It's $300.00 more than "broke", but I have good results with Izotope's Ozone.

http://www.izotope.com/products/audio/ozone/

Especially if you don't have a budget, I agree that Vegas has everything you need, although the plug ins aren't "bundled" as a mastering suite. I would suggest getting the demo of Ozone and get a feel for how its set up (download the mastering turtorial as well which is great). Then you can experiment with Sony plugs that you already have and start creating your own mastering presets. Won't cost you an extra penny and you'll probably end up becoming more skilled as you won't be able to overly rely upon the factory presets that come with the mastering bundles or suites.

HTH,

drbam

Funny, I've had Vegas Video for about a year and I've never noticed any mastering plug ins. Is this something that was released with Sony's version? Mine was from Sonic Foundry. Maybe I need to dig the manual out again. Or are you just talking about using the effects to make up your own mastering type of settings? I don't think I have the tools necessary for that. I have Vegas version 4.0. I have a couple of different EQs and a Compressor, but I don't know if I can 'Master' that well with those. I'm not against using Vegas for just about everything, if it'll work. I'm not at the "High Pro" level yet.

The plug-in Wave Hammer has a good mastering setting named 16-bit mastering. Tweak it to your liking, either in Vegas or Sound Forge.

If you need more serious mastering, go to a mastering studio.

/Phil

If you have Vegas 4 you have HEAPS of plugins. I think you're only looking at the ones in the default chain, you can add (or remove) oh so many more!
How about multiband dynamics, parametric eq, paragraphic eq, multitapped delay, reverb and arrrggghhh!

Man, RTFM!

Bob.

"Funny, I've had Vegas Video for about a year and I've never noticed any mastering plug ins."

No such thing as a "mastering plug-in". If you were expecting to see a "Mastering" label in front of a bunch of plugins - you won;t find it.

Mastering is really best left to the pros but even the pros use standard EQ's , limiters, multiband compressors etc etc to work their magic. If you want to do some basic "at home" type pre-mastering - Vegas has everything (and more) within it's standard plugin set. Couldn't hurt to have a UAD-1 on hand either.

Bottom line - you don't need to buy anymore software. If you can't get a good basic "home mastered" mix from Vegas - you need to spend more time with the program.

Cuzin B

Alright, alright. I found all the plug ins a long time ago. I guess I was looking for something that said 'mastering' right on it. I'm on such a budget right now, that I don't have proper studio monitors for EQing correctly and it may be a while before I do. So it's hard to feel confident about your end result, when, as soon as you listen to it on a different set of speakers, it's sounds like crap. So I was hoping that I could find somethimg that would at least make me feel that the finished product wouldn't be too bad, even if I wasn't sure. (you know, for the video projects that have music in them, especially if I have to try to re-EQ the camera mic.) I appreciate all your responses.

I went through this same thing a few years back...especially the part about doing a mix and then having it translate correctly to other speakers and systems.

While so-called "mastering" plugs like Ozone etc can often bring something to the table - more often than not - these kinds of plugs just end up ruining a song due to the extreme coloration they apply.

I would suggest that you save your coin for a new set of high quality studio monitors first - so you have a good solid baseline to start with and then worry about effects later on. To be honest - my favorite home mixes (and my absolute favorite CDs like a Steely Dan Gaucho or a Pink Floyd DSOFTM) have very little going on in "mastering effects" department.

Oddly - both these gems were recorded years before any of the DAW stuff we take for granted now...but listen to the clarity and killer tones - these albums really shine with well recorded (and VERY well mixed) source material instead of cheesy loudness simulators like Ozone etc...so that when it came time to mix - the engineers pretty much had a masterpiece BEFORE any mastering teams got involved.

Concentrate on getting your very best to hard disk first. Mix and check it repeatedly on a good set of flat response professional monitors. If it still blows - there is no mastering effect anywhere that can save a crappy mix.

Cuzin B

I've been using Vegas for years and have only scratched the surface in it's capabilities. As a songwriter/musician who's only interest is to make my own music with this program, It's hard not to be overwhelmed by the tools. Fish, or cut bait? This forum has been very valuable to me when I simply didn't have time to "RTFM". I have made very decent "demos", some I wouldn't be ashamed to send off to a mastering lab for a self release. At worst, it sounds as good as my ol' Porta Studio. But the important thing for all in my position to remember is this: unless you got a buttload of time to woodshed as a musician and a self taught engineer, you're better off not having unrealistic expectations of any DAW/program. There's just too much technology to keep up with, and investments to be made. When I'm ready to make a "professional" recording, I'll start by putting my guitars under the bed, empty my head of all those unfinished tunes, and take some classes....and RTFM...Until then, my limited knowledge and ears make some ok demos.

Larry

Here is the Short answer: Buy Izotope Ozone. Also they have a really nice literature for your edutainment. Finally there is host of great books on Audio Mastering, do some research and you will be amazed ay how capable Vegas + Sound Forge + (some other mastering tool) really is. I personally love Izotope, everywhere that hears my work says:

You did that on a PC !

laryyo has a good point about just how much time it takes to get the best out of Vegas. The manual only addresses tecnical/menu issues and gives no help to learn how to use the system as a pro would.

Is there no book like "Mastering Audio and Video in Veags for Dummies"?

Just some published work-flow diagrams would be great for a start. Any volanteers?

Follow the links and practice your mixes, diddle and listen everywhere.
Or pay a pro... It's worth the $$$

http://www.digido.com/
http://www.promastering.com/

I gotta second the advice given to at least read the Izotope mastering guide

Also I gotta second the comment to take a look around www.digido.com

But personally I gotta say, you shouldnt be mastering stuff you mix, and I dont care how much experience you got, youre almost always going to get better results taking it to someone who isnt as involved and familiar with it as you are.

I know that sounds backwards, but anything you or your room misses during the mixing stage, will most likely be missed again during the mastering stage if you and the same room does it

Sound Forge, great mastering program. I mix in Cubase or Vegas, master in Sound Forge, use CD Architect to make CDs and my clients love the product. Several people I know have sent their material out for "Pro" mastering and paid a lot of money for it, without great results. I have had people send me tracks on CD to mix and master. Sound Forge has the tools you need to do a good master. If you know how to use them you will get a good product.

Just for kicks, I imported 1st track off Gutter Flower (Goo Goo Dolls) into a rock project I'm currently working on. Vegas Meters pinned @ .1 or 0.0. Put a Waves PAZ analyzer on the track and stereo image very balanced. Needless to say the track was LOUD. Gonna try a cut off DSOTM next. (Bet it's not so hot, but sounds great!).

-jb

Looks like I have my work cut out for me. Thank you, everyone, for your responses. I have a new question to post here and it's a little off topic.

A big THANK YOU to drbam for recommending downlading the Ozone Mastering Tutorial. This is a wonderful basic introduction to Mastering. IF ONLY Sony would do something like this for SoundForge!

This is the "Mastering for Dummies" I have been looking for.

Well, no. Who's closer to the project with my own work?...me. The old addage of "take it to fresh ears" has worn thin long ago.
NOTE: I DO BELIEVE IN TAKING MY WORK TO SOMEONE IF I'M GOING FOR A PARTICULAR SOUND (eg - the mastering eng\mix eng has a new approach or known for a "sound" that he can get with A PARTICULAR PROJECT).
Just like and instrument or artist - I'll use an engineer that way rather than for some "name" status thing.

Your reply of taking it to some mastering pro (who's probably overworked at this point making his personal care factor float at a minimum - no matter HOW known he\she is) makes perfect sense to those totally green in this area - BUT depends on the education of the mixer\user. Hell, if you're green...you should think of the MORE IMPORTANT part - the mix. Have THAT done by someone else as well.

You can use Izotope, T-racks, Waves, or sf plugs, whatever....but it's ALL in HOW (and why) you will use them. And again - it ALWAYS depends on how well it was recorded and mixed. Period.

As for a "which tool" reply:
Better to describe a general procedure (just a quick general process, not set in stone).
In laymans terms I prefer to MIX only in vegas (maybe adding a limiter at the master bus with no settings only the ceiling limit 0.0 as a "just in case", but mainly keeping the master mix volume well below peak point). Render when happy with your all too important mix (which means hearing and liking that mix at all volume levels between very loud and soft).
Then for one example, in SForge, I'll use Waves plugins, the mastering suite usually (LinEQ, Lin Multiband compression, and the L2 - usually in that order) in chain. Because you took proper care of your mix (THE most important and hardest part really, you shouldn't require such drastic editing values to achieve your goal. Hell you may find you only use the Multiband or L2, etc just cause they're there..doesn't mean you HAVE to use it.
Watch your levels and practice mastering listening at medium and loud volume, stand back from the monitors at times and hear it, etc. Know what dynamics are, where they are, and when they're getting squashed to nothing.
* We didn't even get to talk about the "recording" - which is just as important as the mixdown.
** I think the first thing you should learn with mastering is how to make a multiband compressor your friend - learn how to use it surgically. I like the waves C4 on a buss in mixdown phase and the LinMB in mastering phase personally. No I don't work for waves, I just know what I like. If you don't bother to learn how it works, when to use it, then how to use it...you're just flipping buttons...and you're cuts will reflect that.

Can't concur with most other here it looks like - I think the Waves plugs are way more musical in comparison to Ozone. Hell I think Tracks can sound much better than ozone. Ozone lasted on my daw for about a week then bye-bye, off you go to ebay. Yes it costs a bit more but look into the waves plugs. It's HOW you use the tool that matters though (along with how you mixed).

Get some decent monitors first. You need this for the important mixdown (have I said that enough?...THAT'S how important the recording and mix is!!!)

jd

"Well, no. Who's closer to the project with my own work?...me. The old addage of "take it to fresh ears" has worn thin long ago.
NOTE: I DO BELIEVE IN TAKING MY WORK TO SOMEONE IF I'M GOING FOR A PARTICULAR SOUND (eg - the mastering eng\mix eng has a new approach or known for a "sound" that he can get with A PARTICULAR PROJECT).
Just like and instrument or artist - I'll use an engineer that way rather than for some "name" status thing."

I would say mastering engineers aren't known for a "sound" at all, especially as much as are mix engineers. I'm not gonna take it to one with the expectation that it'll change the sound of my mixes, but rather just make them better or polished. You can master your own material if you really want to save money, but unless you are abnormal or take quite a bit of time away from the project, MOST people would just screw it up even more. I'm not saying you're wrong, but it's just better advice then saying "Oh, you know you're own material better then some other guy, so go ahead and master it yourself."

You're misunderstanding. I said "I" take it to specific personel for "MIXDOWN AND MASTERING" with intention of going for a specific sound. Yes there are engineers who think outside the box (going for\suggesting their own sound), just because YOU havn't heard of this doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
You can think of these people in terms of another musician or artist essentially.

Other than that, yeah, I'll do my own mastering (whether it calls for simple plugins or outboard gear). If you don't know what you're doing and don't care to learn, then by all means take it to someone else. Also, If and when I do send anything out, I ONLY send it out to those I know who are and have been working musicians (mix and master).

BTW: What would stop someone (in the digitial realm) with their own tools to try their own mix\master anyways if they keep the original mix intact? It's not going to set them back anything. If it never works out, then take it elsewhere, but you'll never learn if you don't start.
Quite frankly, this whole mastering as a "voodoo art" warned never to be touched in most cases, is a load of shit nowadays. But if you don't want\need to learn any of this then I can see why others just send it off to be done elsewhere (as I said).

jd

I understand you. You can disregard my post as I now realize after rereading it that it was indeed a big retarded. Not sure what I was thinking.

I agree with you too. It's a little harsh saying "never master your own mixes", but it's not like anyone really cares much. That's just the proven method in the pro audio world, because when you have multiple clients it become difficult to really please everyone to the same degree. On a smaller scale mastering your own work may be much better overall, but it's really difficult to say when someone should and when they shouldn't, without knowing their exact situation - which obviously, who can tell on a forum anyways, right?

Learning how to do it with plugins is one thing, and being happy about the results may be the only thing that matters and that is just fine. I don't disagree with that in the least. It's just when you start to get really competative with others that other things need to be taken into consideration. Maybe I'm off in saying that, but nevertheless it is just my opinion - which I shouldn't have to say, but seeing as you seem to take things so personally....

No man, I understand why as for the reply. I think you're just relaying everything that's been told\taught. We got to roll forward with changes in audio and how we work which means some of the old standbys can anw will fall by the wayside. The old mystique and special voodo of mixing and mastering attainability is thinning down with the technology and tools now available. What won't change is understanding sound and music and how the tools relate to it. it sin't going to put these engineers out of biz at the same token.
Just like any other job,art, etc... ya gotta just dive in and start swimming.

We need to get realistic with all this audio stuff and the way it's usually made today. The end result is that the listener is listening to the content rather than concentrating on judging it's superior clarity and sheen (it's ALWAYS been this way). I see this issue put through the audio microscope on these forums. Hell, you can have the best recording\mix\master of horrible players, but the end result is still gonna be the same - they sound horrible (cd pops out and thrown in the forget-me rack)....but hopefully that's a "duh" to all here.
And with the advent and popularity of mp3 players now, most of the music is further agitated by the end-user as they rip, sometimes fuck with, while poorly encoding your big ticket cd.

I still listen to records (especially old jazz, funk, etc). Bad recording quality in terms of what we have today for sure...but the thought of sound quality comparison rarely (to never) crosses my mind as the content is so good. Horribly recorded in many cases - I could care less if the content is good (heck, even "just decent") The content supercedes any"competition" in sheen and loudness people get so worked up about.

I'd say if you're starting...
get\rip 5-10 cuts you love from your cd's (hopefully your smart enough to get all the different music styles) and use them as templates for learning. Learn the tools mentioned and try and emulate\approximate that sound when you're mixing\mastering. It may not come out exact due to how it was mixed recorded, but it will ramp you up faster than just clicking around with your tools of choice blindly. Make a visual check even of you're template waveforms. Look into the panning of each inst in the field (mixdown and recording related). Learn to emulate all those sounds, then learn when to say when (you're done...this is what it is).
If you get a response of "it sounds pretty shitty" from an overwhelming majority of people (usually recording and mixdown related btw), then yeah, start over, take it elsewhere, or pay a seasoned eng for his help and time.

jd