deejaytrixx
New member
By reading this forum I think a lot of ppl who have never dealt in the commercial music industry will begin to think that mastering is some crock or fluke of nature only obtainable by the engineering Gods in the 1million dollar studio heaven. It's just not true.
And I also hear a lot of ppl mastering ONE song. Not that its impossible, but does it really make sense? Why master ONE song. Mastering is a process that is supposed to be applied over a BODY of work (at least that is how I was taught). I mean, what else could you possibly be mastering against if not an entire body of work. If not, then a good mix is probably all you really need, no? (Just being a jerk to inspire some of the "pro's" around here to jump in)
A lot of guys on this site say it...You may not even NEED a mastering engineer. This is a specialized field usually used by major labels or indies with tons of releases who just don't have the time to master themselves..So it becomes a cookie cutter production line way of getting albums done. Select producer and songwriter - pre production - tracking - mixing - mastering..all done at different locations by different ppl. But if you are good enough to mix your stuff, you are good enough to apply some enhancements to ur song after a great mix is achieved!
If you look on the net, the magic of mastering seems hard to find..That is because most engineers are just unwilling to unleash the secrets of how they obtain their mix..For a number of reasons...1) Helps keep them sounding "unique" if there was ever such a thing 2) some don't even know how they do it...REason being..every song calls for soemthing else..Sure there are probably some loose guidelines they follow..but anyone wit any length of time behind the boards knows...the critical ear, identifyin the issue, and knowing how to solve it is the real science behind mixing and mastering..
So that everyone is clear, here are the most common things done in mastering. In almost every mastering session, the following actions are performed:
* Optimizing average and peak volume levels for proper relative loudness
* Signal processing - compression & EQ
* Arranging tracks in final sequence
* Timing of the space between tracks
* Establish a sonic "field" for all tracks
* Place track markers at head of all tracks
* Remove unwanted noise like clicks, pops, hiss
* Clean-up start and ending of each track (including fades)
* Insert Master Track Log – the PQ codes required for replication
The true advantage of getting a good mastering engineer IS greatly outweighed by that of doing it yourself. To get a fresh set of ears on a project is an invaluable way to get your recording from how its sounding in ur head, to how the world will actually accept it. What I mean by this is...these guys have ears that have been trained for mastering. They know their gear, they know how the mix will translate, and they know all the red book, PQ coding mysteries that the common man just doesn't have to deal with.
That being said and done..Mastering doesn't fix a bad mix. It just makes a bad mix sound better..and an excellent mix sound deity like. So..if you are indeed doing that home demo...and you are on a budget...mastering might not be what you need..what you need is to determine what bracket you are trying to compete in and how you will afford it. If you are doing a demo, it doesn't have to sound like the best recording on the charts..because its a flippin DEMO!!!!! its to attract attention of a label that will pay you to commercially record!
But I do suggest taking a turn at mastering by investigating the processes above. At the very least you will learn something by making your mix better of worst
Ive hear masters done on the best monitors and gear, and the worst..the only determining factor in the quality was the person behind the board. Experience in this field is everything. Critical listening is the most expensive gear you have..Everything everyone else says is pure shit..take it or leave it, but that is the "secret" behind mastering from an impartial point of view
And I also hear a lot of ppl mastering ONE song. Not that its impossible, but does it really make sense? Why master ONE song. Mastering is a process that is supposed to be applied over a BODY of work (at least that is how I was taught). I mean, what else could you possibly be mastering against if not an entire body of work. If not, then a good mix is probably all you really need, no? (Just being a jerk to inspire some of the "pro's" around here to jump in)
A lot of guys on this site say it...You may not even NEED a mastering engineer. This is a specialized field usually used by major labels or indies with tons of releases who just don't have the time to master themselves..So it becomes a cookie cutter production line way of getting albums done. Select producer and songwriter - pre production - tracking - mixing - mastering..all done at different locations by different ppl. But if you are good enough to mix your stuff, you are good enough to apply some enhancements to ur song after a great mix is achieved!
If you look on the net, the magic of mastering seems hard to find..That is because most engineers are just unwilling to unleash the secrets of how they obtain their mix..For a number of reasons...1) Helps keep them sounding "unique" if there was ever such a thing 2) some don't even know how they do it...REason being..every song calls for soemthing else..Sure there are probably some loose guidelines they follow..but anyone wit any length of time behind the boards knows...the critical ear, identifyin the issue, and knowing how to solve it is the real science behind mixing and mastering..
So that everyone is clear, here are the most common things done in mastering. In almost every mastering session, the following actions are performed:
* Optimizing average and peak volume levels for proper relative loudness
* Signal processing - compression & EQ
* Arranging tracks in final sequence
* Timing of the space between tracks
* Establish a sonic "field" for all tracks
* Place track markers at head of all tracks
* Remove unwanted noise like clicks, pops, hiss
* Clean-up start and ending of each track (including fades)
* Insert Master Track Log – the PQ codes required for replication
The true advantage of getting a good mastering engineer IS greatly outweighed by that of doing it yourself. To get a fresh set of ears on a project is an invaluable way to get your recording from how its sounding in ur head, to how the world will actually accept it. What I mean by this is...these guys have ears that have been trained for mastering. They know their gear, they know how the mix will translate, and they know all the red book, PQ coding mysteries that the common man just doesn't have to deal with.
That being said and done..Mastering doesn't fix a bad mix. It just makes a bad mix sound better..and an excellent mix sound deity like. So..if you are indeed doing that home demo...and you are on a budget...mastering might not be what you need..what you need is to determine what bracket you are trying to compete in and how you will afford it. If you are doing a demo, it doesn't have to sound like the best recording on the charts..because its a flippin DEMO!!!!! its to attract attention of a label that will pay you to commercially record!
But I do suggest taking a turn at mastering by investigating the processes above. At the very least you will learn something by making your mix better of worst
Ive hear masters done on the best monitors and gear, and the worst..the only determining factor in the quality was the person behind the board. Experience in this field is everything. Critical listening is the most expensive gear you have..Everything everyone else says is pure shit..take it or leave it, but that is the "secret" behind mastering from an impartial point of view
