camn
Active member
Ill be t he could do a kick ass job if it was HIS bedroom.. and HIS waves bundle... cuz he'd be used to it and stuff.
xoox
xoox
G
greggybud
New member
Im thinking that too. I mean with someone with many years of expierence i.e. Bob Katz using only Waves and no outboard gear, how close could he get it?
That probably is something they would never do however.....
That probably is something they would never do however.....
E
ecs113
New member
Maybe we can email him and ask him to master an album, once using outboard gear, once using Waves, and then let us compare the two... I'm sure he has the extra time...
G
greggybud
New member
ecs113 said:
Yeah lots of extra time Im sure.
Perhaps there are mastering engineers who have done this but not shared the results since they could achieve astounding results, and dont want to loose any business? Hey I could be way off here. Im just really currious how close Waves, if used in the right hands by an expierenced ME, could come to something mastered in a mastering facility.
L
littledog
New member
I don't think it is as much an issue of which software and hardware as much as having a listening chain and environment which is accurate enough to reveal the flaws that need to be corrected, and not add anything that is not really there.
a good mastering engineer with a good room and good speakers wouldn't HAVE to have Sonic Solutions with a Weiss EQ, etc. They could do a fine job using Waves or a Finalizer or whatever. It's just they wouldn't be able to work as efficiently, and if you are paying top mastering rates that's clearly important!
a good mastering engineer with a good room and good speakers wouldn't HAVE to have Sonic Solutions with a Weiss EQ, etc. They could do a fine job using Waves or a Finalizer or whatever. It's just they wouldn't be able to work as efficiently, and if you are paying top mastering rates that's clearly important!
camn
Active member
I agree with that. Cuz unlike most recording studios... who all have these half dozen name brand peoces of shit... Most MEs have a couple peices of gear THEY like.. and thats it. They have THEIR eq and THEIR comp... and usually its not the gear that sells the client, but the engineer.
And in reality... A *LOT* of mastering guys use software almost exclusively. This is logical... since a LOT of projects are being finished up in the Digiatal Realm.. and as we know.. d>a is the crappiest sound EVER. So Each guy gets his game going on whatever he likes the most... and as a CLIENT, you dont come in saying... "I'd like you to run this thru your Manley gear, pls" ... instead you give it to him, and let him work.
Ludwig uses, what... his Massenburg rig into his Ivys??
Some guys use Sonic Solutions..
a couple use Logic or Wavelab..
and some are so fortunate to have a SaDie rig.
so the ULTIMATE ANSWER to all the "mastering?" questions?????
--------------------------->>
IF you have no money.... people will know. Tweak it as good as you can and call it good.
IF you want to be a ME... buy a semi-pro mastering program and start practicing. Wavelab... SS.. whatever. Expect good results in 2-5 years.
IF you have money and...:
a) you recorded to tape>> go to a house with a good analog (or hybrid) rig whose engineer has done work you like.. and is into your 'vision'.
or
b) you recorded digital>>> go to a house with a good digital (or hybrid) rig... with a simiar engineer to above.
-----------------<<<<<<<<
I say stick a with a, cuz there is great analog gear out there... take advantage. And stay d with d cuz... stay in the D.
there. Now put that in the FAQ and lets never talk aboot mastering again!
xoxo
And in reality... A *LOT* of mastering guys use software almost exclusively. This is logical... since a LOT of projects are being finished up in the Digiatal Realm.. and as we know.. d>a is the crappiest sound EVER. So Each guy gets his game going on whatever he likes the most... and as a CLIENT, you dont come in saying... "I'd like you to run this thru your Manley gear, pls" ... instead you give it to him, and let him work.
Ludwig uses, what... his Massenburg rig into his Ivys??
Some guys use Sonic Solutions..
a couple use Logic or Wavelab..
and some are so fortunate to have a SaDie rig.
so the ULTIMATE ANSWER to all the "mastering?" questions?????
--------------------------->>
IF you have no money.... people will know. Tweak it as good as you can and call it good.
IF you want to be a ME... buy a semi-pro mastering program and start practicing. Wavelab... SS.. whatever. Expect good results in 2-5 years.
IF you have money and...:
a) you recorded to tape>> go to a house with a good analog (or hybrid) rig whose engineer has done work you like.. and is into your 'vision'.
or
b) you recorded digital>>> go to a house with a good digital (or hybrid) rig... with a simiar engineer to above.
-----------------<<<<<<<<
I say stick a with a, cuz there is great analog gear out there... take advantage. And stay d with d cuz... stay in the D.
there. Now put that in the FAQ and lets never talk aboot mastering again!
xoxo
mixmkr
we don't need rest!!
camn... are those "real" hugs and kisses at the end of your posts... or are those just 'digital' smooches??
xoxo!
xoxo!
pipelineaudio
Well-known member
"IF you want to be a ME... buy a semi-pro mastering program and start practicing. Wavelab... SS.. whatever. Expect good results in 2-5 years.
"
thats rich
"
thats rich
mixmkr
we don't need rest!!
shoot...I think anyone with a brain between their ears ought to be able to get good results in 5 years. That's not out of the question. Great results?...put some more years in it...maybe.pipelineaudio said:
The recording scene nowadays make it so easy for most people to get a good sound, unlike battling the days of yore with tape hiss, generation degradation, etc... Infact imo, I hear MORE lousy music today, but a lot of it is well recorded....just for the fact that it isn't so hard for the most part to get a "clean" track on a CD...therefore everybody and their brother is making CDs now.
But..back to the statement, a good mix simply run thru an L2 sounds great, most of the times...and how simple is that? Finesse with mastering...naw...but it usually works pretty well.
N
NobleSavage
New member
The problem I seem to have run into is that 90% of answers given to questions here at the HOME recording BBS are to go to a PRO?!?!? Despite the title of HOME recording, the big kahunas continually offer suggestions that reek of non-home recording.
"Play a great amp at full volume gives better tone than a pod." - Well, duh?!?!? But how many people have homes that allow them to play their amp at full volume at the same time they actually have time to record, because they are not full time musicians?
"Use a different mic for every instrument and voice." - again, if I were in a pro studio, I might have access to a ton of mics, but being a HOME recordist, I have 2.
"HOw can I Master My Music on My Computer?" - seem spretty straightforward... not "How can I send my music off to someone else to master.... but how can I do it on MY computer. So, rather than shoot the idea down as a bad one, why not offer tips that will give the HOME recordist the best results possible on their computer and with the tools at hand. Will the HOME recordist get the same results as a guy in million dollar studio? No, of course not, I doubt if anyone expects to, they simply wanna be able to get the best results with the tools at hand, which is not a dishonorable goal.
Maybe the URL needs to be changed to antihomerecording dot com, as HOME recording seems to be where most of us are screwing up.
My suggestion to mastering on your computer would be to get as good a group of mixes as possible, take a nice calm Sunday and start getting the levels on the first track as ideal as you can and then use it as a guideline for all subsequent tracks. The final group of tracks should then end the process all having basically the same volume and tonal levels... which is pretty much all the HOME recordist is seeking when they throw around the M word.
"Play a great amp at full volume gives better tone than a pod." - Well, duh?!?!? But how many people have homes that allow them to play their amp at full volume at the same time they actually have time to record, because they are not full time musicians?
"Use a different mic for every instrument and voice." - again, if I were in a pro studio, I might have access to a ton of mics, but being a HOME recordist, I have 2.
"HOw can I Master My Music on My Computer?" - seem spretty straightforward... not "How can I send my music off to someone else to master.... but how can I do it on MY computer. So, rather than shoot the idea down as a bad one, why not offer tips that will give the HOME recordist the best results possible on their computer and with the tools at hand. Will the HOME recordist get the same results as a guy in million dollar studio? No, of course not, I doubt if anyone expects to, they simply wanna be able to get the best results with the tools at hand, which is not a dishonorable goal.
Maybe the URL needs to be changed to antihomerecording dot com, as HOME recording seems to be where most of us are screwing up.
My suggestion to mastering on your computer would be to get as good a group of mixes as possible, take a nice calm Sunday and start getting the levels on the first track as ideal as you can and then use it as a guideline for all subsequent tracks. The final group of tracks should then end the process all having basically the same volume and tonal levels... which is pretty much all the HOME recordist is seeking when they throw around the M word.
mixmkr
we don't need rest!!
noble, I "hear" alot of what you are saying, and I think you are 100% correct. Too many people throw around..."go to a pro"...and they are probably going to now say; "well, the poster wanted to know how to make their mixes sound pro on a behringer mixer and a sm57 and a gina card"... "It can't be done...go to a pro to get pro results."
It is along these lines that I get a smile when I read all this discussion about this and that microphone...do I need "__" for MY vocals, or "__" sounds SOOO much better than a Studio Projects mic...etc. etc. And the person has been playing guitar for two years, and thinks they sound great in the shower
For some odd reason, all these "hardball" equipment users never show up in the MP3 clinic.
It is along these lines that I get a smile when I read all this discussion about this and that microphone...do I need "__" for MY vocals, or "__" sounds SOOO much better than a Studio Projects mic...etc. etc. And the person has been playing guitar for two years, and thinks they sound great in the shower
For some odd reason, all these "hardball" equipment users never show up in the MP3 clinic.
pipelineaudio
Well-known member
well since its home * RECORDING * and not home *Mastering* I dont see the problem with saying " go see a pro"
then again I also think sending files to other HR members for mastering would be a great, fun, sensible and especially economical way to do things as well...everyone can have at it, and you just keep the one you want....sounds cool to me.
I think you are denying you and your music a lot by not sending it to a different set of ears, pro or not
mastering and recording get lumped in together too much
then again I also think sending files to other HR members for mastering would be a great, fun, sensible and especially economical way to do things as well...everyone can have at it, and you just keep the one you want....sounds cool to me.
I think you are denying you and your music a lot by not sending it to a different set of ears, pro or not
mastering and recording get lumped in together too much
mixmkr
we don't need rest!!
pipelineaudio said:
I suppose we should leave out mixing, buying equipment, comparing guitar tunings, computer knowledge, song critiques.....
I think just like master and recording...it is ALL part of the same process...loosely called "recording". Is not mastering part of the recording process? I think it is.
I agree about the ear sharing thing, etc..
(mp3 clinic)
A1A2
New member
ok, I don't want to master....
So, what do I do exactually when I have 10 songs mixed, and wanting to put them together onto a CD?
Correct me if any of my guesses are off:
1) Max the volume on each mix
2) Line them up in editing program, in my case SoundForge
3) Insert/deleate silence in between each mix
4) Change overall volume flow of the whole CD (Automation?)
5) Try to EQ (compression in some cases)
Anything else I should be watching? I don't wanna get flamed for wanting to do a final touchup on my CD, but, I gotta do something(anything but MASTERING) before I burn them onto a CD, right?
Any help would be great, Thanks
AL
So, what do I do exactually when I have 10 songs mixed, and wanting to put them together onto a CD?
Correct me if any of my guesses are off:
1) Max the volume on each mix
2) Line them up in editing program, in my case SoundForge
3) Insert/deleate silence in between each mix
4) Change overall volume flow of the whole CD (Automation?)
5) Try to EQ (compression in some cases)
Anything else I should be watching? I don't wanna get flamed for wanting to do a final touchup on my CD, but, I gotta do something(anything but MASTERING) before I burn them onto a CD, right?
Any help would be great, Thanks
AL
Blue Bear Sound
New member
I REPEAT...............
BOB KATZ - SECRETS OF THE MASTERING ENGINEER
Read it, understand it, live by it... it's all you need to know!
BOB KATZ - SECRETS OF THE MASTERING ENGINEER
Read it, understand it, live by it... it's all you need to know!
L
littledog
New member
Re: ok, I don't want to master....
Without even getting into other issues, let's focus on the one that raises the most problems. Most CD's have songs intended to be heard at differing volume levels, i.e., some songs are "loud" songs, some "soft", some in-between. If you simply maximize the volume (called normalizing) of each track, you do not take intended relative volumes into consideration.
If your soft songs sound as loud as your loud ones, the result is that your loud songs sound wimpy. There is nothing wrong with NOT having every song peak at 0dB. Maybe some will only peak at -6dB in order to fit into the rest of the tracks on the CD. The point is, you have to do what sounds good, not just follow a mathematical formula.
A1A2 said:
Without even getting into other issues, let's focus on the one that raises the most problems. Most CD's have songs intended to be heard at differing volume levels, i.e., some songs are "loud" songs, some "soft", some in-between. If you simply maximize the volume (called normalizing) of each track, you do not take intended relative volumes into consideration.
If your soft songs sound as loud as your loud ones, the result is that your loud songs sound wimpy. There is nothing wrong with NOT having every song peak at 0dB. Maybe some will only peak at -6dB in order to fit into the rest of the tracks on the CD. The point is, you have to do what sounds good, not just follow a mathematical formula.
M
mixsit
Well-known member
Re: I REPEAT...............
I had not been there in a while. It's been good to get back for a refresher and I want to get the Chesky test disk and start working on my monitor/room issues again. Thanks for the bump!
His coments re: "radio ready" got me wondering. Has anyone tried to set up an 'FM radio' processor signal path simulation (with software plugs?) to experiment with how a typical station (if there is a typical) might affect your mix?
wayne
Blue Bear Sound said:
I had not been there in a while. It's been good to get back for a refresher and I want to get the Chesky test disk and start working on my monitor/room issues again. Thanks for the bump!
His coments re: "radio ready" got me wondering. Has anyone tried to set up an 'FM radio' processor signal path simulation (with software plugs?) to experiment with how a typical station (if there is a typical) might affect your mix?
wayne
A1A2
New member
Blue Bear:
Going to print it out. Thanks for the link
littledog:
I was thinking about the same thing. But, my logic was, max them first, so you can hear everything clearly, then use an volume automation to adjust the volume flow. Does that sound about right? or no?
Anyways, I am going to study Bob Katz's article before I ask anymore dumb questions.
AL
Going to print it out. Thanks for the link
littledog:
I was thinking about the same thing. But, my logic was, max them first, so you can hear everything clearly, then use an volume automation to adjust the volume flow. Does that sound about right? or no?
Anyways, I am going to study Bob Katz's article before I ask anymore dumb questions.
AL
J
JesusFreak
New member
I'm probably way out of line here but like that ever stopped me before..
. I think that telling someone that they CAN'T master something at home or that they don't have good enough equipment or that you can't do it unless you have $100,000 room or equipment, or you MUST send it to a PRO ME, is a grossly overassumed misconception.
Now I will state that it is probably correct a better percentage of the time, but just making a complete blanket statement like that is flat out wrong.
I would bet you that most of the ME's that are out there worked under some GREAT ME and they became great over time. But I would also be willing to bet that there were some, maybe a small percentage, but still SOME that for some reason, just could figure it out. Their ears just told them what to do. No special training or special equipment. They could just do it. I would refer to it as a God given ability.
So who's to say that someone here if not a bunch of those here are in the same category. Maybe the guy that wants to know how to master on his DAW was able to make some GREAT mixes without very little effort at all. Maybe when he is done, that CD will sound better than it ever would have if it went to a PRO ME.
I would be willing to say that every single one of us here that can hear and is patient enough and willing to put in the time and effort and won't stop until you know that you've done the best you can, could put out a CD that would rival anything out there today.
The statement was made earlier about it's ultimately going to be the listening public that buys the songs. I don't care one lick if a PRO ME or Engineer ripped my mixed to shreds and told me that it sucked so bad that it isn't worthy of a coaster; If the public likes it...then the PRO's can bite me.
I've been handing out samples of music that I've been recording to a bunch of people. Both musically oriented and not and so far, I haven't had a single complaint or bad review. Keep in mind that these folks, have handed it out to people I don't know either and have got the same results. Dont' want you thinking that the only person to listen to it is Mom...hehe..
So I say..go for it...if you give it your all and it still sounds like crap and you know there is absolutely nothing else you can do to help...then give it to a "Pro"....until then, keep cranking away on it.
God Bless!
. I think that telling someone that they CAN'T master something at home or that they don't have good enough equipment or that you can't do it unless you have $100,000 room or equipment, or you MUST send it to a PRO ME, is a grossly overassumed misconception.Now I will state that it is probably correct a better percentage of the time, but just making a complete blanket statement like that is flat out wrong.
I would bet you that most of the ME's that are out there worked under some GREAT ME and they became great over time. But I would also be willing to bet that there were some, maybe a small percentage, but still SOME that for some reason, just could figure it out. Their ears just told them what to do. No special training or special equipment. They could just do it. I would refer to it as a God given ability.
So who's to say that someone here if not a bunch of those here are in the same category. Maybe the guy that wants to know how to master on his DAW was able to make some GREAT mixes without very little effort at all. Maybe when he is done, that CD will sound better than it ever would have if it went to a PRO ME.
I would be willing to say that every single one of us here that can hear and is patient enough and willing to put in the time and effort and won't stop until you know that you've done the best you can, could put out a CD that would rival anything out there today.
The statement was made earlier about it's ultimately going to be the listening public that buys the songs. I don't care one lick if a PRO ME or Engineer ripped my mixed to shreds and told me that it sucked so bad that it isn't worthy of a coaster; If the public likes it...then the PRO's can bite me.
I've been handing out samples of music that I've been recording to a bunch of people. Both musically oriented and not and so far, I haven't had a single complaint or bad review. Keep in mind that these folks, have handed it out to people I don't know either and have got the same results. Dont' want you thinking that the only person to listen to it is Mom...hehe..
So I say..go for it...if you give it your all and it still sounds like crap and you know there is absolutely nothing else you can do to help...then give it to a "Pro"....until then, keep cranking away on it.
God Bless!
Blue Bear Sound
New member
You forgot a couple of important details......
To hear any sonic problems in your mix, you have to have a signal chain and room that ALLOWS YOU to hear the sonic problems in the first place... THAT is why the cost of ME gear is very high (not even talking about finely-tuned room acoustics)...
THEN... the other thing you forgot (as most do) the most important advantage in analyzing your mix's sonic quality is objectivity, which by definition, a DIY'er wil NOT have....
We've repeated this over and over -- why is this SO difficult to understand?!?!?!?
To hear any sonic problems in your mix, you have to have a signal chain and room that ALLOWS YOU to hear the sonic problems in the first place... THAT is why the cost of ME gear is very high (not even talking about finely-tuned room acoustics)...
THEN... the other thing you forgot (as most do) the most important advantage in analyzing your mix's sonic quality is objectivity, which by definition, a DIY'er wil NOT have....
We've repeated this over and over -- why is this SO difficult to understand?!?!?!?
