How Studying Serban Ghenea's Mixes Made Me a Better Mastering Engineer
“Because I’d analyzed bus compression in Serban’s mixes, I could hear what the problem was and knew how to fix it. I applied the techniques I’d learned, and the compression improved the track, enhancing its movement. The result was a punchier track with a harder-hitting groove. Additionally, I could reduce the overall level reaching my limiter while still maintaining loudness.”
Each morning, I pull up a track mastered by one of the greats and work on matching it. This hands-on analysis teaches me things no tutorial ever could.
Most engineers consume content passively—watching YouTube videos, reading forums, hoping to absorb wisdom through osmosis. But there's a difference between knowing about a technique and truly understanding it.
I reverse-engineer mastering decisions using mixes I've collected over the years from generous friends and clients.
In many cases, it's impossible to access the original mix files, but if stems are available, you can sum them to create a mix close enough to the original that the analysis practice remains worthwhile. This gives me access to tracks I might not otherwise be able to study.
My favorite stems are from Serban Ghenea mixes. When his stems are summed, they're very close to the stereo mix files that mastering engineers would have worked from. As John Hanes, Serban's engineering partner, mentioned in this interview, you can get very close to the original mix by reducing the gain and applying bus compression.
These particular stems require me to recreate the original mix bus compression, so I can study the compression in isolation.
The key question: how much and what type of bus compression should be used? Working to match the bus compression is not only an excellent learning experience but also adds another valuable tool to my arsenal.
As I work on emulating one of these masters, matching the bus compression becomes part of the process. I combine careful listening and metering tools, such as the MetricAB plugin and VU meters, to reverse-engineer the compressor settings.
Once I have it dialed in, I spend time A/B testing the track with and without the compression. This comparative listening is the most important part of the learning process. It allows you to develop an intuitive understanding of what bus compression can do for a track. You'll start to recognize how a track sounds when it's not dialed in, indicating the need for more compression.
When I remove the bus compression from these tracks, they sound flatter and less dynamic. Reapplying it introduces movement, dimensionality, and space, enhancing punchiness and dynamics.
Another benefit is that the RMS level of the track increases with bus compression, so you don't need to push the limiter as hard. This reduced strain on the limiter allows for better retention of the transients, resulting in a more impactful master.
Last week, I worked on a rock track that sounded great, but it was slightly saturated and flat, reminiscent of the tracks I described earlier with the bus compression removed. The track was mid-range heavy, with limited movement in the lower frequencies. I realized bus compression could be beneficial here, even at the mastering stage.
Because I'd analyzed bus compression in Serban's mixes, I could hear what the problem was and knew how to fix it. I applied the techniques I'd learned, and the compression improved the track, enhancing its movement. The result was a punchier track with a harder-hitting groove. Additionally, I could reduce the overall level reaching my limiter while still maintaining loudness.
This is why active study matters. Tutorials teach you what compression does. Hands-on analysis teaches you when and how to use it.
The best engineers didn't learn from watching videos. They learned by doing the work—analyzing and applying what they discovered.
