Anybody got any useful tips on mastering the final mix after exporting out as a stereo wav.

I am particularly interested in EQ to the final stereo mix, not Compression/Limiting. What settings do you use for EQ or do you set the EQ individually for each track to bring out its best character. I stress again I am talking about mastering of the final mix, not mixing EQ- I am sure any who reply to this will know the difference. Also do you use any other filters besides EQ and compression/limiter for the final mastering?

Well, because there are three steps: Recording, Mixing and Mastering.

The main job of mastering is to use Compression/Limiter filters to give it that volume boost (compression) while clipping everything over +3db and -3db (limiting). The limiting keeps distortion under control. There is usually some EQ done to the overall sound- this is what I am interested in getting opinions on. I have read a few articles which suggest a 6db boost at the 12K level (before doing the final compression). Just wondering if anybody else has any tips. 

addition: Mike, if you haven't mastered any of your recordings before, you will be amazed at the difference it can make to a final production. Most music production suites come with these compression filters in the audio effects. The one I have found most useful in Sonar is called simply 'final mix'

Yes, but what you are doing is just part of the mixing stage- you are acting on the individual tracks to get a good mix. All I can say is that the recording and mixing was all I used to do as well. Mastering doesn't effect your mix (and won't fix a bad mix), but it will bring it to life. Honest, every record producer in the world can't be wrong.

Give yourself enough headroom under 3db on your final mix, or the limiter will clip too much signal out on the master

If you intend to release your recording  for sale and distribution, then mastering at home is a daunting task. Take your mix to a professional mastering engineer to at least have it evaluated. Unless you have a studio set up at home with proper acoustics and really good monitors (think Genelac) like a good mastering engineer would have, you probably won't be able to truly hear your mix, imperfections and all. It's also good to have the mastering engineer's objective ears listening to your mix. Otherwise, if you fully intend to master at home, make sure that your final mix is as good as it can be with all the tweaks in compression, eq, and reverb before you export to wav and begin the mastering process. Finally, http://emusician.com/tutorials/emusic_masters_mastering/ - read this article .

Jimdom- really good article, but not much real advice other than 'don't try this at home'. I am not trying to produce a saleable product, but just something for my own benefit- and I am limited to what Sonar can offer. And it has been obvious, even from my own amateurish attempts, that doing the mixing stage with a final mastering stage in mind is the best way to go. It certainly enhances the final mix. I don't compress any track in mixing stage, leaving compression only for the mastering stage.

But we seem to be off track a little and everyone is centering on compression. I always leave enough headroom in the final mix so as not to get the waveform that is shown above. Though I have done this in my early experimentation with mastering and know that it is caused from a mix where the levels are too high ie. you are mixing for the most volume without thinking of what will happen in the mastering stage.

Still looking for advice or tips on the EQ at the mastering stage.

mr70s wrote: This approach sounds more appropriate for classical, folk or acoustic instruments. In other words retaining a wide dynamic range. Who will be the final listener ? Think about their audio equipment. What recordings can you use as a reference point ? Give your ears a rest, and listen to other music. Get your ears checked : I spent many hours mixing an album that I thought sounded dull. I tweaked the eq, but then had my ears syringed. When I listened again, I was horrified by what I had done ! Remember : less is more. And don't worry, even the pros make mistakes !

I don't think this approach is suitable only for accoustic music, but I am in agreement about the less is more and I like making mistakes- it forces you to learn. Funny you should mention the ear problem. My ears fill with wax all the time- something about spending too much time in the water as a youngster and my ears began to close up, now the wax doesn't get out- I now need to get them syringed out all the time.

Perhaps you might like to take the time to listen to some samples in my 'Music in the digital age' thread in Tech Talk and throw me some advice. I am not particularly happy with what I am producing- or put down some of your experiences here.

Thanks for the excellent reply Dean. Interesting point about the frequencies outside the ISO standard. Never thought to cut these.

Also the tired ears. This also is a good point of why too many filters at the mix stage can be a problem. If you go back to your final master after a break of a few weeks and suddenly realise you have done a terrible job of it you can always redo the master, because the individual mix tracks are still there- hopefully in a condition where you can just start the master again and get it right.

So you think the advice I have read about boosting at 12K is a bad idea and I should be cutting instead?

MikeEnRegalia- You are arguing the wrong point. I think we are all in agreement that mixing is the most important stage to get the sound right (knowing that no amount of mixing will fix a bad recording). This is where all the good work must be done. But if you don't do the final mastering, your productions are missing that last, final flourish to make it shine.

Experiment with mastering a stereo mix- the difference may surprise the hell out of  you.

Mastering in no way harms the mixed tracks- they are still intact in their own separate file. You are mastering a stereo export of the this mix. So, at any time you can go back to the mix, tweek it, dump it out to a stereo wav and re-master.

Like I said earlier, 6 months ago I would have argued the same points you are.

I am not that good at mastering, but I know it makes a huge difference to the music.

Well, because any effects or filters you apply at the mixing stage effect that particular track's waveform. Let's say you apply reverb to a vocal. This can be removed while you are working in that session, if you decide you don't like it. But what happens after you exit the session and come back to it a few days later and decide what you thought sounded just beautiful actually turns out to sound like crap. I don't know about Ableton, but Sonar has no way to get your wave back to the state before the reverb. The only way this can be done is to search through all the saved waves until you find the one that you think was it, dump out the track and import this wav back into the track. Not a simple undo by any means

addition: I know you that you know all this and that you can mix very well (after hearing that track you posted). I am just saying that there is no way you should be applying filters to the mix as a whole, at the mixing stage, only at individual track levels. The mastering stage is for playing with all the sounds in one hit.

cobb2 wrote: Well, because any effects or filters you apply at the mixing stage effect that particular track's waveform. Let's say you apply reverb to a vocal. This can be removed while you are working in that session, if you decide you don't like it. But what happens after you exit the session and come back to it a few days later and decide what you thought sounded just beautiful actually turns out to sound like crap. I don't know about Ableton, but Sonar has no way to get your wave back to the state before the reverb. The only way this can be done is to search through all the saved waves until you find the one that you think was it, dump out the track and import this wav back into the track. Not a simple undo by any means

I see. I don't work like that in Ableton ... there is a way to "render" the effects to the track, but it only needs to be done when your computer can't cope with all the effects. So far I didn't have any problems with that ... all the effects on track and/or master level can easily be switched on/off or replaced at any time.

cobb2 wrote: addition: I know you that you know all this and that you can mix very well (after hearing that track you posted). I am just saying that there is no way you should be applying filters to the mix as a whole, at the mixing stage, only at individual track levels. The mastering stage is for playing with all the sounds in one hit.

Dean wrote: Most studio engineers separate the two processes, that may be a historical thing because they've always done it that way, or that's how they were taught, but often is it because the mastering equipment is different to the mix-down equipment, even professional engineers who are using PC software for mixing prefer to use hardware EQ and compression for the mastering.

Yes, I agree on the hardware EQ and compression. There is no way possible to get the volumes without distortion that the professionals get onto a CD out of a Home studio. Notice I don't say DAW or Digital Audio Workstation because the true meaning of this is Software integrated with Hardware, though over time this has been watered down to just mean software.

great - will look forward to that!