Mastering your project: DIY or Go to a Pro?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jack Russell
  • Start date Start date

Mastering: DIY or send to a pro?

  • I do home recording, and I master it myself.

    Votes: 82 72.6%

  • I do home recording, and I hire the pros to master it.

    Votes: 21 18.6%

  • I am a pro: I think DIY is fine for mastering.

    Votes: 5 4.4%

  • I am a pro: always use pros for mastering.

    Votes: 5 4.4%
  • Total voters
    113
Terry Wetzel said:
profanity is the ignorant mind expressing its self!
Click to expand...
You *are* new to the Internet BBS world, aren't you? Half the posts on this BBS are the ignorant mind expressing itself...no profanity required. :cool:

G.
 
Hello gentlemen!

For me "foul language" is just a form of punctuation really, it can be done well or poorly like any other word usage. But then I'm not generally know for my genteel sensibilities.
 
masteringhouse said:
Hello gentlemen!

For me "foul language" is just a form of punctuation really, it can be done well or poorly like any other word usage. But then I'm not generally know for my genteel sensibilities.
Click to expand...

But how dhould you record, mix and master it. That's the real question
 
I use Sound Forge and then CD Architect....I just finished a band and I did a Master on the fly to see how my mix will hold up when they have it Mastered by Disc Makers....I'm curious to see how well I did on the mix and if my Mastering is even close to pro....
 
Jack Russell said:
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...]
Click to expand...
I record at home, but if I'm considering releasing something commercially I'm hiring a pro to do it. Even if commercially means I only sell a few dozen to friends and acquaintances. Mastering isn't that expensive, especially compared to the amount money I've spent on this damn equipment already.

The way I figure, my ears are just too deep into the project by the time I'm finished. I'd want a fresh set of ears, somebody who can see (rather, hear) the big picture.
 
TheGuitarMan said:
I record at home, but if I'm considering releasing something commercially I'm hiring a pro to do it. Even if commercially means I only sell a few dozen to friends and acquaintances. Mastering isn't that expensive, especially compared to the amount money I've spent on this damn equipment already.

The way I figure, my ears are just too deep into the project by the time I'm finished. I'd want a fresh set of ears, somebody who can see (rather, hear) the big picture.
Click to expand...

^ Coulnd't have said it better, I strongly believe the artist should not be the one to mix the song (but should have lots of input on what happens)...its just too hard to judge you own voice etc etc......

And I think the Mixer probably should not be the masterer, you want two different sets of professional ears to listen...... in completely different rooms through completely different monitors, for best translation.

Granted at this point I don't feel competent enough to release anything comercially so I've been mixing my own music. And its hard, I wish I had a pro to help me out haha.
 
i've been really thinking hard about this, but i think i'm going to take mine to the pros. the more i learn the more i appreciate what they do, and that it is not going to be a piece of cake to get the outcomes that i want.

i really do want mine to sound as good as the professional songs i always listen to myself. and i know if i applied myself toward that i could do it, and i think its really interesting too, but for me i think i've decided that i want to focus more on the music and am going to get professional help.
 
I started learning about mastering years ago when I started recording at home, I started out A/B'ing my mixes with albums I wanted my mixes to sound like, EQ'd them to match, added a small amount of reverb overall to the songs and used a little compression to make the mix louder and it didn't sound bad and translated well to all kinds of speakers

Then mastering software came around and I learned more about doing it on a PC. I found that alot of mastering software has a ton of useless settings and pre-sets in my opinion and I just stuck with the EQ, compression, reverb and a small amount of stereo widening in the higher frequencies.

Then I figured I would send one of my songs off to get mastered by a good mastering service, I paid $75, got my song mastered at universal mastering, got it back and compared it to my mastering, I preferred my mastering as 1) it wasn't brickwalled and had dynamics, and 2) it wasn't WAY too bright. It may seem that I wasted the money but then again I didn't because I got to hear the difference between my song mastered my a "Pro" and my own mastering

Something else I believe is driving DIY's to master themselves is the "loudness war" that's going on right now in the music industry. Music is really suffering from this, just as mine did, brick wall mastered, no dynamics, overly loud etc.... Maybe if I would have paid for an entire CD they would have paid more attention to it I don't know......
 
leaningpine said:
I started learning about mastering years ago when I started recording at home, I started out A/B'ing my mixes with albums I wanted my mixes to sound like, EQ'd them to match, added a small amount of reverb overall to the songs and used a little compression to make the mix louder and it didn't sound bad and translated well to all kinds of speakers

Then mastering software came around and I learned more about doing it on a PC. I found that alot of mastering software has a ton of useless settings and pre-sets in my opinion and I just stuck with the EQ, compression, reverb and a small amount of stereo widening in the higher frequencies.

Then I figured I would send one of my songs off to get mastered by a good mastering service, I paid $75, got my song mastered at universal mastering, got it back and compared it to my mastering, I preferred my mastering as 1) it wasn't brickwalled and had dynamics, and 2) it wasn't WAY too bright. It may seem that I wasted the money but then again I didn't because I got to hear the difference between my song mastered my a "Pro" and my own mastering

Something else I believe is driving DIY's to master themselves is the "loudness war" that's going on right now in the music industry. Music is really suffering from this, just as mine did, brick wall mastered, no dynamics, overly loud etc.... Maybe if I would have paid for an entire CD they would have paid more attention to it I don't know......
Click to expand...

Music is a very subjective art form and communication with both mix and mastering engineers is critical. I often ask clients for a sample of a similar release or even their own version of a master to help determine what they are looking for in the final product.

If the first master isn't what you're looking for you shouldn't be afraid to ask for a revision. Many MEs will give you a certain number of revisions as part of the initial cost. Some will even give you a demo before charging. Whether a single or complete album this shouldn't be an issue. If an ME can't improve on your version, it may be a good idea to look elsewhere, not all MEs are the same.

Best,
Tom
 
I always mix and master my own music, I've sent my wav files off to several "pros" in the past, only for the mix to be returned in a state. Way too much reverb on some, EQ screwed so badly that I don't even sound like me... more like a talking computer and other times the mix is just downright butchered; where I sit and wonder who exactly pays these people?

So if you're going to use "pros", I'd always demand a sample of what they plan to do on YOUR mix and not a random sample of somebody elses work, before any money exchanges.
 
Reverb...?

Are you talking about actual professional mastering engineers - or "pros" that are pushing $15 a track?

Otherwise - I'd highly suggest communicating your thoughts with the mastering engineer. Samples are wonderful and all, but I'd argue that most of the 'better' mastering guys are a little weary of the 'cattle call' state of the industry at the moment. I'm not the busiest guy out there myself, but the "sample requests" are running about a month behind at the moment. No doubt, I'm probably losing business because of it. Hopefully not to 'hacks' (for lack of a better term) who would dump reverb all over someone's project without a fairly good reason for it (and consulting the client about something that crosses the "radical" line).
 
MEs hardly ever use reverb except in cases where a tail might be cut short and the fade needs to be lengthened. Reverb just tends to push the entire mix back.

Again, communication is key. If you are unhappy with a job because reverb was added, tell the ME to remove it, though I would ask why it was added to begin with. Other areas can be very subjective and you have to develop a good working relationship with the ME, not take the first results at face value. Better still attend the session so that you can work together to get the desired result.

We are talking about mastering and not mixing? Some still seem to confuse the two.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top