Professional Mastering - Analog & Digital
Professional Mastering
249K+ subscribers
Believe it or not, this is, at least in my opinion, the most challenging part of the chain.
We have a few options, each bringing something unique, so picking a preamp is a highly subjective process.
Here I have 3 options - a modded Neve 1081, a 1073, and an API. Again, subjective, but here are some things to consider.
First, use a line input setting - it’ll impart very subtle harmonic distortion, whereas a mic setting will likely be far too aggressive in the long run.
If a sub-cut is available, that can be useful, especially when paired with a boost to the lows.
I wouldn’t recommend anything higher than 30Hz - so the 1081 and API preamps will let you accomplish this; however, the 50Hz cut on this 1073 removes too much, at least to my ear.
It depends on the track, but more often than not, a subtle dip with a bell around 250Hz cleans up aggressive lows and demasks important, clarifying high mids.
A small boost to the kick’s fundamental - usually between 50-100Hz - a small boost to the upper register of the vocal between 3-5kHz, and a subtle high shelf accomplish a lot with very little.
I usually don’t enjoy hum or buzz in a plugin, but if it’s low in amplitude, then, like dithering, it decreases the perception of quantization distortion through randomized masking.
Lastly, since we’re introducing some harmonic distortion, oversampling will help retain the original sound of the high-frequency range.
So, let’s listen to all 3. I prefer the 1081 recreation and will use that moving forward, but let me know if you think the 1073 or API suited the track better. Also, the track we’re using in our demos is from a Sage Audio client with the artist name Bomethius. He was kind enough to let us use his mix for this video, so I’ll leave a link to his music in the description - check him out if you enjoy the song.
Watch the video to learn more >
You might see 1dB of compression and think, ‘What’s the point of that?’
But, as we’ll see later, subtle compression early on can reduce or completely negate the need for brickwall limiting at the end of a master chain.
Also, 1dB of attenuation from a Fairchild, even its plugin counterpart, significantly improves the fullness and detail of a signal.
It’s a vari-mu compressor, so no matter the time constant, it moves somewhat slowly and holds on a bit longer. Slower settings may sound great on the right source material, but even with subtle attenuation, I prefer to more or less retain the original transient’s shape.
I know I said we wouldn’t get too technical, but looking behind the scenes, we’ll notice significant harmonic distortion, even with just 1dB of attenuation. This particular version also introduces a lot of modulation and non-linearities, which we can observe with a Hammerstein test.
The point being, a little goes a long way here, and we can add a lot of complexity with seemingly subtle settings.
I decided to use linked stereo compression and save stereo expansion for the next processing step, but I recommend trying independent left/right and mid/side compression in case it works better for your track.
Let’s take a listen and notice how the attenuation is almost imperceptible, yet the harmonic distortion and other modulation add some nice complexity.
Watch the video to learn more >
I won’t lie, this processor challenged me - it’s sensitive, and each function interacts more than I’m used to from a plugin.
If you end up using it or a similar Neve 2254-style plugin, just know that gain staging, primarily carefully controlling the input level, is crucial - it’s a lot less forgiving than most plugins, just like the hardware.
Now, with a lot of attention paid to the input, the limit-in setting, the trim setting, the output, and a close eye on your meters, this limiter can sound great as a chain’s final limiter.
Personally, I enjoy using this plugin in parallel, since it’s a great way to quickly control dynamics, then bring up the low-level signal.
For this track, a slow limiter with a fast compressor, and the original units’ fixed ratio, worked really well. The limiter absolutely leveled the signal, while the 50ms release time from the compressor brought back some transient detail.
By delinking the channels into mid and side, I was able to create a dense side image with attenuation and increased amplitude relative to the mid channel. When blended back in with the original signal, we get a super dense, controlled, and wide sound.
Like the Fairchild, this plugin introduces a lot of complexity, but given the limiter’s overachieving behavior, I think it works perfectly as a parallel compressor with option stereo expansion via m/s routing.
Let’s take a listen.
Watch the video to learn more >
Classic EQs have retained their relevancy and sought-after sound, not because they're surgical or pinpoint accurate, but becuase their musical.
Typically, if you hear an EQ referred to as a tone-shaper, you know that the changes are gradual, broad, and purposefully limited to what’s most effective.
So, to end the chain, a tone-shaper is perfect, since I can subtly to moderately alter the full response using broad strokes, so to speak.
Before working with this EQ, I didn’t look at an analyzer; I just started making changes until I found what sounded the best.
And if you use this plugin or a similar one, that’s what I’d recommend. Don’t mix visually, don’t get obsessed with the exact changes. Focus on what works, and you’ll have a productive, enjoyable experience.
What you choose is highly subjective, but a nice boost to 50Hz with subtle dips to the lows and low mids almost always creates an impressive sound.
Now, at this point, our chain could be done.
Our true-peak level is good, our LUFS is -13, so this would work as a polished and dynamic, albeit classic-sounding master.
To achieve greater loudness levels, you could use an analog limiter at the end, or maybe compress more than 1dB early on.
However, I really enjoy the current sound, and given the character of these processors, I don’t want to push them harder - I think the sound is right where it needs to be.
That said, if you want a commercially loud sound, maybe -9 or -8 LUFS, and you enjoy the current sound, cleaner, more surgical processing is the best way to end the chain.
I used a linear phase EQ to attenuate the side image lows, and a digital limiter that I like to limit without waveshaping or additional distortion.Capping an analog mastering chain with clean digital processing won’t undo what you introduced with previous analog emulations. It will, or at least should, retain the current timbre while simply achieving the job you need it to do.
So, let’s listen to our chain without limiting - again, it’s reaching -13 LUFS without much peak-down attenuation, aside from the parallel channel. And we only used 4 processors.
Then, I’ll enable the linear phase EQ to cut side image lows, and a limiter that increases the loudness to -9 LUFS, so you can hear how it sounds at a more standard loudness level.