I gathered a lot of usefull info on mastering using a compressor, how to fatten up drums etc. So thats not the problem. But what happens after you rendered a track to wav. I usually fix the volume in a wave editor and convert te file to mp3. Since thats the old method, I seriously need an update about this.
So what programs do u guys use to master your tracks? Sequencers or Renoise? 
cmon cmon
When I still composed my own music, I would mix it down in Vegas, and master it in Sound Forge. Nowadays I only really do the last two, so in your case I would recommend using Sound Forge.
You will need to use the plug-in chainer (ALT+9) to load a chain of DSP effects, and apply these to your stereo mixdown.
It’s a good idea to use the built-in spectrum analyser (ALT+8), and set this to monitor the output while mastering. That way, you can see exactly what you’re doing to the frequency spectrum.
By the way…all sonic foundry products are to be found @ sony.
But I like the concurrence better. Samplitude is not cheap - but for mastering proposals a serious weapon.
Omg thats not cheap indeed. I dont know if buying something like Soundforge is worth it. I’ll read more about Soundforge on that site.
Quality=€€€
Thanx 
I tend to use some VSTs to master my songs, so I usually do not need to master them in a wave-editor anymore. But in some cases I use Audacity (http://audacity.sf.net/) and an old release of cool edit
Lets just say i found some nice software… thanx for the advice 
i read on devdsp that its not good to master with soundforge or wavelab
reason being that the compression used is in poor quality.
i also would like to know professional methods of mastering…
the mastering in alot of rap and hiphop would be the style i would really like because of the loudness of the bass and the clarity of the highs.
i make heavy breakbeat mashup jungle an believe this would be the best to use for this style.
You can use DX plugins in SoundForge. For example Waves compressors, which are certainly not poor quality.
Biggest professionals use hardware… If that’s an option for you.
Ultra-expensive monitors are a must-have for mastering.
So unfortunately mastering costs…
yeah ive been thinkin after reading that entire post on devdsp,
http://devdsp.net/index.pl?main=categories&category=20
(about 1/3 down the page)
that i should probably find some one other than myself that is well aquainted with mastering in the style i need to do the task.
i would certainly like to have the warmth of tubes 
months later i got used to the sound qual i get nowadays from running a preset i[/i] PSP Vintagewarmer and T-Racks EQ in the Renoise masterchannel to make the mix twice as full (fat), of course lower the main volume to avoid overdrive… Render trackgroups or seperate tracks to wav. Then load them up in a sequencer… like Acid. and then give every single track the treatment needed with the basic internal vst’s. Kicks: compression Eq, Eq everywhere to manage the freqs for placing every instrument in the mix. etc. reverb on synths… same parameters on the same fx in one track…
So actually i master everything twice. or thrice 
My favorite mastering tools are Waves L2 Ultramaximizer and Linear Phase Multiband.
me too!
Hardware is not neccessarily better though, and I wouldn’t be so sure about all professionals using hardware actually. Hardware effects do add a certain character to the sound (phase distortion), and I guess most people still like that. I actually think digital sounds better since it’s more accurate and transparent.
Ultra-expensive monitors would help, but with the things you can do now with a digital workstation, you can actually get really good results on much lower-end speakers too.
choice, I think you’d benefit from the mastering tutorial I’m currently writing since it will explain all those things of how to make the bass louder and the highs clearer.
Nope, cos what you’re doing there is just mixing.
When mastering, you have to consider all the instruments as a whole rather than treating subgroups or individual instruments.
mastering? 
I think Atlantis could shed a little light on this…
EQ-ing - Mixing - Mastering - Finalizing - etc…
Shed a little light oooh lord!
So that we can see-eee…
Just a little light ohh loord…
shed - some - light - loooooooord
…
(James Taylor)
Oh 
are you sure?
You mean all single instruments?
I do that while composing, and during soundresearch… Eq ing every instrument to sound bright or big to fit the mix right…
But i guess you mean doing that after the composing proces.
edit
ah i get it… the whole final mix… I forgot to mention i run psp vintage warmer (compression) and some Eq on the final mix… But i adjust the paramaters with only my ears, there’s no strategy there.
What you’re describing there is exactly what mixing is. Processing each instrument with EQ and whatnot to get everything sounding right to fit the mix.
But, OK, that PSP part may still have been a sort of pre-mastering step, but from what I understand, you treat each of the instruments again with individual EQ and so forth after, which kind of makes it sound more like you’re just treating each of your instruments with the character of the vintage warmer.
Mastering isn’t so much about adding character to a sound, and you also don’t really need a strategy for it. It’s just that I think you need more of a reason and a specialised approach for it to really be called mastering. I mean, if you took the render out of ACID and treated that with an equaliser, compressor and limiter, I’d call that mastering.
F4ck i forgot to log in ^
Quite a bit, as Atlantis will tell you. Hundreds for a few songs, more for a whole LP.
In my mind it’s only worth investing in a 3rd party if you’re releasing an LP, otherwise you’re better off learning how to mix your individual tracks better all by yourself. It will improve your song writing too.
I use Audition 1.5, with vst and dx support. With the 32 float you can get really smooth sounds. There are pleanty of good vsts out there to give you a nice analogue sound if you want it, Isotope Ozone 3 is a worthy investment if you want all kinds of grunt and dirt. For real dirt, get real analogue hardware - nothing beats it. But, as a fidelity freak I’d suggest that everyone concentrait on digital-clarity.
Having good reference monitors is the key, in a workable accoustic space (i.e. no harmonic reflections). Focus on EQ first: A-B reference your tracks with “pro” tracks of the same genre. Then, hunt out as much unnecessary bass frequencies as possible. You will then get more lattitute for hard-limmiting-boosting with the overall db.
Use EQ to then hunt out harsh high-mids. Eg. if you are using distortion, you can get nastiness around 5k. Sometimes small notches around 300hz and 600hz can be tasteful, as well as 3k. Be patient, use subtle notches on a parametric equaliser, and hone into what each track needs for ultimate listenability.
The final step with EQ is boosting the trebbles, but gingerly. Anything above 22k can be boosted to give that crisp modern sound. At this stage, if you are finding things are too harsh you’re probably using cheep synths and samples (which can be cleaned up a bit in the premix).
Then, take the same gentle experiementing approach to compression and limmiting (which I will not write an essay about here). Presets nearly always get you into trouble - learn to control and understand each parameter.
Check your final mix against pro tracks, and then in a few days time when your ears are fresh.
Get help, ask other music enthusiasts how your mix sounds. They will point out things you are overlooking.
Be careful with mastering studios, they may dirty up your sound in undesirable ways. There is a great deal of work out there that is mastered very poorly, and very loudly. This does not equate to good.