The Great Homerec'er "Mastering" Dual!

  • Thread starter Thread starter Queue
  • Start date Start date

Which Sounds the Best to You?

  • TicketA

    Votes: 34 47.9%

  • TicketB

    Votes: 16 22.5%

  • TicketC

    Votes: 10 14.1%

  • I honestly cannot pick one as the clear winner.

    Votes: 11 15.5%
  • Total voters
    71
Although one version is clearly not mastered I have chosen a preference and voted.

AFTER I voted I pulled each into my editor. THIS got interesting. Visually my vote was confirmed but noticed both of the "better" sounding tracks clipped. I know - I know - a clip is not a clip just because an editor says so...

Personnally I like to "master" (loosly using term) so that peaks never go above -0.1 on my EDITOR. But - that being said I preferred the song which clipped more...

....hmmmmmmmm.

zip >>
 
zip said:
noticed both of the "better" sounding tracks clipped. I know - I know - a clip is not a clip just because an editor says so...

Personnally I like to "master" (loosly using term) so that peaks never go above -0.1 on my EDITOR. But - that being said I preferred the song which clipped more...

....hmmmmmmmm.

zip >>
Click to expand...

You should know that in Pro Tools which is considered a pro editor....sometimes it shows signs of clipping yet it isnt (with 100% security that it isnt)
 
Damn I take that back!!

I just pulled A & B into my system and listened on my reference monitors (vs my $20 PC speakers)

B does clip....ouch...

and a bit too much low end...

Lesson #1...don't judge a mix on cheap PC speakers unless you are a pro (like Sjoko...)

I think I'll give the PC speakers to the kids... :-0 Totally discount my vote due to flawed equipment choice.
 
totally right Shailat. I find that in critical situations (like always), if I work in PT, I have to have my Spectrafoo meters working as well.
 
I have voted. IMy vote is cast and admittedly I have next to no knowledge about mastering. I voted for the one that sounded best to me after listening to each track in 20 second segments in rapid succession to hear the differences between them.

The one I voted for was good imo because:
1) vocals sounded good and some of her minor vocal defects were cured. The vocals have penetration without abrasion. (hey that could be a slogan....)
2) the slap note of the bass sounds tight and not too bright.
3) When she sings "Jesus is our ticket" and the band momentary stop the final note has punch and definition. i.e. dum dum dum dum DUM (stop).
4) guitar solo has nice Eq and an appropriate use of panning on just a few notes. a nice pro touch.
5) "jesus is our key" - the word "key" has a subtle alteration to the reverb.
6) "all aboard" again has an appropriate reverb.

Unfortunately NOONE managed to filter out one defect I could hear in my headphones on every track. At the beginning in that sample (i think it's a sample) there are quiet but undesirable digital defects.

I think I know the original and one is a poor mastering job imo with very inappropriate use of effects, panning etc and practically no attempt to alter eq.

As I said I have no knowledge of mastering. I just comment on what I hear. I dont think that most members of the public will really notice the effects of good mastering on pro recordings anyway but I tried to think along the lines of how a professional mastering engineer would go about his job. What he would look for etc.

I'll be interested to know which one is Bruce's but I think I know ;)

It must be obvious form my comments anyway which one I was referring to even it turns out to be the original! LOL.

PS i reveal who I voted for in Queue's page.
 
Oh who cares! ... IMO

A - Bruce's by a mile and the best by a mile.

B - the other effort. Not very good I'm afriad but you're a good sport who ever did it. Thank you for participating.

C - the original and actually better than B... yes i'm afraid so...
 
Mixmr:

"..huh??...there was some clipping on the "all aboard" [stolen off the internet), but the only other distortion was the guitar sound...eh??? "


Mixmr, you sound a little grumpy today. :)

Your mix was excellent, and I'm very impressed with what you did. As I mentioned earlier, I love negative criticism: Listening to those who aren't afraid to tell us, bluntly, the honest truth (or their interperatations of it) are what makes us better. Otherwise, we fall in love with our work, and lose all objectivity.

From my point of view -- and what do I know?, I only managed 21% -- there were a few random ideas I have for you:

* Recording outdoors basically eliminates the problem of poor accoustics from a bad room. Only problem is the sound may have been a little too dry due to complete lack of accoustics. This may have made your guitars and bass sound like they were recorded direct, something many voters pointed out. What might be a cool experiment would be to place some ambiant mics several feet away for some natural outdoor echo. I've never tried it - or heard it tried - but it would be interesting to hear. As long as there wasn't too much wind, animal, or other noises, I guess. :)

* Bruce's master had a good radio sound. Something else to consider would be to overdub or sample a good snare hit. I'm probably getting a little carried away here with the frequency charts, but most of the good radio mixes out ther have some solid action going on around 196 hz on the snare hits. There's a lot of energy and drive in that range, so it might be something to consider.

* Some great funky bass work going on in that tune. Bring it out more. :)

* Unfortunately, I did hear some harshness in the higher frequencies - just in spots. RWhite pointed it out, and he was on the mark. Actual distortion per se? Maybe it was the warmth of his analog gear, but somehow Bruce managed to tame it.

* Currently looking at ways I can incorporate analog warmth and punchiness to some of my own mixes. I'm thinking an empirical labs distressor . . . or maybe even some of the less-expensive tube options like a mindprint envoice or one of the 86 series from dbx (786?). I suppose I could try bypassing the preamp on my Joemeek, and using it's compressor. But I don't think that would help out much with some of the upper-range harshness I sometimes experience with this unit.

Still learning,

Chess
 
Gee, I wasn't imagining things? And I was just getting ready to set fire to my monitors... :p
 
"Fire! Fire! Fire!"

"Shut up, Beavis" (SLAP!)

I'd like to defer this to Bruce, so if the Bear himself is listening . . . Were we hearing some of the apparent brittle-ness (is that a word?) of digital recording/processing?

Or do you think it was something else, or are we just hearing things?

Those voices ! ! Oh those voices in my head !
 
Sure enough... there IS distortion there, but I'm afraid it is actually in the original mix - most noticeable in the intro bass and toms get a bit edgy....

It is not "out there" & obvious, but noticeable if you pay close attention....

Again, along with the distortion in the train sample, there is little that can be done to remove distortion present in the final mix. Once it clips, it's clipped!

The only distortion reduction I did was to eliminate the really sharp (and strong) transient spikes that occurred during the train samples. The distortion is still there, but slightly less apparent because there no is the transient peak to define it. (you hear the sound, but without the 'edge')

Chess, I know you said you thought it needed more bass -- I suspect you may have a monitoring issue, 'cos there was really nothing wrong with the bass in that mix - I sweetened by only a db, if I recall correctly (I listed it in my notes to Queue - which are posted on his page)

And taking liberties with the 'verb like that - a producer would have shot you on the spot! If it ain't in the mix, it shouldn't really be there in the mastering (or "mastering", in this case! ;) ), unless the producer or artist okays it or it's a real "rescue" job!

My only other critique was mucking around with the levels on the intro and the guitar solos.... WAY too obvious.... mix elements generally don't jump around like that, there should be a smoothness or consistent sheen to the flow of the tracks....

Again, I enjoyed this little exercise - hopefully people came away with positives from it, rather than the pissing contest it originally seemed to be!

Cheers chess.... :)

Bruce
 
Pro Stools??

Shailat said:


You should know that in Pro Tools which is considered a pro editor....sometimes it shows signs of clipping yet it isnt (with 100% security that it isnt)
Click to expand...

I don't use protools...they don't play along with everyone else...(and I don't have 20K for TDM) :)

I use eMagic Logic Platinum and a Motu 828. The clip I SAW was in Soundforge. The clip I HEARD was in the former through Event monitors...

Same concept tho...I do understand the difference in editor responses...

My ears just aren't as good as Sjoko's...hence the need for "real" speakers...

peace!

zip >>
 
"And taking liberties with the 'verb like that - a producer would have shot you on the spot!"
---------------

I swear you're like the tenth person to mention something about adding reverb! Are you talking about the train guy at the beginning? Yea, I did cheat a little and add some there.

And yea, I think the bass guitar was kinda' MIA, but then again, I am a bassist, so . . . well, you know how that goes. :) Perhaps a little instrumental bias going on? I should be careful of that.

---------------------------------------
My only other critique was mucking around with the levels on the intro and the guitar solos....
---------------------------------------

Yea, getting back to that whole high-end distortion issue on the drums -- It really wasn't obvious, except for the very beginning/intro. I didn't really know what to do about it, so I figured I'd just fade the song in at the beginning so as to de-emphasize it. That I considered a "rescue job."
 
Last edited:
Q

I received the CD's today.

I'll drop them off tomorrow (hopefully). As soon as I have a answer I'll post it.
 
chessrock said:
I swear you're like the tenth person to mention something about adding reverb! Are you talking about the train guy at the beginning? Yea, I did cheat a little and add some there.
Click to expand...
No worries, it's a pet peeve of mine - I notice it in movies all the time too... the typical woman walking down the street in heels, the clicking of the heels on the sidewalk has 'verb on it! What's the problem, you ask? Outside - you don't hear reverb (since there's nothing for the sound reverberate off of, unless you're real close to a building!)

So in that train clip, where the conductor is clearly outside, there's no way 'verb could be where you put it, resulting in a very obvious and unnatural effect.

Bruce
 
bruce,
sounds a little picky to me, here in DC, union station has a big overhanging cover where people board trains....
...just a little reverb in there... ;)

Queue
 
Ok... minor point -- except that the reverb generated by the conductor's voice would not be almost as loud as the sound of the train's arrival, as it was in chess' version! ;)

Bruce
 
wasn't the train departing????

Queue

(you DO know I'm jus f'in with you...):D
 
Outside of the reverb issue, I thought that train got up to speed pretty darn quick, and I haven't seen a reverb unit that responds to Doppler Shift? Can you tell me how far the nearest reflective surface was to the conductor based on the number of milliseconds of delay in the reverb? How many conductors use a mic anyhow, I thought they used this stick thing to wave around, othrewise the band can stay in time?

Peace,
Dennis
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top