A Guide to Preparing for

Mastering
By Justin Perkins on 12/22/2014 · Mastering

Like 649 Tweet 108

One of the most interesting things I’ve noticed since

becoming a full-time mastering engineer is that many
artists, band members, and even some recording engineers
do not know what mastering really is, what can and can’t be
achieved in mastering, and why mastering might be an
important part of their project.

Because of this, it’s not surprising that many artists (and

some engineers) do not understand what type of files to
send in for mastering, how to prepare them, what to be
aware of in the final stages of mixing, and what to expect
after the material is mastered.

This article explains how to best prepare your material for

mastering, and what to expect afterwards.

For more info on what file formats you’ll need from your
mastering engineer for various release formats of your
finished project, see this article.

Loud and Not Clear

As a mastering engineer, the most chronic issue I deal with
is receiving files to master that are already so loud that very
little can be done to improve the audio quality and do a
proper mastering job. It’s as if the mix engineer already
took the liberty of deciding how loud the masters should be,
leaving little to no headroom left to work with.

I also, on occasion, receive mixes that are already louder

than I would have mastered them. They generally sound
quite harsh and blown out with lots of “pumping” and other
artifacts. Because of the extreme compression that occurs
to make a stereo mix this loud, a mastering engineer can’t
simply “turn down” a mix file that is too loud and work on it.

Technically, I suppose you could do it, but it’s not nearly the
same as getting an unmastered file that has sufficient
 natural headroom and dynamics to work with. While EQ can
sometimes be corrected to a degree, compression and
limiting can never really be removed or undone. In my
opinion it’s important to give your mastering engineer a file
with proper headroom to work with.

Faux Mastering
I think the trend in receiving mix files that are too loud is
because more and more people are used to listening to
music that is quite loud and compressed. If their mixes
don’t have a similar loudness compared to the mastered
material they’re comparing their mixes to as they work on
them, they may have a hard time believing their mix is good
enough until they push it to the same loudness point.

Therefore, it’s quite common for mix engineers to apply

loudness processing to their working mixes to achieve
overall levels comparable to material that has already been
mastered.

I call this “faux mastering.” While “faux mastering” can be

helpful for making final mix decisions, I recommend
removing this faux mastering processing before sending
your mixes to the final mastering engineer.

There are some benefits to having your mix engineer apply

some “faux mastering” to the mixes near the end of the
mixing stage. One reason is to see how the material will
react when pushed to a certain loudness and possibly make
We just launched a new
some site where you
mix adjustments cansending
before streamthem
60+ hours
off for of mixing tutorials
Learn More
mastering. Of course, it’s advised to remove the “faux
mastering” so the mastering engineer has reasonable files RECOMMENDED

to work with.

Transients
You may find that certain instruments or elements of your
mix change slightly when you take a mix with no
compression or limiting on the stereo master fader and
apply some aggressive compression and/or limiting to
achieve more loudness. Drum transients are typically the
Latest Popular Featured first element of a mix to be altered when mastering a song
up to today’s loudness standards.
ARTICLES
Because modern digital audio masters are often pushed so
loud, the audio is typically slammed into a fixed ceiling
VIDEOS known as digital zero. This is also known as 0dBFS which is
the maximum possible digital level.

PRODUCTS When you look at the waveform of a typical unmastered

rock song, the drum transients (peaks) are often the loudest
 and most distinct visual aspect of the waveform. The louder
Search ... 
you go with a stereo track in mastering, the more the
waveform visually turns into a solid blob and the peaks and
transients are less distinct. The peaks are essentially
RECOMMENDED

chopped off in order for the body of the music to become

louder.

Because of this, I find that with a typical song, drums tend

to sound slightly quieter after mastering the song to a fairly
loud level, and guitars and effects seem louder. Vocal levels
can react differently depending on the mix and mastering
processing, but I find that vocals tend to stay more or less
the same, sometimes becoming slightly lower depending on
how loud the master is pushed and how much the
drum/guitar ratio is changed.

Thinking Out Loud

A skilled mastering engineer will find the most appropriate
loudness for a song, and also be sure that the mastering
doesn’t cause the song to contain any unpleasing artifacts
due to the processing and loudness.

Compression on a stereo mix during the mix session can be

okay but remember that compression cannot be undone,
so unless it’s something you are committed to and feel your
mix can’t be without, it may be best to leave all stereo
master buss/fader compression decisions to the mastering
engineer.

If compression does end up being applied to a stereo mix

and sent to mastering that way, be sure not to add
excessive makeup gain to the compressor output causing
the signal to reach or exceed 0dBFS (digital zero).

Some plugins can be misleading because they internally

prevent digital overs from occurring on material that would
otherwise go over digital zero. When this happens, the
dynamics and other elements are being changed and the
mix will likely be too loud for the mastering engineer to do
their best work or effectively use the analog mastering tools
that many people decide to use professional mastering
engineers and studios for in the first place.

Analog Cabin
When I receive mixes to master that are too loud, I typically
do not use my analog mastering EQ and compressor
because to use the analog equipment in this situation, I’d
have to turn the material down in the digital domain to run
through the analog equipment, and then back up again in
the digital domain to reach the loudness level that most
people desire these days.

When material is initially way too loud for the analog gear,
the dynamics have usually been compromised so much that
any additional processing in the analog domain tends to
sound bad.

Jack In The Box

I’ll usually try two or three times to get mixes from a client
that are at an appropriate level prior to mastering, but in
cases where the files can’t be created or obtained, I usually
resort to mastering entirely “in the box,” meaning that no
analog equipment is used.

This is not automatically a bad thing, but again, you’re not

allowing the mastering engineer to use some of the analog
tools at their disposal. Basically, you are painting the
mastering engineer into a corner leaving little room to work
with when sending files that are already extremely loud.

Great Clips
I don’t want to get into a debate about whether analog or
digital sounds better. I have an ever-growing collection of
plugins that I think sound great and wouldn’t want to be
without, but one thing that can’t be achieved when working
with only plugins is a common technique in modern
mastering known as clipping the input of the analog to
digital converter.

A popular way for mastering engineers to achieve loudness

is to clip or overload the input of a high quality analog to
digital audio converter. When this is done skillfully,
tastefully, and successfully, it’s considered by many
mastering engineers, including myself, to be a good way to
achieve loudness in a way that software plugins can’t always
achieve.

Plugins
I think plugins can be great for EQ, compression, tape
simulation, and other processing. But in my opinion,
nothing that compares to the sound of clipping the input of
my analog to digital converter. It has a character that works
well for many styles of music these days. I would certainly
not use this technique on folk, jazz, a cappella, or other
more delicate genres, but for most rock, pop, and other
modern forms of music it can be useful.

Regardless of whether the mastering engineer uses all

software plug-ins, or a combination of plugins and analog
equipment, leaving the mastering engineer with proper
headroom to work with allows for them to do a complete
and thorough mastering job.

Headroom
There’s no official standard for how much headroom to
leave for mastering, but my personal preference is to have a
mix that has no dynamics/loudness processing on the
master fader, and does not reach or exceed digital zero at
any point.

If these two things are true, and there isn’t a plugin or

setting within your DAW that is preventing the material from
going over digital zero when it otherwise would, your mix
should have plenty of headroom for mastering.

Even just cutting frequencies using an EQ plugin on a file

that is maxed out to digital zero can cause it to go over
0dBFS, so leaving some headroom to work with is
important. Many plugins sound their best when they have
some breathing room and aren’t passing extremely loud
audio, which is yet another reason to leave some headroom
for your mastering engineer.

Send It All
One thing that usually works well is I’ll often ask for both
the “faux masters” that the band or client has approved and
been listening to, as well as 24-bit versions of the mixes
with no stereo buss loudness processing.

The pre-masters with possible “faux mastering” allow me to

hear roughly what the artist/producer/engineer is aiming
for, but starting from scratch using the versions with no
loudness processing allows me to utilize all possible analog
and digital tools as needed, and not be stuck with some
limiting and compression artifacts that can’t be undone.

Occasionally I get files to master that already sound great

and need very little work, so I may just work digitally “in the
box” with the “faux mastered” versions, but most of the
time I end up starting with the 24-bit versions with no
stereo buss processing.

Clicks and Pops

Another issue that I’m seeing and hearing more and more
of are unwanted clicks and pops in the mixes.
Sometimes these clicks, pops, and other noises are not easy
to hear until the material is mastered louder. Loud
mastering processing tends to make quiet noises more
apparent. These noises can be clicks and pops from bad
edits, or mouth sounds that occur in the vocal recordings
that become increasingly louder due to heavy compression
used in recording and mixing.

I suggest doing some very careful and attentive listening to

make sure there are no unwanted noises or sounds in any
intros, outros, or quiet passages of the material.

I find that most of the noises come from the vocal track(s),
so listening to the isolated vocals and doing some cleanup
between phrases can be very helpful. All multitracks are
capable of producing unwanted noise, but vocals seem
especially susceptible to unwanted noises and sounds.
Headphones are great for checking for unwanted noises.

I did a project recently where after the song was mastered

and louder than the raw mix, the client could hear some
hiss and headphone bleed in the lead section where there
was not any singing. He went back and looked at his mix
session and sure enough the vocal track was not trimmed
and cleaned up properly, producing some unwanted noise
in the lead section which became audible by the time the
song was mastered. He had to correct that in his mix
session and send me a new mix to remaster through the
analog gear, which as I mention later in the article, is not
usually a quick easy fix and is often subject to some extra
costs from your mastering engineer.

There are some incredible tools out there now for

mastering engineers to remove clicks, pops, and other
noises but removing these at the source in the mix is
usually far more effective and also considered best practice
so that any processing to fix these noises is only applied to
the problematic tracks in those precise places where the
noises occur, rather than across the entire mix by the
mastering engineer.

Trimmings
Don’t trim noise before and after songs.

I’ve noticed that many engineers will be overly concerned

about noise before or after a song and trim it off. They think
they’re doing themselves and the mastering engineer a
favor by trimming it up.

It’s actually detrimental to the project in some cases to do

this. This is because the most effective way to use noise
reduction software to eliminate unwanted equipment noise
or tape hiss is to have a nice clear sample of just the noise
for a second or two (the more the merrier) with no music
playing. When I have a nice clear noise sample to work with,
I can easily and transparently remove unwanted noise or
hiss from certain parts of songs where the noise is too
noticeable. Those parts tend to be at the start, end, or quiet
section of a song.

It’s usually most problematic when songs have some type of

gradual fade in, quiet intro, or long decay of the final note
that fades down into the noise floor of a song. Even if you
trim the noise before the song starts, the noise may still be
audible in the beginning if the song doesn’t have a loud
start. By trimming that noise, you’ve made it nearly
impossible for the mastering engineer to apply some useful
noise reduction to problematic parts of the song.

Often times, noise can go undetected or not be a problem

until the song is mastered significantly louder. This is
because the amount of compression and limiting used to
master music these days causes the noise floor of a song to
be much higher than it would be naturally. Noise that
doesn’t seem to be a problem or even noticeable on a quiet
unmastered song can become a major problem after the
song is mastered if it’s not properly treated.

Of course the noise would ideally be avoided in the

recording and mix process, but should you end up with
noise in any parts of your final mix, leave a nice clear
sample of only the noise before or after the song on your
stereo mix file for the mastering engineer to sample and
work with. Attempting to trim the noise by doing a quick
unnatural fade out usually sounds too obvious, and will still
contain some noise at the very end if you listen carefully.

Again, by fading and trimming that noise, you’ve made it

nearly impossible for the mastering engineer to apply some
useful noise reduction.

When mastering using analog equipment, the mastering

engineer will be re-trimming the beginning and end of your
material anyway after they digitally capture the material
from their analog equipment. Leaving some extra dead air
with a sample of your noise floor before and after the song
is usually not a big deal to the mastering engineer, and is
sometimes preferred, especially if noise reduction needs to
be done.

After I capture the material from the analog gear, I carefully

trim up the heads and tails of songs to be sure that each
song has a natural start and end and that any noise that is
present is something that the client intended to be there. If
there is noise that needs to be reduced I can easily do this
with a few seconds of a noise sample left before or after the
song.

Decay
Another recurring issue I see from having mix files trimmed
too aggressively is when a song’s decay cuts off abruptly
and unnaturally. It doesn’t sound like it would be a common
issue, but it is.

I’m guessing it’s due to inattentive listening to the final

seconds of a mix file, but I receive plenty of songs to master
where the file just abruptly ends before an instrument or
reverb tail is fully finished.

If it’s a major problem I’ll ask for a new mix file. If I’m in the
middle of a project and can’t realistically wait for a new mix
file, sometimes I can create an artificial tail using a reverb at
just the tail end to replicate a natural decay. This is usually
only done when a new file can’t be obtained, or the missing
tail is relatively minor.

You can avoid any of this by making sure that your final
mixes and bounces do not get cut off before the final decay
naturally ends. It’s much easier for a mastering engineer to
do a tapered fade out of what’s there, than to try to make
up something that isn’t there at all.

Miscellaneous Noise
Another thing you can do to help your mastering engineer
is to either remove any unwanted count-ins, talking, or
other noises that you don’t want included on a song.

At the very least, include notes about what should be

removed and what should be kept. I appreciate not having
to guess what should be left in or cut out. I’ve left things in
that people assume I would have cut out, and I’ve cut out a
few things that seemed like nonsense that clients purposely
left in and wanted me to put back.

In today’s digital world, it’s usually not hard to remove or

retrieve little things like this, but as a mastering engineer I
appreciate as many notes about cutting or leaving stick
clicks, count-ins and other questionable stuff before or after
songs to minimize making and sending revisions.

Analog Times
When working with a mastering engineer that uses analog
equipment, it’s important to be sure you’re 100% happy
with your mixes before sending them off for mastering,
because providing a new mix of a song to be mastered
means that the material must be re-processed through the
analog equipment.

This is a real-time process and is also not always 100%

recallable as far as the equipment settings go. Many
mastering engineers charge extra for sending remixes
because it’s not that easy or quick to remaster a new mix of
a song when analog gear is involved, no matter how small
of a change is made to the mix.

Instrumentals
Now that video is easier than ever to create and distribute,
the demand for instrumental masters continues to increase
because of licensing opportunities for music in TV shows,
movies, and other video content.

Do yourself and your mastering engineer a favor and supply

instrumental mixes at the same time as the main mastering
session if you think there is any chance of ever needing or
wanting instrumental versions of your songs.

This is especially true if your mastering engineer uses

analog equipment during any point of their mastering
process.

It’s quite easy to master an instrumental version of a song

at the same time as the main version, but having to go back
and process instrumental versions at a later time can be
rather time consuming and the analog gear settings will
never match the settings 100%.

Now and then I have clients email me months later

assuming they can send me instrumental versions of the
songs to master at no additional charge. In most cases,
additional charges will apply for doing instrumental
masters, especially if it comes up after the main mastering
session.

Save yourself some time and money by doing the

instrumental masters at the same time as the main
mastering session.

Expectations
I’ve experienced cases where some clients simply expect too
much from mastering.

A classic case is a band that I had worked with a few times

over the years. I went from recording and mixing their
albums years ago, to just mixing and mastering, to
eventually just mastering their latest album.

After I mastered their latest album which I believe they

recorded on their own and had it mixed by another
friend/engineer, they were not totally happy with the
results. In particular, they expected the drums to be much
more punchy and aggressive sounding. After some
discussion about it, it seems that what they liked about the
albums I had mixed, was the way I augmented their real
drums with drum samples. The drums on the older albums
sounded crisp, powerful, yet natural enough. They were
expecting this to be achieved in the mastering process on
their latest album.

There are subtle things that can be done in mastering to

shape drum tones and intensity, but transforming some
drums that were mediocrely played and recorded into
something that sounds like a modern Green Day album, for
example, is just not going to happen in mastering. That
would be more of a mixing achievement.

Much of what they liked about the drum sounds on their

earlier albums was how drum samples were carefully
layered in with the real drums to make for a consistently
powerful drum sound. The band mistakenly expected that
to happen in mastering when it really should have been
achieved in the mixing (and recording) stage.

Here’s another example of clients being confused about

what can be done in mastering. One of the mastering notes
I received requested that I add some delay and reverb to
the the backing vocals. This set off a red flag that I should
contact the client to make sure they know what mastering
really is.

Depending on how the song was mixed, and it’s content,

there potentially (but not likely) could have been a way to
add delay to the backing vocals with some creative mid/side
processing, but it’s definitely not normal or realistic to ask
your mastering engineer to add reverb and delay effects to
only certain instruments or mix elements.

If you’re unhappy with something in your mix, it’s likely that

you’ll be unhappy or at least not fully satisfied with it after
mastering. Mastering is more about sweetening what’s
already there, and not trying to save a poor sounding mix or
song, or give it a certain style. This is especially true if the
problems are more performance-related opposed to just
sonic problems.

Metadata
Another often overlooked and ever increasingly important
part of the mastering process is properly adding and
verifying metadata and CD-Text on master files for online
distribution as well as CD masters (usually a DDP image).

Managing metadata and quality control of final masters is a

big part of the mastering process that some people don’t
even think about. Nobody wants to encounter a delay or
receive hundreds or thousands of defective CDs or vinyl
records.

Don’t assume that the mastering engineer knows the song

order and proper titles, album title, and artist name for your
project.
I have a form on my website that allows my clients to
submit all the necessary project info so I have it all before
getting started. Other mastering engineers may need you to
send this info in an email or include a text document. Often
times, the audio files that mastering engineers receive are
not named very well. It’s rare to receive files that are already
named perfectly, and it’s even more rare to receive the files
with proper numeric prefix to keep them in the correct
order.

Aside from that, it’s important to know the album or project

title and proper spelling of the artist/band name before
getting started to avoid confusion and stay organized.

This is why I developed the form on my website, but if your

mastering engineer doesn’t have a system in place for
submitting this info, type up an email or text document with
this info:

Artist Name, Album Title, Song Order With Exact Titles

(including punctuation and capitalization), ISRC codes (if
available), and any special notes about transitions between
songs or other potentially important info.

If any song titles are significantly different than the name of

the mix file, leave a special note explaining this to avoid
confusion. Also, avoid sending a zip file or folder of files
named only “files for mastering”. Your mastering engineer
likely handles several projects a week involving “files for
mastering”. Do your mastering engineer a favor and title the
folder or zip file with the band or artist name, as well as a
version number or date code to help clarify.

It’s not hard to change the song order on an existing master

if needed, but I find it very useful to have a solid starting
point regarding the song order before getting started. It’s
also not hard to change any titles if needed, but your
mastering engineer will appreciate not having to remake
master files and upload them just because you failed to
supply the correct info in the first place.

ISRC Codes
Understand ISRC codes. ISRC codes are assigned to songs,
giving them a globally recognized identity allowing you to
get paid royalties for various usages of your music.

Some mastering studios can generate ISRC codes for you.

You can also obtain your own ISRC codes via the ISRC
website, and your online distributor will assign ISRC codes
for you if you don’t already have them.

It takes a bit of pre-planning to be sure you have ISRC codes

on your pressed CDs because that usually happens a few
weeks before the online distribution is setup. At that point,
it’s usually too late to go back and add the ISRC codes to
your CD master.

I’ve had many cases where clients don’t think about ISRC
codes until the DDP image for CD pressing has already been
uploaded to the CD manufacturer and the manufacturing
has begun.

ISRC codes are necessary to sell your individual tracks via

iTunes and other online music distributors. They are also
required for any songs that you plan to offer for streaming
on Spotify and other streaming services. ISRC codes are not
required to be on a master for CD pressing, but you
probably want to add them if you plan to have them for
other release formats like iTunes and Spotify. You will then
use the same codes when you setup your online
distribution.

Your mastering engineer doesn’t need your album cover

artwork unless you’d like them to supply you with tagged
AAC, mp3, or other files that support artwork. CD masters
(DDP or physical CD-R) can’t contain artwork. WAV and AIFF
files can contain artwork but most audio players can’t read
artwork in WAV and AIFF files at this time.

File Formats
Educating clients on what file formats are used for various
distribution methods is also a significant part of the job,
especially if your name is going on it.

You’ll want to be sure that a client uses the proper files for
submitting to various online distribution services, as well as
CD and vinyl manufacturing.

I’ve had clients inquire about whether it’s okay to convert

MP3s to WAV files to submit for online distribution. This is
obviously a bad idea that some people wouldn’t think twice
about doing and is a great example of why it’s important to
be pro-active in informing clients about what formats they
need for their master files.

Mix in Progress
From time to time a client will ask me to listen to their
mixes-in-progress and offer feedback on what can be better
within the mix before they send it off for mastering.

A common thing I hear is lack of panning on things that

would otherwise sound good panned. This is especially true
with less experienced engineers, but a lot of times I’ll get
mixes for mastering or consulting that sound very mono.
Mono can be nice for certain styles and motifs, but an easy
way to get a big sounding rock mix is to double (at
minimum) your guitar tracks and pan them rather wide. It’s
true that some stereo widening can be done in the
mastering processing. I don’t like to do a lot of it, but it’s
harder to do any widening if things are quite mono to begin
with.

My point here is don’t be afraid to do some wide/hard

panning of doubled guitars and other things that typically
sound good in that fashion. Any wide spatial and panning
desires should ideally be accomplished in mixing.

Vocal Sibilance
Another thing that I find myself battling often in mastering
is vocal sibilance.

What seems like a normal amount of sibilance can get a bit

harsh and piercing sounding after mastering in some
situations. Thanks to multi-band mid/side mastering
processing, it’s often possible to hone in and tame some
sibilance on lead vocals that are only in the center channel
without affecting the high frequencies in the side channels
(usually cymbals and guitars) in the mastering process, but
it’s definitely easier and more effective to manage sibilance
in the mixing stage.

Some vocalists produce more sibilance than others, and

microphone placement and equipment settings can easily
exaggerate sibilance making it very harsh sounding. Ideally,
some de-essing will be done to the vocal tracks themselves
that are producing some potentially problematic sibilance.

Archiving
When the mastering process is done, archive all your
available master files in more than one place. Physical and
cloud data storage is extremely affordable these days.
Storing mastered stereo files doesn’t take up a lot of space
compared to storing an entire Pro Tools or multi-track
session of a song.

While I keep good archives of the projects I master, and can

retrieve nearly anything within minutes, I have to say that
it’s not fun getting those emails from clients from months or
years ago that didn’t keep track of their masters and are
wondering if I still have it.

It’s in your best interest to keep track of your mastered files

in case your mastering engineer either goes missing,
doesn’t keep your project archived for a long period of time,
or has a malfunction with their data storage system used
for archiving old projects.

What to archive can be a little tricky, but archive your

project in as many practical formats as you can. Aside from
archiving a DDP image and 16-bit WAV files of your masters,
you may also want to consider asking your mastering
engineer for 24-bit versions of your masters and at a higher
sample rate than 44.1k, if available.

Right now, 16-bit/44.1k is probably the most common

format you’ll need your masters in for both CD
manufacturing and online distribution, but archiving 24-
bit/high sample rate versions of your masters will likely
future proof your masters for a few decades.

High Resolution
As Internet speed and bandwidth increases, there’s more
and more pressure on Apple and others to offer high
resolution versions of songs in the iTunes Store and other
online stores.

You’ll want to be able to easily have access to these at some

point in time.
Some sites like Bandcamp and Soundcloud already support
uploading these higher resolution files as well as letting
customers and users download the high resolution versions
if they desire.

Either way, archiving as much as you can will likely make

things easier for you in the future if you need to release or
re-release your project in a future, yet to be invented format
or method. As with any file backup, I suggest having at least
two copies of everything.

SHARE TWEET GOOGLE+

You might also like:
1. The Importance and Benefits of a
Mastering DAW
2. Mastering as Another Mix Layer
3. A Guide to Mastering for Digital
Distribution
4. Common Misconceptions About the
Mastering Process
5. 3 Things You Should Know About Metadata

JUSTIN PERKINS

Justin is a mastering engineer from Milwaukee, WI. More at

mysteryroommastering.com and justincarlperkins.com.
Comments Community !
1 Login

♥ Recommend ⤤ Share Sort by Newest

Join the discussion…

Justin Perkins • a year ago

Hi Mad-D,

You ask an interesting question. I feel that at this time,

clipping the input of a high quality analog to digital converter
produces a unique and generally pleasing result that I
haven't been able to achieve using a plugin.

I admit that I haven't searched high and low to find a plugin

that does clipping as well as my Crane Song HEDD, and I
wouldn't be surprised if one day somebody can make one. I
have a lot of plugins that I really love for other processes,
but I can't seem to find one that has the same results of
clipping the A/D converter, especially when I need to do a
VERY loud modern rock or pop master.

I do plan to do some more simplified articles for The Pro

Audio Files in the future and I'd be happy to do some A/B
comparisons of a song mastered entirely with software, and
compare it to a version mastered with the analog chain using
see more

△ ▽ • Reply • Share ›

Mad-D • a year ago

Hi Justin, Why do you tend to use Clipping to the analog

stage instead of Clipping Plugins?

Are that process different?

I think Clipping as a way to shape a waveform (example:

making a Sinewave like a Square).

If you have a good plugin that perform internal oversampling

(like 8x or 16x) what's the point of clipping the file in the
analog input stage?

My question only a curiosity, I can't do a really accurate

comparison cause I use RME converters (they're great but
not pristine like other mastering converters).
If you want you can try to made another article about the
clipping difference from plugin to hardware :D

Many thanks for the article, there are good gems in there!

Cheers,
Mad-D
△ ▽ • Reply • Share ›

✉ Subscribe d Add Disqus to your site Add Disqus Add

% Privacy