Home Mastering - What Do You Use?

[gecko zzed]

OK, so they should "have the ears"...but again, how do they get that ears?

This goes back to you just repeating "do what the music tells you"...and all I'm saying is, THAT amount of "instruction" will rarely teach anyone how to use and develop their ears even there is a deep meaning to it (which I understand).

While you say you’re not implying someone has to be born with it...you also suggest that a lot of it is either part of our skill set or not.
When we debated this the first time...it DID center around learning/teaching...and if I recall, you argued that people shouldn't be spoon fed and told how-to specifics...rather they should just "do what the music tells them".
So you are kinda’ dancing around your own point a bit...but it's really not important to me, it's only important to the guys who don't understand what you mean when you tell them to "do what the music tells you".

Now don't get your Hawaiian shirt all twisted....we don’t have to beat on this any further…I just wanted to welcome you back properly!

Give it a rest, Miro. Or do you just like being argumentative?

Do yourself a favour and read this thread:
https://homerecording.com/bbs/showthread.php?t=270898&

 

[miroslav]

I'm not being argumentative...and I didn't resurrect this discussion...Glen did:

"If you can't tell whether your mix sounds good or not or cant tell what's right or wrong about it, what are you even doing stepping behind a DAW?"

.....

I can't think of another single technical profession or artistic discipline where this is not fairly common sense; people all the time say they do or don't have a photographer's eye or a writer's flair, or understand that technical trades usually require a natural aptitude. Shit, it's even true in sports; people usually know whether they can ever be captain of their football team or not. Yet when it comes to music production it's not only not common sense, but it's actually insulting to others to treat it that way?

To me...and maybe I'm reading it differently...but when Glen talks about having "common sense" and "natural aptitude" for recording...
...it does sound like that is something one would be "born with" as opposed to learned. Does it not?
That's all I was asking Glen..
My contention is that you really DO NEED to step behind a DAW in order to learn what it means to "do what the music tells you"...it's NOT common sense or natural aptitude.

And please tell me...why is presenting my view "argumentative"...but the opposite is not...???

Lighten up....

 

[gecko zzed]

And please tell me...why is presenting my view "argumentative"...but the opposite is not...???

Lighten up....

The reason is because you are making assumptions about a poster based on your extrapolations of stuff he's posted in this thread. And you are continuing to defend those assumptions even when they're being denied by the poster.

What you could have done is work through that link I posted until you found the stuff about ways and means of developing evaluative and critical listening skills. You would then have realised that whatever assumptions you made based on postings in this thread, they are not in fact the case. You could then have said "Oops, now I see. I may have been a bit too hasty and somewhat off the mark in my judgement."

Then I would have been able to relax and lighten up.

have contradicted by the

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

it does sound like that is something one would be "born with" as opposed to learned. Does it not?

I have no idea why it sound like that to you, Miro. The "common sense" was referring not to being born with the ears - or with anything else, FTM - but rather to the having to have the skillz to do a job or make a team or whatever before they try actually doing it. There is no reference whatsoever in that passage to where the skills come from, nor any assumptions made in that regard.

And yes, for every one of those skills and trades I mention, there is a degree of natural aptitude required. And done even try to yell me that you don't know that yourself. We all know that there are people who just can't play a guitar in time no matter how many lessons they try taking because they just can't keep an internal rhythm, or who just don't have the speed to be a first string football player no matter how they train. But that is NOT saying that one has to be born a football player or a guitarist; they still have to *learn* and practice and so forth.

It's no different with analytical or critical listening. Of course a hearing impaired person could face some real obstacles; one has to be able to hear a pretty fair representation of the human hearing range. In that way one has to be born with capabilities, if you insist on labeling me with that bumper sticker. But that doesn't mean one has to be born a critical listener, nor is that anything I was even thinking or talking about until this very moment.

For me it took years of listening to music before I was even close to ready, and my skillz are different now than they were 20 years ago, so it's not a born thing, and I never said or even implied that it was.

You know, miro, you're not just being argumentative at this point. When when you make a charge about someone which they deny or refute (on multiple occasions, I might add), and you don't accept that and keep insisting on the original charge, you're basically calling them a liar. I don't appreciate that, that *does* get my shirt in a bunch.

G.

 

[miroslav]

You know, miro, you're not just being argumentative at this point. When when you make a charge about someone which they deny or refute (on multiple occasions, I might add), and you don't accept that and keep insisting on the original charge, you're basically calling them a liar. I don't appreciate that, that *does* get my shirt in a bunch.

Since you brought up the other thread here...
There WERE some notions presented by you then (just like in this thread) that newbies should not be instructed in any how-to manner, that it only leads them to canned-techniques and whatnot....and that all they need is to “let the music guide them”.
THAT is the only part of your view that I disagreed with and challenged...and that's not being argumentative or calling you a liar...so yeah, don't get your shirt in a bunch…and no need to roll your eyes and moan “why am I wasting my time here” every time someone disagrees with you or doesn’t follow what you are saying.

AFA the "born with"...your comments in this thread initially made me think that's what you were saying with things like "natural aptitude".
I'm not going to sift through a few years worth of other threads before my time here, in order to better understand your views. I just go by what I read in the current threads I’m involved in.
OK...so you are NOT saying "born with"...fine...but obviously you feel there is a certain amount of natural aptitude they must bring to the table. Not sure just how much that is exactly in your view..?...but going back to the other thread, you were practically telling day-old newbies that they should just "let the music guide them"...
…so that sure seemed to me you are expecting people to have a pretty large amount of "natural aptitude"...otherwise they have no business getting behind a DAW…as you put it.

I don’t disagree with you that some people just end up having more talent than others…and I don’t disagree that many newbies are looking to be spoon-fed instead of doing some leg work on their own before coming to these threads to ask questions…(which is the underlying theme of this thread)…
…but I do understand why some of them go blank when told “do what the music tells you”, and NO amount of natural aptitude or critical hearing ability is going to help them…
…they need more specific answers, sometimes paint-by-the-numbers answers…like it or not.
There are Julliard trained musicians…virtuosos with very well developed ears…
…who go all thumbs when they first get into recording.
Often it’s the technology that creates the difficulty/confusion for them to just follow the “let the music guide you” approach. So even though they have the critical ears and natural music aptitude…sometimes they still end up needing simple, paint-by-the-numbers, hands-on instruction.
But I’m all for newbies learning about “plain, simple truths”…it’s how they are taught where we disagree…maybe?

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Do yourself a favour and read this thread:
https://homerecording.com/bbs/showthread.php?t=270898&

I remember that thread; what a rarity. An actual fun thread that was six pages long without anybody trash talking anybody or any arguments or any person B trying to insist to person A that person B actually knows better what person A thinks and believes and says than person A does themselves. That alone makes it a rarity.

But add to that that it was actually about a very good subject, with a lot of different people contributing and participating, and I think that was one of the high water marks of this BBS. I don't know if all the files involved are still available (though I believe my CLEF is still up at least), but I'd kinda think that thread might be a candidate for stickiness.

G.

 

[noisewreck]

Since you brought up the other thread here...
There WERE some notions presented by you then (just like in this thread) that newbies should not be instructed in any how-to manner, that it only leads them to canned-techniques and whatnot....and that all they need is to “let the music guide them”.
THAT is the only part of your view that I disagreed with and challenged...and that's not being argumentative or calling you a liar...so yeah, don't get your shirt in a bunch…and no need to roll your eyes and moan “why am I wasting my time here” every time someone disagrees with you or doesn’t follow what you are saying.

Are you referring to the whole mess about panning vocals in the middle? This is getting really annoying, man. I don't know why, but it seems like you have this need to be "right" all the time, even if it means you have to twist things into oblivion.

Glen was right on the panning thing. Giving canned answers does tend to lead people into canned-"techniques"... if you can even call it techniques.

And I am sorry but telling someone to "pan vocals in the middle" is the same as telling someone to "low cut guitars at 400Hz"... as a starting point? WTF?

While it is true that someone would develop techniques to know how to address issues such as muddiness, definition and the like in the mix, if you have difficulty figuring out where a certain sound needs to come from, you have bigger issues than simply panning.

And yes, in order for someone to be able to play an instrument or sing, they need to have at least some natural aptitude that training will allow one to develop. Without some natural talent, you can take all the training you like and still amount to nothing.

Goddamn this is getting fuckin annoying.

 

[miroslav]

NO...it it's not about panning.
I thought we buried that awhile ago...

This is a discussion about the vagueness of "let the music guide you" for most newbies.

When it comes to audio, about 70% is about subjective opinion and artistic decisions (that's where the talent resides), but it's still got nothing to do with who is *right or wrong*.
The other 30% is based on techniques and skills that need to be LEARNED before anyone can really know what/how to "let the music guide them".

And FYI again...
I didn't bring up this discussion...Glen did...so it has nothing to do with ME rehashing just to be right.
Man...it's like for some shit, there can only be ONE VIEWPOINT...and if it's challenged then you are being argumentative.
Yeah...that IS annoying....

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

It was a mistake for me to even reference that panning thread, and I apologize to everyone for doing that. But it certainly wasn't because I actually wanted to go over that ground again. I would have thought it was obvious from that thread (and I believe another, if I remember correctly) that we were all pretty sick of that thread and that re-hashing that would generally be a bad idea. But as we have seen so often lately, what seems obvious to some is most certainly not obvious to many others. My mistake.

For the record, for those who don't want to go back in this thread and actually look up the facts, here's all I said:

See, my problem is - as Miro knows well, because we got into this pretty heavily a couple of months ago - I just don't *get* at all how or why people find "do what the music tells you" to be such a mysterious or "advanced" concept; I consider it to be a fundamental prerequisite to what we do.

I only referenced that thread as a touchstone, a reference to indicate that I was voicing a personal concern (one that I in fact called my own problem) that I had voiced before; i.e. that this wasn't the first time I ever raised the question of why actually listening to a mix and doing what it requires us to do to it was considered such a mysterious, advanced concept. That's ALL. To use that reference as an opening to the position "But Glen started it!" is mistaken at best, and disingenuous at worst.

Miro, I'm sorry if you took that the wrong way and thought it was some personal re-opening of a can of worms or something like that. I seem to have trouble getting my meaning across to you nine different ways to Sunday. If I am sticking around here, I'd appreciate it if maybe you keep that in mind and double check my meaning with me before you conclude that I am trying to contribute to the insipid "tea party"-like mentality that has become prevalent on this BBS of late. I'll be straight up with you, just like I am with everybody else.

But don't tell me I'm not being straight up with you when I say you're mistaken about how I feel about something or about what I meant in something I said earlier. That - by definition - IS being argumentative...at best.

G.

 

[miroslav]

For the second time…nobody called you a liar...so now you are extrapolating for effect….

I did ask in a couple earlier posts what you really meant by your comments when the "born with" idea first came up and you said I was misreading you...
...which was then IMO, resolved and understood by me that you did NOT say anyone had to be "born with".

From there...I thought we moved on, because there were still questions to do with your view on the degree of "natural aptitude" and what you really mean by saying people should not get in front of a DAW if they don't understand the term "let the music guide you" and how to apply it...
...though for some reason, that discussion has ended or been ignored in favor of this silly side debate about my post motivations.

Bottom line...
I disagree with you that people first need to understand "let the music guide you" before stepping in front of a DAW (which I take it to mean, before they get into any recording).
A lot can be learned at the DAW that NO AMOUNT of non or pre recording/mixing ear training can accomplish for them.
And I also disagree on the older topic of hands-on instruction VS some theoretical understanding that one must obtain via.....osmosis???
"Do like me" has its merits with instruction...and if anyone gets stuck in a rut and never moves forward from that...then their training was never properly completed, IMO.

Now...if that view is me just being "argumentative" for the sake of being "right"...then fuck it...we can let the newbies decide what works better for them 'cuz obviously you and I will never agree on this one...but when it comes up again in some other thread and you again present YOUR views…well, I’ll also again present mine…then someone can again tell me I’m being argumentative…but I guess you never are?

 

[giraffe]

if you can't afford to pay a pro, just get har-bal. seriously.
not kidding.

if you could hear the mistakes that need to be fixed in mastering, and you're the person that mixed it....
you would have just fixed it during mixing. (which is much more ideal, lets face it)

in my opinion, no one has the objectivity to master their own work.

 

[giraffe]

at lot of people (in all, not just this forum) when asked for advice answer essentially,
"get better"

while it's true, it's not at all helpful.

 

[giraffe]

oh and p.s. don't use the limiter in har-bal.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

EDIT: OK, you got a post in while I was typing. The fact that the concept in question is a problem for most newbs is *exactly* the problem. To say that "listening to me mix for what's needed" is so mysterious or advanced because most newbs feel it's that way is no answer or solution.

Ever since I came to this board I've been asking questions like, "Why the hurry to hit the record button or to get something on meSpace?", or "Why do so many folks believe that producing a "pro-quality" recording is so easy that any horse with a DAW can do it right out of the starting gate?" "How can you fix a mix if you don't know what's broken?" and "Don't ask me what I think of your mix, the real question is what do YOU think of it?" and so on. They all dance around the question of, "Do you really have the ears yet that this task requires, or are you jumping the gun (usually because some marketing slug said it was Ok to)?

IMHO and IME, 90% of the problems and questions brought to this board are because the person trying to produce the music doesn't have the ears required to do so. That DOES NOT MEAN that I think they need to be born with them. Is there a certain amount of basic aptitude required? Yes there is! There is in any avocation that requires certain skill sets to perform. But that doesn't mean they have to be born with those skill sets. I have in fact bent over backwards on this board and on my own website trying to convey ideas an methods for newbs to DEVELOP that ear they they were not born with (and which I was not born with either.)

But my god, do I - or anybody else - have to explain every word of that in excruciating detail every time the subject comes up? Can so few people connect the dots or understand nuance that one has to go back and explain first principles every time they open their mouth around here?

Can Massive Master not open his mouth without worrying that someone is going to be insulted by his telling the truth, and having them like his bluntness only when they like the actual answer, but despising his bluntness when it's not the answer they wanted to hear? Does he have to sugar-coat his answers and put on the kid gloves just to avoid being attacked for contributing his knowledge (which is absolutely correct 99.999% of the time)?

Can I make a freakin post without worrying that someone is going to parse my words into something challangeable, regardless of what the reality of my meaning actually is, a meaning that is nothing mysterious or advanced, but rather usually pretty obvious to those not looking for an argument?

Can people explain themselves without being called a liar?

Fucking Tea Party

G.

 

[giraffe]

my ethos is different.
i don't think that you should never release any thing that's not perfect. it just seems like a way to never ever get any thing done.

do lots of work.
do lots of bad work.
regret, redo.

if you spend a month on one song, you'll probably learn how to mix that one song real good.
if you spend a month on 10 different songs, you might learn a little something about mixing songs.

that's just how i see it any way.

 

[miroslav]

IMHO and IME, 90% of the problems and questions brought to this board are because the person trying to produce the music doesn't have the ears required to do so. That DOES NOT MEAN that I think they need to be born with them. Is there a certain amount of basic aptitude required? Yes there is!

I guess this is the heart of it...and while I do agree that the level of natural aptitude will separate people out...
...I don't buy the fact that 90% of the time it's 'cuz they don't have the ears.

Why...?

Well it has to do with music.
Sure, there are some newbies that are both musician newbies AND recording newbies....but, there are also many musicians who have spent years learning/practicing/playing...so I don't buy the notion that they don't have well developed ears for music/audio recording.
They KNOW when something sounds good and something sucks.
IMHO...what they don't have is the learned skills on how to get where they want to go when recording…and not so much a lack of “natural aptitude”.
And that is confirmed by how many musicians DO come here bitching about their audio quality and not knowing how to fix something that sounds bad.
So...they DO HEAR IT...but still, they don't know how to "let the music guide them".

"My mix has a lot of harshness in the upper end on my voice and the bottom is too muddy...how can I fix that?"

"Let the music guide you."....HUH???????

NO.

"Try rolling off the highs a couple of dB in the 4k-6k range and pull back some of the lows in the 100Hz-300Hz range"......etc...etc....etc.

That's where we disagree.
Time spent in front of a DAW fiddling with different settings is IMO a positive learning experience, even if you are just doing what someone is telling you to do. “Do it this way” is a form of instruction that’s been around for thousands of years and in use every day from preschool on up to college level…so I don’t see anyting bad about it, but I guess that you do.
So...like I said, we may never agree on this one (just like we didn't on using center-panned as a starting point ).

Maybe we can agree from now on to each toss in our 2-3 points about these things...and then just leave it at that rather than get into a quote-n-redebate every time it comes up....yes?

 

[giraffe]

actually, to me even bad advice is better then "get better"
because if someone says
"Try rolling off the highs a couple of dB in the 4k-6k range and pull back some of the lows in the 100Hz-300Hz range"......etc...etc....etc.

and you do, and it sounds like magic ass, i'd be willing to bet you've still learned something from the experience.
possibly even more so then if it was advice that just solved your problem, as if by magic.

 

[NYMorningstar]

actually, to me even bad advice is better then "get better"
because if someone says
"Try rolling off the highs a couple of dB in the 4k-6k range and pull back some of the lows in the 100Hz-300Hz range"......etc...etc....etc.

and you do, and it sounds like magic ass, i'd be willing to bet you've still learned something from the experience.
possibly even more so then if it was advice that just solved your problem, as if by magic.

Good point. Experience is crucial to learning audio engineering. It's right up there with book smarts and technical background. Getting away from these drama threads and twisting some knobs will do us all some good.

 

[XLR]

I hear you giraffe. I prefer threads with more specific detail re the OP and less wandering off into analysis of general traits of home recordists, philosophy about trends, theories of tangential x and y's. A little of that's good. But not pages and pages in a thread that's about something else. And arguing about who said what to who is a waste of time. I also appreciate it when people can make their point concisely. I'm a very busy dog.

 

[kcearl]

actually, to me even bad advice is better then "get better"
because if someone says
"Try rolling off the highs a couple of dB in the 4k-6k range and pull back some of the lows in the 100Hz-300Hz range"......etc...etc....etc.

and you do, and it sounds like magic ass, i'd be willing to bet you've still learned something from the experience.
possibly even more so then if it was advice that just solved your problem, as if by magic.

+1 the first time someone suggested to me to do a sweep of the frequencies it was a eureka moment....

also some of the other EQ and compression advice Ive been given save hours of fiddling about and gave me a starting point..


yup I read, yup i would have got it....but many here forget they have been doing this for years...I started from scratch last year...advice helped me get over many of the initial audio hurdles

getting advice is just like using a preset...if gives you a general idea then you try to use your ears to fine tune it


from never recording to recording a whole track and mixing it together seems like the biggest jump you will face when you become a home recorder...its not...its what you have to learn after that