congrats to you for getting sponsored! please pay zero attention to the complainers who have a problem with you being successful, making a living, increasing your reach, etc. really proud of ya
@@Fire-Toolz Not what I meant. Makes me sad that he seems to be forced to promote unrelated stuff for money despite of the great content he delivers, also I think that Wytse is definitely one of the good guys resisting the greed.
I misread the title as "stern mastering" because I'm old and my eyes are bad and was imagining some uncomfortable conversations between engineer and client.
Mixing is mixing. Mastering is mastering. Stem mastering is fixing a particular issue/element in a mix in order to master it better, while not mixing the whole track again. Only if you have to do that, you are back to mixing. Though i believe he made this clear in the vid. Lol.
Cool. Thank you. I want to add that stem mastering is a very simple solution when you need to create different versions of a track. For instance, you can easily create an instrumental version by muting the vocals, or a vocal up / vocal down version that is often required by record companies (e.g. with a difference of about 0.5 to 1 dB). However, these adjustments can be made any time.
I had my last album stem mastered and it turned out great! I had between 4 and 6 stems per song. Drums/guitars/ bass/vocals/ and some had backing vocals separated and some had an “other” stem for keys and aux percussion etc.
How is the mixbus processing handled in this scenario? Even in straight mixing there is always processing on the sum of the buses. Compression, limiting, EQ, possibly saturation. If you mute any bus in that chain the audio hits the processors totally differently, it will change the end result if you sum them separately after MB chain processing independently. It’s a legitimate question, I have no idea how people work around that haha
@@mrnelsonius5631 I guess it depends on how you mixed it. If you are planning for stem mastering you can obviously work around it. I personally just exported each group of tracks and sent them to my buddy. I may have had some compression on the mix bus but I wasn’t worried about it. I wasn’t mixing through a bunch of processing or anything like that. You could also turn of the mix bus processing and have the mastering engineer bring it back in later (if it sounds good). The way I look at it is, if it sounds good then it is good. I’m not gonna stress over how much differently my mix bus compression reacted with only the drums going through it unless I hear something off about it. And if I do I’ll fix it.
Ah!! This is actually my favourite way of mastering, for that very reason: there is something wrong with the mix and I can fix it myself. I didn't realise this had an official name!! Thank you! I completely agree with you on it all. I might not buy a card wallet though...
You ought to have visual examples and audio too. I had stem mastering done for my 1st "album": I was a novice mixer and I learnt a lot. I usually sent the ME a guitar stem, bass, drums minus snare, snare, main vocal, backing vocal and "other" stems. Each was panned and level set as for a completed mix. Jan from FineMastering, was able to address tracking/sonic issues and recombine then stems to finally do the stereo master. I learnt a huge amount from this process.
I think it’s a great idea, specially in the “correcting things” side of it. But whenever I think about it I always come back to this specific question (already considering the mastering engineer would keep the right balance between stems): what about reverbs shared by different stems? I’d necessarily have to have a reverbs stems, right? Would it sound the same?
The reverb aspect also came to my mind but I guess this it supposed to be more toward post mix. I suppose if one screws up on reverb thats it. Maybe that's too close to the mixing side of things to be something the engineer wants to deal with.
@@agapeleone5847 for sure. But I wasn’t commenting about correcting the reverb. I’ll try to explain it better. Usually when I’m mixing my stuff I boil it down to three subgroups: rhythm, “harmony” and voices. There may be some individuals channels from different subgroups that I‘ll send to the same reverb or delay, right? If I want to stem master this song I’d have to add a fourth stem for effects for example. My question is, if the mastering engineer is messing (in a good way) with different EQs and compression for each stem, would it mess (in a bad way) with the relationship between them and the effects printed? Would it sound the same? Would it sound weird if he boosts 8k on the voices stem and it’s not reflected on the reverb, which would also affect the guitar I sent there? Yes, I know mastering is usually just subtle moves and I may be over complicating things, but I think it is an interesting topic.
One simple solution to this is having a specific FX Bus for Reverbs, Delays, etc. Comes in handy because you just deliver an FX stem with the rest of your stem files. (Plus you can do cool things like side chaining all the FX to the vocals or do easy FX volume/pan rides.
I have questions on a technical level about making this possible: in a mix there’s pretty much always mixbus processing that’s working on a sum of all buses and it can determine the balance of the entire mix. If you just send your vocal bus through that chain with say, the drums and instrument buses muted, it’d going to hit your compressors and limiters and clippers etc totally differently. It won’t sound the same anymore. How do you isolate bus stems while still taking into account all the sum processing?
For those who master watching this, question: As an artist I wonder if this process would be more or less desireable for the guy who does my mastering. It seems like partial mixing which would mean extra work right? Do yall think this "stem mastering" would be preferred or no?
I'm new to mixing, I'm an intermediate producer. I wanted to ask you if I should mix the song while producing or after producing (with partial mixing - kick and bass and volume automation and stuff, the usual) and then import the stems of the project into another daw (in my case ableton) and then mix it properly (completely). WHICH IS BETTER TECHNIQUE FOR MIXING?
There is never a right or wrong in music. To answer your question, choose whichever workflow works best. Some People feel like they're sacrificing their creativity when they mix in between. Some people do light mixing in between because it adds to the vibe. But i would always put like a mixer hat or glasses on when im done with the production so that i can think like a mixer. That always helps
I think the thing that irritates (or probably more accurately, scares) some strictly mix engineers about stem mastering is that there IS an element of, or at least the potential for a degree of remixing involved. There’s nothing to necessarily stop the mastering engineer from rebalancing the stems in such a way that could change the overall mix beyond what is traditionally expected from mastering. I personally think it’s a great middle area that allows certain issues to be addressed more surgically than if you only have a 2 track to work with. Anyway, love your videos and keep up the good work 👍
i'll compose sequence in one DAW - bounce down stems and group in another DAW and "stem master" in there... sometimes the label control freak will want to "stem master" a track before release... which i usually just send; drums / bass / others... 3 stems... maximize and blah blah blah
Such a cool idea. I recently sent a song for mastering and after receiving the master preview I started writing feedback and then went "it'll probably be easier if I just rebalance the mix and send it again". Especially useful if one's mixing environment is less than ideal. How does one render the sends for stem mastering? Render them into the other stems, or deliver as separate tracks?
I'm wondering about the sends too, and also how to deal with non-linear effects on the mixbus like compression and saturation? I guess you can't use any while mixing
@@theopbmusic I have the same question, and even the top mix engineers use quite a bit of mixbus processing. Many leave it on *while* mixing. So their entire mix is built on the effects of the mixbus sum processing. It won’t respond the same way when you start muting buses. Very curious how this would work on a technical level, or if it’s just a way for mastering engineers to fix a bad mix without saying “your mix is terrible”. I suspect it’s this
@@mrnelsonius5631 I agree. I would be sad to have to bypass my mixbus processing just so the mastering engineer can have more leverage. I'd rather have them help me fix my mix and at the end give them the full mix with my mixbus processing on.
What do you think is the best way to group your stems? All bass instruments, all drums and percussion, all synths, all guitars, main vocals and background vocals? Plus, maybe an SFX track. Or do you think it’s better to seperate say, acoustic drums from sampled drums, or bass guitar from Sub bass? It’d be nice if there was a standard. This also really changes the way you address the mix buss as well since everything is being bounced separately.
I do have a standard delivery spec list, however, sometimes I do request different stems. I always first listen to the whole song to determine what I want..
@@Whiteseastudio that’s nice. I’ve been looking for some standards for awhile now. I know it’s a song by song basis, but in general I think there are some elements which can normally be shipped together. I know there was an audio stem format for awhile by native instruments or something, but I don’t think it ever took off. Would be a really nice feature for future DAW’s though.
I would personally only request stems if I had to. I can see a possible situation where the mix is good but it doesn't quite fit into the vision for the mastering engineer and they would want something slightly different. I just wouldn't presuppose that and probably try the stereo mix first. But IDK, I don't have experience yet.
Having someone master my work then remaster until its perfection by giving me feedback along the way might be costly but, if they were into it, it would be such a useful use of resources for me to learn from. If you have time Wytsie please let me know:)
So... if I were having you Stem master my track, I’d send my master mix and the individual stems from each instrument? That’s kind of how I master my own tracks...
@@lenimbery7038 Stems are your mix broken down into different elements or groups. When you put all the stems together, it's exactly the same as your full mix. It's typical that, say, all the guitar tracks make the guitar stem, or all the different drums make the drum stem. So the person you're collaborating with only has a few tracks to deal with but can still turn something up or down, which they couldn't do with just a stereo mix.
@@lenimbery7038 yes kinda. It means u send the full track with all elements on ur mixer so they get out like every track invidualy. Like snare on one stem / track and like all the sounds are on different channel/ audio file so yeah. Also just google. What is stem in music production. Would propably tell that better than i can tell. Also i recommend using google if u are missing some info about anything. Hopefuly u got anything out from my answer.
Im not Wytse but it's a bad idea, really bad idea. You'd be better off with some plugins, even while tracking (just use plugins with zero latency and set your interface at higher sample rate like 96000 and lower buffer size for even less latency), or just use UAD. You'll get much better results.
hmm...sounds like another layer not necessary for those who are experienced in the process of recording sound on sound, shelving frequencies, balancing the mix under the direction of a commercial (or not) music producer with a vision for the finished product.
By the way dude, UA-cam metrics have proven that a 10 minute long video is basically the best length for monetizing your channel. I know this is a short video, but just passing along info.
I think if you're working with a professional mixing engineer you shouldn't need it. That being said in the digital age the roles get blurred. I've heard in the EDM community 'mixing' & 'mastering' are basically interchangeable terms and considered part of the same process.
*if your mix was done by a professional engineer, you shouldn't need it. If your mix loses its balance after mastering, the problem is in the mix. It's good practice to listen how your mix sounds with a mastering chain applied before sending it to the mastering engineer. Often you'll find yourself having to adjust the volume of vocals and other elements
Big thanks to Ridge for sending me this wallet and supporting the channel! Here’s the site if you want to check them out! > ridge.com/WHITESEA
That's kind of sad to be honest. All the best to you anyways!
@@lngl7149 It's not sad when it's not a plugin/gear manufacturer. Wallets are ok.
@@TransistorLSD Next step is skillshare .. "Learn to master like a pro in a week! Click *here* and enter the promocode BACON to get 13% off"
congrats to you for getting sponsored! please pay zero attention to the complainers who have a problem with you being successful, making a living, increasing your reach, etc. really proud of ya
@@Fire-Toolz Not what I meant. Makes me sad that he seems to be forced to promote unrelated stuff for money despite of the great content he delivers, also I think that Wytse is definitely one of the good guys resisting the greed.
When you said “stem mastering” I thought it meant mastering each stem LOL
I misread the title as "stern mastering" because I'm old and my eyes are bad and was imagining some uncomfortable conversations between engineer and client.
Lol me too
he is? or at least a group? mixing and processing each stem... then mastering the group
stem mastering is mixing, that's why it is so cool.
Mixing is mixing. Mastering is mastering. Stem mastering is fixing a particular issue/element in a mix in order to master it better, while not mixing the whole track again. Only if you have to do that, you are back to mixing. Though i believe he made this clear in the vid. Lol.
@@jamescuttsmusicjcm5013 ok! clear that there's some degree of mixing to it!! Wheter to finish or to change it!! Lol
Cool. Thank you. I want to add that stem mastering is a very simple solution when you need to create different versions of a track. For instance, you can easily create an instrumental version by muting the vocals, or a vocal up / vocal down version that is often required by record companies (e.g. with a difference of about 0.5 to 1 dB). However, these adjustments can be made any time.
I had my last album stem mastered and it turned out great! I had between 4 and 6 stems per song. Drums/guitars/ bass/vocals/ and some had backing vocals separated and some had an “other” stem for keys and aux percussion etc.
How is the mixbus processing handled in this scenario? Even in straight mixing there is always processing on the sum of the buses. Compression, limiting, EQ, possibly saturation. If you mute any bus in that chain the audio hits the processors totally differently, it will change the end result if you sum them separately after MB chain processing independently. It’s a legitimate question, I have no idea how people work around that haha
@@mrnelsonius5631 I guess it depends on how you mixed it. If you are planning for stem mastering you can obviously work around it. I personally just exported each group of tracks and sent them to my buddy. I may have had some compression on the mix bus but I wasn’t worried about it. I wasn’t mixing through a bunch of processing or anything like that. You could also turn of the mix bus processing and have the mastering engineer bring it back in later (if it sounds good). The way I look at it is, if it sounds good then it is good. I’m not gonna stress over how much differently my mix bus compression reacted with only the drums going through it unless I hear something off about it. And if I do I’ll fix it.
Ah!! This is actually my favourite way of mastering, for that very reason: there is something wrong with the mix and I can fix it myself. I didn't realise this had an official name!! Thank you! I completely agree with you on it all. I might not buy a card wallet though...
i love stem mastering, even just having 3-4 bus stems can make such a huge difference
90% of the time most clients don’t get their tracks professionally mixed. So every master should be a stem master imo
You ought to have visual examples and audio too. I had stem mastering done for my 1st "album": I was a novice mixer and I learnt a lot. I usually sent the ME a guitar stem, bass, drums minus snare, snare, main vocal, backing vocal and "other" stems. Each was panned and level set as for a completed mix. Jan from FineMastering, was able to address tracking/sonic issues and recombine then stems to finally do the stereo master. I learnt a huge amount from this process.
Could I add the nani plugin to my stem mastering and drive it to give it more of a analog vibe?
Just get analog🔥🔥
Glad to hear you are so busy Wyste! I noticed a HUGE surge in new clients and my regulars about two weeks ago. Glad I'm not the only one! :D
Where is the all pass filter video?
Spoiler:
It's a phase manipulation tool
I think it’s a great idea, specially in the “correcting things” side of it. But whenever I think about it I always come back to this specific question (already considering the mastering engineer would keep the right balance between stems): what about reverbs shared by different stems? I’d necessarily have to have a reverbs stems, right? Would it sound the same?
The reverb aspect also came to my mind but I guess this it supposed to be more toward post mix. I suppose if one screws up on reverb thats it. Maybe that's too close to the mixing side of things to be something the engineer wants to deal with.
@@agapeleone5847 for sure. But I wasn’t commenting about correcting the reverb. I’ll try to explain it better. Usually when I’m mixing my stuff I boil it down to three subgroups: rhythm, “harmony” and voices. There may be some individuals channels from different subgroups that I‘ll send to the same reverb or delay, right? If I want to stem master this song I’d have to add a fourth stem for effects for example. My question is, if the mastering engineer is messing (in a good way) with different EQs and compression for each stem, would it mess (in a bad way) with the relationship between them and the effects printed? Would it sound the same? Would it sound weird if he boosts 8k on the voices stem and it’s not reflected on the reverb, which would also affect the guitar I sent there? Yes, I know mastering is usually just subtle moves and I may be over complicating things, but I think it is an interesting topic.
One simple solution to this is having a specific FX Bus for Reverbs, Delays, etc. Comes in handy because you just deliver an FX stem with the rest of your stem files. (Plus you can do cool things like side chaining all the FX to the vocals or do easy FX volume/pan rides.
I have questions on a technical level about making this possible: in a mix there’s pretty much always mixbus processing that’s working on a sum of all buses and it can determine the balance of the entire mix. If you just send your vocal bus through that chain with say, the drums and instrument buses muted, it’d going to hit your compressors and limiters and clippers etc totally differently. It won’t sound the same anymore. How do you isolate bus stems while still taking into account all the sum processing?
For those who master watching this, question:
As an artist I wonder if this process would be more or less desireable for the guy who does my mastering. It seems like partial mixing which would mean extra work right?
Do yall think this "stem mastering" would be preferred or no?
I'm new to mixing, I'm an intermediate producer. I wanted to ask you if I should mix the song while producing or after producing (with partial mixing - kick and bass and volume automation and stuff, the usual) and then import the stems of the project into another daw (in my case ableton) and then mix it properly (completely). WHICH IS BETTER TECHNIQUE FOR MIXING?
There is never a right or wrong in music. To answer your question, choose whichever workflow works best. Some People feel like they're sacrificing their creativity when they mix in between. Some people do light mixing in between because it adds to the vibe. But i would always put like a mixer hat or glasses on when im done with the production so that i can think like a mixer. That always helps
I think the thing that irritates (or probably more accurately, scares) some strictly mix engineers about stem mastering is that there IS an element of, or at least the potential for a degree of remixing involved. There’s nothing to necessarily stop the mastering engineer from rebalancing the stems in such a way that could change the overall mix beyond what is traditionally expected from mastering. I personally think it’s a great middle area that allows certain issues to be addressed more surgically than if you only have a 2 track to work with. Anyway, love your videos and keep up the good work 👍
Video idea: compare Soothe, Gulfoss and Smooth Operator on different sources
So, stem mastering is finishing or fixing a mix (going back to mixing,, thus) and then mastering it, right?!?
i'll compose sequence in one DAW - bounce down stems and group in another DAW and "stem master" in there... sometimes the label control freak will want to "stem master" a track before release... which i usually just send; drums / bass / others... 3 stems... maximize and blah blah blah
Such a cool idea. I recently sent a song for mastering and after receiving the master preview I started writing feedback and then went "it'll probably be easier if I just rebalance the mix and send it again". Especially useful if one's mixing environment is less than ideal.
How does one render the sends for stem mastering? Render them into the other stems, or deliver as separate tracks?
I'm wondering about the sends too, and also how to deal with non-linear effects on the mixbus like compression and saturation? I guess you can't use any while mixing
Depends on the song, I always determine this by listening to the whole song first
@@theopbmusic I have the same question, and even the top mix engineers use quite a bit of mixbus processing. Many leave it on *while* mixing. So their entire mix is built on the effects of the mixbus sum processing. It won’t respond the same way when you start muting buses. Very curious how this would work on a technical level, or if it’s just a way for mastering engineers to fix a bad mix without saying “your mix is terrible”. I suspect it’s this
@@mrnelsonius5631 I agree. I would be sad to have to bypass my mixbus processing just so the mastering engineer can have more leverage. I'd rather have them help me fix my mix and at the end give them the full mix with my mixbus processing on.
What do you think is the best way to group your stems? All bass instruments, all drums and percussion, all synths, all guitars, main vocals and background vocals? Plus, maybe an SFX track.
Or do you think it’s better to seperate say, acoustic drums from sampled drums, or bass guitar from Sub bass?
It’d be nice if there was a standard. This also really changes the way you address the mix buss as well since everything is being bounced separately.
I do have a standard delivery spec list, however, sometimes I do request different stems. I always first listen to the whole song to determine what I want..
@@Whiteseastudio that’s nice. I’ve been looking for some standards for awhile now. I know it’s a song by song basis, but in general I think there are some elements which can normally be shipped together.
I know there was an audio stem format for awhile by native instruments or something, but I don’t think it ever took off. Would be a really nice feature for future DAW’s though.
i didn't know white sea stood for wytse and i've been watching your videos for 30 years hello??
I’ll go ahead and take sixth. Thanks for the video. I really like doing stem mastering. It helps me keep the balance of everything in order.
Totally by incident, I am currently stem mastering for the first time in years. 7 songs with 35-55 stems each....... Challenging!!!
I would personally only request stems if I had to. I can see a possible situation where the mix is good but it doesn't quite fit into the vision for the mastering engineer and they would want something slightly different. I just wouldn't presuppose that and probably try the stereo mix first. But IDK, I don't have experience yet.
Very interesting video
Thank you
Having someone master my work then remaster until its perfection by giving me feedback along the way might be costly but, if they were into it, it would be such a useful use of resources for me to learn from. If you have time Wytsie please let me know:)
Hey. What do you think about browerising? 😁
So... if I were having you Stem master my track, I’d send my master mix and the individual stems from each instrument? That’s kind of how I master my own tracks...
I thought you might explain what exactly is a "stem"?
Stem is a one mixer track exported.
@@Rndmondomdon so when corroborating and someone asks for a stem it means a mix for them to use to play their new tracks to?
@@lenimbery7038 Stems are your mix broken down into different elements or groups. When you put all the stems together, it's exactly the same as your full mix. It's typical that, say, all the guitar tracks make the guitar stem, or all the different drums make the drum stem. So the person you're collaborating with only has a few tracks to deal with but can still turn something up or down, which they couldn't do with just a stereo mix.
@@lenimbery7038 yes kinda. It means u send the full track with all elements on ur mixer so they get out like every track invidualy. Like snare on one stem / track and like all the sounds are on different channel/ audio file so yeah. Also just google. What is stem in music production. Would propably tell that better than i can tell. Also i recommend using google if u are missing some info about anything. Hopefuly u got anything out from my answer.
what are you think about klark 76 for a first analog compressor?
Im not Wytse but it's a bad idea, really bad idea. You'd be better off with some plugins, even while tracking (just use plugins with zero latency and set your interface at higher sample rate like 96000 and lower buffer size for even less latency), or just use UAD. You'll get much better results.
Great video!! ♡
hmm...sounds like another layer not necessary for those who are experienced in the process of recording sound on sound, shelving frequencies, balancing the mix under the direction of a commercial (or not) music producer with a vision for the finished product.
Im not the first, but second is GREAT
I just dumbly assumed all mastering was done on stems
By the way dude, UA-cam metrics have proven that a 10 minute long video is basically the best length for monetizing your channel. I know this is a short video, but just passing along info.
Could you make a video about the different kinds of saturation and where to use each one? Ofcourse its best to show it on the holy Saturn. 🤭😂🤘
Three🔥
We will miss your wednesday's videos!
I think if you're working with a professional mixing engineer you shouldn't need it. That being said in the digital age the roles get blurred. I've heard in the EDM community 'mixing' & 'mastering' are basically interchangeable terms and considered part of the same process.
*if your mix was done by a professional engineer, you shouldn't need it. If your mix loses its balance after mastering, the problem is in the mix. It's good practice to listen how your mix sounds with a mastering chain applied before sending it to the mastering engineer. Often you'll find yourself having to adjust the volume of vocals and other elements
I call it Mixing asistance.
So.... Stem mastering is making the master engineer mix the track for you??? Ah HA!
Them's some expensive wallets.
No money left to put in them after buying one 😅
@@Whiteseastudio I have so few cards these days they would just fall out. lol
6th comment is just for a boss like me jajajajajajajaj
great video!!!
There is no such thing as "stem mastering". There is another name for what you describe; "re-mixing" that has been done for decades!
I only touch my stems lol
no such thing as stem mastering its just mixing.
Steam mastering ? jk
Third comment feels great also
google the word 'literally', dude, it doesn't mean what you think it does
first (definetly not, but I consider)
So it's not mastering, it's mixing a bit and mastering!!! Fek me why can't people mix AND master, what's all the big deal about mastering!!!!
Stemming from oil.
10th :o
Stem Mastering = Mixing 2.0. I just saved you 6:54minutes