Master by Mail?

[jonnyc]

Been doin a little math after checking out their website. They make it sound like there are several engineers working which is great and all but a few things don't make sense or are at least a little fishy. They say there's a two day turn around, so I figured assuming their guys constantly stay busy they can only do 200 to 250 cd's per person per year. Thats only like 20 grand a year, and if that has to be split between the company and the engineer then nobody really makes any money. What reputable mastering engineer is happy with 20 grand a year? If you really crunch the numbers they have to take out cost of cd's, equipment, and shipping out of that 99 bucks. Who the hell stays in business for 10 years with profits like that, of course assuming the BS they're spewing is truthful and accurate. I seem to also remember reading something about mastering chambers, plural. That means they'd need to properly equip each one right? Even more cost. Whole thing seems like total BS.

 

[russtafari]

Here is the reply to the email that I sent.

"Mr. Barber,

Thank you for your email. A few of us went to the thread you sent us and
must say, these old guys who are giving you advise are stuck in the past.
The music industry has changed. It is not what it was even 10 years ago.
Master By Mail is made up of several business partners/engineers
dedicated to providing quality mastering that anyone can afford. Others
might tell you it is impossible to get a great master for $99, but they don't
employ the number of engineers we do to get the job done right. To be
honest, we love to hear these other mastering houses rip on our company
because it shows us that they really are stuck in the old days of doing
things. Times have changed.

Master By Mail Team"

 

[Blue Bear Sound]

Too fucking funny -- apparently, the "times have changed" comment refers to the fact that it's easier than ever to rip someone off!

What a joke.....

In any case russtafari, I hope you have the answer to your original question!!!

"Mr. Barber,

Thank you for your email. A few of us went to the thread you sent us and
must say, these old guys who are giving you advise are stuck in the past.
The music industry has changed. It is not what it was even 10 years ago.
Master By Mail is made up of several business partners/engineers
dedicated to providing quality mastering that anyone can afford. Others
might tell you it is impossible to get a great master for $99, but they don't
employ the number of engineers we do to get the job done right. To be
honest, we love to hear these other mastering houses rip on our company
because it shows us that they really are stuck in the old days of doing
things. Times have changed.

Master By Mail Team"

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Please allow me to translate:

these old guys who are giving you advise are stuck in the past.

"I am an 18-yr-old with the latest copy of Ozone."

Others might tell you it is impossible to get a great master for $99, but they don't employ the number of engineers we do to get the job done right.

"We don't care if someone doesn't have the skills to engineer their way out of a paper bag. As long as they'll work for $5 a song, we'll hire them. Besides, we have the latest copy of Ozone cracked so it doesn't cost us anything extra to set up an extra 'mastering chamber', and Ozone does the mastering automatically so our 'engineers' don't have to know squat".

To be honest, we love to hear these other mastering houses rip on our company because it shows us that they really are stuck in the old days of doing things. Times have changed.

"Like any adolescent brat, the more our parents tell us we're wrong, the more we believe we're right."

G.

 

[chessrock]

When you think about it ...

Everything esle is being outsourced to India these days. Call centers .. even video editing and post.

Why not mastering?

I wouldn't be surprized if, eventually, someone comes along and sets up a "master-by-mail" shop composed of an Indian Engineer, or even 10 or 100 qualified Indian recording engineers who are happy to work for 2 bucks an hour.

It's already being done. Everything will be outsourced overseas eventually.

 

[jonnyc]

The music industry has changed. It is not what it was even 10 years ago.
Master By Mail is made up of several business partners/engineers
dedicated to providing quality mastering that anyone can afford. Others
might tell you it is impossible to get a great master for $99, but they don't
employ the number of engineers we do to get the job done right.
Master By Mail Team"

Again how in the world can they afford to pay a talented ME for that kind of money. Let alone several more. I have no idea what someone like John makes a year but I'd hope it was more than 20 to 30 thousand a year considering his monitors probably cost that much. Here's a thought, doesn't John do one free sample? Why not send one to those guys and send one to John and post them on here.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

I wouldn't be surprized if, eventually, someone comes along and sets up a "master-by-mail" shop composed of an Indian Engineer, or even 10 or 100 qualified Indian recording engineers who are happy to work for 2 bucks an hour.

That's most likely exactly what this is, Chess. Only I'd question the word "qualified".

G.

 

[fraserhutch]

No - I haven't thought this through other than the consideration of trying to avoid less-knowledgeable hobbyists getting royally screwed by wannabes and posers with no real ability, yet claim themselves to be audio engineers.

Not looking to hijack this thread, but at what point along the developmental process would you consider someone to be able to legitimately call themseves an audio engineer?

What is the criteria? Who would YOU consider an audio engineer?

I'm not arguing here, I'm genuinely curious. there's the same issue in the software development world where anyone with a hacked copy of MS Visual Studio can call themselves a software engineer. There isn't any recognized certifying body here either.

 

[chessrock]

That's most likely exactly what this is, Chess. Only I'd question the word "qualified".

The sad part is that many of these people are more than qualified. Only they have a different standard of living, $ exchange rate, and level of industrial development that allows them to get by with less. We can't be so naive as to believe the music / recording industry is immune to the forces that are affecting just about every other industry.

 

[fraserhutch]

Get screwed twice.

At least he would be getting more than I do after getting married

 

[Blue Bear Sound]

Not looking to hijack this thread, but at what point along the developmental process would you consider someone to be able to legitimately call themseves an audio engineer?

What is the criteria? Who would YOU consider an audio engineer?

I'm not arguing here, I'm genuinely curious. there's the same issue in the software development world where anyone with a hacked copy of MS Visual Studio can call themselves a software engineer. There isn't any recognized certifying body here either.

IMO - if someone can consistently turn out recordings that are on par sonically with other accepted professional recordings, then chances are good that they have the skills necessary to be considered a qualified audio engineer.

So some little dweeb with a pirated copy of Wavelab and a few presets definitely won't qualify!

Incidently - I still don't understand why it wouldn't work to have a group of professional engineers be the accrediting body. As I mentioned earlier - accoutants are self-governing by the Charter Association - lawyers have the BAR Association. Seems to work for them....

The respective associations/charter lay out the codes of conduct/business ethics and also provide testing to qualify the professional skills of their members. Sure - you can still have funky lawyers and accountants, but it's much harder to set up a business in that occupations than simply stealing software and throwing up a website!

 

[chessrock]

Not looking to hijack this thread, but at what point along the developmental process would you consider someone to be able to legitimately call themseves an audio engineer?

What is the criteria? Who would YOU consider an audio engineer?

Who would you consider an artist?

Similarly, at what point in time do you consider someone to be able to legitimately call themselves a professional musician?

Or a writer? I suppose it would be at the point that one has a significant enough amount of people willing to pay for their work or services; be it their paintings, photographs, books, CD's, etc.

Just like with anything else, the customer must evaluate the person's repuation and body of work, or take a major risk. When you hire someone to cater your wedding or corporate event ... you probably start out by asking around for references. Perhaps you've already experienced the caterer's "work," personally, by attending an event or ceremony. Or supposing it's someone like Wolfgang Puck, they may already have a strong enough reputation in the industry.

If none of these apply, then you had better at least schedule a visit and a sampling of their food. Same thing with the photographer -- don't you suppose you'd want to look at some of their photographs, first? How abot the wedding band? Think it might be a good idea to listen to their demo?

This stuff ain't too complicated. If you've evaluated the person's work, and you find it worthy enough of your business that you're willing to contract them out ... then they are professional.

 

[LRosario]

Alot of funny replies on this one:


You know what I've learned in this industry when it comes to credibility?


That if you're GOOD at being a con man, then you can actually get very far. Personality and ability to convince people that you know what you're doing.


Like this "multi-grammy" award winning enginneer guy that I hear about in the florida circut that got to that point by being a brown nose more than an engineer. Rack up some credits and bingo, you've got the power to bullshit any young prick band that goes by grammy awards rather than by the sound.


so I wouldn't say that using your merits to market yourself is bad at all, but fuck....don't be shady and dirty about it! (in the case of the 99 dollar menu guy)

Besides, I've never worried about the issue because I know that people can tell the difference between shit sound and a good job.

"they always come back"

 

[fraserhutch]

Who would you consider an artist?

Similarly, at what point in time do you consider someone to be able to legitimately call themselves a professional musician?

Or a writer? I suppose it would be at the point that one has a significant enough amount of people willing to pay for their work or services; be it their paintings, photographs, books, CD's, etc.

Just my point. Who quantifies what a "significant enough amount of people" is?

I guess what I was really asking was whether anyone has a problem with someone just opening a project studio and calling themselves and audio engineer? If so, at what point would you consider their title valid?

More a philosophical question than practical, asked because of the way Bear was using the term:

No - I haven't thought this through other than the consideration of trying to avoid less-knowledgeable hobbyists getting royally screwed by wannabes and posers with no real ability, yet claim themselves to be audio engineers. It seems to be happening more and more, and I imagine it will only get worse. And the more it happens, the moe it discredits the true professionals as a whole, since people become exceptionally wary to being cheated over and over again.

Do you feel that these types cheapen the designation "audio engineer"?

 

[chessrock]

Do you feel that these types cheapen the designation "audio engineer"?

No more than than someone who takes a piece of paper and scribbles on it cheapens the designation "artist," or someone who zaps a microwave dinner cheapens the designation "cook."

If you like their work, then work with them. If you don't, then don't. But people can call themselves whatever they want to -- it's all just titles, and it doesn't mean a whole lot. This isn't a profession where lives are on the line. If you call yourself a doctor, then you'd better be a doctor. Same goes for pilots.

But art is all subjective. If you sing like a dying cow, yet someone, for some reason decides to hire you as the headliner for their venue -- or signs you to a record contract ... that's their right. Maybe they like bad singing. Same goes for engineering. If you suck at it and people still hire you ... it's their right to hire crappy engineers I guess.

.

 

[Blue Bear Sound]

Sure - but that kind of misses my point. Consumers ALWAYS have the choice of who to deal with - again, my accountant/lawyer example. But what accreditation provides is some measure of maintaining professional standards for people who want to setup shop.

It used to be (and still is to a degree) that the cost of professional gear is kind of self-licensing, since the initial outlay/start-up cost of even a modest setup was very high -- but with accessible digital technology, it's much easier for unskilled wannabes to set-up shop and fake it in certain areas - mastering in particular because it is a widely misunderstood process by the majority of musicians/hobbyists anyways that they wouldn't immediately be able to tell lthe difference... it's not hard to make something sound "better than it was" to the average person... a simple level increase can do that -- doesn't mean it's "mastered." And I think a lot of these hacks depend on precisely that -- trickery based on the lowest common denominator of audible "improvement"...

Bottom line is that consumers often aren't discerning enough to avoid being screwed - particularly with process that know they need, but don't know how to qualify. It's much like someone going to a car mechanic and not knowing anything at all about cars - if the mechanic is a hack out to con people, he's going to be quite successful since the ones he catches don't have the necessary skills to know better.... and in the case of mastering, it's not like everyone can learn the skills so that they can evaluate the merits of an internet hack over a true professional.

 

[treymonfauntre]

this is just an example of people getting by with what they have. don't be offended or irrate. you guys act like people who work for very cheap are scab workers just because they don't have dreams to get rich doing this type of work. i, for one, would hate to have anything music related be my full time job. i love it right now because its my hobby. if it was my job, what would i be doing for fun? checking the expiration dates on cans of soup at the grocery store?

 

[Blue Bear Sound]

this is just an example of people getting by with what they have. don't be offended or irrate.

For one thing - I don't see anyone getting irate here -- this is an excellent discussion, and I think people are treating it as such.

you guys act like people who work for very cheap are scab workers just because they don't have dreams to get rich doing this type of work.

I'm not sure I understand how this relates to the issue of licensing/accreditation.... ie - how/when is someone qualified to consider themselves a skilled AE versus a hack with stolen s/w and computer speakers in their bedroom claiming to be qualified to "master" people's music!

 

[giraffe]

Besides, I've never worried about the issue because I know that people can tell the difference between shit sound and a good job.

"they always come back"

thats the story folks.

we don't need goverment regulation in the music industry, crist, just listen to the phrase.

goverment regulation in the music industry?

people get screwed, people move on with thier lives.
i mean really, i'm from the super left and i dont think thats a good idea at all.

 

[Blue Bear Sound]

Just to re-iterate -- I've never mentioned or advocated government involvement in any shape or form. All along I've been talking about a body comprised STRICTLY of audio professionals -- in much the same way as already exists for accountants and lawyers.