Mastering your project: DIY or Go to a Pro?

[Jack Russell]

Well, this is the Home Recording forum, after all, so I'm very curious: what do all you "home recording" people do when you are ready to master your mixes? Is it worth learning to do it yourself, or is it better to send it out to a professional mastering shop and pay for it to be done?

[Poll following...]

[Jack Russell]

Apology: I should have added "I don't know" as a poll option. Ooops!

[Smurf]

I use the great AAMS program. I tried Har Bal but did not like it, tho it worked cool also. The MAIN thing, I think, is to take your time getting it right in the mix first. Do your best there, and then the mastering stage will be semi-easy....there is my 2 worth....

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Originally Posted by Jack Russell

Apology: I should have added "I don't know" as a poll option. Ooops!

Other poll options might include "It depends upon the purpose of the project", "It depends upon the budget of the project", and "It depends upon the needs of the client."

I can't answer this poll because I have done it both ways, and will continue to make the choice based upon the above considerations.

G.

Is your song going to be up against other commercial CDs? If that's the case then you might even be better off recording it at a studio + having a pro master it. After all, this is home recording.

If you do want to do it all yourself then the mix should already be good enough. Mastering should just be about maybe bringing up the levels and possibly shaping the overall song with EQ and making all songs on the CD sound good together in sequence. Also choosing the correct song order.

Since you recorded them yourself you have the advantage of going back to the mix and fixing stuff. And also remixing songs so they sound good together on a CD.

And use some sort of program like CD Architect to burn to a CD so you can control the time between each track on the CD, fade ins/outs, etc.

Or send it off to a mastering/duplication house and have them do that.

Just my 2¢

[Jack Russell]

Originally Posted by SouthSIDE Glen

Other poll options might include "It depends upon the purpose of the project", "It depends upon the budget of the project", and "It depends upon the needs of the client."

I can't answer this poll because I have done it both ways, and will continue to make the choice based upon the above considerations.

G.

Yeah, I am kicking myself for not having better options. I suck.

Anyway, I've recorded and mixed CDs in the past, and I found that sending it out was better. But, in hindsight, given the fact that one such project only resulted in sales of 100 copies and very limited airplay, I probably could have mastered it myself and saved money.

Forgot to add that the song is the most important (although I'm sure everyone already knows this). There have been several people who have made it and become rich/famous and recorded their CD at home or at a friend's home studio. If you think the mix/master of the song is holding it back then maybe go back to the arrangement of the song and the performance.

[Jack Russell]

Originally Posted by danny.guitar

Is your song going to be up against other commercial CDs?

Probably not. We'll play more gigs and sell them or give them away. We'll send some out to local (Balt/DC) radio, but why the hell would they play our music, since we have no label or distribution? Is the music as good as what's on the radio? Yes! The chances of success are nil.

Originally Posted by danny.guitar

Mastering should just be about maybe bringing up the levels and possibly shaping the overall song with EQ and making all songs on the CD sound good together in sequence. Also choosing the correct song order.

This project is a little strange: three songwriters, three singers, 4 songs from each, but we have a "power trio" foundation. The 12 tunes have a great deal of variety. We're thinking that we need to produce each song differently, rather than going for a consistent sound. But we're unsure.

And one thing is for sure: we have a limited budget.

[Jack Russell]

Originally Posted by Smurf

I use the great AAMS program. I tried Har Bal but did not like it, tho it worked cool also. The MAIN thing, I think, is to take your time getting it right in the mix first. Do your best there, and then the mastering stage will be semi-easy....there is my 2 worth....

I agree with you, but perhaps this shows that I'm obviously not a pro. I work very hard for hours getting as good a mix as possible. Having done that, I wonder why the people doing the mastering (whomever it is) think they can change it so much. Why? I feel like I've already perfected it.

Historically, hasn't mastering been the part of the process of confverting a tape mix to vinyl? Therefore, isn't this perhaps a vesigial part of the business?

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Originally Posted by Jack Russell

Historically, hasn't mastering been the part of the process of confverting a tape mix to vinyl? Therefore, isn't this perhaps a vesigial part of the business?

Well, the vinyl part is . But the general concept remains the same. True mastering simply means prepping a project for final pressing/release.

Nowdays that usually means either prepping for CD production or prepping for Internet release.

G.

[TuoKaerf]

Some mastering engineers that I know end up charging a lot just based on the fact that a large percentage of the stuff they get to master is absolute garbage mix wise. They spend more time trying to "fix" things than they want to.

[ecktronic]

I listened to the first mix on your website.
I would go back and fix your mix before considering taking it to a mastering engineer.
The main problem is the vocals arent compressed enough. You could either use more compression or use volume automation.
The snare sounds really nice. It was tuned well.
I cant hear the kick drum though.
I can feel it but I cant really hear it.

Was that live or mulittracked?

Eck

[ecktronic]

There seems to be a large amount of noise in the recording.

Eck

[Massive Master]

I'm a little biased, of course -

Seriously though - If it goes to a "pro" or not, IMO, it should go to *someone* with some amount of objectivity. If there's "no budget" etc., etc., that could be the engineer down the block who has a similar rig and experience.

With your own mixes, you almost always hear something between what the mix actually sounds like and what you want it to sound like.

"Someone else" never heard it and might notice that the kick was muted on two songs (happened just a few days ago) or that there was VDO whine on nearly every track (happens probably once a week) or that the background vocals are overly sibilant (happens often) etc., etc., etc.

[ecktronic]

"VDO whine"

What is that?
Eck

[giraffe]

it's all about the budget.
i will always get someone else to do it if it's and option.

[Ironklad Audio]

depends

i'm trying to put together an EP this summer that i'll probably spend a few bones to have mastered by a local pro who's got 30+ years experience...mostly to see what my mixes sound like after hitting racks of vintage analog stuff

[XLR]

Man, there are few words as emotionally charged as "mastering" since it has an historical meaning re vinyl LP cutting, a professional meaning re ultra-experienced and objective ears with great tools and listening environment correcting a mix for optimum universal playback, and a marketing/merchandising meaning that's related to enabling the home recordist to do complex stereo mix processing.

Personally, I try to avoid using the word.

[Jack Russell]

Originally Posted by ecktronic

I listened to the first mix on your website.
I would go back and fix your mix before considering taking it to a mastering engineer.
The main problem is the vocals arent compressed enough. You could either use more compression or use volume automation.
The snare sounds really nice. It was tuned well.
I cant hear the kick drum though.
I can feel it but I cant really hear it.

Was that live or mulittracked?

Eck

Well, let me first say thanks for visiting and listening. Hooray, someone actually visited the band web site!!!

Anyway, we recorded that track in a third-floor apartment in the city, in a living room, into a DAW, with N-tracks. The drummer of the band took charge of this, as it was his place, and I was in the process of building my basement studio. The studio is done now, and we're getting much better results at the new "real" studio, with an isolation booth, better mics, etc.

Thanks again.

[Jack Russell]

To put my own personal situation into better perspective:

We'll probably mix our own CD, and master it, even though we will not have outside ears to give us constructive feedback (we're kind of doing that for each other, as we're three writers and singers, and we "produce" each other--yes, we fight it out on occassion ).

However, if for some bizzare reason someone in the the Real Biz was interested in our music, from live shows, word of mouth, or the web site, then....hell yes, we'd hire someone to re-master the thing, or even go back and remix. or even have someone remix for us.

We ain't fools. But the crunch of life's obligations holds its huge black knife of $$$ over our heads.

[BRIEFCASEMANX]

If you or the band has no money, DIY

If you suck complete ass at tracking/mixing, DIY(keep pissing into the wind and someday in the distant future you MAY eventually run out of piss)

If you are okay at tracking/mixing, and want some expert advice: ME(and ask beforehand that he give notes/advice to you on the songs. Say you are doing it as a learning experience, he may appreciate your enthusiasm.)

If you are great, the mixes sound great, and you want to step it up to that next level*: ME



*in this case, I would also advise to get involved with a dangerous hobby such as drag car racing or king crab fishing, so that you stop making me look like the clueless asshole that I am.

[Massive Master]

Originally Posted by ecktronic

"VDO whine"

What is that?
Eck

Video - 15.875kHz (depending on the refresh rates, etc.).

It still surprises me (I'd say "shocks" me, but that seems a little strong - although, it actually shocks me) how many seriously big-budget recordings make it out without anyone hearing it... Not the tracking guy, not the mixing guy, not the mastering guy, etc.

But I'd say I'm filtering it out on at least several mixes weekly. I'd make a preset if it wasn't so ridiculously simple to fix. But I shouldn't be the one fixing it... It never should've made it this far. That's the "shock" part.

[BRIEFCASEMANX]

Originally Posted by Massive Master

Video - 15.875kHz (depending on the refresh rates, etc.).

It still surprises me (I'd say "shocks" me, but that seems a little strong - although, it actually shocks me) how many seriously big-budget recordings make it out without anyone hearing it... Not the tracking guy, not the mixing guy, not the mastering guy, etc.

But I'd say I'm filtering it out on at least several mixes weekly. I'd make a preset if it wasn't so ridiculously simple to fix. But I shouldn't be the one fixing it... It never should've made it this far. That's the "shock" part.

how do you get rid of this plague? and what are the symptoms?

[Jack Russell]

Just to continue babbling about my own current recordings for my band (as an example--for this thread topic) in case anyone is iterested:

We used a Rode NTK mic for all vocals, in a mostly isolated vocal room. On the drum kit we used mostly SM57s, with 2 overhead Avelex condensor mics. Guitars were recorded in an isolation booth with a well-placed SM57, using a Marshall 4x12 cab, at various settings for each tune (sometimes quite loud). Bass: direct, or for a few cases miced off the cab with the Rode NTK, at a low volume (this happens to be my own personal taste for a warmer, more live sound in some cases, and might be against the "book" ).

Uh... we recorded these all into an ADAT, using compression on guitars and bass and vox. I have another ADAT for extra tracks also.

For FX at mixdown I have at my disposal 2 Midiverb IIs and 1 Midiverb III, and several compressors (Alesis Nanocompressors). There is an Rev7 unit we can also get our hands on. We are mixing into 2 Lansing monitors, which seem to be adequate and have a good full range. The board is an Alesis M-16 track thing. We mix to a DAT recorder.

So: This example, as I understand it, is not really a pro setup. Am I right? All the gear is "consumer level" and not pro level. Probably the only link in this chain that is really a professional appliance is the Rode NTK. But some would argure that the SM57s DO pass muster in the pro sense; some would not. Alesis gear abounds, but that isn't "pro" is it?

Still, this setup isn't that bad either. I'm thinking a polished recording can be made from this gear, and that, if performed well, recorded well, and mixed well, it could end up as good as anything else in the world. If the mastering is done well.

Am I delusional?

[ecktronic]

Originally Posted by Massive Master

Video - 15.875kHz (depending on the refresh rates, etc.).

It still surprises me (I'd say "shocks" me, but that seems a little strong - although, it actually shocks me) how many seriously big-budget recordings make it out without anyone hearing it... Not the tracking guy, not the mixing guy, not the mastering guy, etc.

But I'd say I'm filtering it out on at least several mixes weekly. I'd make a preset if it wasn't so ridiculously simple to fix. But I shouldn't be the one fixing it... It never should've made it this far. That's the "shock" part.

Can you please send me a sample of something with VDO whine in it?

Eck