Mastering Engineer Hype!

[imdrecordings]

Anyone else noticing this lately?
I mean come on... when have you listened to something and thought \"This sounds perfectly Mastered\"? Unless you were involved in the project at some point.
What's with the Mastering engineers getting the cred for an album sounding AWESOME?
I've always been 40% worried about handing over work that's finished.
I personally have had and seen many piece's sonic identity over shadowed or ruined, by \"PRO\" mastering houses. This can stem from a lot of things. Lack of communication between the producer/band and the ME or a misunderstanding. I.E.- Band/Producer is giving the ME to much credit and expecting way to much from them and has essentially given them an unfinished product. So, when you get a band/producer that give their work to an ME that believes in transparency, they get the same thing back. A louder unfinished sounding product. A growing trend, Yes? Or the label takes on the task of getting the album mastered, instead of someone related to the mixing or recording of the product. The label doesn't pay enough attention. It sounds just good enough to them and all that hard work put in before, has turned to shit, by the end product.
I've always thought ME's mostly come from the school of transparency.

Aren't ME's supposed to put creativity in the back seat?

When you stop and think about what an ME is does compared to a Mix or Recording Engineer do, they don't have much say in the product as a whole, creatively or musically. But they sure have a say on the end products packaging.
I don't mean to sound like I'm pissing on ME's. I know they aren't the ones creating this hype. But who ever has, is really missing the bigger picture and selling them selves short, IMO.

 

[boody]

Ahhh, but the line is blurring, didn't you notice? .... writer merged with arranger, arranger merged with producer, producer merged with mixer, mixer merged with masterer....

THERE CAN ONLY BE ONE :twisted:

... or it's just kwantum physics and nature takes it's course...

or I should call it a day and go to bed...

 

[Macc]

Anyone else noticing this lately?
I mean come on... when have you listened to something and thought "This sounds perfectly Mastered"?

That's a very good point - the only time I even think of the mastering on things I hear is when it's when they've ruined it * . You don't hear a really good ME


* see Wayne Shorter's 'Beyond The Sound Barrier' :x :x :x

 

[djsynchro]

My first ever record (vinyl 12\" single) was really badly recorded, basically because I didn't know much at the time. The guy who cut it spent a long long time fixing the bass end (the master sounded really thin) and it sold out of its first pressing in a couple of weeks, got picked up by some big DJs and to this day I get compliments for it from people.

Over the years he mastered a bunch of my vinyl stuff as well as 2 CDs and taught me a lot of things, such as for a thin hi hat it's better to cut a notch at 5k then to boost the highs because for vinyl that can give problems cutting. He would always tell me what frequencies he would be boosting or cutting anyway... so I learned quite a bit over the years... Respect for the ME!!!!

 

[Paul Woodlock]

A mastering engineer is supposed to get the material ready for the medium it's going to be released on.

If it's an album that means the relative levels and space between tracks. CD Codes, etc. Correcting any tonal imbalances and providng some sort of tonal balance betweentracks mixed in different studios and/or by different mix engineers.

Of course these days it's also about getting the material as loud as possible.

I know someone who sent some stuff to a matering engineer and it came bacl louder but essentially the same. The guy was disappointed. I guess he was wrongly expecting some kind of Lead into Gold situation. His mixed tracks sound fine in the first place.

I don't think that many people know what mastering actually is. I always hear alarm bells when someone lists their typical mastering chain as...

EQ
De-esser!
Compressor
More EQ
Exciter
Stereo Width Enhancer
Multibamd Compressor
Even more EQ

Frightening!!!

 

[joenovice]

I think people over-hype their expectations for \"Mastering.\" A lot of the process is related to disc specifications (Red Book, Pause length between tracks, dynamic balancing between tracks, proper song and CD titles).

It doesn't have as much to do with fixing a crappy mix. After all, you can't shine sh!t.

 

[Never1]

I wonder the hype is a product of the home studio revolution and the plethora of \"do it yourself-ers\" who assume that the mastering guy is gonna make their mixes sound like the latest Andy Wallace or Bob Clearmountain mix?

We can do everything on our own and then it's up to that mastering guy to fix all the problems....

just a thought.

 

[Eric Dahlberg]

I wonder the hype is a product of the home studio revolution and the plethora of "do it yourself-ers" who assume that the mastering guy is gonna make their mixes sound like the latest Andy Wallace or Bob Clearmountain mix?

Steve Albini's mixes seem to be intentionally lo-fi. Thanks to mastering engineers, his mixes sound lo-fi cool instead of lo-fi demo tape. There are a lot of cool sounding records, from Dinosaur Jr. to Daft Punk, that were basically saved by the mastering engineers.

Maybe we make too much out of mixing. Avoid noise, digital distortion, peaking frequencies, and rattling instruments, everything beyond that is subjective as long as there's a mastering engineer to make it sound balanced, loud, and wide in the end.

 

[imdrecordings]

I wonder the hype is a product of the home studio revolution and the plethora of "do it yourself-ers" who assume that the mastering guy is gonna make their mixes sound like the latest Andy Wallace or Bob Clearmountain mix?

Steve Albini's mixes seem to be intentionally lo-fi. Thanks to mastering engineers, his mixes sound lo-fi cool instead of lo-fi demo tape. There are a lot of cool sounding records, from Dinosaur Jr. to Daft Punk, that were basically saved by the mastering engineers.


Maybe we make too much out of mixing. Avoid noise, digital distortion, peaking frequencies, and rattling instruments, everything beyond that is subjective as long as there's a mastering engineer to make it sound balanced, loud, and wide in the end.

You can't depend on that and why would you?
This is part of the problem and I don't believe what you are saying about Steve Albini. I'm not a big fan of all of his work, but judging from his Mic collection, list of gear and credits that can't be true. His records don't sound like SteelyDan, but they are hardly Lo-fi. Take a listen to P.W. Long's album "WE DIDN'T SEE YOU ON SUNDAY" and numerous other Touch-And-Go records.

There are a lot of cool sounding records, from Dinosaur Jr. to Daft Punk, that were basically saved by the mastering engineers.

Agreed and there have been a hand full of releases, around here, that I could say the same ting about.

I agree with the comment about Home Studios furthering this trend, but is this the Voodoo of an "M.E." or the fact that an "Experienced" person has put their hands on it? And if this is the case, it looks like an ME will have to take on more responsibility than they used to..
That kind-of makes me nervous.

Essentially, I want an ME to give me back something louder, a bit more homogeneous (some times I can get carried away) and that sounds like the mix on my system, but on all systems. At least better than what I can do. Otherwise I wouldn't have anything mastered. Lately I've been having to hunt down M.E.'s that are genre specific, out of fear. Perhaps that's my hang up. But it seems to be necessary these days. Anyone else having to do this?

I just hope we aren't on our way to a place where it's a battle of mix engineers.
I don't want someone f**king with my sh*t!
I think of ME's as the people who are doing touch up work on expensive, old, rare paintings. People who know just what to do and when to stop. Before they suck the life out of something.

Ah!... I'm starting to confuse myself....

I only bring this up because I have had 2 friends who sent there stuff out for mastering (in the last 2 weeks)
both reply (when asked how their stuff sounded when it was done being mastered?)
"Eh, it's okay.... it sounds the same. I was expecting more."-quote from friend
:roll:

edit: had to add the ("")... I guess you guys thought that was me saying that.

 

[joenovice]

again.... \"I was EXPECTING more.\"

You have to know what mastering engineers do before you place unrealistic expectations.

I want an ME to give me back something louder, a bit more homogeneous (some times I can get carried away) and that sounds like the mix on my system, but on all systems.

That's not a good reason to pay a mastering engineer. You shouldn't even be talking about mastering unless you have an album or, at least, several tracks that have a specific destination (TV broadcast, CD, Radio, Film).

Forget the idea that a mastering engineer is going to make some track suddenly sound that much better. Even in the best cases, ME's only tweak what they are given.

 

[imdrecordings]

I'm talking about albums, here.
What do you mean Joe?

I also deal in a lot of independent films.
I don't know if you'll believe me, but most Indie films aren't even mastered for audio. This is taken care of by the \"Mixer\". They're only filtered for the video.
You also don't have to worry about slamming the audio to zero, either.

I don't have the skill, room or equipment to take my mix to -8rms, without things turning to shit. I'd pay some one for that last 10% of contouring, objectivity and to deal with the pressing plant.

 

[Suntower]

I pretty much agree with imdrecordings guy...

I give the guy 10 tracks that all sound fine in isolation, but may have uneven overall levels and EQ styles. He does his best to make them into a cohesive -album- ... that sound like they belong together and have an arc.

He may have to fix the odd blunder which only shows up in a really nice room.

And the result is also a lot more portable.

With each record I do, the guy I use now has less and less to do. So in one way, I'm getting a somewhat expensive schooling.

But in another way, the extra set of ears, the added sonic 'portability', PLUS the fact that it's a final line of defence before I send product in for replication---all those make it easily worth the price.

I know guys who do it themselves and to them I say, 'What Balls He Has!' :mrgreen:

---JC

 

[Schaap]

Anyone else noticing this lately?
I've always been 40% worried about handing over work that's finished.

Yep, but I've learned to communicate with the ME and essential is to make clear what your expectations or demands are.

Henk

 

[Stuart Stuart]

I've noticed a strange trend recently - on the new Veronicas album (which thank the lord, I have a small credit on), one of the producers actually mixes AND masters his own work. This is the first time I've seen this on a major label project (the album is about to go number 1 in Australia).

To be honest, I prefer to do my own mastering and mixing at the same time - it's hard to mix without knowing how the mastering compression is going to slam your kick, snare and vocals. I have a ME that I totally trust, but even so, I prefer to quality control from start to finish. Whenever I hear the an outside master come back, I always think 'geez, the snare is too loud, or the kick is too soft, or whatever'.

 

[boody]

Essentially, I want an ME to give me back something louder, a bit more homogeneous (some times I can get carried away) and that sounds like the mix on my system, but on all systems.

That sounds like a very healthy expectation. All you need is find a ME that suits your demands, understands your music and then, like Schaap said: communicate with the guy.

But the line IS blurring. No doubt. We used to have all these different disciplines. They are fading... merging...blending. I myself are a walking cocktail. Used to write songs, started to make demos: arranged those songs, then started to produce them, then record, then mix, then master ....learning a bit of every discipline along the way. Then other people started to notice my music and asked me to write, or produce, or mix, or master, but mostly a combination of those.

This is the new way... as information and gear are easier obtainable, budgets are cut and the major record industry collapses, the music industry changes: more styles, more people, less budget, less specialists, more multi disciplines.

Recent example: once I got a request to master a vinyl album for a couple of guys that started a record company. They had different tracks and made most of the music. One track had problems, so they brought in all the individual tracks, printed with only the important effects. So I mix- mastered it. You can listen to the result here: http://www.myspace.com/mindtrickrecords The first track is mix-mastered, the rest of it mastered.

So I am a songwriter/guitar guy who mixmastered breakcore for vinyl. How about that? And the beauty of it: for one of my projects I have contact with this great hero recording/mixing engineer who's next step will be producing... the lines are blurring... evolution... bring it on!

Aw, last thing: most people I know listen to a track and the only thing they comment on is if they like the song and if they like the sound. They don't care about a recording-mix-master-producer-arranger guy. They just listen to the music.

Budy

 

[Stuart Stuart]

I look at it like this ...

1) I don't want to produce a song that I haven't arranged
2) I don't want to mix a song that I haven't produced
3) I don't want to master a song that I haven't mixed.

Everything relates to everything else. A badly arrranged song will never be saved by mastering, or any other phase in the process.

 

[diggo]

I look at it like this ...

1) I don't want to produce a song that I haven't arranged
2) I don't want to mix a song that I haven't produced
3) I don't want to master a song that I haven't mixed.

Everything relates to everything else. A badly arrranged song will never be saved by mastering, or any other phase in the process.

The issue (or one of the issues) isnt whether you master your own mixes. Rather, it is whether you master your own mixes on the same system (in the same room, with the same monitoring) used to do the mix.

That is asking for trouble, as any flaws in the room/system used to do the mix are compounded, big time.

Mastering is (in part) about reducing the risk that your mix wont "fit" alongside other releases in similar genres. One of the ways to reduce the risk is to master in a good full range room/system that has been designed to reduce sonic flaws to a minimum. Most mix environments are not designed to such specs.

Sean

 

[boody]

I look at it like this ...

1) I don't want to produce a song that I haven't arranged
2) I don't want to mix a song that I haven't produced
3) I don't want to master a song that I haven't mixed.

Everything relates to everything else. A badly arrranged song will never be saved by mastering, or any other phase in the process.

Hmmm, I would say you haven't found the right people to team up with... or you've got serious control freak issues (no offense, just kidding I'm a serious believer in team work

+1 on Sean's comment (although I'm often 'forced' to sin against that principle)

 

[Stuart Stuart]

Yep, I agree with the different room theory, but I also believe that you can, by listening and referencing, listening and referencing, learn the sound of your room and compensate accordingly. For example, I always end up with a low mid build up that I don't hear until I put on a commercial master and reference. If you put on something that is meant to sound kick ass, and it DOES sound kick ass in your room, then you know what you're aiming for.

 

[LFranco]

If you're a control freak and don't feel you need someone else touching your music, then just come to terms with that.

Seriously, it's that simple.

I've worked with all sorts of people, and have enough experience by now that when I start talking to clients who give me the \"Okay, I'm sending you my stuff to get mastered, but only because everyone thinks I should, but I certainly don't want things changing much.\" - I try to persuade them to not waste their time and money (and mine). Simply because this is the type of client who 1) will automatically take any criticism on their mixes negatively, 2) will only evaluate the masters through their mixing setups and 3) doesn't have the emotional strenght to be open-minded to working with others.