Im a mastering engineer, and approve this message! Short version: It's nearly always best to leave everything on and just take of the final limiting / clipping. Leave bus comp and EQ. If I need something else I'll ask 😊 I want to start with the mix that the artist signed off on, warts and all! If in doubt send multiple files with / without bus processing. Any good mastering engineer will be very cautious to change anything without a very good reason... Watch out for that! happy mixing xx
I have many years experience attending mastering sessions with mastering engineers of my mixes. Releasing albums there was EQ and sequencing, and deciding relative volume and quiet space between songs. They always preferred to do the fades and cross fades, and I loved all that finalizing. So I like getting a bunch of my songs together and mastering in Studio One when releasing an LP or EP since Logic long ago got rid of Wave Burner. What I am working at now is, how much to do in the mix in Logic, how much to stem or blend on my Audient 4816 and 'praps very little left to do in Studio One - just help them hang and sound like they belong together. Unnecessarily complicating things and having a blast trying it all different ways. The possibilities are endless. Wanting to do what's best for the songs and have the most fun is quite entertaining to me.
More acting shots! That was hilarious. This triggered a question for me that I'd like to hear about, and that's how you prepare and package tracks to be sent for vinyl-pressing.
When mastering your own material Studio One is the ideal daw as it has separate mixing and mastering platforms included and these are interlinked so if during the mastering process you won't to back engineer a mix you can do this automatically. 😎
I’m starting to think that they want headroom so they can easily impress clients with louder-is-better. Bus compression and clipping can be part of the mix sound, so I’m more impressed by mastering engineers who can handle anything (being reasonable within the mix, naturally)
Yeah, kinda agree with that. And Intersample peaks that "could" be created by normalizing ur track to 0 before mastering are also absolutely not audible. Do wtvr u want, really. Sound-aesthetics and vibe are something to be concerned with, not headroom.
Extra headroom is for fixed point audio processing which can easily cause clipping. Also, bus compression and other mastering processes applied at the mix stage not only complicate actual mastering but make it pointless in a way. Sure, do what sounds good but a mastering engineer wouldn't take already mastered files and do something with them as it's a waste of their and your time.
@@SomberSkies_000i mean… if catching the occasional peaks using very light bus compression is your vibe then i guess use it, however tastefully bringing things in parallel with your busses within your mix to colour your mix may be what you’re most likely looking for, never cheat yourself you pay the price when you listen back in years to come
I don't partake on most of Wytse's views on this topic, however, I respect them. As a mixing engineering Ive only worked with a very small ammount of mastering engineers (also, studied under one of them) and in my work cycle we prefer the approach of delivering things as close as possible to the final product to the next stage. There isn't really a concern with sending a mix with headroom, actually people I work with strongly advise you to leave all the processing and limiters on because that's what the artist has approved. We don't really expect mastering to change the characteristics of a song, just make it louder, maybe bigger, more cohesive and more pleasant to hear, but also remaining very truthful to the approved mix. Telling people to change something is rare, only if there is a big fundamental problem (as in, not aesthethic decisions). It is more about just having a second pair of capable ears in a great monitoring system giving the final OK to a prodduct that has been the result of several professionals technical and artistical views. As for stem mastering I found it very strange if the mix has been done by a competent professional. Like, the artists approve my mix then I got to bypass all my mixbus processing that had a big role on the sound and then transfer the authority over final balance decisions to somene else. Can I really say it was MY mix at that point? What if the artist does not approve the stem master, requesting changed beacause some groups got louder, brighther, darker and so on? Consistency on getting things right asap also play a part in this equation. "Only steps forward, no step back" kind of mentality. Just some personal reflections
Stem mastering usually is a help for people that are not on the “competent professional” level yet. I think the big value in stem mastering over traditional mastering is what people can learn
This is funny. My mastering engineer tells me to send him the mixes the artist has approved. So with everything on it, including limiters etc. The masters I get back are always incredible, I barely need him to do any revisions and his masters are easily the best I’ve ever heard, even from way bigger name engineers.
I've been releasing music since 2008 with labels and have many releases on beatport etc. I have been supported by many famous dj's and have had around 1million plays on Spotify. I have made $0 from music during that time. The only $ I have made was working independently for others and producing for other people for a grand total of $400
You're guaranteed to make money by working a job that requires at least 8 hours of your day 6 days out of the week. However, art hasn't been a monetary endeavor since... ?
Great food for thought as aways! Speaking of words, it might be useful to point out that the term "premaster" historically had been used to mean what we now call a "master". I think that is because when stamping physical discs, the stamp is the master. So the mastering engineer receives a mix, creates a premaster and then the master (stamp) is created from the premaster by the fabrication plant. What is called a premaster in the video here is really just a finished mix that the mix engineer and clients have signed off on. The tricky thing in reality these days is for the mix engineer to be able to give the client a listen copy that is close-ish in level to what they might expect, hence the need for a 2-buss limiter at the mix stage. I guess words change over time. For example, a producer in the 1960-1990s meant something rather different to a producer in the 2020s.
Great video! And it brings to mind some age-old questions: 1) Could you clarify the nomenclature of Mix Buss versus 2-Buss versus Mater Buss 2) Isn't a "pre-master" in this case just the exported "mix" fromt he client? 3) What are your thoughts on Stem Mastering? 4) Do you have any recommendations RE "unmasking" techniques (for example, sidechaining the VOCAL buss to the SYNTHS buss to carve out space) - should these be applied during the MIX or MASTERING phase : could you clarify this nomenclature? Keep up the great work :)
I mix and master everything in the same session, basically because I noticed once I start the mastering process, I find things in the mix that I want to change (this is probably because I am bad at mixing and/or mastering 🤣)
Thank you so much, Wytse. Your advice, extensive experience and knowledge are always greatly appreciated. One day, if I actually get to make a track worthy of professional mastering, you'll be the one I'll be hoping to get.
As long as the mix sounds good, compressed or not, limited or not, whatever or not, mastering engineers should not get any problem. If a producer/mixer uses masterbus processing, it's to get the sound he wants. To me a good production is a production where it sounds mixed, a good mix is a mix where you tell "hell yeah this sounds finished!", good mastering will be details here and there to improve, correct and make sure it's perfect everywhere out of the room. I used to do mastering, decided to stop and focus on mixing. I do work with a masterbus process with eq, compression, saturators, clip and limit, sounds a lot ? actually is not, it's just minor steps. Mixing is also using tool to mix the entire track. Part of the sound. Each time I send my mixes to my mastering engineers (mostly work with 2 dudes I enjoy a lot) they never had any trouble, because it's controlled. Help them to clean some transients, give better information of my expectation regarding tonal balance and dynamic and so… The main difference in this approach will be the experience of the producer/mixer. If he knows what to do and what will be good or not for mastering, he will use the right tools the right way. Less experienced producer/mixer will do too much or not enough. And getting a "not enough" finished mix for mastering is a pain, let's be honest. In the end, communication is key, experience also is (in all steps so can be done right on each). Sending a file to the mastering dude before he starts "ok I can work on" or "I need some tweaks, here they are" is the best option. As a mixer, I never say "here's te mix, do it with that", I go "here's my mix, if you need some tweaks, just let me know. I can remove extra loudness and so". There are as many different way to work as there are different mixers and mastering engineers, if everything works fine, just go for it.
Thank you for doing these! A lot of great insight. I’d say that any processing on the mix bus should stay, unless it’s at the end of the chain and only for loudness (limiters and so). I render the mix as a premaster with all my mix bus on and that render I slap on a limiter that does no more than 1-2 db of reduction. That is delivered as a client ref to the client and I deliver both the premaster and client ref to the mastering engineer. Not so that the engineer can use it, but so that the engineer can hear exactly what was approved and then (easily) beat that. No mastering engineer here in Denmark ask for a ‘naked’ mix. Ain’t nobody got time for that. It’s too much of a hassle trying to replicate the mix with the processing and making that better. Skip the step and just work with whatever approved mix is supplied
This has evolved over the years but this is my own workflow: * Unless I know what I want or I want to address an issue right then and there, I avoid plugins and just use faders and pan while I am still tracking. * Once I have everything I need, then I go to work with the mixing * I have been using a limiter on the stereo out for in-process mixes and that’s really to bring up the volume as I tend to mix on the quieter side (which becomes important later) * I can experiment with stereo bus processing in the tracking/mixing stage but I do turn those off and transfer whatever ideas I have in the mastering stage. * When I am ready for the mastering stage, my mixdown will have about 6dB of headroom (give or take) as I now have that limiter turned off * I use Wavelab for mastering (Cubase for tracking/mixing) * Whatever ideas I have for the “stereo bus/mix bus processing” is now applied to the clip, which would be my mixdown. * I often like to put transitions and segues between tracks or to have tracks blend into each other. Thus this is why mastering and mixing is separate for me as it would be a tangible to try and do these in the same tracking/mixing session. This will mean that my mixdowns will be longer than what the final runtime will be as to allow for those transitions. * If something becomes apparent during the mastering stage that I know can addressed inside the original tracking/mixing session, I go into there to address the issue and create a new mixdown. * I still believe that in mastering, it’s about optimising your mixdown for your intended medium of distribution. When it comes to an album or an EP or more than one song, it’s about making sure everything “sits well together” and has a good cohesion and coherence.
awesome info! u should actually promote you're work allot more, i think many of us have no idea how you're mix/mastering quality actually is... which could get u much more customers! keep it up!
I think if you mixed trough a limiter, and you are confident enough, you should send to master with the limiter on. Taking off the limiter may change the sound too much.
Asking that question means you're two steps ahead; if you've chosen things with purpose you'll know if it should be on/off in the pre-master. if you've got no idea, maybe try figure out why you chose it in the first place.
What's the point of not clipping peaks (on mixer, not with clipper plugins) and with headroom, if there are floating point formats and you have gain in DAW mixer to unclip audio above 0dBFS before processing, and also set your own levels and headrooms you like? Floating format and gain knob are the key to keep it safe from clipping.
I have personally found that making mixing and mastering an iterative process is definitely time consuming and can affect the actual completion of the project. Having distinct one-way milestones and phases to the project is helpful. It’s a great way to make sure that the project conforms to what is standard for the genre. It’s too easy to let the mastering process become a creative or even compositional element in the song. That kind of defeats the purpose of the mastering process. Usually best to be avoided. However, there are times when we MUST do it in order to “save the track”. Almost without exception, every “second album” is a disaster because the artists insert themselves into parts of the project they have no business being in. What you do is healthy and good. You are a mastering engineer, and that pays the rent. But you are so much more. You are a creative. Having projects that you are part of that involves more than “just” mastering is important, actually, VITAL to you. You are not an assembly-line worker, putting the lug nuts on the Volkswagens as they go past you in the factory. I’m not denigrating “mastering” at all. What you do is extremely important-without your skills, no matter how good the song, if it isn’t mastered correctly, it’s dead. I’ve known several of the top mastering engineers in the world, and they all occupy a rare place of having ears of gold, but most of them are exclusively that-they don’t mix, they don’t play instruments, they do the best at what they do that can be done, because that’s all they do. There is absolutely no chaos in their lives. I appreciate that you are not only real, but you continue to stretch yourself by doing projects or parts of projects outside of your core function.
Very interesting video👍 Have you switch to logic, and if yes it could be cool to have your point of view about chromaglow , the new saturation plugging, especially on tape version😅 Have a good day and thanks for your work 🤘🤘🤘
Whatever is mixed trough needs to be on what the mastering engineer gets. Limiter at the end is not included in this though. This is because even basic decisions has been made within this processing context
Im a mastering engineer, and approve this message! Short version: It's nearly always best to leave everything on and just take of the final limiting / clipping. Leave bus comp and EQ. If I need something else I'll ask 😊 I want to start with the mix that the artist signed off on, warts and all! If in doubt send multiple files with / without bus processing. Any good mastering engineer will be very cautious to change anything without a very good reason... Watch out for that! happy mixing xx
I have many years experience attending mastering sessions with mastering engineers of my mixes. Releasing albums there was EQ and sequencing, and deciding relative volume and quiet space between songs. They always preferred to do the fades and cross fades, and I loved all that finalizing. So I like getting a bunch of my songs together and mastering in Studio One when releasing an LP or EP since Logic long ago got rid of Wave Burner. What I am working at now is, how much to do in the mix in Logic, how much to stem or blend on my Audient 4816 and 'praps very little left to do in Studio One - just help them hang and sound like they belong together. Unnecessarily complicating things and having a blast trying it all different ways. The possibilities are endless. Wanting to do what's best for the songs and have the most fun is quite entertaining to me.
More acting shots! That was hilarious. This triggered a question for me that I'd like to hear about, and that's how you prepare and package tracks to be sent for vinyl-pressing.
Great, i have the same workflow of mix and mstering stacking and i have been always listening the pros telling me that i was doing wrong
When mastering your own material Studio One is the ideal daw as it has separate mixing and mastering platforms included and these are interlinked so if during the mastering process you won't to back engineer a mix you can do this automatically. 😎
I use S1 and love this!!! 🔥🔥🔥
I’m starting to think that they want headroom so they can easily impress clients with louder-is-better. Bus compression and clipping can be part of the mix sound, so I’m more impressed by mastering engineers who can handle anything (being reasonable within the mix, naturally)
Yeah, kinda agree with that. And Intersample peaks that "could" be created by normalizing ur track to 0 before mastering are also absolutely not audible.
Do wtvr u want, really. Sound-aesthetics and vibe are something to be concerned with, not headroom.
Extra headroom is for fixed point audio processing which can easily cause clipping. Also, bus compression and other mastering processes applied at the mix stage not only complicate actual mastering but make it pointless in a way. Sure, do what sounds good but a mastering engineer wouldn't take already mastered files and do something with them as it's a waste of their and your time.
@@chrisknight3734 U think mixbus processing complicates mastering and is pointless?
@@SomberSkies_000i mean… if catching the occasional peaks using very light bus compression is your vibe then i guess use it, however tastefully bringing things in parallel with your busses within your mix to colour your mix may be what you’re most likely looking for, never cheat yourself you pay the price when you listen back in years to come
@@XVIIIPRO So peak control on the mixbus is ok, but not color and vibe? Not sure im getting it right
I don't partake on most of Wytse's views on this topic, however, I respect them. As a mixing engineering Ive only worked with a very small ammount of mastering engineers (also, studied under one of them) and in my work cycle we prefer the approach of delivering things as close as possible to the final product to the next stage.
There isn't really a concern with sending a mix with headroom, actually people I work with strongly advise you to leave all the processing and limiters on because that's what the artist has approved. We don't really expect mastering to change the characteristics of a song, just make it louder, maybe bigger, more cohesive and more pleasant to hear, but also remaining very truthful to the approved mix. Telling people to change something is rare, only if there is a big fundamental problem (as in, not aesthethic decisions). It is more about just having a second pair of capable ears in a great monitoring system giving the final OK to a prodduct that has been the result of several professionals technical and artistical views.
As for stem mastering I found it very strange if the mix has been done by a competent professional. Like, the artists approve my mix then I got to bypass all my mixbus processing that had a big role on the sound and then transfer the authority over final balance decisions to somene else. Can I really say it was MY mix at that point? What if the artist does not approve the stem master, requesting changed beacause some groups got louder, brighther, darker and so on? Consistency on getting things right asap also play a part in this equation. "Only steps forward, no step back" kind of mentality.
Just some personal reflections
Stem mastering usually is a help for people that are not on the “competent professional” level yet. I think the big value in stem mastering over traditional mastering is what people can learn
You don't have to bypass your bus processing on stem mastering. Just deliver your mix in stems.
This is funny. My mastering engineer tells me to send him the mixes the artist has approved. So with everything on it, including limiters etc. The masters I get back are always incredible, I barely need him to do any revisions and his masters are easily the best I’ve ever heard, even from way bigger name engineers.
that single cable in the background had me nuts
Oh, thanks for point that out. Now I see nothing but that.
The view under my desk wil give you a heart attack 😅
😃
shout out for all the producers who cant make any money out there.
I just made $220 for doing a song for someone, the most I’ve made for a standard track
I've been releasing music since 2008 with labels and have many releases on beatport etc. I have been supported by many famous dj's and have had around 1million plays on Spotify. I have made $0 from music during that time. The only $ I have made was working independently for others and producing for other people for a grand total of $400
@@sorenandrews1078 yep. you cant make money with streaming anymore
You're guaranteed to make money by working a job that requires at least 8 hours of your day 6 days out of the week. However, art hasn't been a monetary endeavor since... ?
@@AviOSound People have been making money doing music for a long time. There's just always nobodies complaining that are the loudest.
Great food for thought as aways! Speaking of words, it might be useful to point out that the term "premaster" historically had been used to mean what we now call a "master". I think that is because when stamping physical discs, the stamp is the master. So the mastering engineer receives a mix, creates a premaster and then the master (stamp) is created from the premaster by the fabrication plant.
What is called a premaster in the video here is really just a finished mix that the mix engineer and clients have signed off on.
The tricky thing in reality these days is for the mix engineer to be able to give the client a listen copy that is close-ish in level to what they might expect, hence the need for a 2-buss limiter at the mix stage.
I guess words change over time. For example, a producer in the 1960-1990s meant something rather different to a producer in the 2020s.
Um no.
@@thegoodguy44um, yes.
I prefer the term mixdown. That's what it used to be called back during the tape machine era.
Great video! And it brings to mind some age-old questions:
1) Could you clarify the nomenclature of Mix Buss versus 2-Buss versus Mater Buss
2) Isn't a "pre-master" in this case just the exported "mix" fromt he client?
3) What are your thoughts on Stem Mastering?
4) Do you have any recommendations RE "unmasking" techniques (for example, sidechaining the VOCAL buss to the SYNTHS buss to carve out space) - should these be applied during the MIX or MASTERING phase : could you clarify this nomenclature?
Keep up the great work :)
I like conceptual/workflow mindset vids like this (because I can still listen if I’m doing something else).
I do alternate mixing and mastering. Great stuf.
I mix and master everything in the same session, basically because I noticed once I start the mastering process, I find things in the mix that I want to change (this is probably because I am bad at mixing and/or mastering 🤣)
Your acting is simply great!😅
Thanks 😅
@@Whiteseastudio And the Oscar for best male Actor goes to....😂🎉
Acting?
Do you have a video where you doastering start to finish?
Thank you so much, Wytse. Your advice, extensive experience and knowledge are always greatly appreciated. One day, if I actually get to make a track worthy of professional mastering, you'll be the one I'll be hoping to get.
As long as the mix sounds good, compressed or not, limited or not, whatever or not, mastering engineers should not get any problem.
If a producer/mixer uses masterbus processing, it's to get the sound he wants. To me a good production is a production where it sounds mixed, a good mix is a mix where you tell "hell yeah this sounds finished!", good mastering will be details here and there to improve, correct and make sure it's perfect everywhere out of the room.
I used to do mastering, decided to stop and focus on mixing. I do work with a masterbus process with eq, compression, saturators, clip and limit, sounds a lot ? actually is not, it's just minor steps. Mixing is also using tool to mix the entire track. Part of the sound. Each time I send my mixes to my mastering engineers (mostly work with 2 dudes I enjoy a lot) they never had any trouble, because it's controlled. Help them to clean some transients, give better information of my expectation regarding tonal balance and dynamic and so…
The main difference in this approach will be the experience of the producer/mixer. If he knows what to do and what will be good or not for mastering, he will use the right tools the right way. Less experienced producer/mixer will do too much or not enough. And getting a "not enough" finished mix for mastering is a pain, let's be honest.
In the end, communication is key, experience also is (in all steps so can be done right on each). Sending a file to the mastering dude before he starts "ok I can work on" or "I need some tweaks, here they are" is the best option. As a mixer, I never say "here's te mix, do it with that", I go "here's my mix, if you need some tweaks, just let me know. I can remove extra loudness and so". There are as many different way to work as there are different mixers and mastering engineers, if everything works fine, just go for it.
Super-helpful explanation, thank you!
Thank you for doing these! A lot of great insight. I’d say that any processing on the mix bus should stay, unless it’s at the end of the chain and only for loudness (limiters and so). I render the mix as a premaster with all my mix bus on and that render I slap on a limiter that does no more than 1-2 db of reduction. That is delivered as a client ref to the client and I deliver both the premaster and client ref to the mastering engineer. Not so that the engineer can use it, but so that the engineer can hear exactly what was approved and then (easily) beat that.
No mastering engineer here in Denmark ask for a ‘naked’ mix. Ain’t nobody got time for that. It’s too much of a hassle trying to replicate the mix with the processing and making that better. Skip the step and just work with whatever approved mix is supplied
ah yes, denmark. th e country known for the olsen brothers, aqua and nephew. thanks, but no thanks on the "professional" audio advice
video style reminds me of Panorama Mixing & Mastering (Nicholas), very insightful and engaging!
This has evolved over the years but this is my own workflow:
* Unless I know what I want or I want to address an issue right then and there, I avoid plugins and just use faders and pan while I am still tracking.
* Once I have everything I need, then I go to work with the mixing
* I have been using a limiter on the stereo out for in-process mixes and that’s really to bring up the volume as I tend to mix on the quieter side (which becomes important later)
* I can experiment with stereo bus processing in the tracking/mixing stage but I do turn those off and transfer whatever ideas I have in the mastering stage.
* When I am ready for the mastering stage, my mixdown will have about 6dB of headroom (give or take) as I now have that limiter turned off
* I use Wavelab for mastering (Cubase for tracking/mixing)
* Whatever ideas I have for the “stereo bus/mix bus processing” is now applied to the clip, which would be my mixdown.
* I often like to put transitions and segues between tracks or to have tracks blend into each other. Thus this is why mastering and mixing is separate for me as it would be a tangible to try and do these in the same
tracking/mixing session. This will mean that my mixdowns will be longer than what the final runtime will be as to allow for those transitions.
* If something becomes apparent during the mastering stage that I know can addressed inside the original tracking/mixing session, I go into there to address the issue and create a new mixdown.
* I still believe that in mastering, it’s about optimising your mixdown for your intended medium of distribution. When it comes to an album or an EP or more than one song, it’s about making sure everything “sits well together” and has a good cohesion and coherence.
i never thought using stems for mastering. i will try it! :-)
Hello man!, are you still offering the "advice" service from your website?
love the shirt ngl
Good video, thanks mate.
awesome info! u should actually promote you're work allot more, i think many of us have no idea how you're mix/mastering quality actually is... which could get u much more customers! keep it up!
Thanks for the insight. Appreciate ya!
I think if you mixed trough a limiter, and you are confident enough, you should send to master with the limiter on. Taking off the limiter may change the sound too much.
Do you still use Reaper?
Asking that question means you're two steps ahead; if you've chosen things with purpose you'll know if it should be on/off in the pre-master.
if you've got no idea, maybe try figure out why you chose it in the first place.
What's the point of not clipping peaks (on mixer, not with clipper plugins) and with headroom, if there are floating point formats and you have gain in DAW mixer to unclip audio above 0dBFS before processing, and also set your own levels and headrooms you like? Floating format and gain knob are the key to keep it safe from clipping.
I have personally found that making mixing and mastering an iterative process is definitely time consuming and can affect the actual completion of the project. Having distinct one-way milestones and phases to the project is helpful. It’s a great way to make sure that the project conforms to what is standard for the genre. It’s too easy to let the mastering process become a creative or even compositional element in the song. That kind of defeats the purpose of the mastering process. Usually best to be avoided. However, there are times when we MUST do it in order to “save the track”. Almost without exception, every “second album” is a disaster because the artists insert themselves into parts of the project they have no business being in.
What you do is healthy and good. You are a mastering engineer, and that pays the rent. But you are so much more. You are a creative. Having projects that you are part of that involves more than “just” mastering is important, actually, VITAL to you. You are not an assembly-line worker, putting the lug nuts on the Volkswagens as they go past you in the factory.
I’m not denigrating “mastering” at all. What you do is extremely important-without your skills, no matter how good the song, if it isn’t mastered correctly, it’s dead. I’ve known several of the top mastering engineers in the world, and they all occupy a rare place of having ears of gold, but most of them are exclusively that-they don’t mix, they don’t play instruments, they do the best at what they do that can be done, because that’s all they do. There is absolutely no chaos in their lives.
I appreciate that you are not only real, but you continue to stretch yourself by doing projects or parts of projects outside of your core function.
short sweet and informative =like it, thanks
Very interesting video👍
Have you switch to logic, and if yes it could be cool to have your point of view about
chromaglow , the new saturation plugging, especially on tape version😅
Have a good day and thanks for your work 🤘🤘🤘
Chromaglow is pretty fabulous. I've found use for on almost any kind of track.
Is it cheeky to ask your client to go back and record things again? - offering pointers and help at the same time
I just do it
@@Whiteseastudio and honesty does take you a long way. If people are going to put money into their work I think this is good advice
Definitely do it. It's possibly unworkable till you do.
There's 1000 roads to Rome. Wytse, I am on your turnpike.
client : how do I send my file ?
me : I got you fam, just watch this video (giving this video link)
How to make a GOOD *mix?
there fixed it :D
Comment for da algorithm
Streak count: 256
is there anyway to make this video 30 seconds ? thats the limit of my attention spans
Whatever is mixed trough needs to be on what the mastering engineer gets. Limiter at the end is not included in this though. This is because even basic decisions has been made within this processing context