Why are you getting your album "mastered"?

Tech talk about audio recording and live stage production.
---Hosted by Andrew MacRae & Malcolm Boyce

Why are you getting your album "mastered"?

Postby Malcolm Boyce » Sat Jun 23, 2012 3:53 pm

Seriously... You need to be able to answer that question before you go any further, and most importantly before you pay someone to do it for you.

What are you looking for in a "mastering" job?

Well?
"Once again, it is NEVER the gear that makes a good record.
It just fills Forum pages..." --compasspnt

middleaudio.com
User avatar
Malcolm Boyce
Your Humble Host
 
Posts: 3681
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2006 1:07 am
Location: Saint John, NB

Re: Why are you getting your album "mastered"?

Postby dylanger » Sat Jun 23, 2012 4:20 pm

From what I understand mastering prepares the product for its final destination. It makes sure that all songs are at the same volume, proper amount of time in between each song ect. I've read a few articles on this a while back but forget most of the stuff that was said. Taking away compression seems to ring a bell.

I have a feeling like your going to completely disagree with me on this one but here it goes....

Mastering is also when my product is made as loud as other products on the market. Whoever ends up buying my album will probably not be listening to it the whole way through but most likely in a playlist. So if my song is in a playlist that includes David Myles, Glen Hansard, John Mayer, and Colin James, and I'm not worried about the volume of the track, guess who's song is going to get skipped over if its an average Joe listener.

Keep in mind that I'm not an audio guy, I can track a little bit but my place in this world is to write tunes and do my best to get as many people to listen to it.
dylanger
Silver Member
 
Posts: 295
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 10:16 pm

Re: Why are you getting your album "mastered"?

Postby Malcolm Boyce » Sun Jun 24, 2012 5:15 pm

Hey Dylan. You are someone who is in the category of artist that I hope will put a lot of thought into this kind of thing before you spend money on finishing a project. I see too many people putting out material and carelessly choosing a path which can greatly affect the sonic outcome of your project, and thereby it's longevity IMO.

dylanger wrote:From what I understand mastering prepares the product for its final destination. It makes sure that all songs are at the same volume, proper amount of time in between each song ect. I've read a few articles on this a while back but forget most of the stuff that was said. Taking away compression seems to ring a bell. ...

... Whoever ends up buying my album will probably not be listening to it the whole way through but most likely in a playlist. So if my song is in a playlist that includes David Myles, Glen Hansard, John Mayer, and Colin James, and I'm not worried about the volume of the track, guess who's song is going to get skipped over if its an average Joe listener.
I'm just reading what you said about your current impressions of "mastering" are. You only list a few things, and I just want to talk about them.

You bring up the fact that you expect most of your intended audience to be listening not to an album, but cuts in a "playlist", with two of the other few things you mention being done in mastering being spaces between songs, and consistent levels between songs. From what I read that leaves the only other process on your list as "loud". Do you see where some of that seems contradictory to me?

Once upon a time, someone "mastered" an album because they had to. The listening formats made it a necessary part of the process. Now, with digital being the recording and delivery format, it has become a process that is entirely elective, and IMO one that not enough people put the right amount of investigation and thought into. Producers/engineers with experience will have a solid understanding of what they expect from album mastering and/or a finished product. Unfortunately, this is a decision that is being made by artists and/or people funding projects, that don't really understand what to expect from a "master", and it's become a common occurrence that albums are being messed up with totally inappropriate "mastering" jobs.

I have read many articles with artists that have, on initial listening, been happy with masters, approved them and released them, only to discover too late that they fell for being part of the distortion trend in newer music. Substantial acts, not just "indie" artists, are guilty of chasing the trend, instead of making records that are "good", and that they will be happy with for a long time. This of course isn't just a problem in mastering, but with trends in recording period, but this is a topic on mastering...

Those of us that are "anti-loud" aren't ignorant of what the market and our clients want and need. I work on projects that are meant to be "commercial" 'or popular records. I know that they will need to be listenable in a "playlist" setting. I personally have never had a project that I (or a client) have suggested be sent back to be revised to make it "louder". I have also never made part of my instructions or intent to a mastering facility be about "loud" other than to say I'm not interested in "loud"... but fidelity. This is a process that has proven successful for me 100% of the time with respect to "level" of a project when I've been given the chance to have proper input.

I bring this up to suggest that many projects that are coming out crushed and distorted are where one of the top 2, if not the first direction for mastering is "loud".... and then if you can, make it sound "good".

All that being said, a great mastering job can make "loud" sound pretty great, if the style and recording allows. That is also obvious when compared to a lot of what we're hearing these days with the trend of "level" over "good".

I know people want to focus effort on where the "money" may be in a release, but I would hope that you would, if you could, want to release an album that not only appeals to the masses, as well as people like me who actually care about what a track sounds like.

I know that's how I roll. How 'bout you?
"Once again, it is NEVER the gear that makes a good record.
It just fills Forum pages..." --compasspnt

middleaudio.com
User avatar
Malcolm Boyce
Your Humble Host
 
Posts: 3681
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2006 1:07 am
Location: Saint John, NB

Re: Why are you getting your album "mastered"?

Postby Alain Benoit » Sun Jun 24, 2012 6:02 pm

Malcolm Boyce wrote:
I bring this up to suggest that many projects that are coming out crushed and distorted are where one of the top 2, if not the first direction for mastering is "loud".... and then if you can, make it sound "good".



My first experience with this was Godsmack's The Oracle.
To the point that I started checking my monitoring chain immediately for proper gain structure, alas she was piping hot right outta the deck.

A.
www.fluidaudiogroup.com

"No one has time to do it right, but we all seem to have time to do it twice."
User avatar
Alain Benoit
Self Biased Resistor
 
Posts: 1321
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 12:21 pm
Location: Canada

Re: Why are you getting your album "mastered"?

Postby macrae11 » Mon Jun 25, 2012 4:34 pm

Malcolm Boyce wrote:Once upon a time, someone "mastered" an album because they had to. The listening formats made it a necessary part of the process. Now, with digital being the recording and delivery format, it has become a process that is entirely elective, and IMO one that not enough people put the right amount of investigation and thought into. Producers/engineers with experience will have a solid understanding of what they expect from album mastering and/or a finished product. Unfortunately, this is a decision that is being made by artists and/or people funding projects, that don't really understand what to expect from a "master", and it's become a common occurrence that albums are being messed up with totally inappropriate "mastering" jobs.


Been meaning to chime in on this for a while. The part I've underlined IMO is completely untrue. If you're making physical copies mastering is an absolute necessity. I've had enough "masters" sent back from the plant by "engineer" who thought it was an optional process to know. Now whether the mixer in question has the capabilities to master the project is another story. Many mixers have the capabilities to "master" something for online distribution because there's really not too much to do technically. Not saying they can't screw it up where it could have been done better by someone who's been mastering for a long time, but that goes for any stage of the game. Having things properly mastered to the Red Book spec is critical to getting consistently good results.

As to Dylan's goals they all seem normal as to what's expected by today's clients. The big thing to keep in mind is that loudness, or at least good loudness, comes from the mix, not the master. Of course you can blast things in the mastering phase but it will have far worse results than getting a good hot mix and then just getting the last 5% from the master. And by hot mix, I don't mean already limited and compressed to death and peaking at 0dBFS. I mean well balanced, aggressive mix without a lopsided frequency spectrum. ie big buildups in the lows or low mids, or excessively bright.
User avatar
macrae11
Andrew MacRae
 
Posts: 2128
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2006 5:12 pm
Location: Oromocto

Re: Why are you getting your album "mastered"?

Postby sean.boyer » Mon Jun 25, 2012 4:37 pm

dylanger wrote:... Taking away compression seems to ring a bell.


Sorry, but this might be the best thing I've ever read! I can imagine sitting in Lacquer Channel with Noah saying "now, Noah, can you remove all this compression in my mix?" Bwahahahahahahaha!

(Sorry, not making fun of anyone or anything, but the idea of that sentence is making my stomach hurt from laughter. I can just imagine the Compression-B-Gone protools plugin being set to 11)
sean.boyer
Active Member
 
Posts: 61
Joined: Sat May 21, 2011 2:15 pm
Location: Saint John

Re: Why are you getting your album "mastered"?

Postby macrae11 » Mon Jun 25, 2012 4:46 pm

I was going to comment on that too. If there's too much compression it should definitely be taken out in the mix. However that being said, a carefully tweaked upward expander can bring some of the dynamics and life back into an overcompressed recording. Of course once it's been pancaked it's too late, but there are some things you can do to bring it back from the brink.
User avatar
macrae11
Andrew MacRae
 
Posts: 2128
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2006 5:12 pm
Location: Oromocto

Re: Why are you getting your album "mastered"?

Postby Malcolm Boyce » Mon Jun 25, 2012 5:11 pm

macrae11 wrote:
Malcolm Boyce wrote:Now, with digital being the recording and delivery format, it has become a process that is entirely elective, and IMO one that not enough people put the right amount of investigation and thought into.


Been meaning to chime in on this for a while. The part I've underlined IMO is completely untrue. If you're making physical copies mastering is an absolute necessity.
I agree with you, but because of the technology, pretty much anyone can send a product to be replicated without it being what you or I would consider, "properly" mastered.
"Once again, it is NEVER the gear that makes a good record.
It just fills Forum pages..." --compasspnt

middleaudio.com
User avatar
Malcolm Boyce
Your Humble Host
 
Posts: 3681
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2006 1:07 am
Location: Saint John, NB

Re: Why are you getting your album "mastered"?

Postby macrae11 » Mon Jun 25, 2012 7:24 pm

Absolutely they can. It just seemed like from your post that that was a valid option, which is what I disagreed with. Can, especially in this case, does not mean should because even if you do have software that's designed for premastering, you still have to know how to use I properly to get consistent masters.
User avatar
macrae11
Andrew MacRae
 
Posts: 2128
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2006 5:12 pm
Location: Oromocto

Re: Why are you getting your album "mastered"?

Postby Malcolm Boyce » Mon Jun 25, 2012 9:40 pm

macrae11 wrote:The big thing to keep in mind is that loudness, or at least good loudness, comes from the mix, not the master. Of course you can blast things in the mastering phase but it will have far worse results than getting a good hot mix and then just getting the last 5% from the master. And by hot mix, I don't mean already limited and compressed to death and peaking at 0dBFS. I mean well balanced, aggressive mix without a lopsided frequency spectrum. ie big buildups in the lows or low mids, or excessively bright.
You absolutely have to have great mixes for them to translate to be a great master. As you said, good balances and tailored to hold up under some minor peak limiting, and you can certainly have a decently "loud" end result without a lot of heavy clipping or distortion going on.
"Once again, it is NEVER the gear that makes a good record.
It just fills Forum pages..." --compasspnt

middleaudio.com
User avatar
Malcolm Boyce
Your Humble Host
 
Posts: 3681
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2006 1:07 am
Location: Saint John, NB

Re: Why are you getting your album "mastered"?

Postby Malcolm Boyce » Wed Jun 27, 2012 4:05 pm

I was hoping to hear back from Dylan about his further thoughts on the importance of mastering. While we carry on, maybe a few of us can weigh in on our experiences.

I suggest that every commercial release that I have anything to do with be mastered at a proper facility, by a person with experience and great instincts. I appreciate what having someone like that evaluate the mixes, and do what they can to get them to translate, does to the end result. I hear most people talking about rudimentary processes like sequencing and transitions between the tracks, but anyone with a copy of CD Architect or a similar program, and a decent understanding of the procedure can do that. I'm not saying that isn't something that needs to be done, just that if it was what was most important, I'd be doing it myself.

I know that every time I have heard something that I've mixed after it being properly mastered, the reaction I have is that it sounds like what I did, only "finished". To me it's the difference between sounding like an "album", or for lack of a better way of putting it... a demo.

Things that I have mixed and had ruined by "mastering" have been tweaked so heavily that they don't even sound the same as what I mixed. Usually way too bright, which I guess is easy to do, and at first I bet sounds "better". Balances are messed up by over limiting... Stuff like ambiances being way too loud all of a sudden. Any subtle things that you take great care in mixing come back sounding nothing like what was intended.

Don't underestimate the environment that proper mastering facilities have for listening. We're talking about monitoring chains that cost as much or better than many of our small studios' total investment. I have attended mastering and heard things in mixes that I never heard the same way after hundreds and thousands of listens on many different systems. That's what you're paying for... Them to not miss something you may have.

I subscribe to the opposite theory of many. Lots of project studio recordists believe that because they have the power to record albums in their home, they also have the ability to skip the step that most who record with a budget in big rooms don't skip, which is having a proper master made. I believe that is even more important to have mixes evaluated and tweaked because of the nature of mixing in less than ideal environments, on usually less than ideal equipment. That final step can, and in my experience does, make a huge difference in what goes out to the listening public when you release your album.

I'm not saying people can't do a decent job of finishing a project on their own, I'm just saying I believe they would be more satisfied if it were done by someone else. Many people "mastering" albums for themselves have never seen/heard someone else master a project, or even heard a project they worked on come back from someone else mastering it! This is also in line with people "producing" albums without having been in a session with someone else producing... to even know or understand what that involves.

One technical thing that is often overlooked is that proper mastering studios will be able to produce a proper disc that is prepared and error checked to avoid problems with replication. All very important stuff.

I've seen small budget projects spend more money on photos than on mastering. I understand it's a form over function world, but I don't have to like it.
"Once again, it is NEVER the gear that makes a good record.
It just fills Forum pages..." --compasspnt

middleaudio.com
User avatar
Malcolm Boyce
Your Humble Host
 
Posts: 3681
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2006 1:07 am
Location: Saint John, NB

Re: Why are you getting your album "mastered"?

Postby Mathieu Benoit » Wed Jun 27, 2012 4:30 pm

It's very much contextual. I always recommend proper mastering whenever possible. If I'm producing an album, I make sure the client understands that it's not up for debate. If I'm not producing the album, then I will try convince the artist to do it right, but sometimes between their small budgets and the lack of experience they miss that step altogether.

If I'm doing a demo however, I don't mind doing some limiting of the 2 bus. But I'm clear with the client that I'm not "mastering" just making their mix louder to compete with everything else that has been properly mastered.

It's hard to convince some people about things though. Some clients are barely aware of differences between a good mix and a shitty mix, let alone the differences between good and shitty mastering jobs. It's hard sometimes to convince them that there's a difference and that difference is worth ~$800.
"Volume automation takes time. You don't got that kinda time. You could be getting naked with somebody somewhere." -Slipperman

Mathieu Benoit - Fluid Productions
www.fluidaudiogroup.com
www.facebook.com/FluidAudioGroup
User avatar
Mathieu Benoit
Drumwaiter
 
Posts: 4707
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 7:55 pm
Location: Saint John, New Brunswick

Re: Why are you getting your album "mastered"?

Postby dylanger » Wed Jun 27, 2012 5:04 pm

I'm working on it, hopefully have something tonight
dylanger
Silver Member
 
Posts: 295
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 10:16 pm

Re: Why are you getting your album "mastered"?

Postby macrae11 » Wed Jun 27, 2012 8:29 pm

Personally I was pressured into starting mastering, one because my clients needed it and didn't have the budget for it, and two my boss wanted to be able to offer it. So I started out very tentative but willing to learn. One of the first masters I made completely botched at the plant. Technically it was the plants fault but it was something I could have prevented, and now incorporate into my workflow. Luckily(or not) it was my bosses wife's CD so no angry clients.

After primarily mastering for our own clients I started getting requests to master other peoples stuff which I greatly prefer. I still like to have projects that I mix, mastered by J. when the budget allows. I don't have what I consider a mastering grade listening environment, but it works quite well. I'd love to have a set of B&W's in a large room, but I'm using Dynaudio's in a well treated, small-medium room with good results.

One thing I've discovered both from mastering other peoples stuff, and having my own stuff mastered is that the best case scenario is for the mastering engineer to do nothing. Well nothing as far as the sound is concerned anyways. Set the overall volume sure, but other than that it's best if it's just sequencing and formatting. Of course the quality control that Malcolm is talking about is still important, but ideally they shouldn't have to do anything, and shouldn't be afraid to not do anything. To often people feel the need to make themselves useful and screw up something good by doing stuff. With most of the clients that I master I typically have a pretty good relationship so I'll often get them to come in ahead of time with their mixes to go over them in my room. We'll talk about issues that we're hearing and then they'll typically go back and fix the issues in the mix, which is the best place to do it anyways. Usually there's still a bit for me to do, but if they're competent and the mixes were close the first time I often only have to apply a little limiting and do the PQ editing. It takes the same amount of time as if I did all the work, but typically comes out with a better product.

As far as the technical aspect there are other things like CD-TEXT, and ISRC codes which even if you have the proper software can be screwed up. Mistakes can be as little as not having your tracks identified properly or as big as causing a failed master. And while these things aren't necessary per se, not having ISRC codes in this day and age can be a detriment to digital distribution. Unfortunately ISRC's aren't utilized as fully as they should be, but it is getting better.
User avatar
macrae11
Andrew MacRae
 
Posts: 2128
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2006 5:12 pm
Location: Oromocto

Re: Why are you getting your album "mastered"?

Postby Mathieu Benoit » Thu Jun 28, 2012 9:31 am

macrae11 wrote:After primarily mastering for our own clients I started getting requests to master other peoples stuff which I greatly prefer. I still like to have projects that I mix, mastered by J. when the budget allows. I don't have what I consider a mastering grade listening environment, but it works quite well. I'd love to have a set of B&W's in a large room, but I'm using Dynaudio's in a well treated, small-medium room with good results.


I'm having something mastered by you right now, and I feel perfectly comfortable letting you do it. The client's budget was blown to smitherines months ago, so this was a cost effective way to give them something better than me just slapping a limiter on it and walking away. The thing I like the most about it is that it's a final check that is done by you in an environment you are comfortable with. Between that and knowing that you are very competent with the technical aspect of it, I'm totally comfortable with this arrangement for this particular project.

I have another project that I'm producing by myself that is definitely going to J. simply because the budget is there, and I've been so meticulous about every step along the way that it would be foolish to start cutting corners now. I'm also planning on going down for the session, and I might entertain offers if anyone is interested in coming down with me. ;-)
"Volume automation takes time. You don't got that kinda time. You could be getting naked with somebody somewhere." -Slipperman

Mathieu Benoit - Fluid Productions
www.fluidaudiogroup.com
www.facebook.com/FluidAudioGroup
User avatar
Mathieu Benoit
Drumwaiter
 
Posts: 4707
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 7:55 pm
Location: Saint John, New Brunswick

Re: Why are you getting your album "mastered"?

Postby macrae11 » Thu Jun 28, 2012 9:59 am

Mathieu Benoit wrote:
macrae11 wrote:After primarily mastering for our own clients I started getting requests to master other peoples stuff which I greatly prefer. I still like to have projects that I mix, mastered by J. when the budget allows. I don't have what I consider a mastering grade listening environment, but it works quite well. I'd love to have a set of B&W's in a large room, but I'm using Dynaudio's in a well treated, small-medium room with good results.


I'm having something mastered by you right now, and I feel perfectly comfortable letting you do it. The client's budget was blown to smitherines months ago, so this was a cost effective way to give them something better than me just slapping a limiter on it and walking away. The thing I like the most about it is that it's a final check that is done by you in an environment you are comfortable with. Between that and knowing that you are very competent with the technical aspect of it, I'm totally comfortable with this arrangement for this particular project.

I have another project that I'm producing by myself that is definitely going to J. simply because the budget is there, and I've been so meticulous about every step along the way that it would be foolish to start cutting corners now. I'm also planning on going down for the session, and I might entertain offers if anyone is interested in coming down with me. ;-)


Depending on the timing I'd be interested in that, just because I've never done an attended session with J.
User avatar
macrae11
Andrew MacRae
 
Posts: 2128
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2006 5:12 pm
Location: Oromocto

Re: Why are you getting your album "mastered"?

Postby Mathieu Benoit » Thu Jun 28, 2012 10:03 am

macrae11 wrote:Depending on the timing I'd be interested in that, just because I've never done an attended session with J.


Awesome, that would be fun. I heard you should pack a lunch as it's out in the middle of nowhere.
"Volume automation takes time. You don't got that kinda time. You could be getting naked with somebody somewhere." -Slipperman

Mathieu Benoit - Fluid Productions
www.fluidaudiogroup.com
www.facebook.com/FluidAudioGroup
User avatar
Mathieu Benoit
Drumwaiter
 
Posts: 4707
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 7:55 pm
Location: Saint John, New Brunswick

Re: Why are you getting your album "mastered"?

Postby Malcolm Boyce » Thu Jun 28, 2012 11:52 am

Yeah... I'm definitely talking about stuff that falls into the category of "for sale" after it's done. I certainly don't have a problem giving demos or other non commercial works some treatment after mixing before going out into the wild outdoors.

Someone could open a soup and sandwich shop across from Archive Mastering... make a nice business. :-D
"Once again, it is NEVER the gear that makes a good record.
It just fills Forum pages..." --compasspnt

middleaudio.com
User avatar
Malcolm Boyce
Your Humble Host
 
Posts: 3681
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2006 1:07 am
Location: Saint John, NB

Re: Why are you getting your album "mastered"?

Postby sean.boyer » Thu Jun 28, 2012 5:49 pm

It's not that bad... Coffee and fast food are only about 10 minutes away. Mind you, Tim Hortons coffee and Wendy's sandwiches aren't my personal idea of reasonable accommodations, but they will prevent you from starving/running out of caffeine. Plus, when I was down there in April, J kept a fresh pot of coffee on for the whole day.
sean.boyer
Active Member
 
Posts: 61
Joined: Sat May 21, 2011 2:15 pm
Location: Saint John

Re: Why are you getting your album "mastered"?

Postby macrae11 » Thu Jun 28, 2012 7:36 pm

Yeah that's not much worse than us, although there is a gas station that serves food 3 minutes up the road. We also keep the caffeine flowing very freely.
User avatar
macrae11
Andrew MacRae
 
Posts: 2128
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2006 5:12 pm
Location: Oromocto

Re: Why are you getting your album "mastered"?

Postby Nick H. » Fri Jun 29, 2012 9:53 am

macrae11 wrote:After primarily mastering for our own clients I started getting requests to master other peoples stuff which I greatly prefer. I still like to have projects that I mix, mastered by J. when the budget allows. I don't have what I consider a mastering grade listening environment, but it works quite well. I'd love to have a set of B&W's in a large room, but I'm using Dynaudio's in a well treated, small-medium room with good results.


How subtle is the difference? I'll be looking to have something mastered within the next few months, and I doubt the budget will allow for Archive Mastering. And, are the differences in quality of a mastering job somewhat dependent on the project?
User avatar
Nick H.
Bronze Member
 
Posts: 142
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 2:42 pm

Re: Why are you getting your album "mastered"?

Postby Malcolm Boyce » Fri Jun 29, 2012 12:17 pm

Nick H. wrote:How subtle is the difference? I'll be looking to have something mastered within the next few months, and I doubt the budget will allow for Archive Mastering. And, are the differences in quality of a mastering job somewhat dependent on the project?
IMO, the "subtlety" in a different job would be dependent on how much gets tweaked in the process. If an album gets some heavy lifting done at the mastering stage, the differences from place to place would be much larger than if light EQ etc. is done and little else.

This is assuming reasonably equal talent doing the work.
"Once again, it is NEVER the gear that makes a good record.
It just fills Forum pages..." --compasspnt

middleaudio.com
User avatar
Malcolm Boyce
Your Humble Host
 
Posts: 3681
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2006 1:07 am
Location: Saint John, NB

Re: Why are you getting your album "mastered"?

Postby macrae11 » Fri Jun 29, 2012 10:10 pm

Pretty much what Malcolm said. The better the mix, the more subtle the mastering will be which certainly one thing I've strived for with my mixes. The closer I can get my mixes to sound like a finished product the better. One of the big things for me that changed that was mixing through a compressor on the 2 bus. I would sometimes slap a compressor on at the end or my mix, but it was rarely as useful and almost never as satisfying. By mixing through the compressor it shapes your mix as you go which creates a much more cohesive finished product. It also helps point out things that you might not find until mastering.

One of the first projects I did with J. was the Steve Zaat album which I had to do some fairly heavy mix tweaks to after hearing the first master come back. Even mild compression on the 2 bus can really bring out details that weren't obvious before, so adding that process into the mix phase not only makes a tighter mix but makes for less surprises when you get the master back.

Is that even what you were asking?
User avatar
macrae11
Andrew MacRae
 
Posts: 2128
Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2006 5:12 pm
Location: Oromocto

Re: Why are you getting your album "mastered"?

Postby Scott DeVarenne » Fri Jun 29, 2012 10:57 pm

I don't do much of the mixing, but I will definitely start smacking 'er down on the 2 bus, as I go.
User avatar
Scott DeVarenne
mr distant
 
Posts: 557
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2006 12:03 pm
Location: SJ/NB/CA

Re: Why are you getting your album "mastered"?

Postby Malcolm Boyce » Sat Jun 30, 2012 5:26 pm

Scott DeVarenne wrote:I don't do much of the mixing, but I will definitely start smacking 'er down on the 2 bus, as I go.

8-)
"Once again, it is NEVER the gear that makes a good record.
It just fills Forum pages..." --compasspnt

middleaudio.com
User avatar
Malcolm Boyce
Your Humble Host
 
Posts: 3681
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2006 1:07 am
Location: Saint John, NB

Next

Return to Sounds Good...

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 28 guests

cron