Skip to main content

mastering, which is first, eq or compression?

Your Avatar
Submitted by anonymous on

i know there is probably no right or wrong answer. but when mastering a stereo track through hardware which is better from those of have the experience, eq then compress, or compress than eq?



i am experimenting on mastering to a 1/2" tape machine, and wanted to know my best hardware or software routing for a final dump down.



ryan

Comments

Your Avatar
Massive Mastering

You're right - There is no right or wrong answer.



*Typically* what might occur is this -



(1) Clean-up & corrective EQ (buzz, hum, overtones, VDO noise, etc.)



(2) Compression



(3) "Shaping" EQ



Of course, that's not a rule, but it's fairly typical. No sense in compressing video noise or low-end overtones - You won't be able to get rid of it afterward.



The shaping EQ is a totally subjective thing, dictated by the needs of the mix. Sometimes it's better before compression. I tend to apply it after when I can.

Mon, 08/30/2004 - 15:19 Permalink
Your Avatar
Ammitsboel

This is how I often like to do it (if I use a full chain):



-Shaping EQ

-Gentle Comp

-Notch filtering and/or very broard band EQ

-Comp

-Limit



The shaping EQ and Gentle comp react together as a soundbase of how I would like to have it sound like.

But I often find it better to take one or two thing out of the chain...



Best Regards,

Tue, 08/31/2004 - 13:33 Permalink

Well, if you also add a desser as a compressor it would bring it up to 4. Sometimes a little tube saturation and that would be 5? Tape compression 6? transformers 7? these are what I mean about color and vibe and control. With all digital mixes, I find that I use some of these things to add a little color or vibe, others to control. Analog mixes have already gone through many of these processes and don't need it, maybe just a little control.

Depends on the material. Sometimes I use none.

Thu, 09/02/2004 - 07:53 Permalink