Does anybody have any experience with dedicated mastering software, and if so what would they recommend?
I've had pretty limited experience with mastering, which was on ProTools, and it got the job done alright but I'm looking to get dedicated mastering software eventually and wanted to see if anybody had any tips.
Here is a link to some mastering software. http://www.sweetwater.com/c702--Mastering_Software Adobe Audition isn't on there but its a great program for giving a track the final touch. Most decent recording software comes with sufficient plug ins to handle mastering and certainly in Cakewalk Sonar 6 there isn't ay requirement to buy anything else and I assume that Cubase is much the same.
I think everyone will have a different oppinion about what is the best and my answer to that is best is what works for you. Suggest you read reviews
on Mastering Software and make an informed choice. I would say try a free trial of Sonar 6 because it rocks and at the price there isn't much out there to touch it.
http://www.cakewalk.com/Support/kb/kb20061101.asp
Gerry
Those who can't dance always blame the band.
I was mixing on a friends new HD rig today - he had iZotope. Very nice...
Most decent recording software comes with sufficient plug ins to handle mastering and certainly in Cakewalk Sonar 6 there isn't ay requirement to buy anything else and I assume that Cubase is much the same.
Gerry
I have bought Cubase 4 and am just learning to use it but already I've read that I have to have Wavelab for mastering so that's been another outlay. All the musicians I know (and there's plenty around here who earn a living from it) despair at my choice - they all use Macs running Logic Pro. :?
I think it certainly helps to have dedicated software. As it has been pointed out, most DAWs are capable of mastering to a degree. On the other hand I think there is a lot of confusion as to what mastering really is. (look it up http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mastering )I think that a lot of Mastering Engineers will tell you that a mix should sound as good as it possibly can when it's done. And, if it is done well, you shouldn't have to tweak it after the fact. If you do need tweaking, then likely the mix wasn't done well to begin with.
A visit to a professional mastering house might reveal that many MEs still use anologue gear or at the least some form of hardware rather than software. Let's face it. Most software is designed to emulate hardware and often fall short.
Regarding software Wavelab is a start. Audition is another good option. Sequoia and Bias Peak are others. I think that ProTools is still the standard in most cases.
In the end, the purpose of mastering is not to clean up the mess that you made during your mix. It's to prepare a master CD/DVD or (insert intended media) from which all other copies will be made. Hence the term "Mastering".
In the end, the purpose of mastering is not to clean up the mess that you made during your mix. It's to prepare a master CD/DVD or (insert intended media) from which all other copies will be made. Hence the term "Mastering".
I find this whole contribution very helpful.
I like so many different styles that my first CD of my own material is likely to be a real hodge podge from gentle acoustic tunes to 80s style square wave synth stuff. I expect to use mastering mainly to get some consistency between tracks in terms of volume which I believe is called Normalising. There again I may 'bottle-it' (lose my nerve) and give it to a pro to do :?
Don't give up before you try. You might be good at it. 8)
