S
sammol
New member
To the purist metalheads,
If the mixing is already good, do you still need additional processes after?
If the mixing is already good, do you still need additional processes after?
Waltz Mastering
New member
One song? Maybe not.To the purist metalheads,
If the mixing is already good, do you still need additional processes after?
...but the chances of a few songs or a full album working together.... 99.999999999% of the time if the songs/album are destined for serious release, yes additional processing is needed.
Although..
Iron Maiden released an album with no further dsp processing after the mixes in 2006
http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=54823
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Matter_of_Life_and_Death_(album)
Last edited:
Massive Master
www.massivemastering.com
And I think that Tom is eluding to the fact that when a project doesn't go through the "traditional" (for lack of a better term) mastering phase - no matter how much or how little processing is actually done during that phase - it basically makes "front page industry news" - That Iron Maiden album probably had more industry press because of the "not mastering" thing than because of Iron Maiden putting out another album...
And the metal that most of the "purist metalheads" are into these days has an awful lot of post-mix processing going on...
And the metal that most of the "purist metalheads" are into these days has an awful lot of post-mix processing going on...
ecktronic
Mixing and Mastering.
Well if the Mix is amazingly perfect then maybe not, but it is always good to get an ME to listen over to it with a fresh set of ears.
Can you post a sample of the Mix in mind?
G
Can you post a sample of the Mix in mind?
G
S
sammol
New member
I'm not saying that these tracks are not mastered, but I believe you can achieve these sound through perfect mixing ONLY.
(remove the spaces)
www . youtube . com/ watch?v=J3LwaUcVxpY
www . youtube . com/ watch?v=rfummR3Uy6I
www . youtube . com/ watch?v=S-AKursvupQ
www . youtube . com/ watch?v=QVJxCLcU6Wc
(remove the spaces)
www . youtube . com/ watch?v=J3LwaUcVxpY
www . youtube . com/ watch?v=rfummR3Uy6I
www . youtube . com/ watch?v=S-AKursvupQ
www . youtube . com/ watch?v=QVJxCLcU6Wc
rayc
retroreprobate
Perfect mixing is what to whom on what day with which equipment and in which room?
I KNOW many folk believe that M.E. create work by evoking the mysterious alchemy of their craft BUT I believe they exist to provide a real service. I've done mixes that were deemed spot on by a number of people who have good ears. I've had some of those mixes mastered by very talented amateurs and some mastered by professional MEs.
The perfect mix would probably exist. Matchingit with other tracks to make an album would take thinsg a step further though. as mentioned.
There's a difference.
The experiences I've had demonstrated that other, trained, ears can address issues I thoughty I'd masked, or chose to ignore. That goes for the prof & one of the amateur MEs.
I'm pleased I had some tracks mastered because they did go to the next level.
If you have a perfect mix does that include running things that are in every HR's VST list of faux mastering plugs? If Y then it's fhome mastered track rather than a perfect mix isn't it?
In terms of DM - it's the genre most processed in tracking, mixing and mastering that I've heard.
I KNOW many folk believe that M.E. create work by evoking the mysterious alchemy of their craft BUT I believe they exist to provide a real service. I've done mixes that were deemed spot on by a number of people who have good ears. I've had some of those mixes mastered by very talented amateurs and some mastered by professional MEs.
The perfect mix would probably exist. Matchingit with other tracks to make an album would take thinsg a step further though. as mentioned.
There's a difference.
The experiences I've had demonstrated that other, trained, ears can address issues I thoughty I'd masked, or chose to ignore. That goes for the prof & one of the amateur MEs.
I'm pleased I had some tracks mastered because they did go to the next level.
If you have a perfect mix does that include running things that are in every HR's VST list of faux mastering plugs? If Y then it's fhome mastered track rather than a perfect mix isn't it?
In terms of DM - it's the genre most processed in tracking, mixing and mastering that I've heard.
JimmyS1969
MOODerator
M
Murdersgalore
New member
I always use LB-Mastering studios for my death metal needs. I'd give you a sample but he made me sign a contract that I will never release any of my work......ever.
G
Greg_L
Banned
DigitMus
Member
I don't mean to rain on anyone's parade, but when anyone has to ask whether mastering is necessary, the answer - for that person - is no. Mastering is necessary for the large scale release/duplication of an album/CD/EP by a label. If you're signed to a label, they're gonna master it. Period.
If you're selling CDs at gigs, etc. , mastering is not going to increase your sales, or command a higher price, so you might as well save the $$ (if you're happy with your mixes, that is). "BUT WAIT!" you say, "What if some major label hears our CD, and wants to sign us? Wouldn't it be better to have it mastered so they can just release it as is?" Short answer: Not gonna happen. Longer answer: If a label signs you on the basis of a self-produced CD, they're interested in your songwriting/arranging/performing talent; they're interested in your long term prospects, not how well produced (or not) your CD is.
I'm not saying that one shouldn't have one's self-produced CD mastered; I'm saying anyone who questions whether mastering is necessary either doesn't understand the importance of mastering, or (far more likely) isn't involved in a project where mastering will make any difference (in terms of sales/attention/criticism/etc.).
If you're selling CDs at gigs, etc. , mastering is not going to increase your sales, or command a higher price, so you might as well save the $$ (if you're happy with your mixes, that is). "BUT WAIT!" you say, "What if some major label hears our CD, and wants to sign us? Wouldn't it be better to have it mastered so they can just release it as is?" Short answer: Not gonna happen. Longer answer: If a label signs you on the basis of a self-produced CD, they're interested in your songwriting/arranging/performing talent; they're interested in your long term prospects, not how well produced (or not) your CD is.
I'm not saying that one shouldn't have one's self-produced CD mastered; I'm saying anyone who questions whether mastering is necessary either doesn't understand the importance of mastering, or (far more likely) isn't involved in a project where mastering will make any difference (in terms of sales/attention/criticism/etc.).
rayc
retroreprobate
DigitMus,
You're right but you're wrong too.
Are you referring to professional mastering, amateur mastering or "mastering" in general?
Lot's of people have their songs "mastered" for small scale use. If you say that the process is 100% unnecessary for anyone not distributing on a larger scale I'd suggest that you've missed some of what "mastering" does.
Almost everyone who posts in the MP3 Mixing Clinic ends up "mastering" in some form or other.
No one in the world is going to buy a CD of my stuff & I'm not likely to begin distributing freebie CD around the globe BUT I've had a hand full of my stuff matered professionally & an equal part done by excellent amateurs. The songs sound more "finished" and the tracks done by each of the MEs have a consistency & cohesion as a cohort. Sonic issues that I was unable to deal with have also been managed to greater or lesser degrees. I'm happy to have had them done because they sound complete for whatever reason my brain tells me (could be a hip pocket nerve response or a change to serotonin receptors based on emptier pockets when I listen).
It's a judgement that individuals make based on needs, wants & wishes.
I tried a free sample before buying naturally.
A denizen of the MP3 clinic very recently had a album released by a label. The album was recorded and mixed by the member but was mastered externally before the "tapes" were delivered to the label.
You're right but you're wrong too.
Are you referring to professional mastering, amateur mastering or "mastering" in general?
Lot's of people have their songs "mastered" for small scale use. If you say that the process is 100% unnecessary for anyone not distributing on a larger scale I'd suggest that you've missed some of what "mastering" does.
Almost everyone who posts in the MP3 Mixing Clinic ends up "mastering" in some form or other.
No one in the world is going to buy a CD of my stuff & I'm not likely to begin distributing freebie CD around the globe BUT I've had a hand full of my stuff matered professionally & an equal part done by excellent amateurs. The songs sound more "finished" and the tracks done by each of the MEs have a consistency & cohesion as a cohort. Sonic issues that I was unable to deal with have also been managed to greater or lesser degrees. I'm happy to have had them done because they sound complete for whatever reason my brain tells me (could be a hip pocket nerve response or a change to serotonin receptors based on emptier pockets when I listen).
It's a judgement that individuals make based on needs, wants & wishes.
I tried a free sample before buying naturally.
A denizen of the MP3 clinic very recently had a album released by a label. The album was recorded and mixed by the member but was mastered externally before the "tapes" were delivered to the label.
DigitMus
Member
rayC - I guess the term "mastering" has become diluted/broadened in recent times. I was referring to what you call "professional mastering" - which costs money. It makes no sense to spend that kind of money on something which will never pay it back. If someone (like yourself) feels the need to have a project mastered for aesthetic reasons, and can afford it, then by all means have it mastered. But bear in mind that such cases are the rare exception, not the rule.
I guess my definition of mastering is too narrow for the discussion here (I'm an old fossil from the 70s,80s & 90s who obviously hasn't fully adapted to the new paradigm). I think a certain amount of post-mix processing/sweetening can be beneficial to any project, I just never thought of it as "mastering". (& beware that if someone is doing it for free, or really cheap - they might do more harm than good)
I guess my definition of mastering is too narrow for the discussion here (I'm an old fossil from the 70s,80s & 90s who obviously hasn't fully adapted to the new paradigm). I think a certain amount of post-mix processing/sweetening can be beneficial to any project, I just never thought of it as "mastering". (& beware that if someone is doing it for free, or really cheap - they might do more harm than good)
rayc
retroreprobate
DifitMus,
I hear and don't disagree.
I would have had the same definition a year ago but so many younguns have been on the boards talking about the mastering plugs they uyse that I've had to accept that Mastering by a Non ME is a reality.
The real "M.E. doing his/her thing" deal is for those who can afford it definitely. The amateur version is for those with the ears to do it and for the rest, (usually me), it's bung on a bit of EQ, some final master plug reverb & a CD master plug limiter or something like that.
I do know that I won't spend the next year fiddling with the mixes on the tracks I had mastered so at least it puts a full stop at the end of some projects.
I hear and don't disagree.
I would have had the same definition a year ago but so many younguns have been on the boards talking about the mastering plugs they uyse that I've had to accept that Mastering by a Non ME is a reality.
The real "M.E. doing his/her thing" deal is for those who can afford it definitely. The amateur version is for those with the ears to do it and for the rest, (usually me), it's bung on a bit of EQ, some final master plug reverb & a CD master plug limiter or something like that.
I do know that I won't spend the next year fiddling with the mixes on the tracks I had mastered so at least it puts a full stop at the end of some projects.
M
mista jones d
New member
LOL yes man. Clipping
R
room
New member
yes definately to get the sound to gell a bit of compression is needed + limiting to keep the project album in the same subjective volume area
I
instatic
New member
It depends on what your CD is for. I think the most valuable part of mastering is getting the series of songs to flow well. If you intend on selling it then your fans might notice if it didn't flow very well, something which can be sorted most of the time by mastering. Recently I did a recording of a few songs that was just for me to listen to, but I had it mastered anyway just because I wanted it to feel more coherent which I think is fine as well. If you're not planning on selling it or something and you're asking whether it should be mastered or not then it probably doesn't.
JimmyS1969
MOODerator
Mastering is voodoo!! LOL! If you have a product that is viable for market in a commercial world, then I myself, would definitely have it 'professionally' mastered. If it is for personal and 'real world' use, then use tools you have to master yourself. It is probably always best to have a fresh set of ears to help make decisions however. If it means enough to you to make it all that it can be, then spend some money for a second ear. If you have the skills to make it 'all that it can be' yourself, then do (try) it yourself.
That being said, choosing a professional ME, is just like choosing a producer or engineer. No one person can be great at everything. Well, it does not seem possible to me anyway. I remember back 15 years or so where a band had an album I produced, mastered it for $1800 at............ not sure I should say actually, but it was the absolute most popular master ing place at the time. And they spelled disk funny. The resulting product had no low end and my pride in the album was lost. That being said, I am sure if I had say in that situation at the time, I would have had it redone. Still pisses me off now that I talk about it.
That being said, choosing a professional ME, is just like choosing a producer or engineer. No one person can be great at everything. Well, it does not seem possible to me anyway. I remember back 15 years or so where a band had an album I produced, mastered it for $1800 at............ not sure I should say actually, but it was the absolute most popular master ing place at the time. And they spelled disk funny. The resulting product had no low end and my pride in the album was lost. That being said, I am sure if I had say in that situation at the time, I would have had it redone. Still pisses me off now that I talk about it.
G
Green Gizmo
New member
It depends on if you think the material is worth it. If sounds good without mastering get the right guy to master it and it will only sound better. One of the guys on this thread mastered 3 of my death metal albums and I couldn't be happier with the before and after. Right now I think when you don't see mastering done on metal albums is when its more of a virtual recording, a band uses a pod and programmed drums and you have presets that are pretty tweaked you don't have to deal with all the dynamics from acoustics drums and mics. But in general I never heard of metal bands avoiding mastering or having any obscure views on it. The other important issue is make sure the person you pick to master has a resume for the style of music, for me I liked the Suffocation album and just tracked down who did it 
Massive Master
www.massivemastering.com
I know that guy!
Well, assuming you're talking about the last one...
G
Green Gizmo
New member
Yes sir you are the man and you do great work.