mastering in Live

dm_hawk · Post by **dm_hawk** » Wed Aug 09, 2006 1:47 pm

most producers i talk to who use live master in something else, myself included. this seems to be common practice - i do it because of what my ears tell me. anyone feel like offering a technical explanation for this? why should one not master in live?

Tarekith · Post by **Tarekith** » Wed Aug 09, 2006 1:58 pm

- It offers no way of adding CD markers.
- It has no wave editing tools.
- The sound quality (sorry, but I trust my ears too).
- It does not offer dither, accurate downsampling or bit rate reduction.
- Any time consolidation is performed the audio is normalized to 0dB.
- No options to remove DC offset, fix clicks and pops, or other unwanted audio artifacts.
- Metering in version 5 is sub par.
- No way to analyse the audio for peak values, RMS levels, or drop outs.

I'm sure if you had no other choice, an experienced engineer could turn out an ok master in Live. But it really has none of the tools needed for this process, other than the ability to apply plug ins.

djazz · Post by **djazz** » Wed Aug 09, 2006 2:12 pm

dm_hawk wrote: why should one not master in live?

Why not ?

If you want to get serius about mastering its not about the program you use to do the mastering but ... Accustics and really serious speakers/processors.

How many of us have such a good place to do mastering ?
not even the most studios have good mastering rooms, So we aim for a "ok" master that we can listen.

With good use of plug-ins we can do quite good job with ableton. Obviusly we are not talking for a master to get pressed.

Put the best mastering eng on ableton live and me withthe best gear to do the job, he will make the track sounding better. Its not only the gear u have but how u use them

wavejumper · Post by **wavejumper** » Wed Aug 09, 2006 2:45 pm

Tarekith wrote: - Any time consolidation is performed the audio is normalized to 0dB.

don't use consolidation on audio very often so never really noticed but wow, that's pretty drastic. anyway to disable that?

Tarekith · Post by **Tarekith** » Wed Aug 09, 2006 2:49 pm

Nope, it's the way Ableton works.

wavejumper · Post by **wavejumper** » Wed Aug 09, 2006 2:53 pm

bummer. resample it is then. cheers.

j0shu@ · Post by **j0shu@** » Wed Aug 09, 2006 5:15 pm

i use live to master. one reason is i dont have any other daw to work in.

i import the sample, make sure hi-quality is on, and warp is off
make sure track and master are set at unity
then i use izotope ozone slapped across the stereo pair
listen, edit, render, burn, listen in car, repeat

until i get it right.

i usually get good masters, but there is always room for improvement.

if i had something else, i would mess with mastering in it.

gomi · Post by **gomi** » Wed Aug 09, 2006 6:57 pm

dm_hawk wrote:most producers i talk to who use live master in something else, myself included. this seems to be common practice - i do it because of what my ears tell me. anyone feel like offering a technical explanation for this? why should one not master in live?

read all these articles.
they will answer all your questions.

http://www.digido.com/portal/pmodule_id ... age_id=18/

SubFunk · Post by **SubFunk** » Wed Aug 09, 2006 7:15 pm

pepping up the sound in Live is not Mastering!

damn, how often again, why do you people have to misuse this word so much?
applying a multiband compressor and squashing stuff through an L2 is NOT Mastering!

you can use live, logic, dp, pt or cubase to enhance the sound to a certain grade, Yes. BUT NOT TO APPLY REAL MASTERING TO A PIECE OF MUSIC! period.

serious mastering softwares from left to right with right being the best are:

Peak, SonicHD, Pyramix, Sequia. everything else are toys.

damn, sorry but i can't take reading such nonsense / miss information.

this has been chewed up several times on this forum.

Tarekith is so far the only one who gave a few real reasons.

j0shu@ · Post by **j0shu@** » Wed Aug 09, 2006 8:00 pm

SubFunk wrote:pepping up the sound in Live is not Mastering!

damn, how often again, why do you people have to misuse this word so much?
applying a multiband compressor and squashing stuff through an L2 is NOT Mastering!

you can use live, logic, dp, pt or cubase to enhance the sound to a certain grade, Yes. BUT NOT TO APPLY REAL MASTERING TO A PIECE OF MUSIC! period.

serious mastering softwares from left to right with right being the best are:

Peak, SonicHD, Pyramix, Sequia. everything else are toys.

damn, sorry but i can't take reading such nonsense / miss information.

this has been chewed up several times on this forum.

Tarekith is so far the only one who gave a few real reasons.

-1 for attitude adjustment

"pepping up the sound", really.

sure "serious mastering" requires serious tools, but we are all making due with what we have and can get ahold of. mastering is performed by, among other things, EQ, compression, and limiting on a stereo track. period. that is the process, and "applying a multiband compressor and squashing..." is indeed mastering, although incomplete and perhaps not ideal, one can enhance the quality of their tracks in a very noticeable and quite close to professional level.

the tools available to all of us will vary in quality and cost, but that doesnt mean that we are not "mastering" tracks at all. perhaps not at the level you think acceptable, and if so i give you kudos for having access to such facilities / utilities. however if you are tired of reading others discussions about "mastering in live" you would do well to avoid any thread with that title. also, i fail to see any "misinformation" represented in this thread.

ozone is a fine, low cast mastering suite. sure there are inherent problems with live and even VSTs as a "professional" mastering solution, but many "in the know" audiophiles are going to tell you live is in fact a "toy" as well.

if this is the case live and ozone are the only two toys i legally own that will perform the duties of pepping / mastering, and at this stage in the game i am fairly content with both.

hell, im in a mood, make it -10 for attitude adjustment.

dj superflat · Post by **dj superflat** » Wed Aug 09, 2006 8:28 pm

subfunk, you would be aghast at how many of the best records ever were "mastered" with joke tools -- by your definition, they weren't mastered, which seems like a somewhat absurd assertion. i'm not sure how you can assert that mastering is anything other than the final opportunity to apply eq, compression, reverb, etc. to a finished mix (you can't specify the format of the mix, even, because there's stereo, surround, etc.). and a really good engineer can do wonders for almost any material, even with crap equipment. finally, if the mix is right, very little will be done in mastering, and what will be done will be very subtle (even if you hire someone like bob).

dm_hawk · Post by **dm_hawk** » Wed Aug 09, 2006 8:30 pm

[drama]

SubFunk wrote:pepping up the sound in Live is not Mastering!

damn, how often again, why do you people have to misuse this word so much?
applying a multiband compressor and squashing stuff through an L2 is NOT Mastering!

you can use live, logic, dp, pt or cubase to enhance the sound to a certain grade, Yes. BUT NOT TO APPLY REAL MASTERING TO A PIECE OF MUSIC! period.

serious mastering softwares from left to right with right being the best are:

Peak, SonicHD, Pyramix, Sequia. everything else are toys.

damn, sorry but i can't take reading such nonsense / miss information.

this has been chewed up several times on this forum.

Tarekith is so far the only one who gave a few real reasons.

school us, provide some clarity, or fuck off, but don't pop in here trying to shame people who are simply looking for some knowledge and direction.
[/drama]

what exactly does the process of applying REAL MASTERING TO A PIECE OF MUSIC involve? point me to a link if you don't feel like explaining it.

say you've put your track together, balanced your levels, eq'd, compressed, (etc.) the parts and have the render to where it sounds pretty good on a variety of sound systems. this is what is commonly referred to as "mixing," correct? assuming you want to finish the track in your own studio, what is the next step in "finishing" the track? my understanding is... you render it to a stereo file, open it up in an application that sounds better than Live, throw some "mastering" plugs (waves, ozone, etc.) on it to the limits of your taste, knowledge, and technique, render it again, and voila - you have a wav of aiff that's ready to be burned onto a cd, sent to beatport, or whatever. i'm likely wrong or missing something on this. if so, i would appreciate some clarity. we're all just trying to make better music here- one would hope

so, to rephrase my original question: if "finishing a track"[sound engineering novice cautiously tiptoes around the term 'mastering'] is simply a matter of opening up a stereo file, juicing up the sound with plugins, and making sure the levels aren't wonky, why not Live (aside from the fact that it doesn't sound as good, subjectively)?

j0shu@ · Post by **j0shu@** » Wed Aug 09, 2006 9:55 pm

dm_hawk wrote:[drama]
school us, provide some clarity, or fuck off, but don't pop in here trying to shame people who are simply looking for some knowledge and direction.
[/drama]

here here!

+10 for attitude adjustment!

njh · Post by **njh** » Thu Aug 10, 2006 4:27 am

i dont even bother trying to master anything. i figure there are tons of musicians who got some sort of record deal with just a crappy 4 track tape recording..
even if it came to the point were i want to release something independently
i would just have some one else master it. i dont even understand the concept behind mastering (what is it that is trying to be accomplished)?
from what i get your just eqing and boosting levels..

ishimaru · Post by **ishimaru** » Thu Aug 10, 2006 4:46 am

I tried for the longest to get a decent master in Live but I stopped recently and just started using Peak. Which I didn't know could be used for this lol.

mastering in Live

mastering in Live

Re: mastering in Live