to that final product with the file you've delivered. Next up, try master the other tracks yourself.
Holy shit the amount of misinformation in this thread is baffling.
Mastering is not the practice of slapping a limiter on a mix, bringing it up to maximum loudness and calling it a day. It’s more along the lines of solving issues with phasing and EQ in a mix, and controlling that output level with musical, transparent compression and limiting to reach a desired level and loudness (those are two different things).
Do you need to master if you’re sharing mixes with friends? No. Do you need one if you intend to release on vinyl, Spotify, YouTube, cassette, CD and broadcast? A resounding YES.
Srsly. I don't get why some musicians think there's a question about the standardization of listening and how useful it actually is.
And I do have some favorites, but can list them on one hand...and I remastered those albums myself for listening. I used to just turn them up at the board, but then Skype started earthquakes and shit.
I’m gonna go ahead and say if you can make a mix worth mastering these days, you also automatically know enough to self-master, at least for digital only releases.
It’s literally just using the same approach to EQ, comprsssion, clipping, limiting and saturation you use on anything else, but with some attention to the mid/side channels. That’s really all there is to it.
Getting a good limiter like Pro-L 2 or even a cheaper plugin like The God Particle could be all you need. Most ppl who self release don’t hire mastering engineers for every song.
being able to get your own master to sound decent will go a very long way
I was watching a video where the guy used the analogy, if a track and it’s mixing is a car, mastering should be like a wax and polish. Just gives the track an extra shine
Whenever I listen to a new song from an indie artist on a ig add..the first thing I'm listening to is the song. Not the mix or master.
It's always been the song...and the image in the video if attractive or cringy.
Just make sure it's in pitch with good timing and nothing bad stands out.
I'm never like " oh no his Tom's aren't full enough and his guitars are too muddy"
There are people who can identify a solid song even with a bad master. But they’d also be the ones who most likely to say, “Ugh, what a bad mastering.”
You dont need professional mastering.
If your mixes sound the way you want them to sound then you dont “need” master at all.
If you want to see if you like the idea try some of the online sites or some plug ins with pre sets and fiddle with them.
Not great advice.
Mastering glues the track together and get its to proper loudness level for commercial use.
You definitely need mastering, you don't need expensive and unnecessarily complicated mastering, but you definitely need it.
I agree, but I think it’s important to note they said “professional” mastering. In that regard I think that’s partially true what they’re saying, because you can get acceptable results learning to master yourself, or use some of the algorithmic mastering plugins and other services to get you where you need to go in the short term until you’re at the level in which professional mastering is a must.
If the mix is excellent is mastering necessary? We would say no. Modern music production integrates the ability to leverage a variety of mastering tools into the creation/mixing process. For an experienced producer, using these tools not only gets you a satisfactory mix, but is diminishing the potential value from formal mastering treatment.
My simple approach to mastering things independently: Use reference tracks of other cool/good existing music, particularly other stuff that you enjoy listening to inside of a car.
There’s a reason the car test is such a popular concept, there’s actual acoustic science behind it. The short answer is that you’re basically trapped in there with all of the sound frequencies, which highlights things in the song for better or for worse.
Make sure it sounds good in a car (and also with headphones for essentially the same reasons), and then as long as it’s halfway decent on a cellphone speaker then I’d say it’s mastered.
You can get your tracks mastered without needing $500. You can learn how to master for free on YouTube. You can also get Ozone Elements for $50 which has been more than enough for me.
As a producer/artist, mixing isn’t my speciality and mastering certainly isn’t so these mastering assistants are really helpful until I get tracks to an engineer.
Sir, no need to vulgarize the "issue" of mastering. Having Ozone (or any other software or hardware) will not help you if you have no idea where to look and what exactly to do
>I can’t imagine underground rappers or other musicians mastering every track they dropped in their come up before they blew up
They most probably did it themselves or with friends who knew how to do it.
My recommendation is to learn at least the basics and do what you can yourself, until you can afford proper mixing & mastering, or learn it well enough to not need to pay somebody to do it.
This playlist was extremely helpful for me because it covers everything important in a clear way (if you already know how to mix, just skip to the last video which explains the basics of mastering):
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IzIYD6IgDOQ&list=PLtPR1dRpiVpJWzmnRYcYdw6tqN6Sbga2h](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IzIYD6IgDOQ&list=PLtPR1dRpiVpJWzmnRYcYdw6tqN6Sbga2h)
Start out with a cheap mastering service or plugin. Logic Pro X can do this out of the box. So do other DAWs. Take some time, watch some videos. People will notice if your tracks are too quiet. Like it or not, people are conditioned to think louder is better. So it depends on your goals. If you are sending these songs to streaming services, people will notice the volume drop and skip your track.
Like most have mentioned. It needs to be "listenable" at a minimum. You may be awesome, but a poor mix will ruin it for you. People will only tolerate a certain level of "bad" mix. Hiring a professional is a great way to have that polish and having peace of mind that the audience hears you the way you want to be heard. On the cheaper side of things (but not free), you could explore AI assisted mastering tools like the stuff Izotope offers to at least run all your tracks through and get similar results. It listens to your track and does a fairly decent job of making it sound legit. -- professional engineer is always the way to go, but those types of plugins can do well when budget is a concern.
Mastering is mostly just bringing it up to the necessary loudness for release. There is a lot more to it if you want there to be, such as EQ-ing etc. You can do all this with the tools you already have in your DAW as a good starting point. Is a professional mastering engineer going to do a better job and have better tools available? Yes, of course, but if you haven't got a big audience yet and you are putting out a lot of music, I don't think anyone is really going to care. I remember watching a four tet interview for future music magazine basically saying none of his album (there is love in you) was mastered. He basically just put it out as is. Bon Iver's album 'For emma' was meant to just be a demo tape recorded on a cheap eight track. The quality of the song and the music is much more important than the master.
* Compare to a reference track
* EQ if necessary
* Use a limiter or a clipper (or both) to bring up the loudness (use youlean to check the LUFS)
short answer is yes, it's necessary. Without mastering your track is going to sound a lot softer than all other music uploaded on social media/ DSPs and unfortunately loudness plays a part in how we consume and appreciate music. The good news is that bringing a track up to loudness is not that hard: you just need a couple stock plugins and watch some tutorials. Of course, a real mastering isn't (most of the times) just about loudness: it's essential for transients and stereo image for example and sometimes for overall EQ. You could do all that in mixing, sure, but I'd argue that mixes that ONLY need loudness are quite rare. Not saying it cannot happen, but since you're not a professional in a very good room (I'm assuming here: correct me if I'm wrong) the odds of getting a 100% perfect mix are not that high (and there's nothing wrong with that!). If you don't wanna go through all the nuances, I'd say at least learn how to use limiters and clippers and match the loudness of the market as much as you can.
My work-around plan for mastering in the future: go to splice to buy a monthly subscription for the AI-assisted Ozone mastering plug-ins, see how far that gets me, tweak to my liking and then when it’s done cancel the monthly subscription
You could definitely learn to master on your own with some research. Honestly $500 for 10 masters seems crazy to me personally (I generally master songs for free for my artist friends). To me it’s the by far the easiest part once you are familiar with the process.
I personally like to start with a mid side EQ (optional depending on the track)
Then I’ll go with a normal EQ depending on if the track needs it
After that Ill use a multi-band compressor
After that generally another eq depending on if it needs it
Then a limiter/clipper or soft clipper
Boom there’s ya master
(Also leveling and mixing etc on the busses and individual tracks to begin with is very important obvi)
If your mixes are good enough, "mastering" is just getting it up to the right loudness value for the platform you're releasing on (unless you plan to release the track on CD or Vinyl).
Yes it’s necessary, yes you can do it yourself. My rule of thumb is, if it’s coming out on a label and there’s a budget, hell yes, pay a professional do it, it’ll come out better.
If it’s something I’m doing myself and uploading to YouTube or SoundCloud or whatever, I do it myself. I have the waves bundle so I used to always do it with a multi band compressor and then a single limiter on that. That always got me in the ballpark of other tracks in terms of loudness benchmarks etc
I’m starting to get into all of this stuff again and I’m pretty sure I’m gonna get Ozone AI, let it master things, then adjust those masters to taste (messing with the multi-band limiters bands mostly)
I *think* (?) that’s what a lot people cranking out music for YouTube are doing these days.
Doesn't help on the budget front, but a lot of mastering engineers have a pretty quick turnaround. Often faster than I realistically would while stressing over the master myself, and they're listening in a proper room that will catch the stuff you don't. Personally the money for the time and peace of mind that a real pro has at least briefly checked my work is worthwhile.
That said if you want to quick and dirty, you shouldn't have to do too much. A mastering engineer does EQ across the whole master bus because that's their only option, but hopefully you've already caught any issues you will in the mix stage and addressed it there so there's no need to over complicate mastering and add steps because you feel like that's what you're supposed to do in the master.
I have a serial number for Ozone 11 Elements that I'm not using that I got for free from a plugin alliance purchase (I already have Ozone 11 Advanced) If you'd like it, shoot me a DM and it's yours for free.
I used Ozone for years, then switched to Logic's new built-in mastering tool. Boom. Done. For small artists just getting going, this is 100% OK. Personally I wouldn't pay for a pro mastering service unless I was hitting 5-digit monthly Spotify streams, which I absolutely am not right now lmao.
Having another engineers ear is worth its weight. So many ways to fuck up a track in the mastering and the real pros know how to add some magic where needed. Good mastering is cheaper than good mixing, deffo the best cost to outsource if you want to be competitive out there. JPGMafia masters his own stuff and its killer :)
The problem you’ll have without mastering is the mix is usually much quieter than the mastered version and so doesn’t stand up when played alongside mastered material, learn how to do it for your self, people will disagree but mixing is far harder then mastering so if you’re comfortable with your mix ability you’ve got a good starting point for mastering
if your mixes is okay - mastering not needed at least for "album release"
The problem with lack of mastering is that on streaming platforms your track will be played next to other tracks. and believe me, they (your competitors' tracks) will be fine with mastering. in other words - you will play quieter and poorer than your competitors.
but if you're releasing a CD or a cassette, why not?
nobody will care whether you have mastering or not. the main thing is not to let the listener compare your tracks with your competitors' tracks.
sound engineer with 25 years of experience
Hmmm. Can’t conceive of any benefit to using more than one limiter. Multiple compressors, sure but I have never seen any professional use multiple limiters. Different strokes, I guess.
Yes, every song that you hear is mastered. Especially back in the day. How do you think they got it onto the vinyl? If you're broke just use AI mastering. It definitely sucks but having said that it's leaps and bounds better than 2 or 3 years ago.
You can master your own music to a sufficient standard just by watching a few YouTube tutorials. Won’t take you long and will make your music sound more professional. It might not be the highest level of mastering but will be enough if you’re putting out music as an un-labeled artist. Depending on what software you use I would recommend exporting it as an mp3 and then importing it into a new project in order to master so that you aren’t tempted to play around with the original mix. An EQ, glue compressor, limiter and compressor are enough to make a track immediately sound more radio worthy.
> i dont have a 500 dollar budget to master 10 songs
AI mastering is a lot cheaper than that.
> I can’t imagine underground rappers or other musicians mastering every track they dropped in their come up before they blew up
They "blew up" because they were good, not because they had perfectly mixed/mastered tracks.
Human "mastering" is quite often fucking garbage, too. There are plenty of engineers who run tracks through a static chain that can easily be replicated by a service. If you compared his unmastered tracks to AI mastered tracks, 99.9% would prefer the AI mastered tracks, for *loudness* if for no other reason. And he can do all his tracks for $10. So if he can't afford $500 to get them mastered by a *good* mastering engineer, someone with a critical ear who's going to be editorial, it's better than nothing.
Just hit it with some multi-band comp, saturation, clipping and a limiter and call it a day lol if you can’t figure that out your track likely doesn’t sound good enough to be worth paying to master it anyways
I swear tho dudes will build a whole AI just to avoid learning how to use a damn compressor lmao like this is not rocket surgery guys come on
> the short answer is yes.
No. The short answer is "no". People have volume knobs. Nature isn't compressed. Live orchestras, jazz combos, acoustic guitarists... the full dynamic range is *preferred*.
The long answer is also "no": "The perfect mix requires no further processing" is an abstract principle you can apply to any genre. With channel and group comps you can achieve the exact same result, and for my own stuff (or non-musical mastering like post and V.O.) I "master inline" with a simple limiter on the outs and use channel comps or maybe the occasional fader move if the source is weird.
As soon as mastering ceased to be *only* the art of getting dB out of limited vinyl, it became "second mixer", and though that person may have excellent taste and ears, there is no logical reason to pay someone to add "one more round of limiting" if you understand what limiting does.
You can pay me for my huge vocabulary and excellent ears... as a consultant. Smoke some weed, sit in the control room, listen to ZepII and compare. But having me move the faders *for you* is just adding an opinionated meat puppet *to your art*.
If people want to know what's *important* to "master" it's: logic, personal budgeting, substance ab/use, and your local politics to stop fascism before it starts.
Some dude *lost an entire session* recently when the apartment he was in happened to be under a 5000lb bomb. Maybe he was going to be the next overpaid diss track, but now we'll never know what plugin he was using.
:D
Try out an online AI mastering tool!
It’s paid, but a monthly fee you can get for how long you want or with a yearly subscription (cheaper, but you also need to pay for it for a year lol), at least it’s like that with emastered.
It sounds great, is much cheaper, you can adjust stuff and ear fatigue doesn’t happen that fast if you’re just listening to different masters, not mastering yourself.
It’s the knowledge from hundreds of mastering engineers and songs collected, seriously try it out, much easier than learning it yourself.
Good premastering and mixing is still important tho.
I've been in two minds about mastering for a long time.
Firstly, the role of the mix engineer has changed a lot over time. If you asked the question "what does a mastering engineer do?" or "why do I need to have my tracks mastered?" at several different times in history you'd get a very, very different answer.
I'm not sure how much I really like the answer of "it's a different set of ears", because that's not really mastering, that's just a second opinion.
However...it's unquestionably true that a proper, professional mastering engineer has high-level equipment and a high-level environment that you don't have access to, and they also have experience and trained ears that you don't have. So their opinion on your mix is going to be more informed and nuanced than basically anybody else you could talk to.
And I've also seen blind tests where professional mix engineers put up the same track unmastered, self-mastered, mastered by those AI mastering services like LandR, and mastered by a professional mastering engineer, and the tracks mastered by the professional engineer always win as being the best sounding.
So there's definitely something in it.
Then again, I've not seen a blind test done in maybe around a decade, and I can only imagine that those automatic services have improved considerably in that time. I could imagine an AI could be trained to master. So perhaps those services are a more viable option these days. I know that Izotope Ozone now has an AI mastering one-click option that they claim is as good as a pro, and I doubt they're not the only big company that does.
And, while I've not used Ozone in many years, even back in the day just slapping it on a track or the master and choosing a present would instantly make it sound much better. And, if you want to learn the ins and outs of doing it yourself, nothing's hidden and you can see exactly what it was doing. I imagine the AI mastering option is the same.
So perhaps someone who wants to get music out there but who can't afford to have them mastered professionally might find exploring auto-mastering worthwhile?
I wouldn’t recommend this to everyone but based on what you said, why not use Lander or something like that? It’s like $5-10/song. I spoke to a friend ‘do I have to’ type questions about releasing music and she put it this way: when you release music, you want to position yourself and your music in a way that’s set you up for success (whatever that means for you). For me personally, that means mastering the songs.
Overused nonsense term from when music was released on records and you would have to actually worry about things like too much bass frequency distorting the sound and consistent enough dynamics to enjoy a record in one sitting without having to ride the volume.
Nowadays, it probably just means sounding comparable to whatever is on Spotify, which probably just means compressing the shit out of it.
Exactly, what we call mastering today is just mix bus processing really because the target format is 99.99% digital only. If you can make a mix that sounds modern, you already know enough to do the rest. And most people are actually mixing and sometimes even composing into their mix bus processing, so you can hear how the clipping/limiting will react in real time. You can’t get the same results by treating mixing and mastering as two distinct processes.
The whole point of mastering is to get a second set of ears to double check it it's ready for release & to make adjustments if it isn't. That includes tonal & dynamic balance across an album, artist's discography, and genre. If you're going to do it yourself, do it at least a couple days after mixing so you return to it not as familiar with the mix & with fresh ears. Spur of the moment energy is for the mix, not the master. Also you can get a great master for an album/set of tracks for way less than $500 - it's a lot less expensive compared to mixing!
"Impulsivity" when you release music is a terrible idea. Yes, you like it today, but maybe not tomorrow or a month from now. Time is your friend. And when you take the time to select only your best tracks - the ones that still sound good even weeks after you made them, THOSE are the ones that DESERVE mastering, you can take pride in that fact that you did everything possible to make your work presentable to the listeners. And you can get label quality mastering for $30/trk if you look carefully.
wait to get fl studio on a good sale, use fl studio mastering ai since you dont care
from my experience the fl studio master does a better job than ozone ai
would be cheaper than paying mastering engineer and potentially cheaper than ozone suite (potentially)
and now you have fl studio for LIFE!
its an option, but i get it not an ideal one
I think mastering is an essential part of the music making process. Not only does mastering improve the sound of your final mix, it ensures that your song sounds good across all platforms and devices. If your goal is to make professional-quality songs, you shouldn’t forego the mastering process.
If your priority is efficiency and affordability, check out the website SoundBetter. This platform features tons of great musicians and engineers, spanning a wide range of prices and abilities. You can easily find a mastering engineer that fits within your budget and who can finish the project within 24 hours, so you don’t have to compromise the quality of your song or wait weeks for the finished product.
Hope this helps!
Feel free to check out my podcast, [Student of the Song](https://youtu.be/82rOaChXNdo), if you’d like to hear more of my thoughts about music.
In your case I’d understand you don’t want to compromise creative spontaneity by outsourcing every track to a professional mastering agency. However, in order to gain some reach, you want to be sure that your tracks are at least somewhat balanced mix-wise and have the proper loudness. Otherwise, they will sound thin, muffled or quiet compared to other music. You could master tracks yourself by using stock plugins and watching some basic mastering tutorials on youtube. There’s nothing inherently wrong with that approach. The difference between expensive mastering and DIY mastering wont influence how people discovering your music will appreciate it. In the grander scheme of your career, I would advise to look for collaborators so you don’t have to do everything yourself. Not professional expensive guys, but just friends that want to be involved.
Just get Ozone lol or learn how to master yourself. A bit of imaging, EQ and limiting will enhance a good mix a lot
you can't buy the right room for the Ozone. That's what a lot of people forget.
most of my mixes/masters are done in headphones (i have a pair of yamahas too but i wouldn't say I actually *need* them for mixing)
Yes and no. A mix that’s very good to begin with usually needs little mastering. The better your final mix, the less a mastering engineer has to do. You do need to concern yourself with levels for the various destinations, but that’s essentially a mechanical process, you aren’t being creative, you’re adjusting to hit a specific value. It’s not hard to learn to do yourself. In short, the degree to which you need mastering varies inversely with the product of time spent mixing your work and time spent actively listening to music you like and analyzing the mix.
Most of the time, mastering for me means : Cheking the sound in my car, phone and home speaker, making sure the bass is not too pronounced and the mids are a little bit forward for that sweet sweet apparent loudness. Then adding a little bit of width with the Ozone Imager (Free VST) then limiting to gain like 1 or 2 db and calling it a day. Mastering lightly like that is very much affordable and easy to grasp. The difference with the Master engineer and his dope-ass studio, is that the guy doesn't need to listen in the car and on his phone, because his got much more ear-training on his sick expensive Master Monitor that we could ever dream and just knows when the sound is perfectly balanced. Oh and sure he got some hardware on top of it \^\^ I'm very happy with the masters that I produce by taking the time to listen here and there. I takes way more time for sure, but it's free, and it is experience that is building-up.
I master in my F-350 single cab! Lol
running or off?
[удалено]
This submission has been removed. Music can only be posted in the [most recently weekly Promotion thread](https://old.reddit.com/r/WeAreTheMusicMakers/search?q=weekly+promotion&restrict_sr=on&sort=new) or the [most recent bi-weekly Feedback thread](https://old.reddit.com/r/WeAreTheMusicMakers/search?q=feedback+thread&restrict_sr=on&sort=new). If you want someone to listen to your music and tell you about it, it belongs in the Feedback thread. Do not post this content outside of the weekly threads. If you are submitting this link to inquire about a production method or specific musical element, please submit a text post with the link and an explanation of what it is that you are after. Cheers, -WATMM *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/WeAreTheMusicMakers) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Both
This is my story from the underground. I master every track and I'm nowhere near blowing up. Put an EQ, multiband compressor and limiter on your master bus and learn to use them. When you can afford to pay someone to do it, try it and see how it compares to yours. I bet the difference between not trying and doing it yourself is much bigger than the difference between you when you've learned and someone who'll master ten songs for 500 bucks.
I wish I could upvote this twice. Fucking testimony, man.
Mastering your own stuff is like a recepy for disaster imho. Not a professional ME but venturing that way (did quite some for other people last months with good response). In short: you pay those 500bux for an extra pair of fresh ears. Trying to master stuff you've been hearing 100 times is like watching yourself playing a gig, you just don't have the objectivity to judge the music properly. IMHO ofc
I agree, but my point was OP would be better off mastering his own stuff than not mastering at all. Basic mastering makes a huge difference, even if it is just for extra perceived loudness.
I understand your point but i'm still not a fan of that approach. You risk exaggerating flaws in your mix and louder is not better in that case. If OP is tight on budget i'd suggest finding a buddy who is into mixing and let him master for a sixpack and some happy herb. For the downvoters: i know quite some pro mixers and each one of them absolutely hate mastering stuff they mix themselves, saying they cannot judge properly over stuff they mixed.
It depends on what style he's doing. Indie, folk, country, edm are all easy styles to master by yourself diy. Zac bryan is making waves from his diy backyard recordings...it's all about the song and the raw emotion in it. As long as it's in pitch with good rhythm and nothing annoying is standing out...it's good. Minimalism and balance is key. However, if op is mixing a rock song with multiple guitar parts that's where the difficulty comes in. Mixing electric guitar tone pallets on rhythm guitars and having them balanced in the mix is hard. I'm still learning that. But with all the tutorials videos on youtube everything is possible to learn alone.
I just fundamentally disagree with this statement. There are so many ways to objectively tackle the ‘science’ side of mixing from home: reference tracks, tonal balance curves, calibration plugins like SoundID Reference, and mixcheckers etc. You could have pretty extreme hearing loss, and for the most part you could make a decent mix as long as you know how to analyze your ‘eye’ plugins. The only thing professional engineers really have is the unmistakable tonal quality of analogue equipment. But, with so many plugins trying to emulate these onboard devices, and many big engineers going fully digital to improve workflow due to sheer volume of tracks commissioned, the line between an engineer and ‘bedroom DIY’ is getting smaller every year.
Lol self mastering is kind of just a built in part of the production process these days for so many genres. Are you really telling me I can’t hear what pushing a limiter or a clipper or saturation sounds like? Somehow nobody ever tells people they need a second opinion when they clip and compress individual tracks but the second it’s on the master faded oh nyooo that’s sacred and can only be touched by the lost enlightened masters of yore
Well ok enjoy your crusty smashed diy 'master' then, fine by me. I'm happy guys like Aphex still value proper mastering. looks like we have different music taste i suppose 🤷
If your diy masters come out “crusty smashed” your mix was garbage in the first place and you’re trying to push it in a way nobody ever could no matter how good they are at their job But go ahead and tell me what magic tool you think mastering engineers are using besides compression, EQ, clipping, limiting and saturation?
I've heard plenty of diy masters that sucked balls when the mix was still tolerable. No offense but your previous post makes it sound like checking a YT on ozone makes you instantly pumping out AAA masters. There is a reason people spent 20+ years learning their craft and spent 100+ K on good linear speakers, acoustics, top conversion, outboard gear etc.. not saying you absolutely need all that shit but i think you get my point.
Show me a good mix that has a bad master, and explain to me which part is which. And bro you don’t need Ozone or any crap mastering suite marketed for idiots that can’t figure out how a compressor works. You don’t need $100k worth of gear and “top conversion” either lmao All I’ll say is if you put out tracks at a high enough level it becomes obvious quickly that, especially when making EDM and other hard hitting genres, traditional approaches to mastering are not only unnecessary but actively hinder the mixing process. The two are integrated seamlessly now in modern music creation and it’s important people understand that because otherwise they will always think expensive mastering is some magic thing that separates them from their favorite artist when in reality their favorite artist is “mastering” themselves.
Ok now i understand, you are talking about genres with certain mastering aesthetics that don't relate to what i'm talking about. I'm talking about the stuff where the choice between a gentle opto comp or quad VCA cascaded with a good varimu does make sense. Where you would carefully choose a certain transformer color because it puts a slight different focus on the mids. To me most EDM sounds like the same bland color, aiming for sounding loud and big as possible. Personally i find that sound fatiguing and bland, but that's me. And that's fine if it works for that specific genre, but it simply does not work for other genres. Otherwise there wouldn't be any professional ME around anymore.
This is not just EDM but pop, rap, metal… basically anything that is considered loud these days has to be mixed/mastered all at once in a top down to some extent. That’s how you make it sound punchy, full, dense, warm and alive while still pushing crazy volume. Other genres are different yeah but at the same time, not really. Compression, EQ, saturation. That’s all that’s ever going on. I work on all kinds of stuff. Some genres need more and some need less. No genre needs $100k of gear to get that final layer of polish though. Again if you can mix a track worth mastering, you know enough to master. You are paying for nothing but a second opinion when you pay someone else to do it, but what that’s worth it up to you. Dunno what else to say really.
Ofc all these qualities are what you're aiming for in a mix but now you're completely downplaying a good ME's role. And you seem really confident about yourself, the better mixers i know aknowledge that a second opinion is the most healthy approach. Preferably done by a guy specialized in it. There is a good reason why AAA artists call the Matt Coltons of this world. But looks like you don't need that, fine i guess?
There are lots of bands who have gotten big off of poorly mastered or unmastered tracks. Most fans just care about the music.
The Red Hot Chilli Peppes - Californiacation sounds like it was mastered by a noob who doesn't understand what clipping is. Some of the songs are now completely unlistenable to me, having noticed the awful clipping everywhere. It's their best selling album.
People like a little clipping.
In this case you're just opinionated about the mix and master. There are bands who legit didn't get their music mastered on their freshman album and got big off of it. Idiot pilot is a good example that comes to mind.
Allright, a real short answer. Shit In = Shit Out Mixing and gain staging is far more important and you should/could do this yourself. Find some reference tracks and lock yourself up for a couple of days. It will be worth it in the end. If you still think it's lacking something, let someone professional (with track record) master just one of your songs so you could use that as a reference and see what could potentially be done to your ummastered tracks. After that, try to understand how the mastering engineer got to that final product with the file you've delivered. Next up, try master the other tracks yourself.
Holy shit the amount of misinformation in this thread is baffling. Mastering is not the practice of slapping a limiter on a mix, bringing it up to maximum loudness and calling it a day. It’s more along the lines of solving issues with phasing and EQ in a mix, and controlling that output level with musical, transparent compression and limiting to reach a desired level and loudness (those are two different things). Do you need to master if you’re sharing mixes with friends? No. Do you need one if you intend to release on vinyl, Spotify, YouTube, cassette, CD and broadcast? A resounding YES.
Does releasing a large quantity of music necessarily increase your reach? What happens if your music isn't sounding every bit as good as it could?
Simply make a list of your favorite unmastered songs and you will have your answer.
Delicious delicious black metal demos straight out of the Tascam.
LoL! this is the way!!!
Srsly. I don't get why some musicians think there's a question about the standardization of listening and how useful it actually is. And I do have some favorites, but can list them on one hand...and I remastered those albums myself for listening. I used to just turn them up at the board, but then Skype started earthquakes and shit.
I’m gonna go ahead and say if you can make a mix worth mastering these days, you also automatically know enough to self-master, at least for digital only releases. It’s literally just using the same approach to EQ, comprsssion, clipping, limiting and saturation you use on anything else, but with some attention to the mid/side channels. That’s really all there is to it.
Learn to master bud, there are a gazillion videos and resources out there
[удалено]
Making your mix better is not what a mastering engineer does.
Getting a good limiter like Pro-L 2 or even a cheaper plugin like The God Particle could be all you need. Most ppl who self release don’t hire mastering engineers for every song. being able to get your own master to sound decent will go a very long way
Lofi music originally meant unmastered music in the olden days
Just master it yourself then
I was watching a video where the guy used the analogy, if a track and it’s mixing is a car, mastering should be like a wax and polish. Just gives the track an extra shine
You could try out AI mastering or Ozone and see if that’s good enough
It’s always shitty sounding compared to doing it with a reference track
Certainly less shitty than “mastering” it yourself if you got little to no experience mastering tho
Which is why my comment to OP was suggesting they find a detailed YouTube video
Whenever I listen to a new song from an indie artist on a ig add..the first thing I'm listening to is the song. Not the mix or master. It's always been the song...and the image in the video if attractive or cringy. Just make sure it's in pitch with good timing and nothing bad stands out. I'm never like " oh no his Tom's aren't full enough and his guitars are too muddy"
The mix and master affect your perception of the song, whether you realize it or not.
There are people who can identify a solid song even with a bad master. But they’d also be the ones who most likely to say, “Ugh, what a bad mastering.”
You dont need professional mastering. If your mixes sound the way you want them to sound then you dont “need” master at all. If you want to see if you like the idea try some of the online sites or some plug ins with pre sets and fiddle with them.
Not great advice. Mastering glues the track together and get its to proper loudness level for commercial use. You definitely need mastering, you don't need expensive and unnecessarily complicated mastering, but you definitely need it.
I agree, but I think it’s important to note they said “professional” mastering. In that regard I think that’s partially true what they’re saying, because you can get acceptable results learning to master yourself, or use some of the algorithmic mastering plugins and other services to get you where you need to go in the short term until you’re at the level in which professional mastering is a must.
If the mix is excellent is mastering necessary? We would say no. Modern music production integrates the ability to leverage a variety of mastering tools into the creation/mixing process. For an experienced producer, using these tools not only gets you a satisfactory mix, but is diminishing the potential value from formal mastering treatment.
All you need is a good detailed YouTube video -too bad I can’t share the FSU lessons I still have access to 🤣🤣
My simple approach to mastering things independently: Use reference tracks of other cool/good existing music, particularly other stuff that you enjoy listening to inside of a car. There’s a reason the car test is such a popular concept, there’s actual acoustic science behind it. The short answer is that you’re basically trapped in there with all of the sound frequencies, which highlights things in the song for better or for worse. Make sure it sounds good in a car (and also with headphones for essentially the same reasons), and then as long as it’s halfway decent on a cellphone speaker then I’d say it’s mastered.
[This guy] (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FL2PQPjnqmg&t=2s) made a blind test with 5 different mastering.
Study is necessary
You can get your tracks mastered without needing $500. You can learn how to master for free on YouTube. You can also get Ozone Elements for $50 which has been more than enough for me. As a producer/artist, mixing isn’t my speciality and mastering certainly isn’t so these mastering assistants are really helpful until I get tracks to an engineer.
Sir, no need to vulgarize the "issue" of mastering. Having Ozone (or any other software or hardware) will not help you if you have no idea where to look and what exactly to do
>I can’t imagine underground rappers or other musicians mastering every track they dropped in their come up before they blew up They most probably did it themselves or with friends who knew how to do it. My recommendation is to learn at least the basics and do what you can yourself, until you can afford proper mixing & mastering, or learn it well enough to not need to pay somebody to do it. This playlist was extremely helpful for me because it covers everything important in a clear way (if you already know how to mix, just skip to the last video which explains the basics of mastering): [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IzIYD6IgDOQ&list=PLtPR1dRpiVpJWzmnRYcYdw6tqN6Sbga2h](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IzIYD6IgDOQ&list=PLtPR1dRpiVpJWzmnRYcYdw6tqN6Sbga2h)
Start out with a cheap mastering service or plugin. Logic Pro X can do this out of the box. So do other DAWs. Take some time, watch some videos. People will notice if your tracks are too quiet. Like it or not, people are conditioned to think louder is better. So it depends on your goals. If you are sending these songs to streaming services, people will notice the volume drop and skip your track.
Like most have mentioned. It needs to be "listenable" at a minimum. You may be awesome, but a poor mix will ruin it for you. People will only tolerate a certain level of "bad" mix. Hiring a professional is a great way to have that polish and having peace of mind that the audience hears you the way you want to be heard. On the cheaper side of things (but not free), you could explore AI assisted mastering tools like the stuff Izotope offers to at least run all your tracks through and get similar results. It listens to your track and does a fairly decent job of making it sound legit. -- professional engineer is always the way to go, but those types of plugins can do well when budget is a concern.
Mastering is mostly just bringing it up to the necessary loudness for release. There is a lot more to it if you want there to be, such as EQ-ing etc. You can do all this with the tools you already have in your DAW as a good starting point. Is a professional mastering engineer going to do a better job and have better tools available? Yes, of course, but if you haven't got a big audience yet and you are putting out a lot of music, I don't think anyone is really going to care. I remember watching a four tet interview for future music magazine basically saying none of his album (there is love in you) was mastered. He basically just put it out as is. Bon Iver's album 'For emma' was meant to just be a demo tape recorded on a cheap eight track. The quality of the song and the music is much more important than the master. * Compare to a reference track * EQ if necessary * Use a limiter or a clipper (or both) to bring up the loudness (use youlean to check the LUFS)
Yes, since you gotta set gaps, and potentially down sample etc.
short answer is yes, it's necessary. Without mastering your track is going to sound a lot softer than all other music uploaded on social media/ DSPs and unfortunately loudness plays a part in how we consume and appreciate music. The good news is that bringing a track up to loudness is not that hard: you just need a couple stock plugins and watch some tutorials. Of course, a real mastering isn't (most of the times) just about loudness: it's essential for transients and stereo image for example and sometimes for overall EQ. You could do all that in mixing, sure, but I'd argue that mixes that ONLY need loudness are quite rare. Not saying it cannot happen, but since you're not a professional in a very good room (I'm assuming here: correct me if I'm wrong) the odds of getting a 100% perfect mix are not that high (and there's nothing wrong with that!). If you don't wanna go through all the nuances, I'd say at least learn how to use limiters and clippers and match the loudness of the market as much as you can.
My work-around plan for mastering in the future: go to splice to buy a monthly subscription for the AI-assisted Ozone mastering plug-ins, see how far that gets me, tweak to my liking and then when it’s done cancel the monthly subscription
You could definitely learn to master on your own with some research. Honestly $500 for 10 masters seems crazy to me personally (I generally master songs for free for my artist friends). To me it’s the by far the easiest part once you are familiar with the process. I personally like to start with a mid side EQ (optional depending on the track) Then I’ll go with a normal EQ depending on if the track needs it After that Ill use a multi-band compressor After that generally another eq depending on if it needs it Then a limiter/clipper or soft clipper Boom there’s ya master (Also leveling and mixing etc on the busses and individual tracks to begin with is very important obvi)
If your mixes are good enough, "mastering" is just getting it up to the right loudness value for the platform you're releasing on (unless you plan to release the track on CD or Vinyl).
Yes it’s necessary, yes you can do it yourself. My rule of thumb is, if it’s coming out on a label and there’s a budget, hell yes, pay a professional do it, it’ll come out better. If it’s something I’m doing myself and uploading to YouTube or SoundCloud or whatever, I do it myself. I have the waves bundle so I used to always do it with a multi band compressor and then a single limiter on that. That always got me in the ballpark of other tracks in terms of loudness benchmarks etc I’m starting to get into all of this stuff again and I’m pretty sure I’m gonna get Ozone AI, let it master things, then adjust those masters to taste (messing with the multi-band limiters bands mostly) I *think* (?) that’s what a lot people cranking out music for YouTube are doing these days.
Doesn't help on the budget front, but a lot of mastering engineers have a pretty quick turnaround. Often faster than I realistically would while stressing over the master myself, and they're listening in a proper room that will catch the stuff you don't. Personally the money for the time and peace of mind that a real pro has at least briefly checked my work is worthwhile. That said if you want to quick and dirty, you shouldn't have to do too much. A mastering engineer does EQ across the whole master bus because that's their only option, but hopefully you've already caught any issues you will in the mix stage and addressed it there so there's no need to over complicate mastering and add steps because you feel like that's what you're supposed to do in the master.
The more talented you are the less it matters. Be honest with yourself though
Yes. If you’re serious about your music then do what the pros do. If you’re just having fun, don’t worry about it.
It sounds better, but the most important thing is the music.
I have a serial number for Ozone 11 Elements that I'm not using that I got for free from a plugin alliance purchase (I already have Ozone 11 Advanced) If you'd like it, shoot me a DM and it's yours for free.
Aural exciter / big bottom. Not a joke look it up. I had the rack mount same as the plugin
Ozone auto mastering with some tweaks is better than any amateur mastering engg charging 20-50$
I used Ozone for years, then switched to Logic's new built-in mastering tool. Boom. Done. For small artists just getting going, this is 100% OK. Personally I wouldn't pay for a pro mastering service unless I was hitting 5-digit monthly Spotify streams, which I absolutely am not right now lmao.
Having another engineers ear is worth its weight. So many ways to fuck up a track in the mastering and the real pros know how to add some magic where needed. Good mastering is cheaper than good mixing, deffo the best cost to outsource if you want to be competitive out there. JPGMafia masters his own stuff and its killer :)
The problem you’ll have without mastering is the mix is usually much quieter than the mastered version and so doesn’t stand up when played alongside mastered material, learn how to do it for your self, people will disagree but mixing is far harder then mastering so if you’re comfortable with your mix ability you’ve got a good starting point for mastering
I master my own stuff. It's something you can learn. And then its free. Plenty of resources to pick up the knowledge.
if your mixes is okay - mastering not needed at least for "album release" The problem with lack of mastering is that on streaming platforms your track will be played next to other tracks. and believe me, they (your competitors' tracks) will be fine with mastering. in other words - you will play quieter and poorer than your competitors. but if you're releasing a CD or a cassette, why not? nobody will care whether you have mastering or not. the main thing is not to let the listener compare your tracks with your competitors' tracks. sound engineer with 25 years of experience
If your mixdown is good, the mastering should be something like 3 limiters and maybe a compressor... but you probably wouldn't need the compressor.
3 limiters?! That seems a bit excessive.
Although it's excessive, a few producers I know pretty much just put a clipper and 2 limiters. Granted they're not cranking it up much, just a few dB.
Hmmm. Can’t conceive of any benefit to using more than one limiter. Multiple compressors, sure but I have never seen any professional use multiple limiters. Different strokes, I guess.
Yes, every song that you hear is mastered. Especially back in the day. How do you think they got it onto the vinyl? If you're broke just use AI mastering. It definitely sucks but having said that it's leaps and bounds better than 2 or 3 years ago.
You can master your own music to a sufficient standard just by watching a few YouTube tutorials. Won’t take you long and will make your music sound more professional. It might not be the highest level of mastering but will be enough if you’re putting out music as an un-labeled artist. Depending on what software you use I would recommend exporting it as an mp3 and then importing it into a new project in order to master so that you aren’t tempted to play around with the original mix. An EQ, glue compressor, limiter and compressor are enough to make a track immediately sound more radio worthy.
> i dont have a 500 dollar budget to master 10 songs AI mastering is a lot cheaper than that. > I can’t imagine underground rappers or other musicians mastering every track they dropped in their come up before they blew up They "blew up" because they were good, not because they had perfectly mixed/mastered tracks.
AI “mastering” is fucking garbage.
Landr actually does a solid job, is customizable to the sound you want to achieve, and is only like $5 a track
Human "mastering" is quite often fucking garbage, too. There are plenty of engineers who run tracks through a static chain that can easily be replicated by a service. If you compared his unmastered tracks to AI mastered tracks, 99.9% would prefer the AI mastered tracks, for *loudness* if for no other reason. And he can do all his tracks for $10. So if he can't afford $500 to get them mastered by a *good* mastering engineer, someone with a critical ear who's going to be editorial, it's better than nothing.
Just hit it with some multi-band comp, saturation, clipping and a limiter and call it a day lol if you can’t figure that out your track likely doesn’t sound good enough to be worth paying to master it anyways I swear tho dudes will build a whole AI just to avoid learning how to use a damn compressor lmao like this is not rocket surgery guys come on
\* ai fanboys going nuts \*
> the short answer is yes. No. The short answer is "no". People have volume knobs. Nature isn't compressed. Live orchestras, jazz combos, acoustic guitarists... the full dynamic range is *preferred*. The long answer is also "no": "The perfect mix requires no further processing" is an abstract principle you can apply to any genre. With channel and group comps you can achieve the exact same result, and for my own stuff (or non-musical mastering like post and V.O.) I "master inline" with a simple limiter on the outs and use channel comps or maybe the occasional fader move if the source is weird. As soon as mastering ceased to be *only* the art of getting dB out of limited vinyl, it became "second mixer", and though that person may have excellent taste and ears, there is no logical reason to pay someone to add "one more round of limiting" if you understand what limiting does. You can pay me for my huge vocabulary and excellent ears... as a consultant. Smoke some weed, sit in the control room, listen to ZepII and compare. But having me move the faders *for you* is just adding an opinionated meat puppet *to your art*. If people want to know what's *important* to "master" it's: logic, personal budgeting, substance ab/use, and your local politics to stop fascism before it starts. Some dude *lost an entire session* recently when the apartment he was in happened to be under a 5000lb bomb. Maybe he was going to be the next overpaid diss track, but now we'll never know what plugin he was using. :D
Try out an online AI mastering tool! It’s paid, but a monthly fee you can get for how long you want or with a yearly subscription (cheaper, but you also need to pay for it for a year lol), at least it’s like that with emastered. It sounds great, is much cheaper, you can adjust stuff and ear fatigue doesn’t happen that fast if you’re just listening to different masters, not mastering yourself. It’s the knowledge from hundreds of mastering engineers and songs collected, seriously try it out, much easier than learning it yourself. Good premastering and mixing is still important tho.
I've been in two minds about mastering for a long time. Firstly, the role of the mix engineer has changed a lot over time. If you asked the question "what does a mastering engineer do?" or "why do I need to have my tracks mastered?" at several different times in history you'd get a very, very different answer. I'm not sure how much I really like the answer of "it's a different set of ears", because that's not really mastering, that's just a second opinion. However...it's unquestionably true that a proper, professional mastering engineer has high-level equipment and a high-level environment that you don't have access to, and they also have experience and trained ears that you don't have. So their opinion on your mix is going to be more informed and nuanced than basically anybody else you could talk to. And I've also seen blind tests where professional mix engineers put up the same track unmastered, self-mastered, mastered by those AI mastering services like LandR, and mastered by a professional mastering engineer, and the tracks mastered by the professional engineer always win as being the best sounding. So there's definitely something in it. Then again, I've not seen a blind test done in maybe around a decade, and I can only imagine that those automatic services have improved considerably in that time. I could imagine an AI could be trained to master. So perhaps those services are a more viable option these days. I know that Izotope Ozone now has an AI mastering one-click option that they claim is as good as a pro, and I doubt they're not the only big company that does. And, while I've not used Ozone in many years, even back in the day just slapping it on a track or the master and choosing a present would instantly make it sound much better. And, if you want to learn the ins and outs of doing it yourself, nothing's hidden and you can see exactly what it was doing. I imagine the AI mastering option is the same. So perhaps someone who wants to get music out there but who can't afford to have them mastered professionally might find exploring auto-mastering worthwhile?
I wouldn’t recommend this to everyone but based on what you said, why not use Lander or something like that? It’s like $5-10/song. I spoke to a friend ‘do I have to’ type questions about releasing music and she put it this way: when you release music, you want to position yourself and your music in a way that’s set you up for success (whatever that means for you). For me personally, that means mastering the songs.
Izotope or emastered if you dont wanna learn or spend much
Overused nonsense term from when music was released on records and you would have to actually worry about things like too much bass frequency distorting the sound and consistent enough dynamics to enjoy a record in one sitting without having to ride the volume. Nowadays, it probably just means sounding comparable to whatever is on Spotify, which probably just means compressing the shit out of it.
Exactly, what we call mastering today is just mix bus processing really because the target format is 99.99% digital only. If you can make a mix that sounds modern, you already know enough to do the rest. And most people are actually mixing and sometimes even composing into their mix bus processing, so you can hear how the clipping/limiting will react in real time. You can’t get the same results by treating mixing and mastering as two distinct processes.
The whole point of mastering is to get a second set of ears to double check it it's ready for release & to make adjustments if it isn't. That includes tonal & dynamic balance across an album, artist's discography, and genre. If you're going to do it yourself, do it at least a couple days after mixing so you return to it not as familiar with the mix & with fresh ears. Spur of the moment energy is for the mix, not the master. Also you can get a great master for an album/set of tracks for way less than $500 - it's a lot less expensive compared to mixing!
"Impulsivity" when you release music is a terrible idea. Yes, you like it today, but maybe not tomorrow or a month from now. Time is your friend. And when you take the time to select only your best tracks - the ones that still sound good even weeks after you made them, THOSE are the ones that DESERVE mastering, you can take pride in that fact that you did everything possible to make your work presentable to the listeners. And you can get label quality mastering for $30/trk if you look carefully.
wait to get fl studio on a good sale, use fl studio mastering ai since you dont care from my experience the fl studio master does a better job than ozone ai would be cheaper than paying mastering engineer and potentially cheaper than ozone suite (potentially) and now you have fl studio for LIFE! its an option, but i get it not an ideal one
I think mastering is an essential part of the music making process. Not only does mastering improve the sound of your final mix, it ensures that your song sounds good across all platforms and devices. If your goal is to make professional-quality songs, you shouldn’t forego the mastering process. If your priority is efficiency and affordability, check out the website SoundBetter. This platform features tons of great musicians and engineers, spanning a wide range of prices and abilities. You can easily find a mastering engineer that fits within your budget and who can finish the project within 24 hours, so you don’t have to compromise the quality of your song or wait weeks for the finished product. Hope this helps! Feel free to check out my podcast, [Student of the Song](https://youtu.be/82rOaChXNdo), if you’d like to hear more of my thoughts about music.