I still asking myself, when i read and must realize cheaper stuff are not the big deal to get closer results.

So I don´t know how it can work in the best way, to finallize a mix and tracking the master output two times on serveral mono channels and convert/bouncing them as a stereo track after that!?

Cause I won´t buy the next semipro shissl what kills the stereo image or ads noise, be out of phase in linked stereo mode....Like the KT369 or comparable stuff...

So what´s the best way with one comp54,the other hw comps i own are more or less only helpfull for especial tracking needs..

In mastering you should hear what you are doing.. this works in an experimental stage and for fun, but not for mastering. If you say you won't go cheap, than invest in propper mastering gear or use plugins.

This comes up often. I thought of it myself back in the day. It doesn't really work because the tracks influence each other. You would have to jump through some ridiculous hoops to generate signals to feed the sidechains in order to spoof the compressor into thinking that the other channel was attached

You think cheap gear will "kill the stereo image"!

Save your money and buy a used stereo unit, or even second Comp 54. It has stereo link. You can believe that mastering ITB "lacks mojo" all you want, but at least it won't add noise and it won't wobble back and forth, and you can hear what you are doing.

IMO, there is no best way to do stereo compression in two mono passes, because all the ways to do this suck. Compression is not EQ. Each channel affects the other. And I think @ Konfus makes an excellent point. You really want to hear what you are getting while you are doing it.

The decisions you make are more important than "hardware mojo". I disagree with the idea - common around here - that any and all hardware is magically "blessing" your audio by the mere fact that your audio has been passed through it. They are tools. You many not like ITB, but at least the stereo compressors there are the correct tools for the job.

This is the Low End. There are places on this website where your GAP compressor is considered semipro. Just sayin'

If the OP wants to try this and see whether the results please him, I would encourage him to go ahead and do it.
What is technically wrong with this separate L/R compression approach is an abstract thing unless the OP can actually hear the left/right wobbling that will probably result (unless the track is essentially mono to begin with).
Sometimes your ear and brain like things that shouldn’t sound right. Once upon a time distorting a guitar in any way was considered basically and technically wrong.

If your comp had a sidechain input (which it doesn't) you could route a stereo summed send to the compressors sidechain before processing L and R separately. This would create stable L/R balance after the mono tracks were processed.
This is still more trouble than it's worth, because you are also losing out on any ability to process Mid Side information. It prevents you from dialing back the bass on the sides, or boosting the lead instrument in the middle channel, etc
IMO this is taking a step backward and can only lead to headaches.

The workflow issues raised by Konfus are real-world - not abstract or a matter of taste. Irrespective of the linking, sidechain, stereo image wobbling, etc you have to guess at your actual compressor settings, run it twice, and only then do you get finally get to hear what your master actually sounds like.

Of course trial and error works. But no one says it's fast. There are two reasons why nobody does this. Sounding bad may be a matter of personal taste, but being a total pain in the ass, is not.

He specifically singled out prosumer gear complaining that cheap units will "kill the stereo image" and be "out of phase in linked stereo mode". Seems likely that he can hear it, and probable that he won't like it.

I didn’t get the impression that he’d actually tried anything he was writing about.
As to method, I’d just listen to one side and set the compressor for what sounded best on that. Record that and use the same settings to record the other side. Listen to them together as L/R and make a judgement about the results.
But I don’t see a reason to do that for myself.

This time for mastering I still experiment, for the first moment I´m using a Lindell Te-100 with light EQ settings arround +3db and after it TDR Kotelnikov GE and Molot GE with a blend amount of 60% "fet" and 40% "opto" compression and Hornetplugins Tape mk2 at the end.

The Behringer comps are not really helpful, but good for the drum bus.

But at the end to finalize harsh sounding electronic stuff, two small preamps with 12au7 tubes loaded are my cheap trick, to get smooth sounding results.

So at this point a second comp54 would be the holly grail for my semipro needs?

Access analog might sound better then two comp 54s if you have cheap converters

Nice, I didn´t catch that at all , that i can use hardware now via online remote for the money of visiting a restaurant .

So your advice stopped me to check out the double mono compression via comp54!

So these analog service or visit a friendly studio owner would be the better way....

Cheap Converters!? hmm i own a aged fireface uc with AKM4620 converters and now after repair some upgraded caps in the output, but maybee that´s a point in the future. Not really interested to buy a new highclass interface next time, so upgrade the input caps would make more sense....

The difference betweeen the original brown rme caps and new panasonic fm caps are really noticeable, like a filter has gone, when I´m listening on my eve monitors.

Thanks for your hint

You could try turning your L/R signal into Mid/side, and compressing those two signals. Then reverting it to L/R.

My comp54 mk2 does not have a sidechain input, but thanks I´ve found the following discussion to my question and now i understand, that dual mono compression can work for M/S decoded tracks of fewer voices relatively well, without sidechain input, but at the end the will be phase issues what can be a big problem with more voices in the soundfield, as i understand this statement correctly.
But my compressor offers a stereo link function, so i will look in the near future, cause i like the diode comp sound.

https://messageboard.tapeop.com/view...r+mono&t=38771

Your post is difficult to understand. Your linked thread from 2005 has the same information as this thread. Unless the stereo source has almost no stereo information, your combined master will have some wobble.
You make some reference to separately compressing mid and side submasters of a stereo master. That requires knowledge of creating, manipulating and recombining the mid/side elements of the original mix, but it should eliminate any wobble of the center elements in the recombined mix.