F
fenix
New member
Enlighten me.
sonicpaint
New member
You can!
Who said you can't? Do some research and give it a try. There are too many things that can take place in mastering to cover in a single post.
If you really want to learn how to do it, it's going to take quite some time. Start reading it's a big learning experience.
Good luck,
sonicpaint
Who said you can't? Do some research and give it a try. There are too many things that can take place in mastering to cover in a single post.
If you really want to learn how to do it, it's going to take quite some time. Start reading it's a big learning experience.
Good luck,
sonicpaint
Blue Bear Sound
New member
Re: You can!
Well... yes, you can as a matter of course.... but it won't be very effective.
Bottom-line, ignoring the ME's skills, the 6-figure signal chain and monitoring system, as well the ME's golden ears... you can't master on the same system you mixed on... if you didn't catch it mixdown, how will you catch on mastering, given the same system???
Well... yes, you can as a matter of course.... but it won't be very effective.
Bottom-line, ignoring the ME's skills, the 6-figure signal chain and monitoring system, as well the ME's golden ears... you can't master on the same system you mixed on... if you didn't catch it mixdown, how will you catch on mastering, given the same system???
F
fenix
New member
I understand what mastering is. I would like to know specific reasons why I can't master, or why it is not recommended for me to master the stuff I mix. I think I do a decent job. For some reason, there's this rule that says you can't master your own stuff.
People say this on the following reasons:
"Because you don't have a $10,000 monitoring system"
Yeah. So what? Neither do the people that will be hearing the music.
"Because you don't have the proper equipment to do so"
Yeah, I know. But this is homerecording.com and all the stuff I record is low budget and is never indended to be sent off to sterling sound where some intern can master it for some high price. Even mastering at the homerecording level is better than no mastering at all.
"Because you should have fresh/another set of ears master it"
A good mix shouldn't need any drastic mastering changes made to it. Therefore, another set of ears isn't going to make a difference if only slight changes to things such as EQ are going to be made.
People say this on the following reasons:
"Because you don't have a $10,000 monitoring system"
Yeah. So what? Neither do the people that will be hearing the music.
"Because you don't have the proper equipment to do so"
Yeah, I know. But this is homerecording.com and all the stuff I record is low budget and is never indended to be sent off to sterling sound where some intern can master it for some high price. Even mastering at the homerecording level is better than no mastering at all.
"Because you should have fresh/another set of ears master it"
A good mix shouldn't need any drastic mastering changes made to it. Therefore, another set of ears isn't going to make a difference if only slight changes to things such as EQ are going to be made.
M
mallcore pop
Hard Nipples!!!
fenix said:
That was Ted Jensen, and he only said that as an excuse to leave and get coffee.
Blue Bear Sound
New member
Again -- if you could have heard it on mixdown, you would have adjusted things then!
So you're not going to hear anything more if you try and master your stuff on the same system as you've been working on.
And related to this, you've lost considerable objectivity to the material itself if you're the one that's tracked and mixed it. A fresh set of ears will hear things you cannot.... and - a different monitor chain will also reveal things you couldn't hear on your own system.
So you're not going to hear anything more if you try and master your stuff on the same system as you've been working on.
And related to this, you've lost considerable objectivity to the material itself if you're the one that's tracked and mixed it. A fresh set of ears will hear things you cannot.... and - a different monitor chain will also reveal things you couldn't hear on your own system.
Last edited:
sonicpaint
New member
This could get ugly!
I think that if someone takest he time to learn how to mastering audio, it can be very effective. Though learning all aspects of Masting isn't an easy thing to do, it has, will and is being done all the time.
I say go for it, that's how we learn. With software today people can go a long way if they know how to make the best of the tools they have.
Goodluck,
sonicpaint
I think that if someone takest he time to learn how to mastering audio, it can be very effective. Though learning all aspects of Masting isn't an easy thing to do, it has, will and is being done all the time.
I say go for it, that's how we learn. With software today people can go a long way if they know how to make the best of the tools they have.
Goodluck,
sonicpaint
Middleman
Professional Amateur
Ok, you want the 10 cent answer.
Mix your tracks to stereo.
Put a EQ, Comp and Limiter on the buss in that order. Fiddle around with each until you like it.
Your best effort will no doubt be a waste of time because by the time you play it on a car stereo, home stereo, and computer speakers you will realize that your efforts were not all that transferable.
Mastering guys have very expensive stuff so they can make music transfer across many types of systems.
They also do things like meticulously space tracks to the beat of the previous track, arrange the order of songs and get it ready for duplication.
The best you can do mastering your own tunes is to make a nice recording for MOM, maybe a club, your best friend and your significant other.
Also, things you can't hear on cheaper systems that may be on your tracks i.e. excessive subsonics and hiss, are going to show up in a mastering lab. You will never even know they were there until people call you up telling them how your songs are ripping up their speakers, slightly exaggerated but can occur.
Mix your tracks to stereo.
Put a EQ, Comp and Limiter on the buss in that order. Fiddle around with each until you like it.
Your best effort will no doubt be a waste of time because by the time you play it on a car stereo, home stereo, and computer speakers you will realize that your efforts were not all that transferable.
Mastering guys have very expensive stuff so they can make music transfer across many types of systems.
They also do things like meticulously space tracks to the beat of the previous track, arrange the order of songs and get it ready for duplication.
The best you can do mastering your own tunes is to make a nice recording for MOM, maybe a club, your best friend and your significant other.
Also, things you can't hear on cheaper systems that may be on your tracks i.e. excessive subsonics and hiss, are going to show up in a mastering lab. You will never even know they were there until people call you up telling them how your songs are ripping up their speakers, slightly exaggerated but can occur.
Blue Bear Sound
New member
Exactly....
sonicpaint
New member
lol......here we go.
it's starting.....
it's starting.....
Middleman
Professional Amateur
Re: lol......here we go.
Hey, I used to be on your side. But one day it occurred to me that although there is a lot of consumer gear that does a pretty good job of emulating expensive mics, preamps and high end software, there is nothing that comes close in the consumer market that is similar gear to what the mastering guys use. I mean, read a magazine on this stuff, its very expensive gear.
That said, I think learning about mastering is a worthwhile endeavor for anyone. And, occasionally when I want to show off some of my tracks I will take a pass at it with my under $300 software plugins. I would not however start burning CDs for sale without taking it to the lab.
sonicpaint said:
Hey, I used to be on your side. But one day it occurred to me that although there is a lot of consumer gear that does a pretty good job of emulating expensive mics, preamps and high end software, there is nothing that comes close in the consumer market that is similar gear to what the mastering guys use. I mean, read a magazine on this stuff, its very expensive gear.
That said, I think learning about mastering is a worthwhile endeavor for anyone. And, occasionally when I want to show off some of my tracks I will take a pass at it with my under $300 software plugins. I would not however start burning CDs for sale without taking it to the lab.
F
fenix
New member
Re: Re: lol......here we go.
The waves mastering bundle comes kinda close.
Middleman said:
The waves mastering bundle comes kinda close.
Kramer
Well-known member
Blue Bear Sound said:
Words to live by.
FattMusiek
New member
I would call something that "needs mastering" a mixing mistake.
Fix it when you mix it!
I am one hell of a poet by the way.
Fix it when you mix it!
I am one hell of a poet by the way.
The Seifer
Banned
What about just sweetening the sound a little rather than "fixing" things. Even if the mixdown is great, I think even a little mastering can add punch to the song and make it sound a lot better with the right amount of compression and limiting. Here is a song I recently did:
Original
Master
Even though it's not a pro mastering job, I think the mastered one sounds way better than the original mix.
Original
Master
Even though it's not a pro mastering job, I think the mastered one sounds way better than the original mix.
Blue Bear Sound
New member
Same point -- how do you what needs sweetening on the same system you've mixed on? Why didn't you sweeten it when you mixed??The Seifer said:
sonicpaint
New member
It's not just about the song.
Mastering is not just about the song. To make a collection of songs come together to be on an LP or CD, takes place in the mastering stage. The levels are corrected over-all, songs sequenced and spacing between songs are decided along with many other things.
I have to agree that things should be "fixed" in the mix not the mastering. So make sure everything you hope to achieve with your songs have been, before leaving the mixing stage.
Middleman, you used to be on my side? Everyone has their own way of looking at things. We might agree on somethings and not on others. No one is on anyones side, (at least not me) we just might share the same views once in a while. As far as me reading about this stuff, I have. Keep in mind that the skill levels and experience of the Mastering Engineer comes first, it's not just about the gear. Take a deep breath dude, no one is saying your wrong.
Was the intent of the question how he can go about learning to do Mastering? If so, we should try and make some suggestions toward that.
later,
sonicpaint
Mastering is not just about the song. To make a collection of songs come together to be on an LP or CD, takes place in the mastering stage. The levels are corrected over-all, songs sequenced and spacing between songs are decided along with many other things.
I have to agree that things should be "fixed" in the mix not the mastering. So make sure everything you hope to achieve with your songs have been, before leaving the mixing stage.
Middleman, you used to be on my side? Everyone has their own way of looking at things. We might agree on somethings and not on others. No one is on anyones side, (at least not me) we just might share the same views once in a while. As far as me reading about this stuff, I have. Keep in mind that the skill levels and experience of the Mastering Engineer comes first, it's not just about the gear. Take a deep breath dude, no one is saying your wrong.
Was the intent of the question how he can go about learning to do Mastering? If so, we should try and make some suggestions toward that.
later,
sonicpaint
F
fenix
New member
Blue Bear Sound said:
Maybe part of sweetening is to raise the RMS of the mix. To do that, either insert a compressor on the main bus, or mastering.
Blue Bear Sound
New member
Re: It's not just about the song.
I already pointed him towards Bob Katz' book, which right now is quite likely the bible of the mastering process.sonicpaint said:
Last edited: