Listening to one of your mixes MASTERED.

  • Thread starter Thread starter inmyheartx
  • Start date Start date
TheDewd said:
Yes it is. Otherwise, there would not be mastering engineers at all.

By that reasoning, there would have been no mastering engineers until c. 1997, give or take a couple of years.
 
SouthSIDE Glen said:
Dewd continues to operate under the myth that loudness is needed to be competitive. That is just pure dreck perpetuated and believed by the bonehread producers and marketing reps, and has been shown in studies repeatedly over the last 50 years since the idea was first thought up *intrinsically not to be true*.

The fact is what started that whole loudness thing was back in the AM radio heydays; they went by the physics principle that the higher you pushed your modulation strength, the farther your broadcast signal could be heard and the more customers you could reach. This is why they started pushing the volume first on commercials; the more potential customers that could hear their commercials, the more customers they would have; at least that was the marketing theory that was built like a house of cards on the otherwise solid physical properties of AM transmission. It was later added to analog TV broadcasts and subsequent to that, picked up as an idea by the marketing arms of the record companies themselves.

While it is true that the Unwashed Masses do tend to perceive "louder" as "better" - I had sold more than my share of consumer EQs and high-efficiency loudspeakers on that principle alone way back when I was forced to sell products to put food on the table, before I got wise and atoned - this principle works only when the louder product is the exception to the rule.

When you have 9 commercials (or now, songs) pushing 90% modulation on the radio and the tenth one comes in at 105%, people will notice the louder one. However there are three problems with leaving it at that:

- the first is while they notice the louder one, unlike the comparison of components in a showroom, their reaction is usually pretty evenly split between positive and negative making the extra volume a washout in effectiveness.

- the second is that FM and digital satellite transmissions these days are compressed at the radio station in such a way as to minimize the difference in RMS between tracks anyway.

- the thrid, and possibly the most important, is that while the loudness thing may possibly have some positive results when it is the exception to the rule, the effect is not reverse symmetrical. When everybody boosts to goofy RMS levels, there is no advantage any longer since loudness is no longer a nail sticking up out of a board of quieter dynamics. Even more, when 9 songs come in squashed flat as a pancake, the tenth one with real dynamics and movement will now be the one exception which will sound fresh and clean and have the advantage both sonically and marketability-wise.

John had it right at the start that there are many MEs who have squashed material - and they even got gold or platinum sales out of the results - but they did it not because they knew it to be a good idea, but because they were forced to by their client, be they the artist or the producer or both. There is not a mastering or mixing engineer really (and I mean really) worth their chops who would do such a thing of their own volition. And you hear them say it - to a person - all the time in interviews and articles everyhwere in the trades. And what's more, those same tracks would have most like gone gold or platinum anyway, even if the weren't squashed for reasons having nothing to do with dynamics...reasons that range anywhere from the sublime (actual quality of content) to the ridiculous (record promotion politics or the tastes of the masses.)

For a wihile one was able to find some exceptions in the hip hop community where the standard recipe for production was purposely in your face, zero dymnamics, but as that genre matures and evolves, especially in the last year or two, one is starting to see a real trend towards more texturing and dynamics in even the most gangsta of hip hop productions.

And finally, the idea that MEs are only good for flattening dynamics and that tweaking and polishing in the other three dimensions of music mixes is "easier" than flattening dynamics is such a complete misunderstanding of what 21st century MEing takes and is all about that I'm not even sure where to begin. I think I'll just let the naiiveity of that position speak for itself.

G.

First of all, I did a "blind" test with my band. I told them "hey guys I've got new mixes of our songs"...all I did was to push the levels and limit. Guess what ? They all thought it sounded better. My bandmates don't want to sound dynamic, they want to sound "radio-like" and this is what loudness gives you.

Second, sure, the ME has a few other jobs except pushing levels...like burning CD's to RedBook standards in good CDR drives (like John SCRIP does), they place the tracks in order, ensure good coherence in fade-ins and fade-outs, etc....but their main effect on the mix today is to get things loud.

Whether you accept it or not, when you want to sound like your favorite band, you have to squash. My band wouldn't sound like Simple Plan and Nickelback if I didn't squash the mix to bits...
 
mshilarious said:
By that reasoning, there would have been no mastering engineers until c. 1997, give or take a couple of years.
Yep there would have been.
It's not the mix engineer's job to brun CD's to redbook standards, ensure coherence between fade ins and fade outs and make a "ready to press" records.

But today, with technology and digital crap, it shifted to a "make it louder" job.

You just have to accept that the guy who decides is the guy who has the money. Who has the money? The producer who says "louder is better"...and mastering engineers have this "pro stuff limiters and compressors $$$$$" to make the job done on this level.
 
LeeRosario said:
Wow, there really isn't a bias in this statement. The world is an ocean bigger than the pond you're swimming in right now.



So either sterling has opted to forget about doing good business and suddenly adopted amature practices or your ear is a tad bit way off.
Look at any mastering job - rock genre - done by Sterling since 2000.
Everything is squashed.

Recently, Ted Jensen took the squashing to a whole new level with the new NickelBack album, Absolutely deliciously squashed and in yer face....as I like it.

Guys, I'm into hard driving music, not jazz..so obviously a cranked mix sounds good to me.
 
TheDewd said:
My bandmates don't want to sound dynamic, they want to sound "radio-like" and this is what loudness gives you.

That says more about your bandmates than anything else.

And Dewd, on nearly, strike that, on every single device that you'll use to listen to music, there will be a volume knob. If you turn it up the sound gets louder, I mean "better". :rolleyes:
 
TheDewd said:
Yep there would have been.
It's not the mix engineer's job to brun CD's to redbook standards, ensure coherence between fade ins and fade outs and make a "ready to press" records.

But today, with technology and digital crap, it shifted to a "make it louder" job.

You just have to accept that the guy who decides is the guy who has the money. Who has the money? The producer who says "louder is better"...and mastering engineers have this "pro stuff limiters and compressors $$$$$" to make the job done on this level.

How old are you, bro?
 
ez_willis said:
That says more about your bandmates than anything else.

And Dewd, on nearly, strike that, on every single device that you'll use to listen to music, there will be a volume knob. If you turn it up the sound gets louder, I mean "better". :rolleyes:

You should know that limiting and pushing the levels do MORE than make the mix louder. It gives a kind of "digital clipping edge" to the sound which is really nice for rock. If I take a reasonable mix with no clipping and I pump the volume control on my device, the mix doesn't sound radio like yet. If I squash it, then it's there.
 
i'm starting to think some people aren't in on the joke
 
TheDewd said:
First of all, I did a "blind" test with my band. I told them "hey guys I've got new mixes of our songs"...all I did was to push the levels and limit. Guess what ? They all thought it sounded better. My bandmates don't want to sound dynamic, they want to sound "radio-like" and this is what loudness gives you.

Second, sure, the ME has a few other jobs except pushing levels...like burning CD's to RedBook standards in good CDR drives (like John SCRIP does), they place the tracks in order, ensure good coherence in fade-ins and fade-outs, etc....but their main effect on the mix today is to get things loud.

Whether you accept it or not, when you want to sound like your favorite band, you have to squash. My band wouldn't sound like Simple Plan and Nickelback if I didn't squash the mix to bits...

Do the same but match the RMS levels instead of peak levels. Also, do this on high quality DA and monitors!

I kind of agree though, for some reason on a lot of shitty playback systems(my car, my bookshelf stereo), louder actually does sound better.....to a certain point. It also makes shit hard to listen to for sustained periods. I still like all my favorite hits fromt he 70's and 80's but I can't think of one album I still listen to a lot from 5 years ago that SQAUSHED. It makes songs get old quick.
 
TheDewd said:
Of course, the master would sound better at -12 dBRMS, but why would I pay you to do that ? I can get my mix to -12dBRMS easy in my bedroom! FACT is that this level is NOT competitive enough in the business and can keep me from getting a label to sign me.

What I CAN'T get in my bedroom is those really loud volume levels (-6 dBRMS) without hearing too much clipping. THIS is why I would pay you (or any other ME).

So for me, Mastering is ALL about levels! I don't need no stinking phase correction issues, EQ enhancements, etc...do you really think that Chris Lord-Alge needs Sterling guys to make those adjustments? I think not. All they have to do is make the damn thing competitive.

Same applies to me. A mix should sound right at the mixing stage. One SHOULD NEVER need to pay someone else to do a job he should have done right at the tracking/mixing process.

After all that talk...yeah...really...those mastering guys should only be paid for getting levels really high, since the mix SHOULD be right from the bottom to top.
It's always funny to read something from the perspective of a non-engineer.
Here's a few facts to help you out....

1- Most recording environments have bad frequency response. We are talking about variations greater than 12dB. So how do you tell if the EQ is truly correct? Do you really want people to turn your music DOWN because it's too bass or treble loaded?

2- The reason slammed masters sound good to a lot of people is the fact that amplifiers in cheap stereos work best over a limited Vu level. If you don't know what that range is and you've never seen a Vu meter your gonna stuff it up.

3- As you raise the average level of a recording the relative levels of the mix change and what were considered small mixing errors become huge. So unless you know how to address these, simply whacking up the volume will give you loud crud.

4- The "polished" sound of a good master comes from many years of experience in sound manipulation and ears that take years to train..
You may not agree with me now but in a couple of years you'll look back and be amazed at how little you were really hearing.

5- Do you really think someone involved in the music industry can't tell a good finished recording from a bad one? There are reasons why good mastering engineers are revered as semidemigods.... ( I like that word...must use it more often)

6- Loud is not competitive.... If your material sucks then people aren't gonna play it just cuz it's loud.... There is a thing called a volume control... If your music is good people turn it up... if it's bad they turn it down, if it's too loud they turn it down...
 
TheDewd said:
First of all, I did a "blind" test with my band. I told them "hey guys I've got new mixes of our songs"...all I did was to push the levels and limit. Guess what ? They all thought it sounded better.
Of course they did. And if you had bothered to read, rather than to scan and quote, my post you'd understand that point was already addressed and dismissed as misleading at best.

TheDewd said:
Whether you accept it or not, when you want to sound like your favorite band, you have to squash. My band wouldn't sound like Simple Plan and Nickelback if I didn't squash the mix to bits...
Ah yes, I forgot you live on the planet that plays BOTH kinds of music, Metal and Hard Rock. The entire universe of every other kind of music is foreign to your teeny tiny little planet. Real engineers working with real musicians have to know how to infuse flavors of jazz, blues, world beat, funk, alt country, classical, soul, pop, zydeco, bop, reggae, gospel, etc. etc. into the music as well. Squash the shit out of most of those genres and you wind up with squashed shit.

And I'm not just talking about pros working in flagship studios. I'm talking about home recordists with $5K project studios in thir bedrooms working with their own bands or their own musicians. I have local musicians I work with who record stuff that is all over the music map. And more importantly they expect me to be able to draw from any and all of those sonic cuisines when tracking and mixing their stuff. I have one keyboard player who recorded "Locomotive Breath" on solo grand piano only, and another band who regulary performs "Hit Me Baby One More Time" as an R&B-infused rock anthem. Squash that stuff all the same way and I'd be out on the street faster than an interior designer in a biker bar.

What you refuse to understand is that when everybody sounds as loud as Nickelback, there is no advantage in sounding as loud Nickelback. You're just one of the crowd. Loudness is only an advantage in the land of the quiet. However in the land of the blindly squashed, the band with the one eye of dynamics is king.

G.
 
SouthSIDE Glen said:
Ah yes, I forgot you live on the planet that plays BOTH kinds of music, Metal and Hard Rock. The entire universe of every other kind of music is foreign to your teeny tiny little planet. Real engineers working with real musicians have to know how to infuse flavors of jazz, blues, world beat, funk, alt country, classical, soul, pop, zydeco, bop, reggae, gospel, etc. etc. into the music as well. Squash the shit out of most of those genres and you wind up with squashed shit.
G.
I agree that you can't squash any genre.
But then, what genre is on the radio?
What bands get the chicks?
What bands get the $$$ ?
This is what we want...saying otherwise would be lying.
I would never ever squash jazz, classical or vocal music, but then, are any of those bands on the radio and doing lot of shows with young girls hanging out ? I live on my planet for sure...but there are many more people who would like to become popular too and having a loud master is certainly gonna help, otherwise they (pros) wouldn't do it !
 
TheDewd said:
But then, what genre is on the radio?
I don't know about where you live, but here in the second or third largest radio market in North America the top 10 music-oriented FM radio stations in order are

1. WGCI - R&B
2. WVAZ - Classic R&B
3. WLIT - Soft Rock (Lite)
4. WNUA - Smooth Jazz
5. WUSN - Country
6. WJMK - 70's Oldies
7. WTMX - Classic Rock Mix
8. WXRT - Alternative/Album Rock
9. WOJO - Mexican Regional
10 WLUP - Classic Rock

There's not a metal or hard rock station in the list. Yes those stations do exist here in the market, but they are small niche stations at best, and don't come anywhere near the top ten. The closest in this list would be The Loop (WLUP) at #10, who playes probably the "hardest" mix of the bunch. In this metro area of some 6 million people, headbangers are in a definitely tiny minority. It's not much different in other cities either.

TheDewd said:
What bands get the chicks?
In my long experience and association, musicians get the chicks regardless of the music genre. Us engineers are their doormats :). But it doesn't matter if one plays or sings country, jazz, metal, blues or opera, they'll get the chicks just fine.

But more than that, the question itself is so very myopic. The vast majority of quality musicians these days, be they famous or local, aren't interested in the chicks. Most of them are balding married men with children (and sometimes grandchildren) who drive to their gigs in the family minivan. Maybe not in your secluded little heavy metal cove, but if you got out in the musical world and tasted what it's really like when you find life beyond Megadeth, you'd see it's all about sex, drugs and rock and roll...except without the sex and drugs (Ok maybe some beer and the occasional rope burn)...and with a lot more variety than just the rock and roll.

What bands get the $$$
From looking at the top grossing albums of the last 10 years or so, it's mostly Country and R&B.

And if you're in this for the money, boy have you picked the wrong profession :rolleyes: . Not only are the chances of making REAL money in the music trade about as good as the chances of being hit by a bus - regardless of which side of the cables you are on - but that is a piss poor reason to be into music. The best musicians I know are the ones who make the most money at it (I'm not talking superstar performers, I'm talking about real regular pro full time musicians). The reason they make the most money is because they are the best at it, and the reason they are the best at it is because of their love and dedication to the craft, not because of dollar signs in their eyes.

TheDewd said:
This is what we want...saying otherwise would be lying.
That may be why YOU are doing it, but it sure the hell isn't why I or 99.9998% of my associates and my clients are in it. And that is the pure, unadulterated truth.

TheDewd said:
having a loud master is certainly gonna help, otherwise they (pros) wouldn't do it !
The only reason the pros do it is because they are forced to by their clients who fall into one of two categories:

- they are headbangers with dollar signs in their eyes and stiffies in their pockets who believe the myths of music that you have described here in this post and have no real grasp on the reality of the art or the business, and the market.

- they are the producers and exec producers who order the engineers to do it and do so because they are a bunch of marketing hacks who'd be in plaid polyester suit jackets selling used cars if their uncle weren't a hotshot in the music industry, and they just don't know any better. So they try and pull any trick in the book regardless of it's legitimacy just to stay in the business. The same producers who perpeutate the Volume Wars are the same ones who feel they have to slip an 8 ball into the Program Director's jewel case to get airplay because they actually have no clue as to whether the music is actually any good or not.

G.
 
Last edited:
SouthSIDE Glen said:
I don't know about where you live, but here in the second or third largest radio market in North America the top 10 music-oriented FM radio stations in order are

1. WGCI - R&B
2. WVAZ - Classic R&B
3. WLIT - Soft Rock (Lite)
4. WNUA - Smooth Jazz
5. WUSN - Country
6. WJMK - 70's Oldies
7. WTMX - Classic Rock Mix
8. WXRT - Alternative/Album Rock
9. WOJO - Mexican Regional
10 WLUP - Classic Rock

There's not a metal or hard rock station in the list. Yes those stations do exist here in the market, but they are small niche stations at best, and don't come anywhere near the top ten. The closest in this list would be The Loop (WLUP) at #10, who playes probably the "hardest" mix of the bunch. In this metro area of some 6 million people, headbangers are in a definitely tiny minority. It's not much different in other cities either.

Its defenatly area specific, here in boston the #1 radio station is WAAF which is rock/metal, ie pantera, old metallica, rammstein, tool, slipknot, basiclly heavy rock/metal from the 90's with some of the modern crap like nickelback, but right next to them is WKLB which is country. New England is definatly a hard rock metal area, but hip-hop/rap and country are starting to take over (ugh)

if you want to "make it" in the music iundustry, dont copy whats on the radio, because the bands you hear on the radio were signed atleast 2 or 3 years ago and theyre looking for something new, so sounding like nickelback is not going to get you signed.
 
SouthSIDE Glen said:
I don't know about where you live, but here in the second or third largest radio market in North America the top 10 music-oriented FM radio stations in order are

1. WGCI - R&B
2. WVAZ - Classic R&B
3. WLIT - Soft Rock (Lite)
4. WNUA - Smooth Jazz
5. WUSN - Country
6. WJMK - 70's Oldies
7. WTMX - Classic Rock Mix
8. WXRT - Alternative/Album Rock
9. WOJO - Mexican Regional
10 WLUP - Classic Rock

There's not a metal or hard rock station in the list. Yes those stations do exist here in the market, but they are small niche stations at best, and don't come anywhere near the top ten. The closest in this list would be The Loop (WLUP) at #10, who playes probably the "hardest" mix of the bunch. In this metro area of some 6 million people, headbangers are in a definitely tiny minority. It's not much different in other cities either.

In my long experience and association, musicians get the chicks regardless of the music genre. Us engineers are their doormats :). But it doesn't matter if one plays or sings country, jazz, metal, blues or opera, they'll get the chicks just fine.

But more than that, the question itself is so very myopic. The vast majority of quality musicians these days, be they famous or local, aren't interested in the chicks. Most of them are balding married men with children (and sometimes grandchildren) who drive to their gigs in the family minivan. Maybe not in your secluded little heavy metal cove, but if you got out in the musical world and tasted what it's really like when you find life beyond Megadeth, you'd see it's all about sex, drugs and rock and roll...except without the sex and drugs (Ok maybe some beer and the occasional rope burn)...and with a lot more variety than just the rock and roll.

From looking at the top grossing albums of the last 10 years or so, it's mostly Country and R&B.

And if you're in this for the money, boy have you picked the wrong profession :rolleyes: . Not only are the chances of making REAL money in the music trade about as good as the chances of being hit by a bus - regardless of which side of the cables you are on - but that is a piss poor reason to be into music. The best musicians I know are the ones who make the most money at it (I'm not talking superstar performers, I'm talking about real regular pro full time musicians). The reason they make the most money is because they are the best at it, and the reason they are the best at it is because of their love and dedication to the craft, not because of dollar signs in their eyes.

That may be why YOU are doing it, but it sure the hell isn't why I or 99.9998% of my associates and my clients are in it. And that is the pure, unadulterated truth.

The only reason the pros do it is because they are forced to by their clients who fall into one of two categories:

- they are headbangers with dollar signs in their eyes and stiffies in their pockets who believe the myths of music that you have described here in this post and have no real grasp on the reality of the art or the business, and the market.

- they are the producers and exec producers who order the engineers to do it and do so because they are a bunch of marketing hacks who'd be in plaid polyester suit jackets selling used cars if their uncle weren't a hotshot in the music industry, and they just don't know any better. So they try and pull any trick in the book regardless of it's legitimacy just to stay in the business. The same producers who perpeutate the Volume Wars are the same ones who feel they have to slip an 8 ball into the Program Director's jewel case to get airplay because they actually have no clue as to whether the music is actually any good or not.

G.
First, here in Montreal the bands that get the chicks AND the money are Mentake, Simple Plan, Bullet for my Valentine, Panic at the Disco, NickelBack,
The country music market is very small here.
So yeah, it's really location dependant.

Second, I'm not in for the money, I'm in for the FAME! To see my face all over. And most artists that succeeded were in for that very same reason.

Third, some (if not most) popular artists and bands are poor musicians. Musicianship doesn't get you anywhere these days. I know it! I have TRIED so long and so hard to make an extreme european metal band work. We were (are) very good musicians...but the market is so small, you can only RARELY succeed. And when you do, you don't get the kind of airplay popular bands have.

And about the Cyanide comment...when I said we sound like Nickelback, I was refering mostly to the mixing and mastering (loud guitars, loud drums that sound really thick with little overheads and compression to the core), but as a BAND we sound like a hybrid of many other bands. I agree you can't suceed if your music is too close to another artist. But the SOUND has to be close.
 
TheDewd said:
Second, I'm not in for the money, I'm in for the FAME! To see my face all over.
If that's what you want, all you gotta do is commit one murder, kidnapping or aggrivated rape and your face will be on every TV station and in every post office on the continent. No talent required, and all three involve lots of loud volume sounds. And you won't have to worry a bit about silly little unimportant things like technique, musicianship or sound quality. :D

G.
 
TheDewd said:
Of course, a less squashed mix is better, but who cares of you don't get signed because of that ?

Are you by chance signed? :rolleyes:

What bands get the $$$ ?
This is what we want...saying otherwise would be lying.
I would never ever squash jazz, classical or vocal music, but then, are any of those bands on the radio and doing lot of shows with young girls hanging out ? I live on my planet for sure...but there are many more people who would like to become popular too and having a loud master is certainly gonna help, otherwise they (pros) wouldn't do it !

As a pro classical musician, let me assure you:

I make more money playing music for one hour than you make money playing music for one year. I guarantee you. :cool:

As for the chicks: half of the music world is gay :D
 
Back
Top