Advice for hobbyist compiling a CD

heatmiser

mr. green christmas
Hi,

I imagine that different facets of this question have been answered here already over the years, but I'm trying to organize my thoughts on all of this, so I pose this as a general question in the Mastering forum hoping that it is relevant enough to belong here. I'm thinking others have been, or currently are, in a similar situation...

Say you are a hobbyist who writes and records your own tunes. Over the course of say 2 years or so, you compile maybe 8 tunes that seem like they might actually be able to form a complete "album". You're pretty happy with each individual mix, but never mixed them with the intention of having them played back to back to back, so there's no real continuity. How does one approach this?

In my case, a lot has changed over the last 2 years, so the mixes, levels, and overall tone of each tune varies greatly. The first 3 have really nice sounding drum loops with big, airy sounds from the overheads and room mics and lots of cymbal work, while the other 5 have me playing a nice beginner kit with not so great mics and mostly just kick, snare & HH. Really gives them a distinctly different overall feel. Both sounds are ok, but I actually prefer the real drums.

So, can an M.E. (maybe I should say, would they be willing to?) work with wildly different source material and still create a cohesive whole? I guess it depends on the material itself and how much one is willing/able to spend, right?

Or, as a hobbyist with no great ambition in terms of success/sales, would one normally just work with the existing tracks, throw them all in one project and master them yourself to the best of your own ability?

Or, do people in this situation typically go back and re-record all of the songs consecutively so that they sound more like they're all part of the same project?

Maybe I just retrack the drums on the ones with loops and hope that brings the 8 songs together more somehow?

Lastly, are 8 tracks (maybe an average of 4+ mins. each?) really enough to comprise a "CD", or is that really more of an "EP"...?

Sorry, just really confused by all of this...any thoughts?
 
Last edited:
I personally think 8 songs is shy of a cd. Peter Gabriel comes to mind with his 'So' album that had only 9 songs. But they were 9 really good songs, so most folks don't think about it. I shoot for 12, myself. Almost there with my latest one.

A mastering engineer can pull the songs together and get them to sonically sound similar, but as you already noted, the content is going to be different. He can set levels across all songs to the same and eq so they're hitting the same freq's, etc, but there's not gonna be any magic that's gonna add stuff that ain't there to get the old stuff matching the new stuff.

Having said that, your songs are all YOU and they still sound very similar. In the truest sense of the word, they are an album, regardless of which drumset you used or how you recorded the songs. An ME can deal with 2 years of recordings and make a cd out of them, no problem. Think about compilation cd's where many different bands have songs on one cd. Those cd's still sound pretty decent and those are different bands recording in different studios.

I wouldn't mind trying to master your songs, myself. I did my 2nd cd myself and it came out okay. Got some good comments about the total package from people who I trust to tell the truth.

I probably didn't asnwer any of your questions..... :(
 
So, can an M.E. (maybe I should say, would they be willing to?) work with wildly different source material and still create a cohesive whole? I guess it depends on the material itself and how much one is willing/able to spend, right?
I can't speak for everybody, but I'd feel pretty safe to say that the average mastering engineer works on projects with wildly different source material on a regular basis.

Pick any compilation for that matter.

But there are plenty of projects that come in where a dozen different studios were used, there might be 10 engineers across 15 tracks, even wildly different styles of music on one artist's project.

The point is to make it cohesive to some extent - while making it sound like it was done that way "on purpose" --
 
I personally think 8 songs is shy of a cd. Peter Gabriel comes to mind with his 'So' album that had only 9 songs. But they were 9 really good songs, so most folks don't think about it. I shoot for 12, myself. Almost there with my latest one.

A mastering engineer can pull the songs together and get them to sonically sound similar, but as you already noted, the content is going to be different. He can set levels across all songs to the same and eq so they're hitting the same freq's, etc, but there's not gonna be any magic that's gonna add stuff that ain't there to get the old stuff matching the new stuff.

Having said that, your songs are all YOU and they still sound very similar. In the truest sense of the word, they are an album, regardless of which drumset you used or how you recorded the songs. An ME can deal with 2 years of recordings and make a cd out of them, no problem. Think about compilation cd's where many different bands have songs on one cd. Those cd's still sound pretty decent and those are different bands recording in different studios.

I wouldn't mind trying to master your songs, myself. I did my 2nd cd myself and it came out okay. Got some good comments about the total package from people who I trust to tell the truth.

I probably didn't asnwer any of your questions..... :(

Thanks for your thoughts Chili, and yes, you did answer some of my questions! Looking back, my post is rather long and so specific to me that it probably isn't fair to try to get all of that answered in this setting.

Anyway, for good or ill, the 8 songs are probably more like 40 mins total, so 5 mins. each on average - probably still not a full album's worth. I have way more than 4 other tunes, but I would have to dig pretty deep into the old catalog to find them and thus they'd likely just be filler. I probably need some new material or would have to go some kind of EP route.

Different content I understand and embrace. It was the "making them sonically sound similar" part I was worried about.

I am intrigued by your offer. Thank you. I "mastered" each track individually within my Roland - basically just applying a limiter to varying degrees and some EQ to the final mix. The Roland has lots of complex instructions for working on multiple mixes as a mastering "project", coding all of the breaks, something about "redbook" format or something...? It just sounds really complex, but I could try to delve into it a little at least.
 
I can't speak for everybody, but I'd feel pretty safe to say that the average mastering engineer works on projects with wildly different source material on a regular basis.

Pick any compilation for that matter.

But there are plenty of projects that come in where a dozen different studios were used, there might be 10 engineers across 15 tracks, even wildly different styles of music on one artist's project.

The point is to make it cohesive to some extent - while making it sound like it was done that way "on purpose" --

Ok, thank you Massive. That makes sense.

I guess I was thinking that the typical mastering project was one band who went into a studio with an album's worth of material and recorded all of the songs in consecutive sessions over the course of days, weeks, months - whatever.

It is good to know that it is not unusual for you or others to have to work with sonically varied batches of tunes. I think some continuity in terms of levels and tonal flavor is important, but variation, as long as it sounds "on purpose" as you say, is probably fine.

I'm kind of a glass-half-empty kind of guy, so probably was just trying to find an excuse not to do this. I'm sure I'll think of some other obstacles :p!
 
I think 8 songs could constitute an album, .. probably on the low song count side but these days there isn't really a standard to length like there was in the vinyl days.

Also with continuity, and songs being done over a long period of time with different sonics... Most ME's are prepared to deal with that. Getting songs to sit together sonically is part of the gig.
 
I think 8 songs could constitute an album, .. probably on the low song count side but these days there isn't really a standard to length like there was in the vinyl days.

Also with continuity, and songs being done over a long period of time with different sonics... Most ME's are prepared to deal with that. Getting songs to sit together sonically is part of the gig.

Thank you. That is very reassuring as well. I might be able to to revamp 2 older tunes to get them up to snuff...10 might be a better number.

I might be putting the cart before the horse a bit here. I've been reading the tips on your's and Massive's sites and suspect I still have some work to do on my end before proceeding.

It's all a bit overwhelming, but I feel like producing at least one legit CD would sort of legitimize all the time spent on this obsessive hobby.
 
What you outline in your post is pretty much the norm for a mastering engineer. The goal is not always the same depending on the communications / of ideas the producer of the material has but it would be normal to bring the tracks into line with each other to produce an end product that both works as a whole and ideally as individual tracks. The skill is finding the sweet spot to aim for which serves the music best and introduces the least compromise.

cheers

SafeandSound Mastering
Online mastering studio
 
I and probably many more feel the same way. I hope it works out well for you.

Cool. Thanks man!

What you outline in your post is pretty much the norm for a mastering engineer. The goal is not always the same depending on the communications / of ideas the producer of the material has but it would be normal to bring the tracks into line with each other to produce an end product that both works as a whole and ideally as individual tracks. The skill is finding the sweet spot to aim for which serves the music best and introduces the least compromise.

cheers

SafeandSound Mastering
Online mastering studio

Thanks for your input S&S. That is reassuring as well, although I'm sure there are limits as to what you can work with in terms of inconguous recordings. Again, I guess it depends on the individual's goals to some extent.

I guess I really thought that most projects sent to M.E.s were mostly tracked consecutively with primarily the same gear and stuff (like I mentioned above), but I guess with the increase in hobbyists and one-man-bands over the years, that may've changed if it was in fact ever the standard.
 
Sorry none of this helps Pete, but.......

Say you are a hobbyist who writes and records your own tunes. Over the course of say 2 years or so, you compile maybe 8 tunes that seem like they might actually be able to form a complete "album". You're pretty happy with each individual mix, but never mixed them with the intention of having them played back to back to back, so there's no real continuity. How does one approach this?
From that fateful day of Easter '73 when I played the Jackson five's "Maybe Tomorrow" LP over and over throughout the day {apart from an hours break to watch the football}, I've been an albums person. I've always liked singles and even now I'll pick up an individual track if I really like it but that was the day the balance shifted for ever, the era of the individual download {a great idea, by the way} hasn't dented that. I can't say that I've ever noticed major differences in terms of where and when songs were recorded on specific albums.
So, can an M.E. (maybe I should say, would they be willing to?) work with wildly different source material and still create a cohesive whole?
I'd be hugely shocked, highly disappointed and horrendously miffed if an ME told me they couldn't.
I can't speak for everybody, but I'd feel pretty safe to say that the average mastering engineer works on projects with wildly different source material on a regular basis.
Lastly, are 8 tracks (maybe an average of 4+ mins. each?) really enough to comprise a "CD", or is that really more of an "EP"...?
but these days there isn't really a standard to length like there was in the vinyl days.
Anyway, for good or ill, the 8 songs are probably more like 40 mins total, so 5 mins. each on average
The one thing that I like CDs for over vinyl is this; the standard length of an album is now longer because if you want, a single album can be 80 minutes, which, in the old days would've been a double album. In general.
But also in the old days, albums ran anywhere from 28 minutes {the 11 songs of "Back in the USA" by the MC5} to 50+ minutes {"Aftermath" - the Rolling Stones} and even 60+ minutes {"Initiation" - Todd Rundgren}. So I don't really see 8 songs at 40 minutes or so as being shortchanging. There were far shorter albums than that. 40 minutes was pretty much standard. There's a number of C120 cassettes I have that have 3 full albums on them.
I would have to dig pretty deep into the old catalog to find them and thus they'd likely just be filler.
On the other hand, many of history's great albums were padded with 'filler' that the lovers of those albums loved anyway. I've long felt that what an artist may consider filler is largely irrelevant to the listener ~ unless the listener dislikes it !

Also with continuity, and songs being done over a long period of time with different sonics... Most ME's are prepared to deal with that. Getting songs to sit together sonically is part of the gig.
I'm never working on one project at a time. I have the most haphazard way of working which is dependent on so many variables so any of the albums I may eventually create will be a mishmash of things recorded at different times, with different drummers and different mic placements and drum set ups, same with bass and other instruments and different reverbs and/or delays on vocals if there are any. Then if I use VSTis, they'll all be set up differently, sometimes with effects, mainly not, sometimes DI, sometimes out of an amp and miked at different angles with different mics. And the timing of elements between songs could be months or years. In fact, it could be months or years within the same song ! It might be two or three years before I'd get around to recording a vocal or getting a vocal recorded.
No two songs will feature exactly the same sonic elements recorded the same way on the same day.
I have a friend that does mastering. He's said he'll do some of my stuff when I'm ready. I've no real idea what to expect {I'm hopeless in this department} but one thing I do expect is that he'll be able to do it, whatever 'it' is !
I feel like producing at least one legit CD would sort of legitimize all the time spent on this obsessive hobby.
My kids from time to time ask me "Why are you doing all this recording ? What's it all for ?". I've thought in terms of albums since I was 10. Even if no one ever hears them, I've always recorded songs with the intention of organizing the songs into albums. I've done 10 thus far, the first 5 are pretty unlistenable for the most part :facepalm: but they at least exist. I'm currently working on mixing about 14 lousilly recorded cassette portastudio ones before I get to what I've been doing on the DAW these last few years.
I thoroughly enjoy all of this. I love learning and experimenting but I prefer creating and doing . As I've said before, it's like I'm inwardly compelled to do it. It's like farting, it has to come out.
 
~ unless the listener dislikes it !

Ha! That is sort of what I was getting at there.

It's like farting, it has to come out.

Ewwww. I'd prefer not to subject people to sonic farts.

Thanks for all of your thoughts grim. Of course I understand that on some level, anything is possible. Someone would probably master whatever I gave them if the price was right and they were in great enough need of work. Although not normally a slave to convention, I seem concerned in this area at least with what is typically done and what is customary. I guess because I find MEs kind of intimidating?

No one so far seems to think that what I'm describing is a big deal, which is great.
 
Man you are asking some great and (for me) topical questions. Like you I've never released anything. It's funny that you have the impression that your stuff doesn't hang well together. You have a unique sonic imprint - there is no mistaking your sound and style. I've done my share of car listening of my self made heat playlist and everything hangs together well. I do think your last four or five things you have dropped here - starting with my introduction to your stuff - which I guess would probably be paper cup (?) are getting increasingly good-er-er in terms of production quality.

FWIW, and if you were to ask me - I would think about doing a 5 song EP of your absolute strongest stuff. Leave absolutely no doubt that the thing stays strong end to end - 100%.
 
8 songs, 40 minutes is fine in my book. A lot of CDs are too long anyway IMHO... I've made three to date and they've all been 40 - 45 minutes, I think.

You could always have really long song titles to make it seem like there's more... ;)

I'm assuming there that it's all killer, no filler, of course! I'm sure it is... :)
 
Thanks guys. Now I'm confused again!

Grim is basically saying anything goes and just include whatever tracks I want regardless of vintage or production quality.

Chuck is saying, "I've heard your stuff, and you should stick with 5" :p

Armistice is saying 8 songs is fine, but they better all be awesome.

:D

Do MEs ever offer objective advice on stuff like which songs to keep and which to ditch? Do they offer opinions on song order too?

I guess normally the "artist" would have strong feelings about all of that, but I don't think I do. I have trouble being objective about my own stuff as I think a lot of others do too.
 
TBH Pete Im not sure what you consider filler is really that....if I went downt the route of only using the songs I thought were strongest Id have a four track EP..

If I were you id take two from "the best of the rest" and make it ten tracks...album length or not 8 tracks does seem on the short side of things...Im not sure anyone counts an album by minutes


When Ive had my stuff mastered Ive had tracks sent back and been asked to stick the kick up by another 2db...I asked for any comments on the mixes to be sent back.. but we were aware as an amateur, and with songs that spanned quite a range of experience levels, that there were going to be inconsistency...the ME will still do his best to make them a coherent whole
 
Chuck is saying, "I've heard your stuff, and you should stick with 5"

Not quite :-) Picking 5 is not a reflection on the quality of your stuff. IMO - 8 is too small for an 'album', too big for an EP. You picked 8, and kinda sorta gave me the impression that to get any more than that you would have to reach into , as kcearl eloquently put it ' the best of the rest'. So to my mind it doesn't make sense to move UP to a full album, it makes more sense to go DOWN to an EP. Offer additional material as download only, and a freebie.

Others have put forth that 8 songs is cool for an album - so opinions vary....

I would not let an ME help you pick the material. I would let kcearl, rami, rob, greg and I do that lol
 
Thanks Chuck and KC...some additional varied opinions...you all make good points.

Chuck, I was just kidding about my summary of your comments, but you probably knew that.

Honestly, I'm not any closer to deciding how to approach this, but I really appreciate all of the input so far.
 
Chuck, I was just kidding about my summary of your comments, but you probably knew that..

You keep kidding, and I keep up my ridiculously long unnecessary explanations. It's kind of our schtick. As far as advice, I am a horrible person to listen to lol. 25 years recording never released a thing. So to give you the advice I am constitutionally incapable of following myself - just get that shit out there. And finish that solo. That's about it.
 
Back
Top