SSL vs NEVE

As I tour people through our recording facilities in Sydney, I usually refer to our Neve 88R and SSL 9000k consoles as the “Ferrari and Lamborghini of mixing consoles”…. They are both the best cars that money can buy, but it’s up to the driver as to which one they prefer to drive.

Occasionally that remark satisfies my visitor and we move onto seeing something else, but more often than not, they ask what on earth do I actually mean – how do the two consoles actually compare?

So, as a manager I can talk about the practical and technical differences, however I polled some of the engineers and producers at 301 as to their thoughts on the “sound” of the two consoles.

The Audible differences

Leon Zervos was very quick to comment that the Neve 88R’s sound is “warm and thick”, with a nice element of presence when the EQ is enabled. The SSL is less coloured, but does have a certain “edge” to the sound.

Mitch Kenny comments that when mixing, the SSL has more bandwidth and is more forgiving which allows more to be “fit in” to a mix run through this board. However, when recording, the Neve’s pre-amps have a very fast slew rate and as such respond incredibly quickly, which captures transients very openly.

Jono Baker has recently had an experience where he ended up doing the same session on both the Neve and the SSL, and found that the SSL’s pre-amps are muddy compared to the Neve Pre’s – which are cleaner, detailed, and better suited to recordings where the sound needs to be as “open” as possible (such as orchestral music)

We also asked some friends out there on their thoughts:

“Track on Neve, mix on SSL.”

- Ivan Gough, Musician/Producer (TV Rock)

“Tracking? Mixing? I know these words. Just let me think about it for a minute. Oh I remember. Neve = warm to DC, dynamics through roof. Difficult to manage but beautiful. Marry that shit. SSL = the blowjob on the corner. It’s all you need and you don’t have to do a thing.”

- Ben Suthers, Producer/General Technical Guru (Boiler Room @ BDO)

“Tracking on a Neve is nice and creative, SSL for mixing. Having spent many years working with Spike Stent on his G-Series with non-linear summing, its a revelation!”

- Lee Groves, Producer/Mix Engineer

The Technical Differences

• The Neve has a transformer on the microphone input, whereas the SSL does not. This may be a factor in the “warm” sound that is attributed with the Neve – though bear in mind the transformers are on the mic input only, so tape or Pro Tools output don’t pass through these.
• The Neve has much more sophisticated circuitry, because the routing it’s routing is very flexible. This probably again contributes to the coloured “Neve” sound
• For the most part, though, the electronics on each board are quite similar.

The Practical differences

• The Neve sound varies greatly between the eras of their design. We have a beautiful vintage Neve console in Byron Bay and a state of the art contemporary Neve console in Sydney – and they sound significantly different, not to mention that there have been several models in between that vary substantially in their design and sound between the classic and the current. Over in the SSL camp, whilst their sound has evolved, the similarities between E’s, G’s and K’s are more apparent than in the history of Neve’s designs.
• The Neve’s automation is sophisticated, possibly not for any good reason. Despite the Neve being a fantastic sounding mix console, I’m sure engineers opt not to mix on it purely for the reason that you do need a degree in rocket science to operate the automation!
• It takes us about an hour to boot up the Neve console, so we leave it turned on almost always. Unfortunately the Neve computer usually takes a few attempts at booting up and down to get full communication with the board, and with day-to-day pressure to keep sessions on schedule, we opt to leave it on 24/7. I estimate it costs us about $30 per day to keep the console powered – so if we kept it off for half the day, every day, our power costs would be reduced by about $6000 per annum. That’s about 5x times more than an average household per year! Not to mention the waste of energy and the effects on our environment.
• Generally speaking, the Neve at our studio traditionally has been used as a “recording” console and the SSL a “mixing” console.

At the end of the day, both these flagship consoles remain to have a highly desirable sound that continues to be emulated by the very best of plug-in manufacturers. While the digital versions may bring their sound accessible to a wider audience, it is hard to dismiss the real thing.

As Mr. Ferris Bueller once said, “It is so choice. If you have the means, I highly recommend picking one up.” or at the very least, using one!

[written by Anthony Garvin, Manager Studios 301]

Now this one isn’t exactly my tip, I get this one from watching Pensado’s Place, but it’s great so I wanted to share. Basically it’s a way to get that uber brick wall L1 limiting, without getting all the distortion that this plug-in can create.

Insert an instance of the L1 on your channel and bring the threshold/out ceiling down till you just start to see the smallest amount of gain reduction. Then push the out ceiling up to between -0.5dB & -1dB. Then tweak the release time to suit your sound source.

Finally, copy this L1 instance two or three times in serial, and there you go.

Epic brick wall, minimal distortion!

Jack Prest is an In-house Producer/Engineer at Studios 301

This is one of my favourite distortion units and its amazingly cheap (get it here http://www.dadalife.com/sausage-fattener-plugin/). It’s great for creating super gnarly crunched up distortions, but one of my favourite things to do with this plug-in is to use it on the master bus, or even in mastering itself.

If you have a mix that is overall a little bit dull, stick this little bad boy over the stereo mix leaving the Colour at 0 – then bring the Fatness up to between 1-4%. This will had some extra harmonic content giving your track life without noticeably changing the tone of your mix.

Something to be aware of – the gain indicator is actually for the INPUT Signal level into the plug-in. If it’s going red, it means you are digitally distorting the plug-in’s input, which is (generally) a bad idea, so back it off till it’s not clipping.

Jack Prest is an Inhouse Producer/Engineer at Studios 301.

This time, our Studio Philosopher talks about a word that you will probably hear more than any other in a studio session, “vibe”.  Very much an abstract concept, and one that some engineers avoid like the plague, it basically means that the energy and feeling in the room will influence the quality of the recording, in particular the performance. For some engineers this also extends to the mixdown.

Some studios and engineers use coloured or low lighting and special furnishings to create a vibe in their rooms. Studios are occasionally built in lush natural surrounds and have extra facilities like, housing, swimming pools, games etc that can all help to create a particular atmosphere for the recording environment (check out Real World Studios). Even in a small setup it’s a great idea to have some different lighting options (lamps, fairy lights etc) and a comfortable couch/seat for you client.

All of these superficial things aside, the concept of vibe, goes a little deeper… Most important is to create a fun, relaxed and comfortable environment for the talent. Key to doing this is not necessarily cool lighting (although it doesn’t hurt) but your manner as an engineer. Always be friendly and welcoming, make the client feel like a guest in your home and that if they need something they can feel free to ask.

Secondly, know your stuff! Nothing kills the vibe in a room more than you messing around because something has gone wrong and you don’t know what it is. Further to this if there is a problem that you can’t fix, be honest, the client will appreciate you being up front and can relax while you get the issue sorted, rather than standing around while you mess about. Third, be positive. Especially on long sessions, the ability to keep the mood up is essential.

If you are asked for feedback, make sure it is honest, but looks towards what is good and what can be improved, as opposed to what was done wrong. Lastly don’t be afraid to take a break. Even if you are on a tight schedule, often the best remedy for a trouble take or mix is to step back.

Apple Audio Mastering Tools

Earlier last year, Apple announced their “Mastered For iTunes” initiative, along with releasing accompanying Apple Audio Mastering Tools.  In brief, Apple are now accepting higher resolution (up to 24/96) masters for upload/conversion to the iTunes Store. These files are kept in their original format on the Apple servers, and from these the Variable Bit Rate 256kbit AAC’s which go on sale are created. As well as “keeping the highest quality masters available in our systems [that] allows for full advantage of future improvements to your music”, Apple claim that “you can achieve dynamic range that’s superior to red book audio and a final product that’s virtually indistinguishable from the original recording” by submitting higher than CD resolution wav’s for conversion to iTunes Plus format.

This MFiT concept has generated a fair amount of online chatter with many opinions around the claim of higher quality , so instead of re-hashing this, I wanted to take a look at the tools that Apple are providing to support the initiative. Regardless of opinion, iTunes has well over 80% market share in music sales, and as the most likely source that music will be sold from, perhaps the tools can be of some benefit in QC’ing and A/B’ing masters before they go to the iTunes Store for sale.

The Audio Mastering Tools are available as a free of charge download on the Apple website, and comprise of 5 parts: afconvert, Master For iTunes Droplet, AURoundTripAAC, afclip and Audio to Wave droplet.

Afconvert is a command line utility that is part of the Mac OS Core Audio framework, which converts wav or aif files to iTunes Plus (256kbit VBR AAC) files. The conversion is done in two steps: first to a 32 bit floating point CAF file whilst adding iTunes sound check metadata to the file and, if necessary, doing a sample-rate conversion. The CAF file is then compressed into an AAC file.

The Master For iTunes Droplet is an easier to use drag-and-drop application, utilizing afconvert. Remembering that Apple accept full resolution wav files to ingest into the iTunes Store, and not AAC conversions, I was curious to know if this conversion process was any different to the “store” conversion… And after blind testing Mastering Engineer Leon Zervos with a song bought from the store, and the original master converted with the Droplet, he found that there was a subtle difference, but not enough to be a concern from a mastering perspective.

The AURoundTripAAC Audio Unit is a plugin for comparing iTunes Plus compression to the uncompressed audio in real time. Via the Audition tab, you can switch the monitor path between “source” and “encoded” to compare before and after the codec on the fly. There is also a clip indicator, which goes into more detail by displaying the peak value, and tallying each sample and inter-sample that clips, both before and after encoding.  Interestingly, a full resolution file with a peak at 0dBfs, but no clips, produces clipping in the AAC version, as well as more frequent inter-sample peaks (which are peaks that lie between samples, that can become apparent in the up-sampling process of DAC’s).

Moving over to the Listening Test tab in the AU is where things get entertaining. The plugin presents “Source” and randomly selected “A” and “B” paths – one being the unadulterated source, and the other being the compressed codec signal. Below these buttons, selection is required by the user to determine whether  “A is Source” or “B is Source” (known as an A-B-X test). After 20 selections, you are prompted with your test results. Do it, test yourself! At first, I found myself having to listen with much more concentration than I expected, and even then my results were a little embarrassing. After further listening, and demonstrating this to Leon, the differences became more apparent – particularly in the transient on the snare drum in our test track.

Moving on through the tools, afclip is a command line utility for checking various audio files for clipping. Once a file is run through afclip, a readout is presented to show where clipping samples are present in the file (similar to the detailed clip indicator in the AURoundTripAAC plugin).

Lastly, and the simplest of the Apple Audio Mastering Tools, the Audio to Wave Droplet also utilises afconvert and will convert any Mac OS X natively recognised audio format to a wav file. Presumable this is to aid in the comparison of various formats and/or codecs, and to appease my curiosity, I compared various AAC to wav conversions in Logic to those done via the droplet. There was absolutely no difference (determined via a null-test).

As a separate download, Apple also offer AU Lab, which is a stand alone Audio Unit host. If you don’t run Logic, this is an option for setting up real-time AAC auditioning using the AURoundTripAAC plugin. With most Macs equipped with optical input and outputs, this could be an easy way to use the RoundTripAAC plugin on a spare mac as a digital insert, to test the results of iTunes Plus compression. However, within the delicate constrains of mastering, the opinions given to me by engineers advise not to use this as a black and white test. Optical connections are more prone to jitter and other digital side effects, meaning the sound is coloured simply by passing through the Optical I/O, irrespective of any extra processing.

As a final note, and complete aside to this use, AU Lab is a simple, low overhead AU host that loads AU effects, instruments and generators with flexible routing and preset management – I’m sure it has a few uses in some setups where extra effects or instruments are needed!

Mastered for iTunes documentation, the Apple Audio Mastering Tools and AU Lab are available at:

http://www.apple.com/itunes/mastered-for-itunes/

[written by Anthony Garvin originally for, and with thanks to Audio Technology Magazine - http://www.audiotechnology.com.au/ ]

The Waves C1 Compressor.

Here’s a little trick I found the other day with one of my favourite swiss army knife compressors, the Waves C1. It’s especially good for snare drums and toms. If you find your drums are a little bit too snappy, especially with a really hard stick sound, this setting can work a treat to control that snap while retaining the drum sound’s dynamics.

First, you want to set the attack and release settings as fast as possible (one of the best features of this compressor is the wide scope for adjusting attack and release times), then crank up the ratio to at least 30:1 leaving the threshold and the makeup gain at 0. If you feel the need you can play with the ratio and release time, but pretty much it’s a set and forget.

Jack Prest is an Inhouse Producer/Engineer at Studios 301

I am the Studio Philosopher and I have been enlisted by Studios 301 to share some of my thoughts and knowledge about all aspects of studio life. Much of what we do in the studio is technical, but these technical aspects are influenced and informed by less tangible qualities. Over the coming months I will provide insight into ways have thinking that may influence your studio practice or at the very least make you analyse how you work.

To begin we will appropriately start before we even get into a studio session with Preparation.

In many ways preparation is at once one of the most important and overlooked aspects of a recording or mixdown session. An engineer (or assistant) who is across all aspects of an upcoming session and has the necessary setup in place before a session starts will almost always provide for a stress-free (or at least less) and productive session.

The first key in preparation is knowing your equipment. This means before you even have a conversation with a potential client you should have an intricate knowledge of the operation of your setup, hardware and software. From a large studio to a basic laptop rig be aware of possible eventualities and troubleshoot them long before you bring anyone else into the room.  This means spending the hours with your equipment and software, watching tutorials, and READING THE MANUAL!

Now that you know your setup, you’ve got a client booked and a session approaching. It is essential for you to make contact via email and/or phone to clarify exactly what the client requires. In larger environments request a tech list and room setup sheet. Even if your recording a mate in your bedroom having a clear idea of exactly what and how the want to record/mix is going to make your life easier on the day and also make you look super professional.

Once you’ve received all the technical specs and info for the session the next step is to set up your session the day/night before.  This means you can troubleshoot any last minute issues (of which there is almost always at least one) without a client over you shoulder. It also means on the morning or the session, when things can get a little chaotic, you can be in a position to make minor adjustments and handle new client requests rather than doing basic setup.

This level of preparation is a bare minimum for anyone working in a large studio environment and I believe is essential no matter the size of your setup. This hard work beforehand enables you to focus on creativity and magic making during a session.

Till next time…

Since the iPad was introduced a couple of years ago, there have been many interesting music apps developed covering a vast area of music production: drum machines, synthesizers, effects units, seemingly limitless DAW controllers, plus GarageBand itself. However, I’m questioning why there still aren’t some software tools available for the iPad that could be put to excellent use on this technology. Here is my wish list….

At the top of my list for iPad apps is Ableton Live. The unique hands-on aspect of Live, combined with the success of controllers like the APC, Launchpad, and other iOS controllers like Griid all say something obvious – the iPad itself would be an ideal platform for Live! You have a relatively cheap, reliable and hi tech touch surface on top of a CPU that compares to a computer of only a few years ago, how would it not work? How would it not be awesome?! Ableton’s unique session view, in my opinion it’s distinguishing feature, would come to life (Live?) on the iPad’s touch screen. It would make an excellent sketch pad for starting a project when inspiration hit and then transferring to your desktop computer for editing and final mixing later. But on the other hand, with audio interfaces like the RME Fireface now functional on the iPad, perhaps it could even become a complete Ableton studio tool itself?

The next item on my wish list, or perhaps we should say firing line, is Pro Tools. Ok, expecting a Pro Tools HD-like system to run on an iPad is crazy (though it won’t be one day soon), but how about something like “Pro Tools GarageBand”? GarageBand is a simplified version of Logic that offers compatibility to its bigger brother desktop application; can we please have similar iOS software for Pro Tools users? Or something else to think about – how many Pro Tools users spend time on their laptops between sessions tuning, editing, drum replacing, beat detecting etc etc? What about four different version of Pro Tools iPad that focused on these tasks? “Pro Tools iTune”, “Pro Tools iEdit” “Pro Tools iReplace” and “Pro Tools iDetect” perhaps? The pinch, swipe, zoom interaction on the iPhone and iPad has resonated with its users so well that Apple has now implemented this functionality on their computer hardware…. Imagine what this control could do for us when editing! We could pinch zoom on a waveform, swipe to scrub, tap-hold to select, double tap to cut and so on and so forth. The interface has the potential to immensely speed up our workflows on those repetitive tasks.

Ok, I’m going to review my expectations. Perhaps the development time is so immense that they are already working on it and we just need to wait a little longer?

In the meantime, let’s go back to basics. I mentioned the huge variety of MIDI style DAW controllers available for iPad earlier. But there are a few apps missing… Where is Avid’s own controller for Pro Tools? Steinberg’s custom Cubase Controller? Apple’s specific Logic controller?

Well over a decade ago, Mackie had a revolutionary idea of combining a mixing console’s ergonomics with the power of a DAW in the form of the HUI. The idea was refined and within a few years the technology had hit it big, with many hardware brands creating their own DAW controllers. In 2004 the Lemur was released, which operated remarkably like an iPad (with a touch screen for controlling MIDI commands) and really got us geeks salivating (and it has also now been released for iOS). But really, what revolutions in DAW/MIDI controller technology have we had in the last few years?

So, what if we took some of the editing workflow ideas mentioned above, combined them with the concept of a DAW controller and had the inside knowledge, understanding and access to the DAW code? We could have a controller that blends a hands-on console-like experience, with the editing finesse of a mouse and the feedback of a high-resolution screen – all on the iPad. Editing a waveform on an iPad could be so easy… Controlling multiple parameters on a plugin, which IS actually THE plugin on your iPad would be creatively invigorating! Automation could be both fast and hands on. MIDI sequencing would become less technical and more musical. (While we wait for this, check out V-Control by Neyrinck – this is the closest I’ve seen to this concept with their “V-Window”, but it lacks the elegance and finesse that could be achieved if these apps were made by the same developers as the desktop software)

As tablet and smartphone technology continues to improve and proliferate, we will see the use of desktops decrease – in India already, mobile Internet traffic has surpassed desktop Internet usage – but for the foreseeable future desktops will still have a place in music and audio production. However, why not make better use of this technology that is so accessible (and so cheap) now to improve our workflows and bring more creativity into our interaction with the software?

What do you think? What is on your App wish list?

[This article written by Anthony Garvin and has previously appeared in Audio Technology Magazine]

[Follow this link for more technical insights: http://www.audiotechnology.com.au/]

What is Mastering?

We have learnt that You, our audience, comprises of a very broad range of musicians and music lovers, from seasoned professionals, to those just beginning to exercise their passions and wanting to learn more about it all. This post aims to clear up some mysteries about the purpose of Audio Mastering for those less familiar with this process.

What is it?

At Studios 301, our mastering engineers work on diverse material, from classical, acoustic, electric and electronic music. More importantly, this work is produced in an increasingly wide variety of studios, from large scale recording complexes (not unlike Studios 301) and bedroom studios, to laptops and iphones sitting on a beach.

As you can imagine, the end results also sound quite diverse in their “fidelity”. The mastering process aims to provide the finished recordings with a “polish” so that they sound as balanced and consistent as possible when played back on any sound system. It is the last step that’s done before playback, broadcast, replication and distribution.

Having an impartial set of ears on a recording also never hurts.

Here’s one way to think of mastering: When a farmer takes a fresh apple to the grocer, mastering can be seen as the process of cleaning that apple to a shine and wrapping it in vacuum packaging so that it remains fresh, leaving an attractive appearance to the shopper.

For those more familiar with film & video production, it is the audio equivalent of ‘grading’.

Why do we need it?

There are many reasons that we need mastering. For example, when an album is made, it’s quite common for each song to have it’s own “sonic palette” or sound design. Similarly, groups of songs might have been recorded or mixed in different studios, and quite possibly by different producers – each with their own set of “ears”.

A side effect of a using different studios for recording and/or mixing is that irrespective of the equipment, every room has it’s own acoustic “sound”, and a mix engineer will make decisions based on what they hear. This could result in ‘resonances’ or ‘troughs’  in the frequency spectrum, causing the engineer to inadvertently boost or cut a particular frequency to compensate due to what they’re hearing.

When grouped together as a single body of work, the album may sound disjointed and inconsistent due to each song’s disparate creation environments. Plus, they might also have vastly differing levels of “apparent loudness” depending on the style or genre of each song.

The ultimate aim of mastering is to give the body of work a cohesive listening experience – while always maintaining the mix’s original integrity.

The Process

Mastering is a process that involves both objective and subjective listening.

Every mastering engineer has their own “style” and personality that they’re renowned for. However, an objective point of view is generally taken before any subjective processing is applied.

Objective issues relate to aspects of the mix that are seen as imperfections. In most cases, these are not down to personal opinion, but rather, unmistakable blemishes that weren’t apparent or intended at the time of recording/mixing such as signal or data corruption. They could also be things that were caused as a result of the recording/mixing environment, such as poor monitoring.

issues requiring “Objective” treatment:

• mono / out-of-phase / widening
• lacking definition in bottom end
• mix is jumping around madly
• unnatural changes in volume
• unwanted noise/hum/glitches
• frequencies that ‘stick out’
• bass / top end imbalance
• stereo imbalance
• too dull / bright
• muddy mix
• hidden vocal
• quiet overall

This objective treatment can be thought of as the corrective stage.

EQ, compression, multi-band compression, parallel compression, exciting, stereo widening/narrowing, and limiting are amongst the tools used here, some very sparingly, others not at all. The thinking here is to use these tools only if absolutely required, and when so, with a most delicate of touch. Again, this is not the time for aggressive processing – what you want to do here is to add some *sparkle*, but NOT alter the mix – one must always keep that in mind.

There are rare instances however, where mastering is needed to rescue a poor mixdown, or restore old mixes, in which case more heavy handed treatment is called for.

Next is the “Subjective” treatment.

The is the part where the mastering engineer’s personality comes into play. It is where they will apply their personal judgement to the colouration and balance of the audio.

Much like a songwriter’s style – what a mastering engineer “hears”, is what defines their character.

This is where the mastering engineer adds their value – and that value is entirely a matter of opinion – you may either like it, or you may not.

I believe this process should always be two-way conversation between artist and engineer, but sometimes creative opinions can differ, and may not always resolve. It is for this reason that some artists/producers/labels will take the time to seek a mastering engineer that understands their style and ‘fits’ their music – and then nurture that relationship.

Optimisation

After all sound processing has been applied, the final step is to optimise the audio signal for the intended output format.

This can be for any of the following:

• radio
• tv
• wav/CD
• vinyl
• cinema
• gaming
• mp3 (hi / lo)
• Mastered for iTunes
• mobile phones
• PC speakers
• laptops

This largely objective process, is to ensure that the mix sounds as close to the intended recording, compensating for any added colouration that the medium it is being rendered to may impose on the recording, due to it’s own physical limitations.

For example, low bit-rate mp3s add a certain “sizzle” in the top end, so if the recording has alot of high frequencies present, this will exacerbate that sizzle effect, so you may choose to compensate accordingly before rendering to that format.

Similarly, vinyl has alot of physical issues one must consider. For example, anything below 300Hz should generally be in mono to ensure the cutting needle is able to cut the necessary groove. Any bottom end that is panned left or right, or even out-of-phase, will cause problems and not be able to be transferred to vinyl. Each side of vinyl also has limited duration, and if mastering for a long side, you may consider gently increasing the top-end towards the end of the recording, to compensate for the decreasing high frequencies you’ll hear on the inside tracks of most vinyl albums.

Another element that is oft debated by mastering engineers everywhere, is the stage that ensures your recording will sound as good as, if not better than (read: loud), other music played alongside it. This involves what is called “apparent loudness”.

This desire to sound louder than other recordings, started what is now known as the “Loudness War”. To pinpoint it’s exact beginning is difficult, but it was around the time recordings became widely available for purchase – around the days of vinyl. The war element of this is achieved through active participants performing in competition with each other trying to make recordings sound as loud as possible, and is the musical equivalent of an evolutionary arms race. It was borne out of the psycho acoustic phenomenon that occurs when you listen to two or more pieces of music that have different volumes compared to each other. The phenomenon is that the louder piece of music always sounds better than the quieter one (up until the threshold of pain).

New methods of imprinting a hotter signal on analog mediums kept evolving. Digital recording technology didn’t have the physical limitations of vinyl and tape, and could offer louder and brighter recordings from start to finish.

This process however, has it’s drawbacks, in that it can cause the music to sound “squashed”. The easiest way to explain this to think of the apple in vacuum packaging. If too high a vacuum is applied, the apple will simply crush , and while it’s still inside this neat little package, the apple no longer resembles the initial recordings. This is a personal choice – and every mastering engineer will have their own personal philosophy on it.

This is an example of how the loudness of masters has evolved over the decades:

How to prepare your tracks for mastering.

Before sending your finished works off to be mastered, there are a few very important things you should do.

It’s important not to forget these crucial steps, as it can easily undo all the hard work spent on the track in a matter of minutes.

Your checklist:

• People often write and mix using mastering type plug-ins at the master buss stage. When using plugins that have several processing stages such as multi-band compression, EQ, and limiting (T-Racks, iZotope Ozone, etc) it can be a dangerous thing simply turning this OFF, because if you have been mixing “through” these plugins, then turning them off will affect the overall balance of the instruments/tracks, and the mix won’t resemble what you’ve been working on.
• Just prior to the final bounce, turn OFF the brickwall limiting stage at the very end of these chains, leaving the rest ON to maintain your mix balance.
• You may find that the level on master buss channel will now be in the red during playback. Skip to the loudest part of the track, and pull the output level back to a point where no signal goes past 0 dB, or into the red at all.
• Then set your Left & Right locators so that they are just outside of all audible audio – be aware of any lingering reverb tails that may be present at the very end of the song, shifting your Right locator accordingly.
• Set your output bounce parameters to 24-bit and at the sample rate of your project (44.1k/48k/96k/etc) and hit ‘Bounce’.

Once you’ve bounced it out, take a quick look at the final waveform.

** You want your waveform to resemble this, with visible peaks and troughs in the waveform:

this is an example of what your waveform should look like.

**And NOT this, which resembles a brick:

this is an example of an overlimited waveform.

The reason is that a clipped or limited signal such as this, leaves very little room for the  mastering process to be applied to your mix.

There is alot of pressure from record labels, DJs and radio stations to provide mixes that are as loud as possible. While that is understandable, it is also important to note that the best way to do this is actually in the mastering process, not necessarily at mixdown.

The reason is this: a mix that has had the life squeezed out of it, like the above image, will have very little dynamics left, and may sound overly saturated. The signal will not benefit greatly from additional EQ that may be needed to balance the mix (the objective process) or apply any subjective treatment in order to make the track ‘sparkle’. The track will be muffled and already overtly loud, and may disappoint you when the master returns no louder, or even possibly a little quieter.

Going back to my previous analogy, another way to think of it is this: An overtly limited mix is like the farmer giving the grocer an apple, covered in spots of dirt but already sealed in vacuum packaging. The grocer now has what looks to be a dirty apple, and is unable to clean it due to the tight packaging, and no amount of cleaning the outside, will actually clean the apple inside.

While a grocer could remove the packing, clean it, and re-pack it, in the audio terms, once this packaging or ‘limiting’ has been applied, one cannot remove the packaging, or reverse the process. The audio is forever squashed, and anything the mastering engineer does, will only ever be on top of what has already been applied. Therefore, a dirty apple, within several layers of packaging.

Ultimately, the mastering process, as minor as it is, can also make or break your final recording. It is a crucial and important process that a mix can often benefit from when placed in the right hands.

If you are a musician, engineer or producer and you seek to know more about this process , you are welcome to send tracks for a free assessment to Studios 301 for feedback on the mix, should you be unsure of when a mix is ready for mastering.

While a lot of what is written here covers the general principles of mastering, I must stress that there is also a significant amount here that covers my own personal approach to mastering. Every engineer has their way of doing things, and that is why I personally find this area so fascinating!

We welcome any feedback, commentary, discussion, or questions below.

[written by Sameer Sengupta]

Our studios have existed in a few forms since 1926 and we are arguably the world’s oldest studio complex. But rather than getting hung up on this history, we’d rather use it to learn from our successes and failures, and to continually improve Studios 301 so that we are operating well past 2026.

We also want to share this experience with you and hope that this blog will become a go-to source for musicians, engineers and producers from all backgrounds. Over the coming months, we will be posting articles about mastering, recording, mixing and audio technology, and want to start a conversation with you about music production in all it’s forms – so bookmark the blog now!

We will be bouncing questions and ideas off our team, and sharing those insights with you. Our very talented team includes our senior mastering engineers Leon Zervos and Steve Smart (each with decades of experience), as well as Andrew Edgson, Sameer Sengupta and Ben Feggans who are the leaders of the next generation of mastering engineers.

From a recording perspective, we’ll be sharing the opinions and expertise of Nick DiDia, with his unique “American” experience of music and production. Plus Tim Carr, Simon Todkill, Jordan Power, Simon Cohen and Jack Prest – all 301 based producers, with skills in genres from folk to hip hop, electronic & orchestral music, to straight up rock’n’roll.

And last but not least, the brains behind our custom equipment – Stephen Crane – will be on hand to share his wisdom (when we can pull him away from his workshop, neck deep in work!)

If there is anything in particular that you want to know about, we encourage you to post in the comments below, or on our Facebook Timeline. We will take everything on board for any upcoming articles.

In the meantime, here are some other people doing great stuff:

Audio Technology Magazine

Macprovideo.com

Gearslutz.com

Liveschool.net

Anthony Garvin

General Manager

Studios 301