If you're looking for mastering plugins, that's an entirely separate topic but many people think of mastering as the sonic processing and forget about the technical details.
Some affordable alternatives to WaveLab Pro (WaveLab Elements is too limited) would be Triumph by Audiofile Engineering, DSP Quattro, Studio One V3, or even HOFA CD Burn & DDP or Sonoris DDP Creator Pro if you just need some basic master assembly tools. I find it much more arcuate, easier to use, and more suited for the task than REAPER. It's great for all that but then I move to WaveLab to finalize things.
I use REAPER for the initial processing via plugins and analog gear, trimming up and doing some spot edits with RX5 set as external editor. While REAPER has a lot of mastering focused features, they'll all a little clunky and basic compared to WaveLab. Making things hard for no reason is weird to me but to each his own. When I get a mastering job where I decide the mix needs help beyond level matching the songs, I ask for the multitracks and mix session so I can take care of things more quickly and save the customer money. Just like someone might suggest to "get it right at the recording", I'm suggesting to finish the mix from the multitracks. Still, I get the impression that there's this idea that you can take an unfinished mix and "fix it in the mastering" (like how people quip "fix it in the mix") and this is considered SOP in some circles. Makes communication more difficult when terms are redefined is all. You can call it "mastering" if you want too. Maybe this is the "restrictions lead to creativity" camp? That's fine but you're actually mixing and not mastering yet. Seems like a very unusual restriction to impose. There aren't any rules and if it sounds right it is right.
If you really like a workflow of only going so far with the multitracks and then restricting yourself to the 2 track to finish it, that's fine.
0 kommentar(er)
