New Mastering Contest

[xstatic]

I like the idea of using the PMC 12 song if finster is agreeable. I purposely mixed that song without any brickwalls. I left the RMS low enough to not make it too rough on the ME, but also, there are still some things that could use help on it. In the end though, I think that mix is a good candidate for a mastering song. Personally, since I mixed that version, I would probably stay out of the contest if we used that song. I think it would be cool to have the members on here that run mastering houses be the judge, and maybe even post their own mastered versions after the contest. That way we can all see what we did right and wrong and give us ideas on how to improve. It may also drum up some business for you mastering guys on here by letting everyone see just what you can do

 

[masteringhouse]

I think it would be cool to have the members on here that run mastering houses be the judge, and maybe even post their own mastered versions after the contest. That way we can all see what we did right and wrong and give us ideas on how to improve. It may also drum up some business for you mastering guys on here by letting everyone see just what you can do

As long as it doesn't become a popularity contest, I don't see why everyone can't make comments. I'm not really a fan of "contests". Personally I think it should be a wholesome learning type thread. People post their results, and feedback comes in regarding what they have produced instead of a pissing contest. If my history of these things is true, the results will often be that one person will like a master and another won't, not that there is a clear-cut winner.

I would also be nice if submissions were anonymous. In general people seem to grade the more popular engineers or pro submissions higher (sometimes without hearing them). It's often times more politically motivated, than having to do with the product. After all, if one of the Bobs (L,K,O) submitted his sample, who on this board (who uses a real name) is going to tell him it sucks or it isn't as good as Walter's?

 

[mshilarious]

I would also be nice if submissions were anonymous. In general people seem to grade the more popular engineers or pro submissions higher (sometimes without hearing them). It's often times more politically motivated, than having to do with the product. After all, if one of the Bobs (L,K,O) submitted his sample, who on this board (who uses a real name) is going to tell him it sucks or it isn't as good as Walter's?

I've never had a problem judging impartially. Heck, Bear assigned the highest rating the label of "Massenburg", but if he ever entered, he's just another contestant to me. If his entry was terrible, I'd tell him just like the guy at the Orange Bowl told Ashlee Simpson Not that I expect that would happen, on either account.

If anybody in the last PMC wants to know my real name, PM me (prepare to be bored, because I have a common name that is practically un-Googleable) Or check out the HR BBS map on Frappr, I put that pin directly outside the door to my studio

 

[bendbones]

Well, you guys can master one of my tracks if you like ;-)
Some guy mentioned before that the mix was good and would really benefit from being mastered well.

Ok, so I'm just wanting one of my tracks mastered to be honest (i.e. for free). But it is in the spirit of home-recording. - If you're still looking for a track, then I'l post a link tommorrow or something and maybe you can all consider it

Cheers

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Tom is absoluetly right, if you guys want to go throught with this in the form of an actual competition (though I'm not sure I get the point of competing in this case) where the judging is by the public, the submissions HAVE to be anonymous to the public. If they're not, there are going to be at least two bias' in the voting:

1) People are going to tend to think they like the jobs done by the bigger names. It's impossible to be impartial in these kind of head-to-head contests, no matter how sincere one tries to be in their voting. That's why taste tests are double-blind.

2) You know how this board operates; scoring is meaningless. Just look at what some do with rep points. There's nothing to stop them from stuffing the mastering ballot box the same way. I'm from Chicago, I know how that works!

Actually, come to think of it, there's nothing to stop cheating even if it is anonymous. All one has to do is recognize their own file (it easy to use certain markers to ensure that too) and then build the behind-the-scenes campaign to "stuff the vote for entry #2."

I say screw the contest aspect of it. Tom is also right that it's a totally subjective thing; majority opinion is not a measure of quality, especially if the majority are of varying qualifications.

However, people can post their own work with a short explanation of how and why they did what they did, and discussions can ensue discussing the reasoning and merits of the different approaces, styles and outcomes. Much can be learned by everybody without having to pick winners or losers...especially via a corrupt process.

G.

 

[chessrock]

Since when did you become such a Wussy, Southside?

I know what I'm getting you for X-mas, this year: A skirt, and ballerina tights. Pink.

 

[mshilarious]

However, people can post their own work with a short explanation of how and why they did what they did, and discussions can ensue discussing the reasoning and merits of the different approaces, styles and outcomes. Much can be learned by everybody without having to pick winners or losers...especially via a corrupt process.

What the hell? Corrupt?! Thanks a freakin' lot. I spent dozens of hours critiquing and then judging mixes which I am happy to do, but I didn't expect that in response.

We've had 12 PMCs, I've only been a part of 2, but I've read all of them, and I see no evidence whatsoever of bias or corruption. I specifically reject any such charge for PMCs #11 and #12, and challenge anyone to produce evidence to the contrary. Comparing PMC judging to the rep system is an insult.

The formula is simple: you pick a song, you recruit three judges, you put up a prize. I've had enough of this thread; I'll await the contest on the mp3 board.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Sounds like I struck a nerve, Chess. Keep the cross-dressing noth of Madison, please.

G.

 

[masteringhouse]

G. said it much better than I. Why not call this a "Mastering Study" rather than a contest? Why all the machismo?

 

[chessrock]

Do I have to order two ballerina tights now? Man, X-mas is expensive.


.

 

[mshilarious]

Yareek, if you don't mind, how about this: I'll host the contest. 7string, bendbones, send me a link to your tracks via PM and I'll pick one. You will need to supply .wav files for the contest, but mp3s will do for now.

I'll put up one of my mics as a prize, probably my Shure 330. I'll chip in something for a second prize too. I will need some volunteer judges (how about Yareek, 7string, and bendbones?).

I'll have a look at the rating system and tweak it for mastering. I will probably enter the contest myself, but be ineligible for the prize. I will ask NL5 to host the premaster files.

Once I have it all together, I'll start the thread on the clinic, called "New Mastering Contest #1".

Objections? Suggestions?

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

What the hell? Corrupt?! Thanks a freakin' lot.

Jeez, ms, I wasn't attacking you or your work, I was just saying that the whole "competition" aspect of it is both flawed and meaningless. That's not a judgement on the work, it's a judgement on the process.

Beyond that, would someone please explain to me the purpose of a "contest"? Especially when the playing field is so uneven. Wer're not talking about mixing here, we're talking about mastering. Just how is someone with Guitar Tracks played through BX5's in their dorm room supposed to compete against a mastering shop?

What I'm proposing is that it's possible to get all the benefits one is looking for with this idea by posing an unmastered tune and letting everybody have their go at it just like was proposed. But with their submission they'd include a description of their gear and environment along with a diesciption of what they did to the mix and why they did it. From there much can be shared and learned by all in the matters of how technique, style and gear can make a difference. Which is really the purpose of this whole thing isn't it?

Taking it to the step of judging which master job is "best" adds no further value to the exercise because of all the other variables involved. Are Tom and John going to automatically be vying for "best" because they have the gear and the experience? Or does Joe Berhinger win "best" because he did a pretty competant job given the fact that he mastered on computer speakers in a closet?

It's not "wussing out" to raise these points, nor is it "insulting" to past winners of other contests to point out the flaws and the needlessness of the judging process. It takes guts to go against the flow to state what one believes in even though goes against the grain of many. And it makes no judgement on the quality of one's work to say that the process that judges them is flawed; the quality of the work reamins what it is regardless of the judgement, right or wrong.

There's more than one way to successfully master a mix. Picking a winner between two perfectly good jobs is about as meaningful as saying that chicken parmasean is "better" than kung pow chicken. Let's just throw both recipies onto the board and learn from each other as to why each of them is good or bad without saying that one is better than the other. It just makes more sense to me.

G.

 

[mshilarious]

There's more than one way to successfully master a mix. Picking a winner between two perfectly good jobs is about as meaningful as saying that chicken parmasean is "better" than kung pow chicken.

From my point of view, there are fewer options in mastering than mixing, and fewer options in mixing than tracking, and fewer options in tracking than performance, and fewer options in performance than composition. Yet there have been competitions in performance and composition for hundreds of years.

Even so, I don't view music as sport, it's an art. However the competition serves two purposes: it gets more people interested, and it provides a benchmark for improvement. Read a PMC thread and hear how peoples' mixes get better as they receive feedback. Then see how people chart their progress by tracking their relative positions across PMCs.

The bottom line: mix competitions are fun, and I expect a mastering contest will be too.

 

[masteringhouse]

There's more than one way to successfully master a mix. Picking a winner between two perfectly good jobs is about as meaningful as saying that chicken parmasean is "better" than kung pow chicken. Let's just throw both recipies onto the board and learn from each other as to why each of them is good or bad without saying that one is better than the other. It just makes more sense to me.

G.

Amen.

Having a study also allows people to supply more than one submission so that they can learn and improve their skills rather than being stuck with only one attempt. Mastering often requires more than one version for the client with tweaks. Why should this be different?

BTW I like my tights in lavender, it sets off my beautiful brown eyes.

 

[chessrock]

Should I order you guys up a couple of pink strawberry daiquiris with the little umbrellas to go with your Chicken Parmesan and Kung pow Chicken? (bawk, bawk bawk)

 

[Dogman]

I would love to be part of this for a learning experience, whether or not it is a "competition". Most of us who enter the PMC's don't really view them as a competition against the other people, but as a competition to learn, and try and better ourselves at what we like. I have shit for equipment, and worse skills, but still do it, as it helps me improve my music. I believe that is what most of us are here for....a bit of fun, and maybe getting better at something that we spend so much time doing.
I've never seen favoritism in a PMC, and even some very harsh criticism towards some mixes that were done by more experienced people than I. Nothing bad, just pointing out flaws some people might not hear, do to our lack of experience. All seems to end fine, and everyone walks away for the better when done.
Now, I'd love to learn a bit about what the Mastering process is, by doing something rather than just reading. Sounds fun and informative.

 

[masteringhouse]

Should I order you guys up a couple of pink strawberry daiquiris with the little umbrellas to go with your Chicken Parmesan and Kung pow Chicken? (bawk, bawk bawk)

LOL.

If I were chicken I wouldn't have posted any replies to this thread.

As an instructor at two colleges I just don't see the point. I don't have students competing against one another in a class. If more than one student does a great job they all get "A"s, not a prize for what I may think is the best. When they listen to one another's work everyone learns and improves. It's healthy, not some experience where the "losers" go away feeling inferior or cheated. In a true competition of skill everyone is on an even level playing ground, that's not the case here with varying degrees of equipment and experience.

I've had an idea in mind for a while were there could be a site, kind of a "doctor's lounge" where various ME's could take the patient of the month and give input and examples of what they might do to improve the mix. A lot could be learned I think, rather than going away with a prize. Besides, what's a budding mastering engineer going to do with a ribbon mic?

 

[NL5]

In defense of the PMC's, they are not true "contests". There is a winner, but it is all good natured, with the main focus being improving EVERYBODY'S mixes. Everyone critiques mixes, gives advice/pointers.

I must say too, that the quality of the mixes has improved remarkably.

 

[Dogman]

In defense of the PMC's, they are not true "contests". There is a winner, but it is all good natured, with the main focus being improving EVERYBODY'S mixes. Everyone critiques mixes, gives advice/pointers.

I must say too, that the quality of the mixes has improved remarkably.

Yes, and that's what it's all about, for me at least. The interaction with people is quite fun, and learning something, is a bonus. I've actually had great experiences with 99.5% of the people on this board, and it has been a blast. This would just be something new for me.

 

[Yareek]

In defense of the PMC's, they are not true "contests". There is a winner, but it is all good natured, with the main focus being improving EVERYBODY'S mixes. Everyone critiques mixes, gives advice/pointers.

I must say too, that the quality of the mixes has improved remarkably.

Exactly. I learned a lot about what I needed to do to mix with the one I entered (mainly in the low end). It's like having 3 reliable sets of ears checking your mixes along with a bunch of other people chiming in on it.

I realize that mastering is probably one of the most difficult things that you can do, and I figured it'd be fun to take a stab at it. I'm sure some people will take an L2 and drag the threshold way down (hey, I used to) and some people will probably overdo a sonic maximizer or something, but even so, they'll be able to learn from it.