Mastering Tools In Logic ???

[DigitalMusicProduction]

Hi

Recently finished a soundtrack consisting of piano, strings, synth and sound FX, film tv type, and was wondering what FX processing tool I could further use in Logic to bring out more brightness and clarity to the track as I still feel it has a potential to shine better.

I've already applied Logics Stereo Spread plug-in which has brought the track more to life, however, still a little inexperienced in the production field so any tips would be appreciated.

[Drew Stephenson]

I don't use Logic but assuming it has the usual collection of EQs and compressors then for brightness and clarity you could try the following.
- A high shelf EQ adding a couple of dB with a corner frequency around 12kHz. This may give a bit too much weight to high frequencies of certain instruments (violins, cymbals etc) so...
- A dynamic EQ set to duck the troublesome (higher) frequencies some of those instruments when they intrude.
- A multiband compressor with about 6 bands set to a low ratio (2:1 say), with automatic make-up gain engaged, set so that all the bands are constantly tipping in and out of a dB or so of reduction can give a bit of increased separation and clarity. Watch out for slight reduction in stereo width of centrally panned sources though.
- Also for clarity, an EQ with a mid-side setting can be useful as clearing out some low frequency content from the sides signal can often help things here without much in the way of negative impacts elsewhere.

Smarter people will doubtless be along soon with better ideas, but that's how I'd start to address those requirements without using any special tools.

(Edit: it's also worth looking at Ian Shepherd's page. He's a mastering engineer but has a few videos that show how to address common issues with only EQ, limiting and compression. https://productionadvice.co.uk/about/ )

[RichardT]

I would be tempted to try to fix these issues by adjusting the mix elements rather than trying mastering tools on the whole mix.

As Sam Inglis (SOS editor) says - only master a track when you think it doesn’t need mastering!

[Wonks]

I was going to say what RichardT said.

Unless you’re purely mastering someone else’s track, it’s so much easier to fix the mix.

[tea for two]

Hi

Recently finished a soundtrack consisting of piano, strings, synth and sound FX, film tv type,

Hi there. Is it possible at all to hear a snippet. Mostly because I like listening to music from SoS forumees.

and was wondering what FX processing tool I could further use in Logic to bring out more brightness and clarity to the track as I still feel it has a potential to shine better.

I've already applied Logics Stereo Spread plug-in which has brought the track more to life, however, still a little inexperienced in the production field so any tips would be appreciated.

I use Logic's Channel EQ to boost cut frequencies of sample instruments to make them more clear in the mix, also to make more space for sample instruments in the mix.
I use Logic's Vintage Tube EQ which is a Pultec emulation also Logic's Vintage Console EQ which is a Neve 1073 emulation to shape sample instruments.
These help make sample instruments sound more as I would like them. Which also within a mix gives more clarity more presence to them.

Also see if making the sample instrument Mono this is in Logic's Gain plugin makes it easier to bring more clarity distinguish more the sample instruments in the mix.

Worth stacking the same instrument sample ontop of one another : doubling the track by copy pasting, to bring more presence to that track within the mix.

Other than that I just use Logic's Gain plugin to increase loudness. That's aboot it.

In terms of plugins won't do any harm looking out for sale of plugin SPL Vitalizer MK2-T around £29 but NOT at £199 it's current listing.lol.
Here's SoS review of the hardware SPL Vitalizer MK2-T https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/sp ... izer-mk2-t

[Drew Stephenson]

I would be tempted to try to fix these issues by adjusting the mix elements rather than trying mastering tools on the whole mix.

I would do that too, but I thought I'd try answering the question for a change.

[Wonks]

Sometimes you need to go beyond the original question to find the right answer for the OP.

Making a track sound brighter/more interesting using stereo tools is fine, but you need to be aware that when heard in mono (as it will be on some TVs etc.) you’ll lose that effect, so getting the base track sounding good without those sort of tricks is preferable.

[Drew Stephenson]

This is true, but sometimes you just need a hf shelf on the master bus.
It doesn't all have to be complicated.

[RichardT]

I would be tempted to try to fix these issues by adjusting the mix elements rather than trying mastering tools on the whole mix.

I would do that too, but I thought I'd try answering the question for a change.

Sheer lunacy!

[Hugh Robjohns]

...Worth stacking the same instrument sample ontop of one another : doubling the track by copy pasting, to bring more presence to that track within the mix....

...Or just push the fader up by 6dB which would do exactly the same thing!

[Hugh Robjohns]

Recently finished a soundtrack consisting of piano, strings, synth and sound FX, film tv type, and was wondering what FX processing tool I could further use in Logic to bring out more brightness and clarity to the track as I still feel it has a potential to shine better.

Doesn't sound like the mix is finished to me!

Brightness (or the lack of it) is a simple function either of standard EQ (if sufficient high harmonics are present in the mix to pull up), or of harmonic synthesis/enhancement (if they're not).

But both techniques should really be a part of the mix process rather than mastering... and if the individual sources are dull it would make sense to address that problem during recording rather than hoping it can be fixed in mastering.

Likewise, clarity (or the lack of it) is most definitely something that should be addressed in the mixing stage, rather than mastering. A lack of clarity is usually down to issues of frequency masking between instruments, particularly through the midrange areas, and/or dynamic mix balance problems.

Despite the common mythology, mastering really isn't a where you should be fixing problems. It's where you format for release and maybe add a little polish here and there if needed when auditioned on a really good monitoring system with completely fresh and independent ears.

[RichardT]

Increasing clarity is one of the main mixing tasks!

An additional cause of unclarity is the use of effects.

It could be worth either reducing effect levels or, if you haven’t already, EQing the signals passing into the effects processors. For reverbs it can be highly beneficial to put both HP and LP filters onto the signal passing to the effect.

[DigitalMusicProduction]

Thanks for all your responses, I thought it would be helpful if you could hear the track to get a clear picture of what could be added for a more polished finish.

https://music.youtube.com/watch?v=Hl6pO ... dSN9LF-67o

[Drew Stephenson]

Three thoughts:
1) Nice atmospheric piece, I like it.
2) there are elements in the wide sound field where I'm getting hints of distortion/clipping and I can't tell if it's deliberate or not. That suggests to me that it either needs to be more pronounced if it is, or fixed if not.
3) It's a wide mix but I'm getting the sense that it's instruments panned centrally and made wide - If I toggle between the mid and sides I hear much the same thing. I'd be inclined to experiment with narrower sounds panned much further away from the center. Have things enter and leave in different places and draw the listener's ear to different parts.

I'm not hearing a need for further brightness, but you might well get more clarity by narrowing and moving your parts/instruments around.

[DigitalMusicProduction]

Thanks for all your responses, I thought it would be helpful if you could hear the track to get a clear picture of what could be added for a more polished finish.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1l8mQjK ... p=drivesdk

[Drew Stephenson]

Is that a different version to the youtube one above?

Also that link is asking me to request access...

[DigitalMusicProduction]

I've taken the YouTube version down, the new link is the correct version, request access and I'll authorise the link.

[Drew Stephenson]

That's not playing for me I'm afraid and if I try and download it I get an error message.
I'd suggest a private link on SoundCloud or something similar.

[DigitalMusicProduction]

That's not playing for me I'm afraid and if I try and download it I get an error message.
I'd suggest a private link on SoundCloud or something similar.

The YouTube version was excessive in its volume hence the reason for the distortion, the new version is better, that link should be good now.

[DigitalMusicProduction]

That's not playing for me I'm afraid and if I try and download it I get an error message.
I'd suggest a private link on SoundCloud or something similar.

The YouTube version was excessive in its volume hence the reason for the distortion, the new version is better, that link should be good now.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1l8mQjK ... p=drivesdk

[Drew Stephenson]

Thanks, will have another listen tomorrow.

[Drew Stephenson]

Had a listen to this now, distortion is fixed, my points one and three still stand though (I'd narrow the overall piano stereo image a bit as well - this will also help with a bit of clarity).

I'll correct myself on the brightness front a bit, if I was given that as a two-track I'd probably be adding a hf shelf to give it a bit more air, dropping a couple of dB from the low mid and maybe adding a little more in the lows.
But if it was my track from scratch, I'd follow Richard and Wonks' and go back to the piano track and get a more of the high frequency from source.

[Hugh Robjohns]

The mix seems to rely on 'spatial unmasking' — in mono the piano is really drowned out by the synth beds and I think that's the route cause of you 'lack of clarity' perception.

So what's happening in the stereo image is that so much of the synth beds are sitting out at the edges of the image, they're not masking the (few) parts of the piano that do spread across the middle. But as the piano is, itself, very wide, the piano notes towards the edges are being masked by the synths.

And if you listen in mono you can hear quite easily how much masking is going on and burying the piano. That's your perceived lack of clarity. Some EQ to the synth tracks (especially applied to the Sides signal) might help, as might some arrangement changes so that the piano and synths aren't playing similar chord inversions.

As Drew suggests, this really isn't a mastering problem to fix, it's a mixing issue and I'd go back to the mix and rework it.

I'd probably narrow the piano slightly because although In this kind of music a realistic piano image isn't necessarily required, it does still feel overly wide to me...

But that may be an illusion caused by the synth beds and bass which are most definitely overly wide. A lot of these kinds of synth pads deliberately over-do the stereo chorus and spacious reverb type effects for impact on headphones and speakers, but they really don't translate well into a good, mono compatible mix.

I don't feel it lacks overall brightness, though. I think it's just the masking effects that are making you think that.

[RichardT]

For synth pads, I almost always reduce the level of effects. Out of the box, the effects sound good if the pad sound is played by itself, but in a mix they are too much and make the masking effects much worse.

Pads can be subjected to quite radical EQ without damage, in fact they often need to be!