Yes, I do read what I write. When I said pros use it, I ain't bluffing.

1. Jon Castelli used 2 instances of soothe2 on the master of a billie eilish song and 1 instance of soothe2 on another song on the same billie eilish album.

2. Jon Castelli also used that GULLFOSS on the Billie Eilish Album, On the Master of one of the songs he was mixing.

3. Illangelo used Gullfoss on the master of the song "alone again" I think if I remember correctly.

(Source of the above points: MixWithTheMasters)

4. You know Ozone came up with their own spectral modules in Ozone. That alone should be an indicator to you that these spectral things are getting more common day by day even in mastering.

5. In the Ozone Maximizer, The "Transient" & "Modern" mode uses some kind of spectral technology behind the scenes in only these 2 specific modes.
I read this one somewhere I don't remember rightnow.

Thank You for insulting me with your kind words!

 

If you have an extremely dynamic song. Too dynamic, fluctuations / peaks of 20-30db, it can really help. I will sometimes automate gain on 8th or 1/4 notes even. Stray peaks that just need some taming before any dynamics tools. Some additional tricks i'll use from time to time:

1. Automation of mid/side eq. Opening and closing the sides using a high shelf. Excellent in a build up in EDM. Ramp the sides up during the build so it becomes big and wide and exciting, then close it back down in the drop so it becomes centered and punchy. Sometimes the opposite will work, ramping down so it becomes narrow and focused during the build, and the drop becomes huge and wide.

2. Automate simple gain throughout sections. Take a pop song. Verse A - (static), Verse B - (+1db), PreCh breadown - (-1.5db), Ch Drop - (+1db), and so on.

3. Reverb automation, which can be more of a creative effect, but a simple touch of 5%, barely noticeable can subtly enhance sections or when removed can create focus and punch.

4. Clipper - Say you have a general clipper set, just shaving off 1db or so, push it a bit more in the ch / drop to create more harmonics and energy. Shit i'll sometimes really push it, and then back down on the output at the same time, so its more crunchy and harmonically rich, but not blatantly louder.

 

That's very solid advice. How do you feel about static Mid-Side EQ? I'm having good results with It with a particular song, although that seems to be entering the "changing the mix" territory, which might make some clients uncomfortable.

 

I use it all the time. It really depends on the song / genre and the client. If the client gives you an insane sounding reference, and their song sounds like a litter box, i will often times push way beyond traditional mastering. If they give you a great mix, and are just expecting minimal tweaks, that final 5% to polish things off, then maybe be more conservative.

You can still be conservative enough with m/s stuff to where its not overbearing or noticeable.

 

The more time passes, the more I realize It's all about communication. I've had some "what did you even do" kind of questions in the past for being too subtle.

 

For me the best mastering work is not about how much processing is made but the knowledge that every movement is done to deliver consumer grade music. You can throw 2 soothes, m/s eq, compression, or only use a limiter and a dither, i don't really care about that. I do care about the intention of the song; the mastering engineer that can make it consumer ready while retaining the performance character is my hero. The mastering engineer that changes the intention of the record to fit a standard (his standard, for instance) or to simply change things that are only a matter of taste, this person is my nightmare. Keep your expensive mastering outboard gear on your pocket if the purpose of it is changing the vibe of my song.

 

I agree with not changing the vibe of the song too much, but meeting a "standard" loudness is one thing that is heavily requested by clients.

It drives me crazy to smash the shit out of masters, but I have on many occasions had clients tell me they like the master, but they want it louder, even though its plenty loud and will be normalized by streaming services.

I just started sending 2 versions to those people.

One at the level of loudness that I like, and one 2dB louder (usually).

They seem to be happy with that, and I like providing the option.

But it becomes so obvious to any trained ear when listening on something like car speakers, how insanely quickly ear fatigue sets in with the overly compressed and limited music.

I can barely listen to that at high volumes, but then I'll move to something less limited, I can crank it, the drums have power and are hitting hard, and barely any fatigue.

Literally listening to the track louder, with less fatigue.

I think keeping the original intention of the song intact means keeping it listenable, but apparently some artists don't agree haha.

 

Indeed, they are not artists.

 

Loudness is measurable. Numbers can be reassuring to insecure artists. Plus I noticed that many musicians dont hear the sound, at least not all the characteristics. And if they do, they have problems to hear it the way the average listener will.

 

so you heard about 3 people using a certain EQ from 2019 and that proves that "everyone" uses it. no further questions.

 

in audio mastering you do the things which are neccessary, not which are possible.

that applies for the type of processors you use, and it is probably also the only useful answer to the question whether to record plug-in automation or fiddle with knobs in realtime.

 

What you want then? Entire industry showing you projects that yes we use spectral processors? I showed you some evidence and i could probably give you 4-5 more examples. It's upto you whether you want to believe it or not.

Thank you!

 

Spectral processing is a popular music production technology and is currently all the rage but what is it exactly?
We use Sonible’s smart:EQ 3 to help explain.
www.attackmagazine.com/technique/tutorials/what-is-spectral-processing
www.musicradar.com/news/producers-guide-spectral-effects

 

Even with normalization done by streaming services, a song that is -6 lufs will often times feel louder than a song that is -12 lufs. Even with everything normalized to -14 lufs.

 

Yup, and its still going to sound shittier and more fatiguing the more compressed it was before it was uploaded to the streaming service.

Is the track feeling slightly louder worth it feeling worse to listen to?

 

Normalization doesn’t make a -12 LUFS track feel as dense or present as one mastered at -6. The "louder" mix will sound upfront, even after normalization, because of RMS density, crest factor, transients etc. In genres like pop, trap, and EDM, that density is part of what makes a track “hit". Theres also the fact that soem playlists, club systems, and radio bypass or reduce normalization, and quieter masters can feel underwhelming when played next to a louder one.

That said, loud doesn’t have to mean fatiguing. There are masters at -6 LUFS that still sound open and punchy because they use multi stage clipping, multiband dynamics, transient shaping, parallel tricks etc, instead of just brickwall limiting. Really, it depends on the song / genre. Of course i would never slam an acoustic guitar singer songwriter to -6, but a pop EDM track absolutely.

 

I'm aware of many techniques and methods required to make certain genres "hit" harder, and that for certain live applications a louder/fuller/more up front master allows for better translation. Yeah you can absolutely have a super loud master of an EDM song that still has a clean mix. EDM is also one of the most fatiguing genres to listen to.

I dont think a good EDM mix is going to lack presence to the point where a loud master can actually fix that issue. You can try tho. Just my opinion.

With that said, there are other listening applications where those louder masters suffer greatly, and I would heavily argue that they lack punch compared to less compressed material.

I would also argue that those edm songs are "made" loud during mixing, and the mastering is either negligible or harmful to those mixes if you're using heavy limiting and compression.

Festivals are so loud that you're an actual idiot if you're close to the stage and don't wear hearing protection, so I'm not sure how useful an overly loud master is (especially if there's FOH controlling the levels). Industry standard isn't always the optimal experience.

I get what you're saying in general tho. Certain genres definitely need to be louder in general, and as a result they will be more fatiguing (not necessarily "worse" in many ways) overall.

Edit: Yeah ill take a slightly quieter master if it literally means it won't cause temporary (or maybe permanent) hearing impairment to my ears:

https://www.headphonesty.com/2025/05/listening-digital-compressed-music-harm/

To be fair tho, I'm never listening to music at super loud volumes for 4 straight hours. I'm also not a guinea pig... or maybe I am.

 

Last edited: Jul 28, 2025 at 8:54 PM

When a -6 LUFS track is normalized to -14 or -12 the only difference between this track and a track mastered at -12, for example, is the amout of distortion and compression that can be heard and this can trick your brain to think it sounds louder. But LUFS is the most accurate measuring system we have right now, and believe me: -14 LUFS is always -14 LUFS. I did this test a million times and i'm always listening to normalized music, even if i know the values they were mastered. No difference at all.

Spoiler: Do you want to sound loud at -14 LUFS?

 

Makes sense. That minor bump in perceived loudness can come from extra compression, with the (obvious) tradeoff of reduced dynamics and distortion.

Maybe you can use the distortion to create extra loudness in the mastering stage as a creative decision! Thats how I look at clipping during mastering. I hate to fuck around with my clients mixes that much tho.

Probably better to use it creatively during mixing though. Check out Ed Sheerans vocal on Castle on the Hill during the chorus. They used digital distortion as a creative effect on his voice.

I thought it sounded like balls and was pretty off at first, but then when I learned it was a purposely decision I thought it was kinda cool, and still kinda sounded like balls.

 

Why not be like "how can it NOT be used in mastering"?
Do we think the chorus needs the same settings in every single plugin as the verse?
I'm not even a mastering engineer, but I often have to fix things in mixes for my day job and a lot of them can't be properly fixed without trimming automation to specific needs on specific parts.