• Wondering which camera, gear, computer, or software to buy? Ask in our Gear Guide.

Audio mastering question.

I asked one of my friends to help me to master audio tracks, and noticed in his set up that all of his tracks are bussed into MasterComp track, that runs compresors. But then MasterComp track is bussed into Bounce track as well. Why is that?

I would ask him, but he is gone for next couple of days and I'm just dying from curiosity lol

NewBitmapImage-1_zps2fbd27d1.png
 
If it's for film you don't master, you just mix. And, unless you are going exclusively for web distribution, you don't compress the entire mix.

That's not to say that you can't use compression/limiting on individual tracks or sounds, or even on a sub-buss. I put a VERY LIGHT compressor on the dialog track (2:1 or 3:1) to give the dialog just a little more "pop" and a limiter as a safety (although you shouldn't really need it). I also use compression on gunshots and other loud sounds to give them more perceived loudness so I can pull them back into the mix.

Music is another issue entirely, but we won't get into the extreme compression and volume wars discussion here.
 
Yeah, the approach to movie sound is different than for music albums. Commercial music is compressed to death. Compression in film is usually used only to control levels when recording.

Some say not to use limiters / loudness maximizers, but for direct to DVD movies I don't know how else you can get levels to match other commercial releases. Otherwise you have to turn your TV up to like 80% just to get a normal level.
 
What you do depends on the distribution channel. In theatrical releases you don't use stem compression or limiting, except perhaps a tiny amount of gentle compression on the dialogue stem. For other distribution channels compression and limiting is used, the amount depends on the delivery spec of the broadcaster or distributor.

The setup used by your friend is not the setup used professionally. Pretty much all distributors and broadcasters require a range of deliverables, which virtually always means various individual stems. Normally the channel outputs would be routed to a stem buss which would be compressed (except in theatrical releases). The outputs of the stem busses would be both recorded and routed to the full mix and M&E busses which would have a limiter inserted (again, except for theatrical releases).

BTW, be careful using the term "mastering", which has a different meaning in the music biz to what the term means in film/TV.

Compression in film is usually used only to control levels when recording.

I don't know where you got this from but it appears to be another one of your completely invented, misleading and incorrect statements. For everyone else, compression is not used in this way in film and you should NOT use compression to control levels when recording!

G
 
I don't know where you got this from but it appears to be another one of your completely invented, misleading and incorrect statements. For everyone else, compression is not used in this way in film and you should NOT use compression to control levels when recording!
G
For anyone who wants to try and record ADR without some compression GOOD LUCK!
 
For anyone who wants to try and record ADR without some compression GOOD LUCK!

If you can't record decent ADR within the 100dB or so dynamic range provided by most audio interfaces without the use of compression you've got some extremely serious faults with your recording equipment or some extremely serious faults with your knowledge of recording ADR!!

No one ever records ADR with compression! Come on, fess up, you're just trolling!

G
 
If you can't record decent ADR within the 100dB or so dynamic range provided by most audio interfaces without the use of compression you've got some extremely serious faults with your recording equipment or some extremely serious faults with your knowledge of recording ADR!!

No one ever records ADR with compression! Come on, fess up, you're just trolling!

G
Sounds like you're the troll. Distortion is unacceptable. -100 db is unacceptable too. Nice signal to noise ratio there if you find stuff at -100 db acceptable.
 
Audio engineers who do music mixing also get irritated by the current trend of adding lots of compression to music. They cry about how Doobie Brothers and Steely Dan albums sound so dynamic and great and why do people nowadays have to make their mixes sound so loud and compressed. People like in your face mixes.

When you have someone in for ADR you may only get one chance to record a good take of yelling from perhaps 12 inches away from the mic. And signal to noise ratio is critical. Record too low and you start introducing too much noise. I've never heard of recording stuff at down to 100 db. Bring that up to an audible level and you're gonna hear nothing but 60 cycle hum.
 
Sounds like you're the troll. Distortion is unacceptable. -100 db is unacceptable too. Nice signal to noise ratio there if you find stuff at -100 db acceptable.

Who said anything about recording at -100dB? If you cannot set your mic-pre appropriately to capture every nuance of ADR with a 100dB or so of dynamic range to play with, then you need to go and learn a few absolute basics of sound recording. From the sound of it, you have an earth loop fault and you obviously don't seem to realise that you need to cure that problem rather than ignoring it and trying to record so hot you clip the inputs, not to mention the mic-pre noise you are adding to your ADR by having the gain so high. Lastly, why on earth are you having someone yelling only 12" from the mic? You really, REALLY need to learn some sound recording basics before you start trying to advise others and you need to learn a great deal more than the basics if you are going to contradict those who do it for a living!

Why do you say he's trolling? He's just trying to help. Not everyone here is an "audio expert".

Agreed, not everyone here is an audio expert but then how many people here (who aren't audio experts) would contradict technical advice given by those who are audio experts and provide totally incorrect advice? I can't see how that is "trying to help", except maybe his own ego. In fact, Blade's incorrect info/advice is doing the exact opposite of helping, which constitutes trolling and is precisely why I called him out on it. You should also be aware that this is by no means the first time that Blade has tried to hijack an audio related thread by spouting a bunch of complete nonsense!

G
 
For anyone who wants to try and record ADR without some compression GOOD LUCK!

We just did an ADR session over the weekend where I was finally able to use a mixer/mic-preamp between the DR40 and the mic. WOW, what a difference the mixer made, there's essentially no noise and the audio is perfect. There's no way in heck we're going to need to compress that at all. In fact, it's so good, we're going to have to work hard on matching it with the rest of the audio.

Not sure what you were meaning here at all...

CraigL
 
Why is this? I always find mastering my sounds makes everything sound nicer. I also do it if I want to change the way the voice sounds, like Bane.

It just is. Because film sound is one of the few sonically dynamic audio mediums left. As I mentioned, unless it is being mixed exclusively for internet distribution, I have never been at a film/TV mix session where the rerecording mixers added compression to the entire mix. Yes, individual sounds may be compressed, and, as I also mentioned, some very light compression (2:1, 3:1) may be put on the dialog buss, but never the whole mix.

If you want to argue the point you may want to join, or at least monitor, a few of the audio post groups on LinkedIn or over at the GS site. These are all folks who do this for a living, with the IMDB credits, Oscars and Emmys to prove it.
 
We just did an ADR session over the weekend where I was finally able to use a mixer/mic-preamp between the DR40 and the mic. WOW, what a difference the mixer made, there's essentially no noise and the audio is perfect. There's no way in heck we're going to need to compress that at all. In fact, it's so good, we're going to have to work hard on matching it with the rest of the audio.

Not sure what you were meaning here at all...

ADR often does need a little gentle compression in audio post but that depends on: The nature of the voice, the dialogue being spoken, what's going on in the rest of the mix and what the distribution channel is going to be. What BladeJones is suggesting and what I'm strongly disagreeing with is that ADR should actually be recorded with compression!

Why is this? I always find mastering my sounds makes everything sound nicer. I also do it if I want to change the way the voice sounds, like Bane.

Changing the way the voice (or any sound) sounds is part of the mixing process. It sounds like you are confusing the terms mixing and mastering. Mastering in music is where the EQ of the mix is tweaked so the mix sounds as good as possible on a wide range of playback devices and where heavy limiting is employed to maximise the level and usually reduce the dynamic range. Mastering in Film/TV refers to the process of print-mastering, which is the recording of the deliverables (the stems, M&E and complete mix for example) to optical disk, tape, computer file or a combination. In the case of 35mm film, the Dolby soundtrack is printed to an optical disk (the print master) which is then transferred to the 35mm sound negative. Mastering in Film/TV should not affect the sound at all. In music the term mastering (shortened from the correct term; pre-mastering) originally meant changing the sonic characteristics (EQ and energy levels) of the mix to compensate for the sonic characteristics of cutting and replaying vinyl records. There is no vinyl compensation required in film or TV and so there is no pre-mastering phase, the other correctional roles of the music mastering engineer are done in film/TV during mixing by the re-recording mixers. In the case of something like Bane's voice, the re-recording mixers would be working to the instructions of the Sound Designer/Supervising Sound Editor and ultimately of course the Director.

G
 
The basic break down is that mixing is the appropriate word most of the time as it covers almost every stage of the work done on sound. Mastering is just the final stage, done to provide a final layer of polish to a product that is already mixed. As others have pointed out, mastering in films is less extensive than in music as you apply little to no compression.

Things to remember: One does not replace the other. In the same way you can't polish a turd, you can't master a shit mix and expect a great result. It works both ways, you can't have a great mix and then master it badly. In both cases you'll end up with bad audio.
 
ADR often does need a little gentle compression in audio post but that depends on: The nature of the voice, the dialogue being spoken, what's going on in the rest of the mix and what the distribution channel is going to be. What BladeJones is suggesting and what I'm strongly disagreeing with is that ADR should actually be recorded with compression!
Now the troll / angry engineer is finally correcting himself. I stand vindicated.
 
In a nutshell.......

"Mastering" when applied to the audio soundtrack of a film is the strictly technical process of mating the completed mix to the picture for distribution purposes.

Currently the term "Mastering" when applied to music is re-EQing the final studio mix so that it sounds consistent over a wide variety of platforms - radio, TV, stereo, ear buds, computer speakers. The last 10 to 15 years or so it has also come to mean applying huge amounts of compression in an effort to make the songs seem louder.

Back in the early and mid parts of the 20th Century "mastering" was only preparing the master disk so that the records could be duplicated. During the 60's and 70's it became re-EQing the final studio mix. There were some truly "magical" mastering engineers, and the thought processes and approaches were very different than today. Concept albums were popular, so mastering engineers would (among with all the other things they did) very slightly increase the high end as the album progressed - your ears get "tired" over long periods of concentrated listening and you lose the higher frequencies. Singles (45rpm) were also individually mastered apart from the album mix, and, quite frequently, there was a separate radio mix/master.
 
Now the troll / angry engineer is finally correcting himself. I stand vindicated.
Erm, no, he didn't correct himself, he corrected you. You said "record with compression", he said "add compression after you record". It's COMPLETELY different. You should know that if you're such a pro and the fact that you don't goes a long way to proving everything that's been said about you in this thread.
I have nothing against you personally because you've not tried to stand on my toes yet, but this thread is full of whining and arguing, and APE is right, more than one person has even agreed with him (and now I am too), so back off. Pick your battles, preferably ones you know you can win.
I know it's a big ego game, but it's not worth it.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top