--Low Frequency low-off at bewtween 50->72Hz, because you usually 
don't need anything below 50Hz. Otherwise you get too much rumble
and sonic mud. 

--Find the spot where it aliases, then dial it back and limit the 
highest highs to keep any aliasing and out-of-band noise from 
creeping in.

--Compression,... yeah what the others have said. DO NOT COMPRESS
AN ENTIRE MIX, it sounds really funky,.... unless that's the effect
you're going for. And I certainly hope you're not.

Compress individual elements, IF and ONLY IF YOU ABSOLUTELY NEED IT.
Don't compress too much it will alter you frequency spectrum. You 
compress a signal, you compress the whole frequency range of that
signal. Unless you have a plug-in with multiband compression. My 
Digital Performer-4 has that, frequency band selective compression.

Compressing more than -2dB, you risk "pumping" and "breathing"
artifacts, so use it sparingly.

--Limiter,.... similar problem, don't limit more than a dB or two, 
or you get "pumping and breathing" effects that are more amplitude 
related and less frequency related. Over limiting sounds bad. Use 
it sparingly.

--Reverb,.... with individual elemnts, use small room short time 
verbing. For overall mix/mastering, just a smidgion of large space
verbing. You CAN NOT PUT A LARGE ROOM INTO A SMALL ROOM, it won't 
work in 3-dimensional space, it won't work in virtual space either.

--EQ,.... EQ individual elements to their ranges, give them their 
place in space and frequency. Then do an overal mix/master EQ, it
will make more sense to the ear from a spatial and spectral point 
of view.

Sorry for any shout CAPS, I'd use bold or italics, but this email
composition window has some limitations beyond plain generic fonts.


cheers,
-partev


==================================================================



--- khirai@ongaku.isa-geek.net wrote:

From: kelly  hirai 
To: csound@lists.bath.ac.uk
Subject: Re: [Csnd] Mastering
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2011 10:01:02 -0400 (EDT)

playback environment is a major consideration. live shows would mix a 
heavely compressed and bandwidth limited mix for broadcast because back in 
the day, tv sound was through a 3" paper speaker. sometimes i'd be 
listening to SNL's musical guest and half the band would be mixed out to 
keep it uncluttered. everything super dry except for the soloists.

you would take your cd masters around to boom boxes, cars and various home 
hifi situations to get some perspective on how you mix was going to be 
heard, how it would stand up to heavy eq'ing, distortion. not much 
reverb in a living room or car so you make your own space. this is what i 
think of when i think of mastering.

that said, and on the topic of multi speaker sound environments, half of 
the speakers i have are in guitar amps. i have a multi channel card, i 
should try a tape composition for pa and backline he he. jumping aroud 
stage stomping on stomp boxes... he he! ooh, gears are a 
turning.

k.

On Thu, 11 Aug 2011, peiman khosravi wrote:

> Hi Michael,

My response follows below.

On 10 August 2011 21:41, Michael Bechard  wrote:

> Regarding reverb, why would you think it is so much better for a sound to
> evoke space on its own instead of adding reverb to it? If the reverb sounds
> good and it evokes the exact feel you want from it, then what's the problem?
> Reverb has been used to great effect by a great many producers and
> musicians. Hell, even orchestras choose to play in particular concert halls
> because of the acoustics those spaces offer.
>
> The experience of the inherent spatiality of a sonic context is not the
same as recreating an acoustic environment and essentially imposing it on
another environment, because the buttom line is you are always going to hear
it as reverb. For me at least one of the skills of mixing is the ability to
create spaces in a sophisticated way. And as soon as you begin to think of
sounds as being inherently spatial then your ears no longer hear reverb as
spatiality but as a distracting peripheral artifact. It is a shift of
listening consciousness from thinking what you hear is space to actually
experiencing space. And I am not just saying don't use a reverb plug-in (use
it but not as reverb). Some spectral processes (e.g. blurring) can easily
end up sounding like reverb if one is not careful, and I do my best to avoid
this too. My problem is not with reverb tools themselves but the perception
of reverb, because it immediately kills the magic by revealing the trick
(same can be said with arbitrary dynamic panning of sounds). It shifts your
listening focus.

The situation is quite different with instrumental concert music and pop
music production where reverbration (real or fake) becomes a cultural
artifact, part of the package or 'timbre' of the music. My point is use
reverb but only if you actually want the "experienced" listener to hear
reverb because it will not sound ecologically coherent. Hearing space is
altogether another thing and I think should be tackled during the
composition process (not as a final add-on) in a deep and complex manner
that it deserves. And to expand I think there is a similar issue with
obvious close-miked sounds that literally evoke the 'microphone space'.
Unless used consciously and carefully this can so easily ruin the composer's
intended effect by putting the listener in the studio space and distracting
her from the sounds themselves.

In the end, reverb is just another tool in our acoustic tool-belt, meant to
> be used whenever the occasion calls for it.
>
> Then yes I agree on this one, I just don't think it should be used in
concert electroacoustic music :-)

I'll shut up now!

Best,

Peiman

> Michael Bechard
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* peiman khosravi 
> *To:* csound@lists.bath.ac.uk
> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 10, 2011 1:34 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [Csnd] Mastering
>
> My answer to all your questions would be no. I may compress individual
> sounds but never a whole track. You don't want to flatten the dynamics in
> your piece. In a diffusion context the first rule is not to 'fight' your
> dynamics but exaggerate them: lower the levels in a quite section and push
> them a bit in the loud climaxes!
>
> And the same goes for reverb. I just think that reverb is such a cheap way
> to 'evoke' space. Your sounds will [should] naturally create their own
> spaces and should not need extra 'spatiality' injected by a fake [sounding!]
> room acoustics . If they do then there is something missing in the mix in
> the first place (I have not listened to your tracks so I am not making a
> comment about your music at all).
>
> Best,
>
> Peiman
>
> On 10 August 2011 19:24, Drweski nicolas  wrote:
>
> Hi Csounders !
>
> I am finishing a project with voice and "tape". I am in the final part, and
> I am asking me if I should :
> 1 - Put reverb on the voice (actually it have a little an a compressor)
> 2 - compress the voice and the tape audio together (doing a mastering of
> it). And in that case, what opcode would you advice me.
> I would like to have your feedback. What do you think would be good to do
> on the the sound aspect ? On the voice, the tape or both ? Does anyone here
> that, composing an ensemble of electroacoustic pieces, are making a
> mastering (equalisation, compression, reverb), as it will be.
> Here are the extracts of the work :
>
> http://soundcloud.com/acousrama/1-coeur-rouge-australie
> http://soundcloud.com/acousrama/5-murmure-indien
> http://soundcloud.com/acousrama/6-coucher-de-soleil
> http://www.acousrama.net/le-petit-prince.mp3
>
> *N*. *D*rweski
>
> acousrama  : site web
> L'espace acoustique  : Les
> approches
> danse acousmatique  :
> esthétique
> Les mamelons de Vénus  :
> instrument musical
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
             https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"
Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"





_____________________________________________________________
Netscape.  Just the Net You Need.
Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"

Right, unless there are only a few discrete components that can be  
filtered out with some noise cleaning software. Also, what SR were you  
using to have
96K signals in your piece, > 192KHz?

Victor


On 11 Aug 2011, at 11:41, peiman khosravi wrote:

> What you are saying seems interesting, but I would have though that  
> if materials are already aliased then there is nothing to be done  
> about them right?

Dr Victor Lazzarini
Senior Lecturer
Dept. of Music
NUI Maynooth Ireland
tel.: +353 1 708 3545
Victor dot Lazzarini AT nuim dot ie





Send bugs reports to the Sourceforge bug tracker
            https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=81968&atid=564599
Discussions of bugs and features can be posted here
To unsubscribe, send email sympa@lists.bath.ac.uk with body "unsubscribe csound"