Writing out my thoughts helps me to get a clearer perspective on them, since I think visually and have a hard time accomplishing things without the aid of pictures, so I wanted to document my mastering perspective here, in the event that it may be helpful to some people. Of course, it may not be and some may find it totally useless.
There seems to be an endless debate here about whether, or not songs should be professionally mastered. And many, including me, have made protests that the pros do not readily provide tips, tricks, or techniques to help self-mastering enthusiats achieve their goals. I will address this issue first.
Every artist is different. Every song is different (though that can be argued depending on the genre). There is really no easy way out when it comes to mastering, as with mixing. The uniqueness of the artist and the material, in part, dictate the approach required to master a song. It is impossible without having never heard someone's material, to advise them on how to master it. ME's listen to the material they get and then make decisions on what each song needs before they apply anything to it. However, it isn't that simple. They also have to work with the artist, or producer to develop an understanding of what they hope the ME will accomplish with mastering. What kind of energy do they want the song to have, what emotions are they trying to impact? Are there any things in the songs that the artist, or engineer thinks may need some adjusting? It isn't as simple as saying "use a MB compressor to add -3 dB of gain between 30 and 100Hz." The song can be affected by not only what you dial into whatever tool you are using, but also the sound quality of the tool itself. Mastering engineers (pro, or not) consider things like, "will adding a little bit of pumping and breathing to this make it sound more interesting?" Of course the more experience you have with mastering, the quicker you are able to recognize what will work well on certain material.
A professional ME, a good one who with a good reputation, will have enough equipment to work with almost any scenario. Don't get me wrong, I am not saying to always send your material out.
I have struggled between mastering my current CD project myself, which is intended for commercial release, or to send it out. So I have to break down my options in a logical manner.
Do I want the best sound possible? Yes. Do I trust myself, my environment, my monitors, my cables, etc... to help me achieve that goal? I am not sure, which is almost the same as saying NO. I do trust some of my gear. My monitors do translate well, but, not perfectly. Also, I am limited to plug-ins for processing compression, EQ and reverbs and they certainly are not the best available, I simply can't afford that.
Mixing is very personal. Everyone has their own style. Mixes that sound perfect to one person may seem like they need work to another. Mastering is not a perfect art either. Not all ME's hear things the same. Not all have the same equipment in the same environment. Shopping for the right person to master your material can be like shopping for a car, which certainly is one aspect, aside from cost, that makes DIY mastering so appealing. So if I were to master my own material for this CD, how would I do it?
Well, for starters, I don't have many options, so I would have to decide on what tools I will use. That narrows my options down to 2 acceptible compressors, 2 acceptible EQs, 1 acceptible "loudness maximizer"/limiter and a few reverbs, if needed. All plug-ins and all inexpensive.
Next I would have to decide what order I want to put the songs in (mandatory no matter who masters it). This in itself might take several days of moving stuff around and listening to it over and over again. I have to decide about fades and the length of spaces between songs... more listening over and over again.
Next, not having the experience to simply know what would work best for each song, I have to experiment with tools and settings, over and over again until I find the best combination, perhaps even rendering several versions of each one in case I can't decide which sounds better.
I have to listen to them in the living room (easy, the home theatre can be controled from the studio), on the cheap stereo, both car stereos, my companion's computer, my mom's stereo, my mom's car stereo, small cassette players, the boombox and the walkman. If it doesn't sound acceptible on all of them, then I have to go back to the decision making process and try again. I have to do this for 9, or 10 songs before I can add my fades and then burn the CD, probably 1 month and a nervous breakdown later.
See, if someone asked me "how much compression should I use on the bass frequencies?" I would not know how to answer them, because there really isn't an answer. It all depends on the bass content, whether, or not it even needs any compression, what type of compression it needs, etc...
Now, with that out of the way, I have to explore the other option: the dreaded sending it out.
First I have to find the ME that can do a job with my material that I will like. So I have to shop around. Look at client lists, e-mail them, or have my rep call them and ask questions. Ask for samples, or even if they will master 30 seconds, or so of one of my songs to see how it turns out. Some offer this service for very low rates, others do not mention it, so we have to ask and then perhaps negotiate a cost to get a sample of my material, which is unique and hard to compare to most commercial stuff you hear.
Once we find an ME we like, we send the material with times and fade information and pages of details on each song and the vision I have for each one, as well as the project as the whole. We have to try to get the ME to understand the material and what it means so that he/she can do what he/she does best without having to second guess my goals. On every commercial CD I have, there is the name of an ME. Some of the mastering jobs on some of those CDs are terrible, especially the indie ones. GREAT! That saves me trouble because now I know who to avoid. However, chances are that the ME's on the CDs that are mastered well are too expensive (you sometimes pay for a name). So, I have to foind a suitable compromise.
Once I make a decision as to who will master it, I send the package to them. I wait. Perhaps we communicate with them further about certain things during the course of the mastering process. After the wait is over and I get the mastered CD back, I expect it to be fine, after all I have done my best and the ME has done his/her best, hopefully. I then listen to it everywhere (as described above). If something is wrong I tell them, if it is fine, we thank them.
So how would sending it out benefit me? Hmmm, cost, for one thing. Cost? You say... No way! You say. Just grab a free plug-in and go to work, it hasn't cost you a penny. Oh sure it has. That free plug-in may not be what I want for some things. The quality may not be as nice as what I desire. I may have to buy a better plug-in. How much better? You ask. $500.00 better, probably. So that one plug-in just cost as much as getting the whole CD mastered professionally and that is just ONE plug-in. So, instead of spending $1500.00 on plug-ins (even though I can use them over and over again), why not let someone else do it that has something better? Besides, time is money, usually and sending it out could save me a lot of time.
Now, if there were no plans to release this CD commercially and all I was going to do was upload MP3s to a web site, then I would use what I have now, not worry about sending it out and be done with it. If someone said "it needs better mastering," I would say "it's a free MP3, deal with it." But having recorded for many years and then experiencing the uncomfortable feeling that comes when I take my new accomplishment to mom's house expecting to hear what I heard in the studio, only to find out that the version I did on a 4-track sounded better on her (once very expensive) stereo, I am not sure I want to experience that with a CD that took months to track, mix and master.
Also, have I mentioned this is a commercial release? Of course I have. A record label is being formed exclusively to distribute my work. They do not want something that they cannot sell. So when it comes down to it, realistically, I trust myself to master my music if I am just playing around and having fun, but not as much when it comes to something so serious. This does not mean that I trust ME's either. In fact, I don't trust anyone, but that's another story. So the ME will have to earn my trust by showing me that he/she is the right person for the job before I commit to anything.
Caution does have to be applied when chosing an ME. Shoot, I could advertise as being an ME, but I know I don't qualify to be a professional one.
NOw, lately there have been posts about using obscure things like reverb in place of EQ. There is no logic here, because even if you could use a reverb for that purpose then it is still EQing. If I master the material myself then I will use whatever needs to be used to get the results I like, even if it means touching up the mix. Therefore, I will expect the ME to do whatever needs to be done to get the best results, whether it is adding, EQ, compression, reverb, or synthetic 30 weight motor oil. As long as the end result sounds good, then personally I don't care how they did it.
Small print:
Not edited for content. Typos, poor spelling, gramnmer, or inaccurate information are no fault of the author's and should be blamed soley on Microsoft, the maker of the keyboard used to type this.
There seems to be an endless debate here about whether, or not songs should be professionally mastered. And many, including me, have made protests that the pros do not readily provide tips, tricks, or techniques to help self-mastering enthusiats achieve their goals. I will address this issue first.
Every artist is different. Every song is different (though that can be argued depending on the genre). There is really no easy way out when it comes to mastering, as with mixing. The uniqueness of the artist and the material, in part, dictate the approach required to master a song. It is impossible without having never heard someone's material, to advise them on how to master it. ME's listen to the material they get and then make decisions on what each song needs before they apply anything to it. However, it isn't that simple. They also have to work with the artist, or producer to develop an understanding of what they hope the ME will accomplish with mastering. What kind of energy do they want the song to have, what emotions are they trying to impact? Are there any things in the songs that the artist, or engineer thinks may need some adjusting? It isn't as simple as saying "use a MB compressor to add -3 dB of gain between 30 and 100Hz." The song can be affected by not only what you dial into whatever tool you are using, but also the sound quality of the tool itself. Mastering engineers (pro, or not) consider things like, "will adding a little bit of pumping and breathing to this make it sound more interesting?" Of course the more experience you have with mastering, the quicker you are able to recognize what will work well on certain material.
A professional ME, a good one who with a good reputation, will have enough equipment to work with almost any scenario. Don't get me wrong, I am not saying to always send your material out.
I have struggled between mastering my current CD project myself, which is intended for commercial release, or to send it out. So I have to break down my options in a logical manner.
Do I want the best sound possible? Yes. Do I trust myself, my environment, my monitors, my cables, etc... to help me achieve that goal? I am not sure, which is almost the same as saying NO. I do trust some of my gear. My monitors do translate well, but, not perfectly. Also, I am limited to plug-ins for processing compression, EQ and reverbs and they certainly are not the best available, I simply can't afford that.
Mixing is very personal. Everyone has their own style. Mixes that sound perfect to one person may seem like they need work to another. Mastering is not a perfect art either. Not all ME's hear things the same. Not all have the same equipment in the same environment. Shopping for the right person to master your material can be like shopping for a car, which certainly is one aspect, aside from cost, that makes DIY mastering so appealing. So if I were to master my own material for this CD, how would I do it?
Well, for starters, I don't have many options, so I would have to decide on what tools I will use. That narrows my options down to 2 acceptible compressors, 2 acceptible EQs, 1 acceptible "loudness maximizer"/limiter and a few reverbs, if needed. All plug-ins and all inexpensive.
Next I would have to decide what order I want to put the songs in (mandatory no matter who masters it). This in itself might take several days of moving stuff around and listening to it over and over again. I have to decide about fades and the length of spaces between songs... more listening over and over again.
Next, not having the experience to simply know what would work best for each song, I have to experiment with tools and settings, over and over again until I find the best combination, perhaps even rendering several versions of each one in case I can't decide which sounds better.
I have to listen to them in the living room (easy, the home theatre can be controled from the studio), on the cheap stereo, both car stereos, my companion's computer, my mom's stereo, my mom's car stereo, small cassette players, the boombox and the walkman. If it doesn't sound acceptible on all of them, then I have to go back to the decision making process and try again. I have to do this for 9, or 10 songs before I can add my fades and then burn the CD, probably 1 month and a nervous breakdown later.
See, if someone asked me "how much compression should I use on the bass frequencies?" I would not know how to answer them, because there really isn't an answer. It all depends on the bass content, whether, or not it even needs any compression, what type of compression it needs, etc...
Now, with that out of the way, I have to explore the other option: the dreaded sending it out.
First I have to find the ME that can do a job with my material that I will like. So I have to shop around. Look at client lists, e-mail them, or have my rep call them and ask questions. Ask for samples, or even if they will master 30 seconds, or so of one of my songs to see how it turns out. Some offer this service for very low rates, others do not mention it, so we have to ask and then perhaps negotiate a cost to get a sample of my material, which is unique and hard to compare to most commercial stuff you hear.
Once we find an ME we like, we send the material with times and fade information and pages of details on each song and the vision I have for each one, as well as the project as the whole. We have to try to get the ME to understand the material and what it means so that he/she can do what he/she does best without having to second guess my goals. On every commercial CD I have, there is the name of an ME. Some of the mastering jobs on some of those CDs are terrible, especially the indie ones. GREAT! That saves me trouble because now I know who to avoid. However, chances are that the ME's on the CDs that are mastered well are too expensive (you sometimes pay for a name). So, I have to foind a suitable compromise.
Once I make a decision as to who will master it, I send the package to them. I wait. Perhaps we communicate with them further about certain things during the course of the mastering process. After the wait is over and I get the mastered CD back, I expect it to be fine, after all I have done my best and the ME has done his/her best, hopefully. I then listen to it everywhere (as described above). If something is wrong I tell them, if it is fine, we thank them.
So how would sending it out benefit me? Hmmm, cost, for one thing. Cost? You say... No way! You say. Just grab a free plug-in and go to work, it hasn't cost you a penny. Oh sure it has. That free plug-in may not be what I want for some things. The quality may not be as nice as what I desire. I may have to buy a better plug-in. How much better? You ask. $500.00 better, probably. So that one plug-in just cost as much as getting the whole CD mastered professionally and that is just ONE plug-in. So, instead of spending $1500.00 on plug-ins (even though I can use them over and over again), why not let someone else do it that has something better? Besides, time is money, usually and sending it out could save me a lot of time.
Now, if there were no plans to release this CD commercially and all I was going to do was upload MP3s to a web site, then I would use what I have now, not worry about sending it out and be done with it. If someone said "it needs better mastering," I would say "it's a free MP3, deal with it." But having recorded for many years and then experiencing the uncomfortable feeling that comes when I take my new accomplishment to mom's house expecting to hear what I heard in the studio, only to find out that the version I did on a 4-track sounded better on her (once very expensive) stereo, I am not sure I want to experience that with a CD that took months to track, mix and master.
Also, have I mentioned this is a commercial release? Of course I have. A record label is being formed exclusively to distribute my work. They do not want something that they cannot sell. So when it comes down to it, realistically, I trust myself to master my music if I am just playing around and having fun, but not as much when it comes to something so serious. This does not mean that I trust ME's either. In fact, I don't trust anyone, but that's another story. So the ME will have to earn my trust by showing me that he/she is the right person for the job before I commit to anything.
Caution does have to be applied when chosing an ME. Shoot, I could advertise as being an ME, but I know I don't qualify to be a professional one.
NOw, lately there have been posts about using obscure things like reverb in place of EQ. There is no logic here, because even if you could use a reverb for that purpose then it is still EQing. If I master the material myself then I will use whatever needs to be used to get the results I like, even if it means touching up the mix. Therefore, I will expect the ME to do whatever needs to be done to get the best results, whether it is adding, EQ, compression, reverb, or synthetic 30 weight motor oil. As long as the end result sounds good, then personally I don't care how they did it.
Small print:
Not edited for content. Typos, poor spelling, gramnmer, or inaccurate information are no fault of the author's and should be blamed soley on Microsoft, the maker of the keyboard used to type this.
Last edited: