3 ms·

That's subjective. Just because people do something doesn't mean that I can't say they shouldn't do it. I didn't say it never occurs, I specifically said it may

That's subjective. Just because people do something doesn't mean that I can't say they shouldn't do it. I didn't say it never occurs, I specifically said it may occur. I'm not against master-bus compression, but as it's fundamentally altering the waveform, dynamics of a song and hence artistic expression, then I personally considering it mixing, even if for some reason Mastering Engineers decide to do it. EDIT: Man, I just realised how stupid that sounds. "master-bus compression" not considered mastering! Okay, perhaps I need to change that perception... ah, nomenclature.

TheOtherHobbes 10y ago
If the mix engineer does it it's mixing. If the mastering engineer does it it's mastering. Either can use bus EQ and bus compression. The mastering engineer usually approaches the job as a final polish of something that's already finished. The mix engineer can go back and change the mix after adding bus EQ and/or compression. Usually the mix engineer makes [n, which may be a large number depending on time and budget] of mixes, with feedback from the band and producer and sometimes a record company exec. Then everyone's favourite mix goes off to the mastering engineer for that final polish, assembly into a consistent-sounding album (if it's an album) followed by final format sourcing. These days artists often do their own mastering. It's not hard to get something better than cheap mastering, but DIY won't be as good the best full-fat pro mastering. I was always a fan of the sound of the DBX Quantum processor, which is highly rated by professional mastering engineers - not as highly as custom hardware, but a good few steps up from most DIY mastering options.