am i asking too much out of mastering

  • Thread starter Thread starter giraffe
  • Start date Start date
giraffe

giraffe

i love negative rep
i recently got a sample from a reputable ME and heard very little difference from what i did at home.

don't get me wrong, it was better, a little smoother in the mids-upper mids, and the bass was slightly better controoled. but not the kind of difference i was expecting.

the mix was ok i'd say, in line with stuff i do.
and i heard mastering jobs that made a mix go from absolute hell to, well, listenable. but the amount of change was impressive.

and to top it off i'm trying to convince this band that they need to pay for professional mastering, but it will be kinda hard to pull off if they can't hear the difference from what i did with a 4band eq and an L2, and what would cost them conciderably more money.

so..... am i asking too much out of mastering?????

here is some examples of my work (not any from the band in question)
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/5/cardboardbombsheltermusic.htm

i'd say the stuff i'm talking about sounds a little better than that stuff too.
thankx
 
no your not...the mastering engineer can only work with whats in front of him. if you're eqing and L2ing before he gets it...it doesnt leave him room to work with what he should have to work with. on the same note.....if the band sounds bad...its still obvious after mastering. if cheap mics and the mix isnt great, you can tell after mastering. its hard not to use all toys you have to make it sound good for the band but sometimes putting on the polish too soon ruins the paint job.
 
distortedrumble said:
no your not...the mastering engineer can only work with whats in front of him. if you're eqing and L2ing before he gets it...it doesnt leave him room to work with what he should have to work with. on the same note.....if the band sounds bad...its still obvious after mastering. if cheap mics and the mix isnt great, you can tell after mastering. its hard not to use all toys you have to make it sound good for the band but sometimes putting on the polish too soon ruins the paint job.
Click to expand...


i sent it to him with no L2 or EQ
(i'm not stupid)
i'm compairing what he did to what i did
(actually thare was about 2db of compression, that i decided wont stand, but only 2db)
 
so whats did you do a blind test with anyone else? you could be biased to your own mix. (not trying to piss you off or anything...).
 
i've checked it with other people.
and the mix sure as hell won't win me a grammey, but it's ok.
i'd call it better than average home stuff, but it's really hard to judge your own.

also, it is (the mastered version) better, but NOT 500-600$ worth of better.

(just a little frustrated)
 
if they dont plan to make 500-600 selling it then i dont see the point in getting it mastered
 
Again, not to piss you off but it's possible that you just can't hear the difference between what you're doing and what the ME is doing. When I started doing mastering, I thought the same way you're thinking right now. And... given that it's your mix, you're probably too close to it to hear things the way someone else did.

OR, your mastering engineer isn't very good.

OR, you're right.
 
G -

We really need to hear the before and after to make a decision.

Can you post both somewhere?
 
Are you listening back on the same monitors you mixed on?

Are you sure that what you are listening on actully reveals the details of what the mastering engineer (might have) accomplished?

Are you sure the mastering guy you chose doesn't just suck?
 
If it was a sample, just tell him what you think it's lacking. Maybe he'll re-cut it.
 
Maybe if he got it to sound close to the way you had it sound when you "mastered" it, he did a good job figuring out what you already liked. Talk to him again, tell him your thoughts and see if you can work something out. If you can't, there's no reason to come to the conclusion that ALL mastering is not worth it...the styles and techniques of GREAT mastering engineers vary widely.
 
I know we've all heard mastering jobs that were *definitely* "worth it".
 
maby it's one of thoes "i should have recorded it better in the first place then the master would have had more to work with"

but i think this band needs (they will be trying to sell it) a pro master job
but i have to be able to sell them the idea.

ok here goes, for the record i do think the master is better than mine esp in the mids, upper mids he eliminated some distortion or harshness, and he cleaned up the bass some (both things that needed dooing)

although i kinda gave it away just for fun i wont tell you which is which

http://www.soundclick.com/bands/5/cardboardbombsheltermusic.htm

ruby sample 1&2

probably the solution is as simple as i need to better communicate what it is i
want, but i've started this party now so.......

and maby i'm just an ass and thought that a decent master would magically make it sound like it was done by that multi grammy winning fat whats-his-name

maby i'm just asking to much out of mastering
 
I will admit that there is a only a subtle difference between the two, but after hearing the mix, you shouldnt be at the mastering stage anyway. :eek: :eek:

Dude, dont tell me you cant hear that autotune on her voice going haywire like 4 times.

It sounds bad you gotta fix that kinda stuff before you master.

Oh, in my rant i forgot the point, (OOPS) the "sample 2" is the one i thought sounded best.

Is it the mastered one?
 
Well, for what it's worth, I think he did a pretty good job - he really leveled out the eq, tightend up the bass, and put some life into the top end.......

And BTW - I didn't read your post till after I listened.......
 
NL5.... you never made a guess as to which was which

xfinsterx..... please be specific as to the location of the auto tune in question
honestly, i wasn't aware thare was that big a problem

also, if you feel the need all mix comments, even the mean and hornery kind, are appricated.
as a matter of fact i'd rather the mean and hornery kind (be brutal)
 
I'm not psoitive which was which, but the one sounded quite a bit better - I believe it was #2 tho.
 
i checked them both out, now i'm no engineer, mix master or what not, but I think they sound pretty close to each other,
why not just charge them for the mastering you did....
and that auto-tune is annoying, it might be a little better is she just went out of pitch a bit, which it kinda sounds like she does even with auto-tune..

gl
 
sample2 is better imo, the vocals sounded mroe controlled.
i could also hear the autotune jumping around, esp at 1:33
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top