Ok all the mastering engineers here take a listen.

[nonreversebird]

I am an Electrical Engineer and a Professional Musician. I have been reading this BB for some time now and this is what I am getting out of it NOW.

I can appreciate ones selfconfidence in their craft but the one thing all of you are taking for granted.

The overall perspective on mastering you all are pointing out is a fresh set of ears to take ones music and "Master" it.

I have run through my CD 3 times mixing it. Now focusing most on Bass and Drums (primarily kick).

With out the original mix you guys are going to have nothing. A person that is going to master a form of music MUST be familiar with it as well. Like myself I am very conserned someone would mix my stuff somewhat like a NU-Metal band mix or maybe a Screamo HardCore mix.

That is not what I want. I personally want an Old Skool mix beefed up and panned so that it is at the levels of modern heavy rock music. That is what is going on with old records from bands like Rush, Nazareth, Kiss.

That is what I am looking for. Its going to take an ear all right. Its going take an ear familiar with the music.

If you guys dont know what the artist wants their music to sound like you can waste their money and leave them with something that is not them.

do you not agree?

How many of you have declined to master a CD etc, on the grounds that you are not familiar enough with the style and your ears just might not be the right ones for the job?

 

[masteringhouse]

A good ME should be well versed in a variety of styles. It's not uncommon for an ME to master rock, classical, blues, jazz, hip-hop, country, etc.

Personally I cut my teeth mixing music for a variety of artists for over 10 years before getting involved in mastering. You get a good feel for what quality audio is about, learn how far to push a given style, characteristic EQs, and elements of good vs. bad audio that are common among all styles of music such as imaging, distortion, editing techniques, etc.

Whenever I have declined to master a CD it is related more to that fact that the original mix was so poorly done that I feel the client is wasting money, and should spend dollars either re-mixing or re-recording to get the original mix to the point that mastering is worth it.

In regards to stylistic differences all of my clients get an evaluation copy in which to decide if they would like me to continue with the project or want to hear particular tweaks before paying. There aren't any surprises that way and everybody is happier with the final product.

Communication with your ME is key. It's always a good idea to provide a few commercial references so that he knows what you're looking for and can't verbalize. It's also a good idea to provide mixes during the mixing stage so that the ME can give you advice on what may end up being problem areas during mastering and have you fix them before it's too late.

 

[nonreversebird]

Hi Tom, thanks very much for your cool response

In fact if it means anything to you I added to your reputation. I believe that there are millions of guys that would hack away at some music and just take the persons money. That is exactly what I am afraid of. I personally am spending a LONG time mixing my music. I am now on my 4th run through 16 songs and I hope this is the last run. You probably know what I am doing. That is setting my mixer up. Resetting velocity for midi instruments. Increasing or decreasing levels. I have found that for me the way I am mixing is probably insane to most. I mean I am playing my song out of a computer in Cakewalk through external gear and mixer then into another computer into a DAL CardDeluxe. This card does a great job. Has a great frequency response but what I hear coming out of the playing computer is not what is coming out of the destination so I have to moniter it. I have found a good way. Low level monitering in headphones and small powered speakers. I thank you for your honest answer. I knew that there is NO way anyone can make a Kick drum come out of a mix if it just isnt there. So I am using all different methods to test my mixing. I still believe that the preset EQ issue is something that should be taken into account. My last drummer I played with uses a Rock Eq setting. He told me he couldnt hear my kick drum so I have taken care of it.

Mixing is hard as hell. I am working day an night so my mix is worthy of one who can REALLY do the mastering.

Now the question is. How many so called studios have qualified engineers to do the job.

What do you think?

 

[7string]

A good ME should be well versed in a variety of styles. It's not uncommon for an ME to master rock, classical, blues, jazz, hip-hop, country, etc.

Personally I cut my teeth mixing music for a variety of artists for over 10 years before getting involved in mastering. You get a good feel for what quality audio is about, learn how far to push a given style, characteristic EQs, and elements of good vs. bad audio that are common among all styles of music such as imaging, distortion, editing techniques, etc.

Whenever I have declined to master a CD it is related more to that fact that the original mix was so poorly done that I feel the client is wasting money, and should spend dollars either re-mixing or re-recording to get the original mix to the point that mastering is worth it.

In regards to stylistic differences all of my clients get an evaluation copy in which to decide if they would like me to continue with the project or want to hear particular tweaks before paying. There aren't any surprises that way and everybody is happier with the final product.

Communication with your ME is key. It's always a good idea to provide a few commercial references so that he knows what you're looking for and can't verbalize. It's also a good idea to provide mixes during the mixing stage so that the ME can give you advice on what may end up being problem areas during mastering and have you fix them before it's too late.

Wow! What a great response Tom! I may give you a rep for that.

But that leads me to this question: What if you get something that just can't be compared to anybody else? What if you get a Jim Morrison or Jimi Hendrix who wants his own style and sound without trying to sound like somebody else that is already famous? I know there are few of these types of people around these days since breaking new ground doesn't seem to be in most artist's heads. Everybody wants to sound like Metallica or whomever. I figured this out about 20 years ago when the radio station I worked at only played solo artists that all sounded the same. It's especially apparent in country music these days, but this is all another thread. With the exception of somebody wanting to break new ground. How would you handle that? Work closely with the artist to try to achieve his 'vision' I'm guessing?

 

[masteringhouse]

Wow! What a great response Tom! I may give you a rep for that.

But that leads me to this question: What if you get something that just can't be compared to anybody else? What if you get a Jim Morrison or Jimi Hendrix who wants his own style and sound without trying to sound like somebody else that is already famous? I know there are few of these types of people around these days since breaking new ground doesn't seem to be in most artist's heads. Everybody wants to sound like Metallica or whomever. I figured this out about 20 years ago when the radio station I worked at only played solo artists that all sounded the same. It's especially apparent in country music these days, but this is all another thread. With the exception of somebody wanting to break new ground. How would you handle that? Work closely with the artist to try to achieve his 'vision' I'm guessing?

Absolutely, I work closely with the artist regardless. Again good engineering principles apply but you will have the occasional experiments like running a mix through a distortion pedal or experimentation with panning etc.

Most of this should be ironed out in the mix stage rather than mastering for the most part, mastering basically is about processing and organizing the mix so that it sounds great and translates well across audio systems. I wouldn't want to be known for a "signature sound" or impose my will on a final master.

 

[7string]

Absolutely, I work closely with the artist regardless. Again good engineering principles apply but you will have the occasional experiments like running a mix through a distortion pedal or experimentation with panning etc.

Most of this should be ironed out in the mix stage rather than mastering for the most part, mastering basically is about processing and organizing the mix so that it sounds great and translates well across audio systems. I wouldn't want to be known for a "signature sound" or impose my will on a final master.

Great response! Again! This leads me to some thoughts. Comments?

A good mixing engineer will probably be able to recocgnize a band that is trying to sounds like somebody else since it will be fairly obvious in their music.

A good mixing engineer will also probably be able to recognize talent when he hears it and will try to make the band sound like themselves instead of somebody else.

A good mixing engineer should always work with the artist/band to achieve what they want. In other words, NOT mix the project alone but with the artist/band there in person.

A good mastering engineer doesn't have a signature sound because each project sounds different.

I could probably think of about a million others, but I wouldn't want to monopolize your time... at least not without matching your hourly rate...

 

[Dogman]

Interesting thread guys. Just stopped by to read.

Ed

 

[Rokket]

Absolutely, I work closely with the artist regardless. Again good engineering principles apply but you will have the occasional experiments like running a mix through a distortion pedal or experimentation with panning etc.

Most of this should be ironed out in the mix stage rather than mastering for the most part, mastering basically is about processing and organizing the mix so that it sounds great and translates well across audio systems. I wouldn't want to be known for a "signature sound" or impose my will on a final master.

You sound like the kind of ME I would love to work with. Of course my recording gear would make you kick me in the pants and go home....

 

[masteringhouse]

Great response! Again! This leads me to some thoughts. Comments?

1. A good mixing engineer will probably be able to recocgnize a band that is trying to sounds like somebody else since it will be fairly obvious in their music.

2. A good mixing engineer will also probably be able to recognize talent when he hears it and will try to make the band sound like themselves instead of somebody else.

3. A good mixing engineer should always work with the artist/band to achieve what they want. In other words, NOT mix the project alone but with the artist/band there in person.

4. A good mastering engineer doesn't have a signature sound because each project sounds different.

I could probably think of about a million others, but I wouldn't want to monopolize your time... at least not without matching your hourly rate...

Hey no problem, that's what I'm here for.

For larger projects I would add producer to 1 and 2 above. Many producers are also engineers, but sometimes it's good to separate these roles if the engineer is not familiar with the style or the band.

 

[Blue Bear Sound]

A good mixing engineer should always work with the artist/band to achieve what they want. In other words, NOT mix the project alone but with the artist/band there in person.

I don't quite agree... mixing "by committee" is a recipe for disaster. The guitarist is never loud enough, neither are the drums or the bass, and the shy vocalist always wants to bury themselves - or the vocalist with the 80's hair wants to be louder than the guitars!

The way I approach mixing with the client is to talk to them beforehand about the sound they're looking for - groove-dominant or rhythm-dominant? Present vocals or blended? Depending on the project I may even ask for reference songs of mixes they envisioned (although quite often, if the project wasn't tracked by professionals, the tracks themselves don't allow me to get them anywhere near any reference songs, since they would have had to think about that before the tracking phase!)

In any case, I talk to them about the sound they're shooting for, and then set up an initial mix on my own. I then call one or more of the band members in (or email/FTP them a copy) for them check, they offer some tweaks for their preference and I make the changes, or they like it as it is and we move on. The client is always in the loop, but one of the reasons clients often bring their projects to me is for MY perspective on mixing their tracks, so it would be very counterproductive for me to have the band in the same room while I'm working a mix!

 

[masteringhouse]

I don't quite agree... mixing "by committee" is a recipe for disaster. The guitarist is never loud enough, neither are the drums or the bass, and the shy vocalist always wants to bury themselves - or the vocalist with the 80's hair wants to be louder than the guitars!

It doesn't always have to be this way though Bruce. I've done work with more "seasoned" bands that understand the gestalt of mixing (the whole is greater than it's parts). They undertand that the song should always take priority over anyone's contribution toward it.

If I do run into a situation in regards to mixing "by committe" then I ask the band for a representative during the mix sessions and all others have to hang out at the bar or strip club. Usually boredom causes the other members of the band to start chiming in where they aren't needed so keeping them occupied usually makes them happy and out of the way until their opinion is needed. OTOH if you don't have a representative at all, the band will come back with change after change that could have been handled more quickly and easily if present. Often times they want to try things that don't work, but you still have to let them hear it or they won't be happy. Other times I learn something new from a weird idea, or if I still feel that it doesn't work just chalk it up to creative differences between me and the client. In these cases the client wins the debate since it's his record.

 

[Blue Bear Sound]

I agree Tom -- I generalized a bit for "color" but you're right - it very much depends on the calibre of the band in terms of studio "know-how." I still definitely prefer a closed-door session for at least the set-up mix... then the band (or rep) can come in for the later stages.

 

[Teacher]

To quote/paraphase a ME "Music is Music...." Brad Blackwood

but he's also on the verge of being Uber famous so take that FWIW

 

[masteringhouse]

I still definitely prefer a closed-door session for at least the set-up mix... then the band (or rep) can come in for the later stages.

Oh yeah, the engineer definitely needs to experiment and "take in" the mix as well as try to insulate the client from any setup or tech issues that tend to bore them.

BTW something that helps with clients that need to have a hands on approach but are screwing up the mix is to have "dummy devices" that have knobs and lights but do nothing. Here's an example:

http://www.funklogic.com/palindrometer.htm

If the guitarist wants his solo up, let them raise the "solos" knob just a bit

 

[Blue Bear Sound]

Oh yeah, the engineer definitely needs to experiment and "take in" the mix as well as try to insulate the client from any setup or tech issues that tend to bore them.

BTW something that helps with clients that need to have a hands on approach but are screwing up the mix is to have "dummy devices" that have knobs and lights but do nothing. Here's an example:

http://www.funklogic.com/palindrometer.htm

If the guitarist wants his solo up, let them raise the "solos" knob just a bit

Yeah - that technique really works well with clueless producers and record label execs!!!


"You want a better sound, Sam???
See that unit over there? Turn the SUCK knob over to Minimum... I must've left it on max during tracking 'cos the band was just too good!"
"How's that? Better?? ...good, glad to help!"

 

[BentRabbit]

it very much depends on the calibre of the band in terms of studio "know-how." I still definitely prefer a closed-door session for at least the set-up mix... then the band (or rep) can come in for the later stages.

lol I remember some of my first times in a studio when all of us were allowed in the control room during mix down... Four 19 and 20-something 'experts' making our own demands on getting the song right...
Thinking back, our engineer was one of the most patient men I think I've ever met... Starting out with a nice balanced sound and then allowing all us chefs add to the soup... By the time all the sliders were at the top of the console, he'd point out where we were at and bring em all back down again... Within 10 - 15 minutes, we had them all pushed back up to the top again...
It only took 3 or 4 times of doing this before we made a band decision to only allow one or two people to be involved in the mixing process...

I never saw the engineer smirk, but I'm sure he was rolling his eyes big-time at us...

 

[Dogman]

lol I remember some of my first times in a studio when all of us were allowed in the control room during mix down... Four 19 and 20-something 'experts' making our own demands on getting the song right...
Thinking back, our engineer was one of the most patient men I think I've ever met... Starting out with a nice balanced sound and then allowing all us chefs add to the soup... By the time all the sliders were at the top of the console, he'd point out where we were at and bring em all back down again... Within 10 - 15 minutes, we had them all pushed back up to the top again...
It only took 3 or 4 times of doing this before we made a band decision to only allow one or two people to be involved in the mixing process...

I never saw the engineer smirk, but I'm sure he was rolling his eyes big-time at us...

I can remember 4 18-20 year olds sitting with a 4 track, trying to mix it to cassete, and how that went. I can only imagine if there were more tracks, and way more knobs and sliders to deal with. We drove ourselves nuts over nothing. Probably would have been killed if we were doing all the bickering in front of an adult. My guess is the guys doing the tweaking have to have a lot of patience to deal with some of there clients. Probably worse than kids. Blue Bear and Masteringhouse have to have more patience than God himself!!!
Ed

 

[Blue Bear Sound]

...have to have more patience than God himself!!!

You have no idea!!

How about the band with the drummer who couldn't stand anything on his ears, so headphones drove him nuts! On top of that, he had sensitive ears, so volume was a huge issue at any level.........

 

[masteringhouse]

Or recording and mixing a project for close to two years (on and off).

 

[Farview]

I am an Electrical Engineer and a Professional Musician. I have been reading this BB for some time now and this is what I am getting out of it NOW.

I can appreciate ones selfconfidence in their craft but the one thing all of you are taking for granted.

The overall perspective on mastering you all are pointing out is a fresh set of ears to take ones music and "Master" it.

I have run through my CD 3 times mixing it. Now focusing most on Bass and Drums (primarily kick).

With out the original mix you guys are going to have nothing. A person that is going to master a form of music MUST be familiar with it as well. Like myself I am very conserned someone would mix my stuff somewhat like a NU-Metal band mix or maybe a Screamo HardCore mix.

That is not what I want. I personally want an Old Skool mix beefed up and panned so that it is at the levels of modern heavy rock music. That is what is going on with old records from bands like Rush, Nazareth, Kiss.

That is what I am looking for. Its going to take an ear all right. Its going take an ear familiar with the music.

If you guys dont know what the artist wants their music to sound like you can waste their money and leave them with something that is not them.

do you not agree?

How many of you have declined to master a CD etc, on the grounds that you are not familiar enough with the style and your ears just might not be the right ones for the job?

This sounds like you have confused mastering with mixing. By the time mastering engineer gets it, it is only a stereo track. (most of the time) All of the desissions about guitar sound, drum levels, panning, soft synths, vocal compression, etc. have been made by the mix engineer.