SurroundByUs.com

I have tested and Ozone mastering is the best I've worked.
In the case of preventing high levels. I recommend using a plugin to raise or lower the db per channel (the package from Tony ... he hung on a forum here.) brings one. greetings to all and is excellent on SPEC. awaiting the new version. greetings

Yep -set the latency - the surrounds with Spec 4.0 on its own were better than with the mastering VSTs.
Thanks again for the advice

Hi,

Thank you for the highly automated surround layout, indeed it saves a lot of processing & calculation time! I've a question on the Mastering side of the layout which needs reassuring.
What is the correct approach to work when additional mastering is needed (and not go with the Free Mastering group) in SPEC layout? 1. Process sound with desired tweaks bypassing Free Mastering and ZPan (in case of ArcTan), and afterward feed the single MCH file in the separate Mastering layouts as a separate process to desired results, OR is there a way to link commercial mastering group from the additional mastering layouts in SPEC layout instead of the Free Mastering group.

For example, when try using Ozone mastering group placed in the SPEC layout instead of the Free Mastering group, there are latency issues which I do not know how to resolve - maybe not making the proper latency connections, if any, or maybe the layout cannot work that way and do not resolve such use, and one must only resort to working with Ozone in a separate mastering layout?! Just not sure of the right approach, having spend several days tinkering to no good results! Any clearance and help on that is highly appreciated... Thanks!

Hard rock definitely depends on mix. Most of the 80's and early 90's are shot because of the dated production of the time with those hollow guitars and cavernous drums. Some modern remasters of that material seem to subscribe to the brickwalling theory of mastering rather than bringing those mixes up to modern standards, unfortunately. Some of vinyl rips I've come across here and there actually do improve sonically somewhat upon the mix. Hard rock production was definitely better before, and after, that era.

With some of these albums as well, the difference between bringing out the sonics and "ow! my friggin ears!" is thin.

Your best bet is always going to be ArcTan. You can definitely reach for a bit more separation, if you are not getting it, via use of the SLICE rear blend silders, but don't try to create audible artifacts when all channels are running. Also remember that ArcTan places sounds in the soundfield and not in particular speakers and that you're listening for separation and lack of artifacting within that soundfield, not whether that SR channel sounds great on its own. Little things, even using that "recenter" slider a tiny bit every now and then, may work to increase your separation.

I've messed around somewhat with the DeVerb/MoVerb plugins and some heavily reverbed albums (tried it on some Jesus & Mary Chain once - THERE was an experiment!). Your mileage may vary, but using them with some restraint on your source material might help out.

In the end, though, I still believe in "source source source."

Remember that we supplied the "Free Mastering Tools" because we wanted to ensure that the SPEC package itself remained either freeware-based or home-brewed. I agree that there are better paid tools out there, though.

Re: Latency,

If your mastering VST has a latency (Delay out in samples) output pin you need to connect to the first or second input pin on both the Normalization and the Recording Gate & Sync Bidules.

It's OK to connect two or more things to an input on those.

If your VST does not have such a pin, but still has latency, you will need to add a constant or integer variable that is set to the latency amount, and make similar connections.

Those can be found via right click --> Building blocks --> Math.

Typically the vst will tell you in the gui.

Worst case we can measure it with the live pc plugin, as we used to use in spec.