Mastering Plugin -- Help me Pick?

[glowrak guy]

Are there any other options/tips/etc?
Thanks!

A bootable AVLinux dvd has the Harrison Mixbus demo for testing.
Harrison have grouped a default set of plugins with a very nice sound,
which may be just about 'enough', if it suits your music style,
or possibly a valuable and easily accessed alternative for various uses.
Being ardour based, it should be easy for you to experiment. It goes on
sale quite often, and the upcoming V4.0 will be free to recent interim purchasers.
Cheers

[mclstr]

This post is mainly about technique and not so much about which mastering plugins to use.

This is mainly advice for those that are relatively new to mixing,

I am a long time recording, mix, mastering engineer and producer and most of the great engineers I've worked with agree, try do as little as possible to the mix/mastering stage.

EQ, compression, effects,..., when mixing, go to the individual tracks that need the work, not the mix buss.

I do always use a peak limiter on the master insert or out, but rarely anything else. I may have eq and compressor plugins on most of my individual or group tracks though.

There are exceptions to this guideline of course, but in most cases your mix will benefit if you focus on the individual tracks.

[bluebell]

I used Jamin for some time and it wasn't a resource hog.

Now my dream team for mastering sits in my Qtractor's Master out bus and is (in this order):

- CALF EQ
- CALF Multiband Compressor
- CALF Saturator
- CALF Multiband Limiter

Be sure to use the same crossover-frequencies in Compressor and Limiter.

[jonetsu]

Are there any other options/tips/etc?

There's Tracktion's MasterMix which is a mastering plugin by itself, pre/post EQ, multiband compressor, limiter and gate. It goes back to some 15 years ago I think, when it was made by Mackie (console maker) so it's not really new, meaning it had bug fixes and refinements. It has a series of presets for different types of mastering. There's no manual bundled with, but there's this one from the Mackie days:

https://www.manualslib.com/manual/37688 ... ktion.html

The interface stayed the same. There are also many presets from those times.

There's also a 1-hour tutorial on Groove3 for $10 (one month pass - there might be other tutorials of interest along this one)

Sound On Sound review:

http://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/tra ... master-mix

I got MasterMix recently and tried it on one piece so far, 'jiji' :

https://soundcloud.com/nominal6/jiji

For that one I've chosen the preset 'Final Master' as is, no tweaks. I found it added a bit of separation, which was nice. I still have to spend some time trying out this plugin. BTW, that piece kind of turns around endlessly, which was the idea there, kind of 'mixing' the feeling of movement while staying basically at the same spot, like sitting in a train, with the noises here and there being things going by in the window. It was put together in Bitwig, mixed in Mixbus 32C, then 'masterized' (still new at that) in another Mixbus 32C session.

Otherwise I use Harrison's Mastering EQ, Presswerk (Limiter), and Satin (bypass Mixbus tape master tape saturation). I'm not yet using a multiband compressor, learning about it these days.

Cheers.

[antiesen]

There's Tracktion's MasterMix which is a mastering plugin by itself, pre/post EQ, multiband compressor, limiter and gate. It goes back to some 15 years ago I think, when it was made by Mackie (console maker) so it's not really new, meaning it had bug fixes and refinements. It has a series of presets for different types of mastering. There's no manual bundled with, but there's this one from the Mackie days:

Sorry, but no - Tracktion´s Mastermix is not the same as Mackies Final Mix. It is a different plugin, but Tracktion did recreate the functionalty of Final Mix.

[jonetsu]

Sorry, but no - Tracktion´s Mastermix is not the same as Mackies Final Mix. It is a different plugin, but Tracktion did recreate the functionalty of Final Mix.

Indeed. Thanks. I stand corrected. Music Radar explicitly states it:

It's based on the Final Mix plugin that shipped with Tracktion when it was owned by Mackie. However, as the new owners don't own the rights to that particular module, they have - with Mackie's consent - rewritten it from scratch.

Furthermore Sound On Sound specifies that the original developer of Final Mix, Stoller, did the rewrite:

With their ever-increasing sophistication, such tools don’t tend to come cheap, so Tracktion developer Julian Storer’s reinvention of his Final Mix mastering suite is an affordably welcome development

[Bree]

Good stuff! I've been trying out different techniques since I last stopped in. Normally I do go track by track... but I'm mired with being handed an already compressed track that I find ... well... let's just say it has weird levels. Long story short... I thought there's only so much I can do given the state it's in but the artist differs in opinion.

That said... I do think I've gotten better results since the thread opened and I've taken the LSP (vst) set for a spin. Very impressive and it allows me to stay within my preferred DAW. I'm still open to other options but LSP is pretty mind-blowing given that I tend to rely on LV2 plugins, but can't use them without switching DAWS or opening up an LV2 host ... which sometimes doesn't seem to go so well. Not sure why...I think my routing is wrong.

[sadko4u]

That said... I do think I've gotten better results since the thread opened and I've taken the LSP (vst) set for a spin. Very impressive and it allows me to stay within my preferred DAW. I'm still open to other options but LSP is pretty mind-blowing given that I tend to rely on LV2 plugins, but can't use them without switching DAWS or opening up an LV2 host ... which sometimes doesn't seem to go so well. Not sure why...I think my routing is wrong.

That's mostly the problem of other hosts (that started as non-linux products) that they don't support LV2. Probably because LV2 is sometimes hard to support. Anyway, currently LV2 is the main standard of plugins for the Linux platform, and LinuxVST is only compatibility standard. So if you use REAPER or Renoise, or something else, and don't want to leave them, there is only one way: ask the support about when they are planning to start LV2 support under Linux platform.

[ssj71]

Probably because LV2 is sometimes hard to support.

well, I think its just because they already write support for other plugin formats on other OS's and LV2 probably has fewer plugins and users than the more common formats, so they don't prioritize it.

So if you use REAPER or Renoise, or something else, and don't want to leave them, there is only one way: ask the support about when they are planning to start LV2 support under Linux platform.

+1
though you should just ask for LV2 support on all platforms. it would be nice to spread it to other systems too.

[jonetsu]

That's mostly the problem of other hosts (that started as non-linux products) that they don't support LV2. Probably because LV2 is sometimes hard to support. Anyway, currently LV2 is the main standard of plugins for the Linux platform, and LinuxVST is only compatibility standard. So if you use REAPER or Renoise, or something else, and don't want to leave them, there is only one way: ask the support about when they are planning to start LV2 support under Linux platform.

What would be the advantages for a VST developer to make the changes required to support LV2 when they can keep VST and make it LinuxVST ? I mean, wouldn't imposing LV2 counter-productive to have popular VSTs ported to Linux or, for a new VST product, to get the extra effort to make LV2 for only a few more sales ?

[sadko4u]

What would be the advantages for a VST developer to make the changes required to support LV2 when they can keep VST and make it LinuxVST ? I mean, wouldn't imposing LV2 counter-productive to have popular VSTs ported to Linux or, for a new VST product, to get the extra effort to make LV2 for only a few more sales ?

There are no advantages. But if many users will ask for this feature, I think, they have no way.

[ssj71]

What would be the advantages for a VST developer to make the changes required to support LV2 when they can keep VST and make it LinuxVST ? I mean, wouldn't imposing LV2 counter-productive to have popular VSTs ported to Linux or, for a new VST product, to get the extra effort to make LV2 for only a few more sales ?

LV2 has a few advantages, like better host-plugin integration capabilities (like being able to designate which port is a sidechain input). But mostly I think the comment was more toward hosts/DAW developers, rather than plugin devs.

[Luc]

LV2 has a few advantages,

And the huge disadvantage of isolation, the one single problem that Linux users still have for choosing to use Linux, and the main roadblock in the way of widespread acceptance.

[ssj71]

And the huge disadvantage of isolation, the one single problem that Linux users still have for choosing to use Linux, and the main roadblock in the way of widespread acceptance.

I honestly don't know what you mean. We indeed have a chicken and egg problem in linux audio that there is not much support because there are not many users because there's not much support because there aren't that many users. But you either use it and help break the cycle or don't and let others fight it.

[Luc]

Most people love and use MP3. People who take audio more seriously will likely prefer WAV or FLAC. Who ever uses OGG? Richard Stallman? Certainly nobody who is not a Linux user. I understand the reasons for OGG, but that doesn't really work very well in practice. ANY piece of consumer grade audio equipment you buy will support MP3. Will it support OGG? Hmmm... not many.

I wonder if so many Linux plugins are only available in LV2 (no VST) out of politics/ideology, similar to OGG. Either way, the bottom line is I never use any of the LV2 plugins. Wanna hear about some great plugins? Well, I can only recommend Windows plugins, because that's what works for me. LSP plugins are among the few exceptions, because Vladimir has the good sense to provide his plugins in multiple formats.

I sure wish Tracktion and Bitwig would support LV2, but can we really blame them for not supporting it? Are they being stubborn? Yes, maybe. But even more so is the Linux camp by insisting on LV2 and living in a bubble, while the rest of the world is making lots of music with their beloved VSTs. Many people here seem to love Reaper. Is it going to support LV2 when it's ready? I doubt it. Then there goes another DAW that cannot use LV2 plugins. That is self inflicted isolation.