The future of Mastering? WTF?

  • Thread starter Thread starter maestro_dmc
  • Start date Start date
The new age of mastering version sounds a little harsh to me. The low end is woofy and the highs seem exaggerated. It's better than I expected though. A 192 kbps MP3 isn't even worth being free.
 
I listened to these last night on my phone with earbuds and thought the original file sounded better. The "mastered" one was louder but a bit harsh in the highs, especially at volume.

Today, in my room (studio), I'm of the same opinion.
 
But here's the question.....what are is being compared here?

Maybe the original could be master a lot better than the online freebie.....it's simply a question of knowing a bit more about mastering and using the right tools....but if you don't, then the online option may be for you. :)

IOW....take a well mastered song, remove all of the mastering, and then run that through the online option...and then compare. Just tossing up "something" that you call "mastered"....and using that as a comparison may not really prove anything.
Like these days....everyone is "mastering" their own stuff....but are they really *mastering* or just applying what they think they need AFA processing, and calling it "mastered"???
 
miroslav said:
But here's the question.....what are is being compared here?

Maybe the original could be master a lot better than the online freebie.....it's simply a question of knowing a bit more about mastering and using the right tools....but if you don't, then the online option may be for you. :)

IOW....take a well mastered song, remove all of the mastering, and then run that through the online option...and then compare. Just tossing up "something" that you call "mastered"....and using that as a comparison may not really prove anything.
Like these days....everyone is "mastering" their own stuff....but are they really *mastering* or just applying what they think they need AFA processing, and calling it "mastered"???
Click to expand...

Ahh. Very good point.

Like in my case, with this particular track, I recorded in PreSonus StudioOne, and used the "Project (Mastering)" mode to "finish" the project, using the plugins provided the best I could with my limited understanding of what needed to be done. Not ideal, but I was under the gun a bit and had made promises ...blah blah blah. . . had to be done. So this track was technically already "mastered" (poorly) by me, which was my plan all along anyway (with this project).

Tangent: I am really just now getting into recording other peoples projects for payment, and I am seeing that the Mastering process and options will need to be spelled out at the beginning of a project, since I really shouldn't be trying to master things myself. It's not that I wouldn't love to learn how to do a right proper job, just that I know it's good to have a fresh set of ears listen and know what needs to be done. Better that than just assume "OK, multi-band compressor? Check!, Brick wall limiter? Check! Lo-cut? On!" like you said, just applying things because that's what I've read you "do".

How do you guys handle that? Is it spelled out up front that mastering is not included? Do you even master stuff yourself?


I think my preference toward Mastering Options should go in this order:

  1. Send the work out to a professional 3rd party Mastering Engineer, (or have the client find their own)
  2. Learn how to master properly, and then have the results checked out by ears I can trust.( maybe on an online forum or something?:rolleyes:)
  3. Something Else
  4. Some other option I haven't thought of yet
  5. Use an Online Service like Landr

So who's next? Who will send in an "un-Mastered" mix and then post it here with the 3rd party "Professionally Mastered" (or self mastered) version for comparison/critique? Let's go. :eatpopcorn:
 
maestro_dmc said:
Ahh. Very good point.

Like in my case, with this particular track, I recorded in PreSonus StudioOne, and used the "Project (Mastering)" mode to "finish" the project, using the plugins provided the best I could with my limited understanding of what needed to be done. Not ideal, but I was under the gun a bit and had made promises ...blah blah blah. . . had to be done. So this track was technically already "mastered" (poorly) by me, which was my plan all along anyway (with this project).

Tangent: I am really just now getting into recording other peoples projects for payment, and I am seeing that the Mastering process and options will need to be spelled out at the beginning of a project, since I really shouldn't be trying to master things myself. It's not that I wouldn't love to learn how to do a right proper job, just that I know it's good to have a fresh set of ears listen and know what needs to be done. Better that than just assume "OK, multi-band compressor? Check!, Brick wall limiter? Check! Lo-cut? On!" like you said, just applying things because that's what I've read you "do".

How do you guys handle that? Is it spelled out up front that mastering is not included? Do you even master stuff yourself?


I think my preference toward Mastering Options should go in this order:

  1. Send the work out to a professional 3rd party Mastering Engineer, (or have the client find their own)
  2. Learn how to master properly, and then have the results checked out by ears I can trust.( maybe on an online forum or something?:rolleyes:)
  3. Something Else
  4. Some other option I haven't thought of yet
  5. Use an Online Service like Landr

So who's next? Who will send in an "un-Mastered" mix and then post it here with the 3rd party "Professionally Mastered" (or self mastered) version for comparison/critique? Let's go. :eatpopcorn:
Click to expand...

I don't know a single mastering engineer who uses multi-band compression though...
 
I won't use a "professional mastering engineer". Too many hacks out there. I won't use a one-size-fits-all robot program either. I just do it myself.
 
So are there actually people involved in the "mastering" or is it just an algorithm?
 
As long as people keep making shitty music you won't need a mastering engineer. Just slam the hell out o it. Only people who make great music understand how important mastering is and how it is really worth the money. Eventually good music will come back around again.
Rod Norman
Engineer

maestro_dmc said:
Free Online "Mastering"


I guess all you mastering engineers will be out of a job soon.:rolleyes:

:facepalm:
Click to expand...
 
fireflyva said:
So are there actually people involved in the "mastering" or is it just an algorithm?
Click to expand...

Did you ever see how sausage is made?
You put all the raw meat into the machine at one end, and sausage comes out the other end.
At the supermarket....all the sausage looks the same.
 
Rod Norman said:
As long as people keep making shitty music you won't need a mastering engineer. Just slam the hell out o it. Only people who make great music understand how important mastering is and how it is really worth the money. Eventually good music will come back around again.
Rod Norman
Engineer
Click to expand...

Not with people like you claiming to be "engineers".
 
Listened to the ain't rnr track before & after.
The after isn't bad but it isn't good either.
Most folks do similarly well/poorly at home with their software and presets.
I pay for mastering but that's because I want the best from the track and can't do it myself. I also like the chance to discuss what I'm after and get revisions done if I want them.
 
Greg_L said:
Lol! They're stalking us!
Click to expand...

That's just good business IMHO. Knowing when/where someone is talking about you and engaging that audience is just smart, not stalking. Still unsure about the service, but props to them for their business awareness.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top