Professional Mastering

masteringhouse said:
Where do you see negative rep points? Looked in profile but only shows good stuff unless somebody doesn't hate me yet (which I find hard to believe :) )

Technically I don't know that I got a neg, since it was a 0 rep (gray). But I'm guessing some newbie doesn't love me for knowing a Volpicelli . . . not sure why they dislike that, but it takes all kinds :confused:
 
mshilarious said:
Technically I don't know that I got a neg, since it was a 0 rep (gray). But I'm guessing some newbie doesn't love me for knowing a Volpicelli . . . not sure why they dislike that, but it takes all kinds :confused:

Ah I see a grey one, didn't know that's what it meant. For some post that was actually pretty innocent and informative.

I'm honored. "Someone hates me, they really hate me!" :)
 
Sorry masteringhouse.

masteringhouse said:
plainrat -

Sorry let's start over. The term crap was used in a general sense it had nothing to do with your mix. I can see how it may have been misinterpreted.

Largeness is achieved in many ways and depends on your definition of the term. Some people think volume when they are describing large, to others it means "density" (as in "those guitars sound huge"), and to others it may mean the "depth".

Volume we all know how to control. Through the use of compressors, limiters, riding gain through automation or manually, as well as how loud music is perceived by the nature of the frequencies it occupies. The trick is making music "appropriately loud" and doing it without having too many remnants of distortion (compressing or limiting always adds distortion to some degree).

Expansion of the stereo image (width) can be done with M/S processing, phase tricks, and use of delays. IMHO a good mix shouldn't need any of this. It's best taken care of in the mix. Changes in phase to accomplish this usually weaken a mix and can potentially cause issues in mono. If a mix sounds "centered" try other options in the mix via panning and delays (check out Haas effect thread). The end product will stand-up much better for it without all of that extra processing.

Depth in a mix is best accomplished with proper mic technique, delays, reverb, EQ, and levels. This is a tough trick to pull off in mastering as unless you get stems, there is little control over the individual tracks in a mix. Adding reverb over the whole mix just makes the mix sound more distant, not the individual elements.

Another definition of depth/bignesss is the sound that you get from things like analog tape. This comes from harmonics added through use of things like tubes, tape, devices like the Crane Song HEDD which add harmonics that match tube and tape (not the exciter variety), along with other analog emulation devices as well as analog gear itself.

Hope this at least partially answers the original question.

My gear list? Most often used pieces are:

Main DAW:

Pro Tools HD system on a Mac, but also have other PC related software that I use from time to time.​

Digital processing/conversion:

Weiss EQ1
Weiss DS1

Various plugins such as
Waves Masters bundle
Waves Restoration bundle
Crane Song Phoenix (tape emulation)
Spectra Foo (metering)

Apogee PSX-100 A/D D/A converter​

Analog processing:

Crane Song STC-8 compressor
Crane Song Ibis EQ
Chandler LTD-2 compressor
Urie LA-22 (de-esser/compressor)​

Monitoring is dynaudio acoustics BM15s with BX-30 sub

Masteringhouse sorry. Im here to learn and make friends not cause hassles...Um.I think there was a full moon the other night, at least out here.
Anyway, according to your analysis of Huge, I think it might be depth I'm lacking if anything. The mix is good.The stereo width is good, and I think I've done everything else right w/ good mics and spendy pre-amps. Although .. I didn't mic room ambience or re-amp., I've used delay on some tracks and maybe I should try different verbs on some tracks for more depth. I've listened w/ plug in (limiter at mastering setting) and things got better. and gone to another studio with different monitors(I use Dyn. BM5a's) and a couple more plugins and when applied things got way closer (or bigger or whatever)liked you walked closer to the stage) I'm thinking I'll get even better results than that from a ficility with good gear and ear and alot of mastering experience. To be honest, I was unaware I could find that right here with you or other members of this forum, but now that I know that, I'll be visiting your website. respectfully, plainrat
 
plainrat said:
Masteringhouse sorry. Im here to learn and make friends not cause hassles...Um.I think there was a full moon the other night, at least out here.
Anyway, according to your analysis of Huge, I think it might be depth I'm lacking if anything. The mix is good.The stereo width is good, and I think I've done everything else right w/ good mics and spendy pre-amps. Although .. I didn't mic room ambience or re-amp., I've used delay on some tracks and maybe I should try different verbs on some tracks for more depth. I've listened w/ plug in (limiter at mastering setting) and things got better. and gone to another studio with different monitors(I use Dyn. BM5a's) and a couple more plugins and when applied things got way closer (or bigger or whatever)liked you walked closer to the stage) I'm thinking I'll get even better results than that from a ficility with good gear and ear and alot of mastering experience. To be honest, I was unaware I could find that right here with you or other members of this forum, but now that I know that, I'll be visiting your website. respectfully, plainrat

No hassle plainrat, just a misunderstanding. Happens a lot in forums and emails. A few of us who have been around the block on this forum have a tendency of getting our dander up a little too quickly. Questions like these get asked a lot by folks less experienced than yourself who are looking for magic plugin settings to make a low quality mix sound like it was done in a million dollar studio, or for someone else to fix it for them (most often for free). Sorry if I gave or got that impresssion from your post.

I would definitely like to hear your mix, there's a lot of talent here that could make some great suggestions either on how it's currently mixed or how it might be helped through mastering.

Best,
Tom
 
masteringhouse said:
No hassle plainrat, just a misunderstanding. Happens a lot in forums and emails. A few of us who have been around the block on this forum have a tendency of getting our dander up a little too quickly.

YOU TAKE THAT BACK!!!!!

;) :)
 
plainrat said:
I realize improving the mix with mastering is impossible.

Nah, not really true. My mastering guys bail my ass out all the time, and I have made a few hundred records and supposeldy a pretty good mixer. They can not totally remix a song in mastering, but a great mastering engineer can really make some great improvements some times. The guy currently making me look better than I am these days is Stephen Marsh at Threshold Sound Threshold
 
Improving mix w/ mastering

I disagree w/ you and my own words earlier...it's like....The icing on a cake always makes it taste better...but it doesn't change what the cake really is...just makes it easier to swallow. I like to keep on baking till I get it right. Then I can leave it out in the rain if I want.
 
Ronan said:
Nah, not really true. My mastering guys bail my ass out all the time, and I have made a few hundred records and supposeldy a pretty good mixer. They can not totally remix a song in mastering, but a great mastering engineer can really make some great improvements some times. The guy currently making me look better than I am these days is Stephen Marsh at Threshold Sound Threshold

Ronan -

I'm sure that you're being humble, but what it it about your mixes that you find an ME needs to improve on constantly?

Usually there are some EQ desicions, and volume adjustments should be done in mastering as it can be difficult to judge an entire album when you are mixing one song. Other than this, editing, arranging the CD, and quality control, there shouldn't need to be much more done in mastering to a great mix IMHO. To me this isn't so much changing the mix as making them cohesive. Mastering great mixes is more about creating an "album" than fixing anything.
 
mix

masteringhouse said:
No hassle plainrat, just a misunderstanding. Happens a lot in forums and emails. A few of us who have been around the block on this forum have a tendency of getting our dander up a little too quickly. Questions like these get asked a lot by folks less experienced than yourself who are looking for magic plugin settings to make a low quality mix sound like it was done in a million dollar studio, or for someone else to fix it for them (most often for free). Sorry if I gave or got that impresssion from your post.

I would definitely like to hear your mix, there's a lot of talent here that could make some great suggestions either on how it's currently mixed or how it might be helped through mastering.

Best,
Tom
Tom... Very good. I've e-mailed your company for instructions...

plainrat
 
masteringhouse said:
Ronan -

I'm sure that you're being humble, but what it it about your mixes that you find an ME needs to improve on constantly?

Usually there are some EQ desicions, and volume adjustments should be done in mastering as it can be difficult to judge an entire album when you are mixing one song. Other than this, editing, arranging the CD, and quality control, there shouldn't need to be much more done in mastering to a great mix IMHO. To me this isn't so much changing the mix as making them cohesive. Mastering great mixes is more about creating an "album" than fixing anything.

I am not sure that I would say there is anything that a ME needs to improve on "constantly", but I know my mastering guys have my back when I need it. I have mixed some records where the ME has done litterally nothing to the mixes and other where things are a bit more radical.

One thing is that I work in studios all over the world and sometimes when I get back to a more familiar listening envirmonment realize that problems in the mix room have caused me to make some wrong decisions. But also even in my own mix room (I own a modest commercial room in LA) when i am done mixing a record I might realize on one or all the songs that I have mixed the vocals too loud, or the kick drum too low or made the guitars too abrasive etc. A good mastering engineer can help with all these things. A great mastering engineer can usually bringing the percieved level of a vocal up or down pretty significantly.

Of course the best case scenario is to remix, but many times that is not possible because of schedules and budgets, or more often if I feel the mix is perfect except for one thing. I am a die hard analog console guy, so its never just a matter of opening up the PT session again (a trade off I gladly make for the benefits of analog mixing, but that's another topic)

This is a little OT, but another thing about great mastering guys: I have probably made more records than most people on this board but I am constantly learning and trying to get better and I count on my mastering guys to give me feed back and help me grow as a mixer. I do not want a mastering guy to stroke my ego, I want him to give me objective feed back about what parts were good and what parts he had trouble with.
 
Cool Ronan, thanks for the feedback.

Have you ever tried stems or are you dead set against them?

Also, have you tried mixing from PT through an analog board? Lots of well known engineers I've talked to seem to be taking this route, as well as flying back and forth from tape.
 
Last edited:
mshilarious said:
Now you're pushing it :mad: ;) :D
SOMEONE LEFT THE CAKE OUT IN THE RAIN..AND I REALLY COULDN'T TAKE IT CAUSE IT TOOK SO LONG TO BAKE IT......follow me? sorry...just trying to be hilarious.
 
Back
Top