The following is the order of the analogue mastering equipment in my Studio B chain. Individual processors can be bypassed or adjusted depending on the track, and the routing can be changed using the Flock Patch when required.

The first processor in my mastering chain is the Zombie Recording Company Mammut. This is a dedicated low-frequency enhancement and control processor, and it's an excellent place for me to begin shaping the master.

Think of it as a tool that concentrates specifically on the low end. It gives me EQ and compression-style control over the bass frequencies, allowing me to enhance, shape and tighten that part of the frequency spectrum.

Getting the low end into the right place early in the chain is particularly useful because it can influence how later compressors react.

If the bass is excessive or uneven, it can cause unwanted gain reduction further down the signal path. By dealing with it first, I can create a more controlled foundation for the rest of the mastering process.

It's a brilliant piece of equipment, and I really enjoy what it brings to the mastering chain.

Next in the chain is the Bettermaker PEQ Core, a digitally controlled analogue equaliser inspired by classic Pultec-style processing.

One thing I particularly like about this unit is that I don't need to physically touch it. The hardware is controlled through its plug-in, and the settings can be recalled automatically.

The unit itself doesn't need to sit directly in front of me. I've positioned it elsewhere in the studio because the entire operation is handled from the computer.

In my mastering chain, I tend to use the PEQ Core primarily for enhancing and sweetening the high frequencies.

I might add some top-end presence while simultaneously shaping or rolling off parts of the extreme high-frequency range to create a particular tonal curve.

The PEQ Core is also excellent for low-frequency processing, but because I have other equipment dedicated to that part of the spectrum, I generally use it differently.

This is an important point when building a mastering chain. Just because a piece of equipment can do something doesn't mean it needs to perform every function it offers.

After the PEQ Core, the signal enters what I consider the main EQ section of my mastering chain.

This consists of two equalisers: the Black Box Analog Design HG-Q and the WesAudio ngTubeEQ.

I like to think of these two processors as one extended equalisation system, with each contributing its own characteristics and controls.

The Black Box operates in stereo within this section of the chain, while I normally use the ngTubeEQ in mid-side mode.

This gives me a combination of stereo equalisation, analogue tonal character and the additional precision of mid-side processing.

They're two very different equalisers, but in my experience they complement each other extremely well.

Once I've completed the initial equalisation stage, the signal moves into my compression section.

Rather than using a single compressor to perform all the dynamic control, I like to combine two different types of compression.

First is the WesAudio ngBusComp, a VCA bus compressor. After that is the WesAudio ngTubeComp.

I really enjoy the way these two compressors work together because they offer different characteristics.

On the track shown in the video, the ngBusComp is only applying a small amount of compression, mainly catching peaks rather than heavily controlling the mix.

One feature I use is the sidechain high-pass filter. In this example, I have it set to around 150 Hz.

That means low frequencies below the filter setting contribute less to triggering compression, while the compressor remains capable of reducing the overall signal level.

The ngTubeComp follows and can provide additional dynamic control, including responding to the low-frequency content.

I think of the pair as working together to achieve a more balanced result, rather than relying on one compressor to do everything.

It isn't literally multiband compression because the signal isn't being split into independent frequency bands. However, the sidechain filtering and different compression characteristics allow me to approach the dynamics in a more controlled way.

After the compression stage, the signal moves into my Bettermaker Mastering EQ.

I use this unit for a very different purpose from the earlier equalisers.

By this point, I've already shaped the general sound and applied the compression I want.

Now I can use the Bettermaker to make very clean and precise adjustments, bringing out particular frequencies and enhancing areas of the mix.

The Bettermaker has a more transparent and clinical character than some of the valve-based equipment earlier in my mastering chain.

That's exactly why I like having it in this position.

Rather than adding more obvious analogue colour, I can make subtle additive EQ adjustments and bring out the sweet spots of the finished master.

It's a really useful way to finish shaping the frequency balance after the compressors have done their work.

The next processor is the WesAudio ngOmniBox.

This is a relatively recent addition to my mastering chain and gives me several additional processing options in one unit.

After I've finished shaping and compressing the track, I can use the OmniBox to apply further processing when something else is needed.

Depending on the master, this might involve additional equalisation, compression, saturation, clipping or stereo-width adjustments.

The reason I like having it towards the end of the chain is that it acts as an additional finishing processor.

I don't necessarily need every function on every song, but having the options available is extremely useful.

In the video, the OmniBox isn't actively processing the master I'm recalling. That's because the track was originally mastered before I added the OmniBox to the system.

I've included it in the recall chain so I have the option to use it if required.

One of the particularly useful features of my OmniBox setup is its analogue insert.

I use this with my HUM Audio LAAL limiter.

The LAAL is an exceptional piece of analogue equipment, but unlike much of the rest of my mastering chain, it doesn't offer the same digitally recallable controls.

To work around this, I use WesAudio ngLeveler gain-control stages around the LAAL.

This gives me digitally recallable input and output level adjustments for the limiter.

For example, I can increase the signal being sent into the LAAL to achieve more limiting, then reduce the output level to compensate.

Being able to recall those gain settings is very useful when returning to a mastering session.

It doesn't make the LAAL's own physical controls digitally recallable, but it gives me recallable control over the levels going into and coming out of the unit.

It's a clever solution that allows me to integrate a traditional analogue limiter into a largely digitally recallable mastering system.

Once the signal has passed through my analogue mastering chain, it's converted back into the digital domain and returned to Pro Tools.

At this point, I have the opportunity to apply further processing using software plug-ins.

This is another important part of my mastering workflow, because there are certain things that digital processing can do extremely well.

Depending on the track, I might use tools for mono bass management, dynamic resonance control, final limiting or other corrective adjustments.

Some of the plug-ins I use include iZotope Ozone, soothe and additional mastering processors.

These are generally used to achieve things that either aren't practical with the analogue equipment or are better suited to a digital environment.

The important thing is that I don't see analogue and digital processing as opposing approaches.

They each have strengths, and combining them gives me a much wider range of options.

When people discuss analogue versus digital mastering, the conversation sometimes becomes unnecessarily divided.

You'll hear some engineers argue that analogue hardware is essential, while others prefer to work entirely inside the computer.

Personally, I think limiting yourself to either approach means potentially overlooking some excellent tools.

Analogue equipment can provide beautiful tonal characteristics, compression behaviour and saturation. These are qualities I enjoy and use regularly in my mastering work.

At the same time, digital audio processing has developed enormously. There are exceptional plug-ins available for precise equalisation, dynamic processing, stereo control and limiting.

Rather than deciding that one approach must be better than the other, I prefer to use whichever tool produces the result I'm looking for.

That's what makes a hybrid mastering chain so powerful.

One of my favourite things about this particular mastering chain is that almost everything can be controlled and recalled digitally.

In a traditional analogue mastering studio, recalling a previous session can involve manually resetting the controls on every piece of equipment.

That can be time-consuming, particularly when you're working with a large collection of hardware.

With my setup, the control plug-ins represent the physical equipment in the mastering racks.

When I open a project, the digitally controlled units can recall their saved settings.

If I change a setting and decide I preferred the original, I can simply undo the adjustment.

Combined with the Flock Audio Patch system, this allows me to work with an extensive analogue mastering chain while retaining much of the convenience of working inside a DAW.

That's particularly valuable at Audio Animals, where I regularly move between different projects and return to previous masters for revisions.

If you're building your own mastering chain, my advice is to start by understanding what each processor is doing.

Think about whether you want to shape the tone before compression, apply more transparent equalisation afterwards, or introduce limiting at a particular stage.

Experiment with moving processors around and listen to how changing the order affects the finished sound.

An EQ placed before a compressor can change how that compressor responds to the music.

Move that same EQ after the compressor and it can produce a noticeably different result because the compressor is now reacting to the signal before that EQ adjustment.

The same principle applies throughout the chain.

Don't feel that you must copy somebody else's setup exactly. Every engineer has different equipment, different preferences and different requirements.

Over time, you'll develop a signal path that feels natural and gives you consistent results.