Topic: Remaster my recording?

[krowllaw]

I have a recording I'd love for someone to enhance and explain to me what steps they took so I can learn.  I'm happy to compensate fairly for the lesson. Is there anyone here that has the time for that?  Thanks!

[Scooter123]

I’m happy to help, but you need to ask yourself some questions first

1.  What Do You Want to Achieve?  Put another way, what’s wrong with the recording?  Is the source clean enough that a remaster will be worth it?

2.  Do You Have Money to Buy Software?  Yeah, some is free but the good stuff costs money or take the risk of downloading pirated Russian versions.  You’ll need about $1,000

3.  Do You Have the Time to Learn This Software?  50-100 hours practicing, screwing up, and trying different techniques is part of the learning process.

[morst]

Does it need level boost?
Spectral re-balancing? (EQ or perhaps multi-band compression?)
Click and pop removal?

[krowllaw]

Thank you for the replies. 

I think I made this one worse instead of better, for example:
https://archive.org/details/goose2022-03-04.nashville

I recorded The War on Drugs last night and it probably needs a little EQ, levels adjusted, etc.  Nothing really wrong with it but I'd rather set levels low at the concert and fix afterwards. 

Often if I get to record it isn't from the right spot in the room, etc. and so I'm just trying to learn how to make things a little better in those situations.  I don't have a lot of time to dramatically improve a recording but if I knew what generally works in Audacity then I can replicate that. 

Thanks!

[Gutbucket]

First and foremost, good mastering requires really accurate monitoring.  Secondly a good ear and mindful awareness.  The importance of everything else pales in comparison to those two things.  Really accurate monitoring is equivalent in importance to good location when taping - it represents the first, second and third most important things in the process!

If your monitoring is not accurate, your corrections will not only target those inaccuracies overlaid upon those of the recordings. You may not notice, or be aware of, problems in the recordings which become apparent elsewhere, and might even make them worse.

Simple corrections of obviously wrong things like noises, balance problems, drop-outs can be fixed more easily. Those are in the realm of initial raw file processing and mixing rather than mastering.

[Scooter123]

Isotope RX7 for the heavy lifting and Goldwave for volume and compression. Reaper for most of my plug ins   Adobe CC for some plug ins and time alignment.

I use the JEMS method.  I start on RX7 with de-click, azimuth adjustment, and phase. Then render and figure out specifics.

RX7 took me 100+ hours to figure out, watching videos and experimentation.  I emphasize experimentation because you’ve gotta know what the settings do and whether a little tweak or something more aggressive is necessary. 

There are some good books. Geoff Emrick, Tom Dowd, Ken Calait, Rudy Van Gelder, Bobby Owsinski, but these are overviews of theory, not hands on, how do I do “x” with “y” software.

Most remasters screw up recordings in my opinion.

[krowllaw]

Simple corrections of obviously wrong things like noises, balance problems, drop-outs can be fixed more easily. Those are in the realm of initial raw file processing and mixing rather than mastering.

This is an excellent point and you are right, I’m really just talking about raw file processing, not true mastering.  I just want to efficiently spend an hour after a show normalizing, eq, etc., cutting tracks and uploading to archive.org.   I’m in no way qualified nor have the ear to do much more…..

[Dirtybiz]

I have a recording I'd love for someone to enhance and explain to me what steps they took so I can learn.  I'm happy to compensate fairly for the lesson. Is there anyone here that has the time for that?  Thanks!

I have been in your shoes most recently and a now good buddy has helped me with the workflow.  I'm happy to share what I've recently learned to help you! 
Feel free to send me a DM and we can try and get you up to speed.

Dennis

[goodcooker]

Simple corrections of obviously wrong things like noises, balance problems, drop-outs can be fixed more easily. Those are in the realm of initial raw file processing and mixing rather than mastering.

This is an excellent point and you are right, I’m really just talking about raw file processing, not true mastering.  I just want to efficiently spend an hour after a show normalizing, eq, etc., cutting tracks and uploading to archive.org.   I’m in no way qualified nor have the ear to do much more…..

I'd be happy to share my fairly straightforward post show workflow with you. Send me a PM if you like.

There are a few threads here about this sort of thing that can point you in the right direction. What freeware people are using for what tasks and so on.

[krowllaw]

Thank you all for your advice and help!  In the past I would share what I have and then take the time to make it better later.  Now with archive.org it seems so "permanent" that I feel the need to get it right before I upload.  Honestly I was the only one recording (which is often the case) and I just want to get the music out.  You can hear the recording I am trying to improve and post on archive.org here:

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1KuXBj2eiz-_WSJXVIR_6BVPpOZoXJEVb

[nulldogmas]

You can hear the recording I am trying to improve and post on archive.org here:

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1KuXBj2eiz-_WSJXVIR_6BVPpOZoXJEVb

It sounds pretty good and clear to me, just a bit heavy in the midrange. Using my tried-and-true EQ method of closing my eyes and moving the sliders up and down until it sounds better, I came up with the settings below, but your mileage may very much vary.

Now with archive.org it seems so "permanent" that I feel the need to get it right before I upload.

I've recently upgraded several of my recordings that are on archive.org after figuring out better ways of doing postproduction on them. If anything, archive.org is so easy to replace files on that it feels a lot less permanent than bittorrent, where I would have to chase down everyone who torrented my recording to let them know I have a new version.

[bonghitwillie]

i have asked this question on another forum in the past. i would think you need a flat response monitor(s). what speaker(s) does everyone use? on the other site, someone used headphones instead of speakers.

[Dan33185]

i have asked this question on another forum in the past. i would think you need a flat response monitor(s). what speaker(s) does everyone use? on the other site, someone used headphones instead of speakers.

I always use headphones when mastering recordings, it allows you to hear things you may not hear on speakers until after the fact.

[Scooter123]

Basic Mastering for Uploads:

RX7:  De-Click (Removes Clapping) > Azmuth (Removes off axis artifacts from moving the recorder's position) > Phase (Not necessary, but to my ears this makes a difference, don't know why)

Compress, Limit or Normalize:  On Audacity, Goldwave or other simple DAW, makes sound more balanced and boosts quiet parts, limits or compress loud parts

Gain Adjustment:  On Audacity or Goldwave, I tend to reduce the volume after a song is over to remove whoops hollars, clapping etc, which is often louder than the song

Splits:  On Goldwave, I drop a cue, name the song, and Goldwave does a nice job splitting the file

Flac Conversion:  On Media Monkey, also it names the tracks the way I like them (Artist - Track Number Song Name)

This whole process takes about an hour for a typical show. 

[krowllaw]

You guys are awesome, I learned so much (and now have a reference for when I forget).  I miss the days where I could skip class and spend all day on trial and error.  For now, I have a replicable process to get these recordings out and shared before I forget about it or get too busy.  Thanks!  One day I'll go through my closet of DATs and finally share some of those. 


https://archive.org/details/twod2022-09-26

Thanks again!