Master by Mail?

[LRosario]

Unfortunately I don't read or speak Arabic. Otherwise I'd know what the hell mshilarious' sig actually says!

And, Tom at MasteringHouse: Not to worry, babe. At the worst I'll send Moose and Rocco over to help you find your UAD1 for you.

Seriously, though, the "creepy" part, as Chess put it, is it it took me all of about 20 minutes to compile that information from free and public sources on the Internet. And I left stuff off the forum post like his name, address and home phone number.

Another 10 minutes and a couple of $15 charges on my credit card and I could have legally had his social security number, how much he has left to pay on his mortgage, his medical history and his FBI criminal record. But that's just tooooo creepy - and totally unnecessary for this thread.

G.

yeah...seriously. Use the 15$ wisely and have the guy master one of your songs.


I think I just made a funny.

 

[Blue Bear Sound]

Mastering by Mail believe they are professional engineers. It's your opinion against theirs.

See why it won't work?

No Sonic - I don't see it.... if a licensing body were made up of the likes of Bob katz, Al Schmidt, George Massenburg, Ed Cherney, and Frank Fillipetti - they wouldn't be able to call themselves "professional engineers" because they would not be able to demonstrate suitable skills or knowledge to such a group.

 

[andyhix]

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.

Even though it may be a two day turn around, they are probably still only spending an hour or maybe two on any given CD. Given that, you could look at it a couple ways - they are wildly popular and busy and rake in several hundred to several thousand a day, or [more likely] they get a sucker every few days (or weeks) that they happily "master" to make them some extra beer money. The rest of the turn around is probably packaging, them going to their real day job, and then fitting the mastering job into their evening xbox schedule.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

if a licensing body were made up of the likes of Bob katz, Al Schmidt, George Massenburg, Ed Cherney, and Frank Fillipetti - they wouldn't be able to call themselves "professional engineers" because they would not be able to demonstrate suitable skills or knowledge to such a group.

And just how is one supposed to demonstrate such knowledge?

Will one be forced to go through some training course that we have to pay for to become certified, with the money going solely to the propigation of the governing body?

Will they accredit other courses so that the only way to get certified is by giving thousands of dollars to Full Sail?

Will it simply be taking a written test that they devise, in which case one need only study a book for a couple of weeks to pass it without ever having even sat in front of a mixer?

Will we have to provide pictures and receipts of what kind of gear we have to prove that we're not some hack with an SM57 and a SoundBlaster? And if so, where do they draw the line? Is a Mackie 1604 not good enough but a Mackie 32.8 is?

Will one be forced to have Pro Tools capability in house to have Pro Tools certification? Will lack of Pro Tools experience make them an amateur?

Will one have to demonstrate that they are a salaried engineer or provide copies of their business tax returns to prove that they are a working professional before they get accredited? And if so, when they lose their job or hit a dry spell, do they then lose their certification like the schmucks in SAG?

How long before they want us to pay dues?

If I had a dollar for every MCSE (Microsoft Certified Software Engineer) who couldn't write a professional chunk of code or teach someone else how to if their life depended on it, I'd be able to buy lunch for everybody in this thread.

And as for the certifiers; power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.

I'm sorry, but my personal opinion is the idea of an "official certification body" is just a way to create whole new set of problems in an effort to get rid of the current set of problems. And it still won't get rid of the current problems. There will still be plenty of scheisters out there on one end and suckers on the other.

And what makes it worse is that the current set of problems does not affect me or any of my clients, but the new set of problems would. It would be a major pain in the ass and a cost to me in time and money if I chose to participate, and a drag on my merchandisability if I didn't. Either way it would wind up costing both me and my customer base.

Count me out.

G.

 

[Blue Bear Sound]

All goods points, Glen - and I actually don't disagree with you at all, but we still have a growing issue of technology lowering the bar enough that shysters can more easily scam musicians than ever before.

So how about a different approach... let's say we know of this problem and are in a position to find a solution to solve it -- do we opt to simply leave it alone, because the artists who get suckered didn't do their due diligence? And if that's not an option, what approach would you (the community "you", not just Glen!) suggest to combat it?

 

[masteringhouse]

G.

Actually there is such a thing as a "Certified Pro Tools Engineer". I called one of the training centers once and asked once if I could take a test to see if I passed. They said I could "place" at the first level, but would have to take the courses (something like $1K a pop) to go beyond that.

Kinda proves your point ...

 

[masteringhouse]

what approach would you (the community "you", not just Glen!) suggest to combat it?

Word of mouth and threads like this.

People have to do their homework before hiring any type of service, if you want to take a chance on a $15/song mastering facility it's your dime.

Personally I like the evaluation approach when possible after nailing down a few legitimate services. There could be three great engineers, but most likely one of them is going to fit your style a bit better. Not that that other two are bad, just that the one may have a better understanding of your particular style or maybe you just like working with them more. A certificate isn't going to tell you that.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

So how about a different approach... let's say we know of this problem and are in a position to find a solution to solve it -- do we opt to simply leave it alone, because the artists who get suckered didn't do their due diligence? And if that's not an option, what approach would you (the community "you", not just Glen!) suggest to combat it?

You are right, we are in a position to find a solution, and there are already tools in place to combat shysters: The Better Business Bureau, the Federal Trade Comission, The US Post Office, etc.

I'd seriously consider asking these guys to look into Mastering by Mail for deceptive trade practices if nothing else because their advertising as far as their facilities capability and manpower capabilities just does not seem to add up. But I think (correct me if I'm wrong) one has to have a specific case as an actual customer before they'll follow up. I'm not sure about that yet, though. I've done a fair share of research for the past 24 hours, maybe someone else can pick up the ball on that one and find it out for us?

G.

 

[Blue Bear Sound]

Actually - I just looked over the BBB site.... I hadn't been there in a while - they are taking online business practices quite seriously since last time I looked. Turns out they would look into inappropriate/misleading practices if the complainant provides contact info, and they don't have to necessarily be a client - particularly in the case of misleading advertisement.

So it does appear that there are other effective options with which one can report unreputable or shady online businesses!

 

[chessrock]

And if that's not an option, what approach would you (the community "you", not just Glen!) suggest to combat it?

I could see a community-run web site that provides engineering credits. Wait a minute -- we used to have just that when allmusic.com was around.

Anyway, it would take some man hours to update people's credits on a regular basis, but it would basically serve as a means for a prospective client to browse a database and find out what records / credits the person has; check in to their background to see if they're legit. From there, you could work out sort of an EBAY-type system where past and current customers can "rate" the person's work using a point, or star, system, and can post comments about the person's work (and personal character).

From there, you could also have downloadable MP-3 examples of the person's work. Obviously, something like this is going to cost some $$ in order to pay for the upkeep and data entry of the site, you could charge a small fee for new submissions -- we're talking in the neighborhood of $10-20 per. You could also charge extra to allow the engineer to post reviews of their work (or links to them). Charge an extra $10 if they want to include a link to their web site, or $100 if they want to post an MP-3 "reel" or demo. This would likely cover all costs to maintain the site, and any extra could be donated to some worthy charity that supports the arts.

I'll be happy to personally solicit $$ for listings and demo postings, etc. and do some of the manual data entry if someone else can provide the technical expertise of getting the site designed, launched, maintained, etc.


It wouldn't solve all of the problems, but at least it would serve as a convenient means of research for those who actively choose to be informed; For example, all credits would be thoroughly checked ahead of time in order to ensure accuracy. For example: "Alright, Mr. Albini, can you supply me with CD copies of these Pixies disks where you are credited?" Similarly, we could have someone like Southside Glen check in to them and post findings on guys like masterbymail. Comments: does not have legitimate address listed (refers to home in Michigan), does not post name or respond to emails with a name or phone. Has not provided pictures of facility. That kinda' thing. Ultimately, the burdon of proof would fall on the person being listed to refute these kinds of comments and to provide evidence/proof of their legitimacy.

 

[giraffe]

i'm actually a certified pro-tools engineer

seriously, it was an option in school.

 

[masteringhouse]

I could see a community-run web site that provides engineering credits. Wait a minute -- we used to have just that when allmusic.com was around.
.

allmusic.com is still around, just have to register first to use it.

If interested link to my page (hopefully this will work):
all music page

 

[bblackwood]

Anytime this discussion comes around (licensing audio engineering) I bring up two issues:
1] Technically, if you want to call yourself a licensed engineer, you're going to need a degree, and
2] who's going to be the final arbiter of art? Who's to say a person is good or bad? Based on what criteria? I mean, we're talking about ART here...

 

[masteringhouse]

Anytime this discussion comes around (licensing audio engineering) I bring up two issues:
1] Technically, if you want to call yourself a licensed engineer, you're going to need a degree, and
2] who's going to be the final arbiter of art? Who's to say a person is good or bad? Based on what criteria? I mean, we're talking about ART here...

Yeah Brad's back!

Haven't seen ya in these parts in a while partner ...

 

[SonicAlbert]

No Sonic - I don't see it.... if a licensing body were made up of the likes of Bob katz, Al Schmidt, George Massenburg, Ed Cherney, and Frank Fillipetti - they wouldn't be able to call themselves "professional engineers" because they would not be able to demonstrate suitable skills or knowledge to such a group.

With all due respect to those great people, I don't want them to be a licensing body.

Any body made up of industry people that are in competition with those that they are licensing/regulating will be ripe for corruption and favoritism. This is why, for example, musician's union officers cannot accept union work as players while they are serving in their official positions at the local.

At some point, artists have to take personal responsibility for their choices and make an informed decision as to who will master their album. If they choose unwisely, then next time they will probably make a better decision.

I don't know why it bothers you so much that this mastering by mail place is offering $99 album mastering. Anybody who has done even the slightest amount of research will know that the time commitement it takes to master an album properly would make working for $99 not worth it, so therefore they are most likely going to be speeding through the album in one pass. You yourself offer one pass mastering on your web site for a reduced price, so I assume the concept of doing it in a single pass doesn't offend you.

I mean, there are composers in LA that will score pictures for free, or even spend their own money on it, just to get a credit. There's always going to be people willing to do the work for less, so there's no point in getting irritated about it in my opinion.

Again, it all comes down to people making informed decisions, and with all the info available on the net these days, that is easier than ever. If someone spends $99 on a mastering job and then complains that it doesn't sound as good as an album that Bernie Grundman mastered, then they really are getting exactly what they paid for and deserve. Next time hopefully they will make a better choice.

Let the market sort it out.

 

[Blue Bear Sound]

The $99/album doesn't bother me at all - that will indeed sort itself out because people will get what they pay for....

What really bothers me is the false advertising by using skewed samples in an attempt to mislead potential clients. It's a delibarate attempt to boost their apparent skills, and it's effective enough to fool a large segment of potential clients who wouldn't know better.

 

[punkin]

Man I would vote for a registry or a guild, where you ME's could post your resumes and shack specs. .

If there was such a thing...that's where I would look first if I were looking for a first class job. The keeper of the registry would have to hold some sort of standards for filtering out the lameoids but as long as you post what the criteria were for allowing or denying up front so that the musicians could undertand what calibre of ME they might be encountering. Not to say that there aren't some up-n-comers that a "good deal" might be what some folks are looking for or if that's all that is affordable at the time but it would be something.

 

[7string]

I would think the problem would eventually take care of itself. Hopefully it won't take long and word of mouth will spread and people will realize it's a sham and not even bother with it. And the one's that do use the service just might end up going to a higher end service for re-mastering.

 

[chessrock]

What really bothers me is the false advertising by using skewed samples in an attempt to mislead potential clients. It's a delibarate attempt to boost their apparent skills, and it's effective enough to fool a large segment of potential clients who wouldn't know better.

Not to mention the whole "gear list" thing ... of which there's really no way to verify what they are truly using on a project.

I can see your point with that stuff, but then again, false advertising is a problem in all industries.

 

[ermghoti]

Maybe people could just do a tiny amount of work, shop around, and determine that paying a small percentage of market rate for a job will almost always end badly. You could probably get somebody to paint your car for $50. I do not recommend it.