tune mastering nightmare!

Protoplasym I'd like to know the name of this guy you were watching making this 'limiting job' master you speak of. In PM if you don't want to disclose his name to the public.

There are millions of digital mastering 'houses' popping up nowadays trying to convince every bedroom producer that mastering is an essential part of production and that affordable digital mastering is just what's needed to make that latest floor stormer of yours really shine. But whether they are worth it is a completely another matter. I'm sure for a beginner it is very hard and might even be impossible to DIY simply because they might not know what is involved and why. So in that case it might be worth it to pay 12£ for the process. But as you get more experience and knowledge you will be able to do simple home masters yourself (depending mostly on your listening environment), since the same plugins these small mastering chop shops use are in the reach of your average producer when it comes to price. For example Ozone 4: 250$. T-Racks 3 150€, and even a PSP bundle with a limiter, eq and compressor would be 550$.

It's not going to be a noticeable difference to a paid master (depending a lot on the service provider of course) if you know what you are doing. And dnb heads usually do at least to some extent due to the highly technical nature of dnb.

I'm not saying these cheap mastering services are unnecessary. I'm just saying that if you understand what they are doing you can easily do it yourself.
 
For the sake of ease of reading, I'm going to break up my following posts... (apologies if this annoys anyone : )
 
glennyb said:
obviously a good mixdown makes mastering a more straight forward process. so tell me this: do you do your mixdowns in a perfect space?

these perfectly flat monitors you have, what are they? barefoots or atc's? because if so im jealous, most of us cant afford a 5 figure sum for monitors. any consumer range monitors are not perfect, as much as we'd like them to be. add that to: where they are, your room, etc, and they generally start to become a pair of glorified speakers.
Click to expand...

No disrespect, but you've already hit the nail on the head with your opening statement, but then go on to make points about things that aren't necessary (if and when the Mix is solid in every respect). If the Mix is where it needs to be then there is ZERO need to do anything on the Master Channel short of Limiting the track... that's it.

My space is not perfect... there is no such thing as a "perfect space"... some are better than others, mine is suitable and I have learned to utilize it to the fullest as does any Engineer/Producer when confronted with the space they have to work in.

I do not have "perfect monitors" either, on the contrary: I use speakers that most of you would probably think are not suitable for Production work, yet I am nailing my Mixes left and right... why... because I've learned them inside and out, along with the room... I have learned where they excel and where they do not, I've learned what they lie to me about and what they're on point about. These are old, practical Engineering rules. I've read these rules countless times in different books, sites/etc, and they have served me well. When you combine 'decent' speakers, a 'decent' room, and a decade of Experience, it doesn't take anymore than that to make good art... at least in my case. Some guys have a more natural ear than others... I've taken a 'long' time to get to where I am.. I didn't always have the room I have now, nor the speakers I have now, nor the experience.
 
glennyb said:
i dont really know where you get the idea that mastering all happens in the digital realm from either? most decent mastering studios will be using incredibly high quality analogue gear, compressors and eqs that could make you cry with pleasure they are so good. sure, its the trend to crush everything through a limiter at the end but thats really not what mastering is about. its about polishing a track and making it sound consistent, not making it as loud as possible (although that seems to be what its coming to unfortunately, fucking loudness war needs to die).
Click to expand...

I didn't say it all happens in the Digital Realm: I said Mastering in the Digital Realm is not as difficult or special as most would like it to be, or claim it to be. I'd mentioned in a previous post that if someone prefers the sound of a Hardware Limiter, then that is a slightly different ballpark.. I don't have any experience routing my material to a Hardware Limiter and then back into the Computer... I wouldn't ever mess with that route because I don't have a soundcard with high enough quality D/A - A/D converters... if I did, I might dick with it just to see what the results are but honestly, as fantastic as my Limits come out, I don't see the reason to ever contemplate going that direction with my work.

Again, if someone wants their material to go through an Analog process, then your statement has merit, but when someone only wants a digital limit: all of that is negated. If someone wants an Analog job, then yeah... but for those who don't want anything to do with that (I'm one of them : ), a studio filled with a million dollars of fantastic Hardware Comps/EQs/etc does me zero good. And now we're back to the actual fundamentals that are necessary to doing a "master" - 1. Great sounding Room 2. Great sounding speakers that don't misrepresent the sound 3. Quality Software to do said Limit 'or' whichever other tricks one wants to do at that point (MB Comp, EQ, Stereo tricks, etc). Those 3 things are not 'that' hard to come by... for people living in an apartment and are squeezed for room, yeah, I understand, having a "decent room" may not be an option. Also, not everyone can afford speakers to get the job done, and not everyone has enough experience to know what a good limit sounds like.

I'll give you those, but the point I'm trying to make is that it's no where near as impossible to attain those things as some would make others believe. As I write this, I'm wondering to myself if maybe I am in the minority of individuals who has access to all these basics to do a quality Master and maybe I am. I mean... I've been living in my current house for over 3 years and in that time, I've moved the speakers/"setup" around a couple times to get it to where it is, and before that, I'd been producing in less fortunate standing for 7+ years, so yeah, it definitely didn't come to me overnight.

I guess I just don't put a whole lot of value in what I've had to do to get where I am simply because this has always been a hobby for me, so by that token: I guess you guys have a point (as far as Mastering being worth something, monitarily speaking)... to me... it's just art, and it's fun, and now that I've gotten to where I've gotten, I can't imagine charging someone anything to do what only takes me mere minutes.


What you've listed at the bottom is NOT something that is to be done at the Mastering stage... that is what a Producer is supposed to do during the construction of the track. Polishing a track and making it sound consistent is to be done at the Mixdown stage or during the Creation process, NOT during a Master. Imo, this is a huge misconception shared by too many producers. This is why I keep saying that a 'Digital Master' is nothing more than slapping a Limiter on the Master Channel. I'd also stated that if someone feels their track needs MB Compression and EQ and Stereo Enhancing on the Master, then that is simply a personal thing.. if they feel their work sounds better that way, or if that is part of their "process" then so be it, it does not make it the definitive way to Produce a track.

If you were to take a poll of all top sounding producers in the world (signed and unsigned), you would find that everyone does their Mixdowns and Masters differently. I can respect those who feel they need a "pro Mastering Engineer" to do all these extra 'icing on top' tricks at the Master stage, but I cannot respect those that feel the need to say that's the only way to accomplish a Master, because it is not.
 
Last edited:
glennyb said:
A. and your engineer with decades of experience knows what will translate to consumer systems as well as sound good in his perfect space. he will get your track to sound that bit more special than you ever could, because he has a completely objective view, he hasnt spent hours/days/weeks slaving over it, he has not attachment, so he will make judgments that you simply cannot, because like it or not, you cannot see the track completely objectively if you wrote and mixed it.

B. plus, wouldnt you rather concentrate on the creative side of making music, rather than pissing about trying to learn how to master properly?

C. btw: im not saying you should send your tracks off to get mastered just to play them out or whatever. take the bodge job route, on most PAs noone will notice. im just saying that pro mastering is an art, and you cant just 'stick a limiter on it' and consider that even close to the same thing.
Click to expand...

A. I'm a consumer, I have multiple systems to test my work out on... does that not constitute the same thing? : ) BOLD - I completely disagree with this... it's my opionin that no one but me is going to best serve my art. There are plenty of Producers in the history of Music Production that will agree with what you said, but in the end: I would never let anyone Mix my work down and after the experience I had with getting a couple tracks mastered by a "pro" (here in Texas), I'd never let anyone "Master" my tracks again.

Case in point: I had a track "mastered" (cost me $80) that translated beautifully on everything I'd played it on (before it was mastered), and all I wanted was for it to sound louder (this was years before I knew anything about using a Limit on the Master Channel), and this guy in his "perfect room" with his "perfect speakers" promptly decided that my track was lacking in certain frequencies and was overbearing in others... I argued with him that I'd heard the bloody track in over 10 different systems and it sounded perfect yet he argued that his room sounded better than everything else I'd played the song on. I went along and entertained him and told him to do his best... know what he did in his "perfect studio"... he went to town with EQ on the entire mix, used an abundance of Multi-Band Compression, and even did some weird tricks with the Stereo Image... and it sounded pretty cool in the "perfect studio".

Too bad after I left the studio, all the previous systems that the track had sounded good on (they ranged from a cheap Stereo to multiple top notch car stereos to different computer setups) didn't sound good anymore. The guy completely botched the track up with his "objective view" of what my track should have sounded like. One can blame him, or their setup, yada... the excuses could be endless.. my point is that his perception of what my track should sound like would never, ever match how I felt it should sound. This is the case with everything I make, no ones going to make my art soar the way I envision it.

Others feel that it takes an outside view to bring their work to life and that's fine by me, just don't expect everyone else to feel the same.

The other "pro mastering" job experience I have was with one of the top Engineers in London... all the hell he did was slap a Limit on my track, and in all honesty, I liked my Limit more than his... his was a smidge louder, and mine is a lil cleaner... NOW, he did a fantastic job on Mastering it for vinyl, something I would NOT be able to do, but that is another ballpark alltogether.

B. Fair enough... although again I disagree, I feel Mixdown and Master are integral to the creation of Music and essentially are all rolled into one. The Mixdown represents the Music so I can't differentiate between the two - they are one in the same for me. But for others like yourself who feel the way you do, fair enough: different strokes for different folks.

C. Again, no disrespect: but if you feel that "Polishing a track" and "making it sound consistent" are aspects of Mastering, then we'll simply have to politley disagree for the reasons/points I've already laid out.
 
Last edited:
kama said:
B. Protoplasym I'd like to know the name of this guy you were watching making this 'limiting job' master you speak of. In PM if you don't want to disclose his name to the public.

There are millions of digital mastering 'houses' popping up nowadays trying to convince every bedroom producer that mastering is an essential part of production and that affordable digital mastering is just what's needed to make that latest floor stormer of yours really shine. But whether they are worth it is a completely another matter. I'm sure for a beginner it is very hard and might even be impossible to DIY simply because they might not know what is involved and why. So in that case it might be worth it to pay 12£ for the process. But A. as you get more experience and knowledge you will be able to do simple home masters yourself (depending mostly on your listening environment), since the same plugins these small mastering chop shops use are in the reach of your average producer when it comes to price.A. For example Ozone 4: 250$. T-Racks 3 150€, and even a PSP bundle with a limiter, eq and compressor would be 550$.

It's not going to be a noticeable difference to a paid master (depending a lot on the service provider of course) if you know what you are doing. And dnb heads usually do at least to some extent due to the highly technical nature of dnb.

I'm not saying these cheap mastering services are unnecessary. I'm just saying that if you understand what they are doing you can easily do it yourself.
Click to expand...

Thank you sir... nails and heads and all that jazz!

A. This is all I'm stressing, guys... it's not impossible to have a decent room, decent speakers, decent software, some patience, and a good pair of ears to do quality Limits on your tunes.

For those who think Multi-Band Comp/etc/etc on the Master Channel is something that's necessary for the process to be called, "Mastering" then so be it... whatever floats your boat.

Imo (and no disrespect fellas), but if you're having to do ANY EQ or Comp or Stereo enhancement on your Master Channel (either with software or hardware) then I'd be willing to bet that 9/10 there's somethign wrong with your Mixdown and you should look there before attempting to mangle your track at the Mastering stage. Granted, (as I'd said before) there are some who enjoy utilizing those kinds of Tricks on the Master Channel because they like the sound/etc and that's fine too... but just because one feels doing EQ on the Master Channel is necessary does not mean that someone who does his homework and absolutely nails the Mixdown pre Mastering stage isn't doing a "Master" because all he has left to do is 'slap a Limiter on the Master Channel'.

B. I don't remember his name but I remember the studio... he was an English fella I remember that much... in his late twenties. This was back in '05 I wanna say. I'd only been using a compute for Production for a year at that time, lol.. it's amazing how much one can learn in five years.
 
Apologies if I sound like a pompous ass. I've come to the point to where I feel like my work speaks for itself well enough to where I can have these strong opinions about the intricacies of Production.


feel free to disagree : )



(thanks for the discussion, guys: I'm really enjoying it)
 
Protoplasym said:
I've taken a 'long' time to get to where I am..
Click to expand...

Protoplasym said:
to me... it's just art, and it's fun, and now that I've gotten to where I've gotten...
Click to expand...

Protoplasym said:
yet I am nailing my Mixes left and right...
Click to expand...

Protoplasym said:
When you combine 'decent' speakers, a 'decent' room, and a decade of Experience, it doesn't take anymore than that to make good art... at least in my case.
Click to expand...

You're so full of yourself it hurts man.

Also I find it interesting that you seem to be very confident in technical matters, your mixdowns being perfect etc. How come are you asking for feedback and criticism on a web forum then? I think you're failing to grasp one basic rule of this 'art' you speak of: People themselves are their worst critics possible. The outsider's view of things is priceless no matter how artistic you want to be: If you'd make tracks for yourself you wouldn't share them with us in the first place. This is also true in mastering. It's been said in this thread earlier but I'll say it again: You become blind/deaf to the flaws in your own work. I can prove this by quoting one of your track threads in the new talent/track section easily but I'd rather not since it was actually a good track despite of this blind spot. You just refused to see or hear something that was quite obvious to most of the listeners.

I know I said that with experience people can make their own masters as good as your average digital mastering service. So it seems we're not actually arguing here. It's just your way of presenting things that caught my attention.
 
kama said:
You're so full of yourself it hurts man.

Also I find it interesting that you seem to be very confident in technical matters, your mixdowns being perfect etc. How come are you asking for feedback and criticism on a web forum then? I think you're failing to grasp one basic rule of this 'art' you speak of: People themselves are their worst critics possible. The outsider's view of things is priceless no matter how artistic you want to be: If you'd make tracks for yourself you wouldn't share them with us in the first place. This is also true in mastering. It's been said in this thread earlier but I'll say it again: You become blind/deaf to the flaws in your own work. I can prove this by quoting one of your track threads in the new talent/track section easily but I'd rather not since it was actually a good track despite of this blind spot. You just refused to see or hear something that was quite obvious to most of the listeners.

I know I said that with experience people can make their own masters as good as your average digital mastering service. So it seems we're not actually arguing here. It's just your way of presenting things that caught my attention.
Click to expand...

Interesting... I'm sorry you feel that way. You feel that because I ask for feedback I'm unsure of my tracks.. You misunderstand the point of feedback then if you truly feel that way. Feedback means different things for different people. For me, it's fun hearing what others think... doesn't have any bearing on what I think of the track though. When someone tells me that an element in a track of mine is too loud or too quiet on their setup, I find it interesting.. to me, it doesn't mean anything definitive. Would I prefer to hear nothing but, "sounds solid on my setup Prod Wise" type comments... of course, but I imagine that will never happen... know why?... because everyone has different ears.

Yeah, lol... I guess I'm full of it when it comes to knowing what I like and how I want something to sound. When I give someone technical feedback (i.e. turn this down a couple DB, that up/etc/etc), I expect them to take it with a grain of salt. I don't expect them to think I'm right or wrong. It's always interesting to hear what others hear in terms of both Technical and Artistic aspects.

You're well entitled to your opinion, but I strongly disagree when it comes to making music. Now, that's not to say that I've never accepted a suggestion from a friend on what to do with a track, because I have... but 9/10, I rely on what 'I' want the track to do and how 'I' want it to sound. Hearing others feedback is inconsequential to that aim, but still interesting nonetheless.

Lol... whatchu got? What, the Ravey Lead in the "Bomberman" track, lol... hey, a bunch of you guys thought it was too loud, I disagree, it's right where it needs to be on everything I've listened to it on - that's why I appreciated but disregarded those suggestions to turn that element down. Speaking of that track, lol.. and you should find this quite funny, but I'm surprised no one looked at it through a SA and noticed that the Sub isn't 100% centered. I was reusing the Sub Patch I'd used in "Bomberman" for something else a couple weeks ago and noticed that it had some PWM that was causing the hits to be off centered. Lol, I have to rerender that damn thing one more time to fix that because I somehow missed that.


I'm sorry I'm hurting you with my being so full of it nature. Does this mean we're not friends anymore?
: )
 
Nah, you drive a hard conversation and I can appriceate someone who stands behind their views. I'm now sorry about the opening line of my last post but you seem to understand the point veiled behind the harsh words - from here it looks like you contradict yourself with your actions here: because as far as feedback and criticism are concerned, I've always regarded them as ways of bettering myself at whatever I do, instead of just asking for people's opinions and then disagreeing with them, as it seems to be the case with you (at least that what it looks like to me). Taking all that criticism in has sometimes been hard and has lead to major letdowns but in the end (i hope) I've learned something by it and evolved myself further.

It now seems we are very far from the original topic of mastering and we're starting to lead it to a direction where it's about the people rather than the matters at hand. For that I'm sorry but I still think that even in all your confidence and bravado you would gain a lot with a more humble mindset when it comes to music, especially your own. If you have something to reply I'll honour the argumentation and read it but I will not carry this conversation further to get the matter back on track.

PS. on the bomberman bass thing, why would you change it if it sounds good but looks bad on a spectrum view? I've never heard of anyone just listening to tunes by looking at a SA... IMO it's an urban myth that all bass has to be mono (and this might lead us back to the mastering topic with politically-correct-ninja-like guile). Only if it sounds bad when summed to mono it needs work, since some (most?) club systems have a bridged bass amp configuration that will sum to mono.
 
Last edited:
From my understanding the only reason bass below a certain frequency has to be in mono is because it's almost impossible to cut to vinyl otherwise ... actually destroys the needle lol
 
fucking hell...

feel like I've just watched a game of verbal tennis!

I think its all subjective. The person making the track will always know what they want and everyone else will want something different.


In terms of mastering... unless its for vinyl... it doesnt need to be done professionally.

Ive played out plenty of times with my tracks... ok it might be quieter if im playing from a CDJ than the vinyl that im spinning it against... but all you gotta do is crank up the volume on the mixer.

its not rocket science is it?

and like proto said... if you learn your setup well enough then there's no point spending money on something/someone that will do nothing but boost the volume by a DB.


but whatever... each to their own!
 
Back
Top Bottom