04-02-2014, 05:58 AM
I'm curious... are you 100% opposed to processing on the master channel? I try to avoid it whenever possible, but I don't really take a dogmatic stance (I try to avoid that whenever possible, too).
In my opinion, sometimes a little EQ on the master bus can provide a smooth and natural-sounding lift in a way that EQing all the individual tracks can't do... the way I think about it, if you have to boost EQ, you're effectively using a pre-amp and introducing distortion on some level, however subliminal. So rather than introducing distortion that might limit my mastering options in the endgame over 20 tracks individually, sometimes I'll use an EQ to add clarity to the highs, or use it to tame the inevitable buildup of low mid frequencies.
I've also seen examples of people using extremely light reverb inserts on the master bus as mix glue with good results, though I prefer saturation personally.
I guess some folks are of the opinion that the sort of master bus processing I'm talking about should be saved for the mastering phase, and if I had the resources to have my music professionally mastered, I'd probably let the million dollar ears make those judgements, but for home-brew music, I like the results I get... I'm not usually going for slick, glossy productions like modern mastering is geared toward anyway.
The main question I'm asking (purely out of curiosity.. to learn and understand another artist's style and approach) is why you're opposed to it. Obviously it's a bit of a broad brushstrokes technique, so any decision you make can affect more than what you intended, but sometimes I can't find another way to get the results that I'm after without shooting myself in the foot by overprocessing tracks individually.
In my opinion, sometimes a little EQ on the master bus can provide a smooth and natural-sounding lift in a way that EQing all the individual tracks can't do... the way I think about it, if you have to boost EQ, you're effectively using a pre-amp and introducing distortion on some level, however subliminal. So rather than introducing distortion that might limit my mastering options in the endgame over 20 tracks individually, sometimes I'll use an EQ to add clarity to the highs, or use it to tame the inevitable buildup of low mid frequencies.
I've also seen examples of people using extremely light reverb inserts on the master bus as mix glue with good results, though I prefer saturation personally.
I guess some folks are of the opinion that the sort of master bus processing I'm talking about should be saved for the mastering phase, and if I had the resources to have my music professionally mastered, I'd probably let the million dollar ears make those judgements, but for home-brew music, I like the results I get... I'm not usually going for slick, glossy productions like modern mastering is geared toward anyway.
The main question I'm asking (purely out of curiosity.. to learn and understand another artist's style and approach) is why you're opposed to it. Obviously it's a bit of a broad brushstrokes technique, so any decision you make can affect more than what you intended, but sometimes I can't find another way to get the results that I'm after without shooting myself in the foot by overprocessing tracks individually.
I'm grateful for comments and suggestions. Thank you for listening!