masteringhouse said:
It depends on the format in which the stems are sent doesn't it?
If someone sends the stems in a Pro Tools file format it can be done.
Assuming ITB compression, yah.
Not sure I follow the analogy. As a client you are always relying on external sources. That's usually a good thing, more ears, more skills to lend to a project.
Not when used as a crutch which doesn't allow them to learn to do what they are hired/supposed to do!
I think you are also assuming the client and the mix engineer in the above paragraph are the same person? For this forum that is often true which why I'm guessing that you phrased it this way. Assuming that they are different people, how long can the client wait for the engineer to improve their skills and acoustic/monitoring situation before getting their mixes good enough for mastering?
I assumed nothing about who the client is, but if they are relying on the mastering engineer to fix the mix, why not choose a different mix engineer or take the time to learn to do it right themselves?
No matter how you slice it, this is mixing in the mastering room.
In the golden days I remember (I believe Bob O) mentioning somewhere that the ME's job was to do flat transfers of the mixes.
Everyone has different 'golden days', I suppose, but ever since Doug started TML in '65, mastering engineer have been correcting and improving mixes. There's 30+ years of some of the greatest sounding records ever made where stems weren't used.
Stems certainly aren't a new invention, but why should they be used now?
The answer is because folks are rushing along without trying to improve their own skills, and many people are willing to help them along that path. I'd rather send stuff back to be remixed and help them learn to avoid the same mistakes.
This of course assumes that the mixes are great to begin with. Given that there are more people involved in the recording process that are less schooled than before given the cost of entry, there are more likely going to be people needed with greater experience further down the recording process in order to help fix that which has been "broken". In order to help fix these issues you may need to have to have greater ability to dig in deeper into a mix than before. Stems are just one possible tool for this and in my experience have significantly helped in some situations.
See? You see it as a solution, I see it as perpetuating the problem.
They'll
never learn how to mix it 'right' if they only learn to rely on someone else!
Depending on how you work, you can always take a break from a project and attack it new the next day. This should help one to get a more objective perspective after the "fixes".
Yikes, talk about eating their budget.
Don't forget 'you only get to hear it the first time once'.
That said, in the past week I had two projects submitted as stems that worked out great. Last month I had one where the producer was constantly asking for changes that definitely went past mastering and into remixing. In that case I handed the project back and suggested that he remix before any further changes and made many suggestions for improvement. Still waiting for the remixes on that one ...
I don't doubt you can get better results from stems, all things considerd. I just wonder who it's helping, besides you...
I'd rather spend the extra time working with the client to improve the areas that need to be addressed. Kind of the buy a man a fish, teach a man to fish thing...