true mix specification verses delivery specifications

  • Thread starter Thread starter drtechno
  • Start date Start date
D

drtechno

Active member
Through Observation, I noticed that the audio signal on real analogue format (phonographic record, tape) is different from the CD and MP3 format. Same commercial mix, but more dynamic range on the analogue.


So, I'm going ask the question: what is the proper mix specifications that works everywhere?
 
What do mean by "mix specification"....???

Each mix is different, there is no "specification".
 
miroslav said:
there is no "specification".
Click to expand...

Well now, weren't you the one who brought up the new "Apple Specification"?? I kid, I kid.... :D

When making an "observation" between phonograph and CD, you have to be sure the two sources were from the same master. It's common that albums are mastered differently for each destination media. How did you have a chance to listen to the same song on phonograph, tape, cd, and mp3?? That in itself I find interesting. :)
 
Delivery format and mix specification are two different things to me.
IOW....you can mix your song....then you can churn out a half-dozen different delivery formats.

The Apple thing wasn't about delivery format, but about a loudness algorithm.
Their format is MP3. :)
 
miroslav said:
...you can mix your song....then you can churn out a half-dozen different delivery formats.
Click to expand...

Yup, and somewhere in between those two steps is a mastering process. There are so many blundering holes in the OP's post, it's almost pointless to respond.

If there is any "specification", it's "Don't Make It Sound Bad".
 
There is also the limitations of the media. You can do things in digi and tape for that matter that simply can't be tracked on a phono disk.
 
well I've notice if I get a test press of a mix I mixed first for a CD it turns out like crap. if I disable my compressor on the master in daw, mix down then get it to united for test press, it comes back nice.

I'm just wondering is there a level/loudness/dynamic range specifications that is standardized so that I mix once, and not have to master twice when I switch media. or is that how the way the ball rolls now.


or is it because it has to do with the way mix likes to be for cd vs ep.
 
Last edited:
You should remember that vinyl is a needle in a groove. If you brickwall your mixes, like so common these days, the variations in the signal might be so small that it may not be enough to physically move the mass of the needle.

if I disable my compressor on the master in daw, mix down then get it to united for test press, it comes back nice.
Click to expand...

That there is your specification and what I mentioned in an earlier post. Do what you need to do to get it to sound good.
 
Mastering for vinyl is a completely different process than mastering for cd or tape. Your mix really shouldn't have the compression and limiting on it. that should be done by the mastering engineer. Chances are, you will have a different mastering guy for the vinyl than for cd, since mastering for vinyl involves creating the master with a lathe.
 
Thanks guys. I'll just send united my "CD premaster" for records, since the signal meets the specifications that united sent me when my bad test record came back. Then "cd master" to cd printer. I master my own stuff because for the reason : the budget places never seem to do it correctly. Either go way too overboard with the limiter or they just master eq and no limiting and it not up to current delivery specs. I imagine if I took it to one of the bigger ones: Universal, Capital or Apple or someone like them, I would not have that issue, but I don't have a budget for $500-$750 a track for that.
 
Last edited:
drtechno said:
Thanks guys. I'll just send united my "CD premaster" for records, since the signal meets the specifications that united sent me when my bad test record came back. Then "cd master" to cd printer. I master my own stuff because for the reason : the budget places never seem to do it correctly. Either go way too overboard with the limiter or they just master eq and no limiting and it not up to current delivery specs. I imagine if I took it to one of the bigger ones: Universal, Capital or Apple or someone like them, I would not have that issue, but I don't have a budget for $500-$750 a track for that.
Click to expand...

There are way too many "budget mastering places" out there today that don't know what they're doing. But you don't have to go to universal either. Just make sure it's not someone with a bunch of "Mastering plugins" and programs who thinks the work is going to be magically done for him with these tools. Mastering is a critical step, so don't scrimp on it! You'll get what you pay for.
 
Beck said:
There are way too many "budget mastering places" out there today that don't know what they're doing. But you don't have to go to universal either. Just make sure it's not someone with a bunch of "Mastering plugins" and programs who thinks the work is going to be magically done for him with these tools. Mastering is a critical step, so don't scrimp on it! You'll get what you pay for.
Click to expand...

Complete agreement here ^^.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top