Is it okay to master in the same project or start a new one

[Trythanks Lightfoot]

When you have finished working on a record. Is it best to master the tune in the same project or to render it to a WAV file and then start a separate project session for mastering?

 

[Diouf]

If your computer can handle doing everything in one session, then go for it. Just bounce tracks and groups that are taking up too much CPU processing power where needed and you're good to go.

 

[Benzorghini]

There are advantages to separating the mastering stage and the production stage, but not all will apply to everyone:

• It keeps you focused on audio mastering since you can no longer tweak the arrangement or mix
• It eliminates the CPU and RAM (memory load) of all the individual tracks, buses (or group channels)
• A single stereo mixdown is what most mastering engineers will expect if you're having someone else master your track

If none of those apply to you, then there's no reason not to master in place.

 

[Kyle]

The simple act of removing the printed mix audio from the mixing process in your DAW and then mastering it in a separate file changes your mindset. Mixing and mastering are different arts with different goals. "Starting over" in a new file puts me at the beginning of a different step-by-step process involving different technical and auditory activities.

 

[Michael]

Doing your master in the same session as the mix usually limits you from using high-quality audio software plug-ins on your master. Limiters for example (and many other plugins) are better at higher oversampling rates or higher quality settings.

A busy mix might be full of CPU once you start adding plug-ins to the mastering chain. But if you bounce that mix into a new session. You will be starting from a clean slate for CPU and you can freely use as many plugins as you will need and with as high-quality settings as you want