My Thoughts On Mastering

[dacalion]

Should I Master my own work?
Most Common Answer - No!
My Answer - Compare it to riding a bike. Some people can, some people can't. If you can ride a bike, the more you ride it, the better you get at riding it. If you can't ride a bike, then stop trying to. Riding a bike is for some and for others it's just not. I feel the same way about Mastering. If you understand it then go for it, if not, then stop! It's that simple. Learn what Mastering is... Learn it's purpose. Learn every factor involved in it and give it a try.

What Is Proper Mastering?
Most Common Answer - The way John Doe does it!
My Answer - I've researched this until I was blue and have yet to NOT find conflicting answers. I did find solid guidelines to "Proper Mastering" but there is no bible on it, anywhere! Why? Because Mastering is a evolutionary process, it's changed and constantly continues to change. Masters don't do what they did in the early days of recording, so in my opinion, instead of calling it "Proper Mastering" it should be called "Modern Mastering" on something similar. Whats even more confusing is when everything was analog, it wasn't good enough so we went digital. Now the trend is digital analog! Basically, we want 0's and 1's to do what resistors and capacitors did back in the day...lol.

"Why Are Headphones So Wrong?"
Most Common Answer - Because you're eliminating what your music will sound like in real space!
My Answer - Very Simple...Whats the number 1 form of listening to music these days? Nuff said! LOL

** Now for the disclaimer =) - I'm not suggesting anything, do what you do and have fun doing it. That includes worring about these issues. Just don't hold back on researching and testing. I feel like that's just as important as making a beat in "our" stage of the game. Once you advance, these questions and my answers will be irrelevant. That's a no-brainer! As a Producer, you will have others solving these problems for you. Just remember...if it's hot, it's hot! It doesn't matter how it got hot and if you bust your arse every time you get on a bike, STOP!

Peace Kings,
dac =)

 

[wrightboy]

good post. the headphone thing was dead on.

 

[Relic]

Word.

 

[thedreampolice]

but there is no bible on it, anywhere!

There is, and this is it.

[ame="http://www.amazon.com/Mastering-Audio-Second-Edition-Science/dp/0240808371/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1336157069&sr=8-1"]Amazon.com: Mastering Audio, Second Edition: The Art and the Science (9780240808376): Bob Katz: Books[/ame]

 

[Formant024]

If your mixes arent there, stop thinking about mastering!

You have to make a distinction when talking about "digital". There's digital transport, digital media and digital processing.

The transport part is an obvious improvement over analog, digital retains a signal as is while analog is far subjective to conditions that degrades the signal when the distance increases. Up till 96kHz things are currently alrighty, anything over 96kHz will need a very good (expensive) clock.

Digital media... obviously cleaner than tape, not to mention the hurdle when working with tape compared to working on a DAW. Whether its better really depends on the project as its common these days to use tape (or emulation like anamod ats-1) for saturation. Back then it was unavoidable till ADAT came around and these days it can be "an ingredient".

Digital processing in mastering completly depends on the utility. Things like limiting are better off these days in the digital realm but EQ for specific jobs are still best off in the analog realm.
Ive said this before but most high end mastering hardware mostly cater to the mid/high frequencies better than plugins. Mostly this will account for jobs not! relating to hiphop/electronica though it of course would benefit (i consider it a marginal benefit).
Also IR plugins are getting better, im not so much impressed by dynamic IR's but ive heard some really good EQ IR's which makes those expensive EQ's less neccesary (for hiphop/electronica)

So digital processing excells in handling low end dynamics pretty well which means that hiphop/electronica is good to master ITB... IF! your room is proper and your monitoring mastergrade, if not than see my first sentence of this post.
.
If those conditions are met, than its even alright to use a headphone (for reference). Its true that headphones alone arent the best to master on but knowing your gear is more important. Knowing how your references translate is key (nothing is perfect anyway).


My take on mastering subjects on ILL;

If someone brings up a subject related to diy-mastering, than anyone should ask the TS first whether he has the proper room and monitors. Again! if those conditions arent met, stop the ffin thinktrain since everything after that is basicaly a big pile of BS with no proper reference to start with. There is no substitute for the lack thereof and it will make the material worse. I can only see mastering possible without those conditions if you have reference based on experience which implies you're a mastering engineer already.

 

[Formant024]

There is, and this is it.

Amazon.com: Mastering Audio, Second Edition: The Art and the Science (9780240808376): Bob Katz: Books

This! is a no brainer.

 

[dacalion]

Even Bob quotes and confirms that there is no "magic silver bullet"... either he's referring to werewolves or saying that nothing is set in stone. He also talks about the evolution of mastering...anyway, if thats your bible sobeit!

 

[Fade]

Good points here.

When making "Camp Blood", I simply used my ears. I'm by no means a mixing and mastering guru but I just went by feel. I mixed first in my headphones because I make all my beats on my headphones, then I started mixing through my Mackie's. For mastering, I used Ozone and tweaked a bit but again, I went by feel. I then made sure everything sounded great on the Mackie's then I checked again in the headphones and I was good to go.

My final mix might not be amazing but I don't care, I was just trying to obtain the best mix that I thought was needed for that particular project.

If I want to get a pro sound then I'll go to the pros, simple.

But keep the tips coming, this will help a bunch!

 

[wrightboy]

i agree with it being all about feel. sometimes you can mix "the life" out of a song.

 

[Formant024]

Also, the best tip i can give is to know the limitations.
There might be infinite techniques but there are lesser things you should not do. Understanding these limitations grants you to work by ears with succes though it can be lifetime study hehe

In my experience, the hardest part about mastering utilities is convincing yourself that the utility is usefull instead of assuming its the best thing on the planet...whether that be techniques or tools, you have to do a lot of research yourself. From this you realise that there are indeed no silver bullets or the best utility for mastering but that some tools are right for some jobs and the lesser you need to use, the better.

Like ITB mastering, if you need more than 4 plugins on the master then you need to look back into your mix.

Fade; I havent checked it at all but ill throw my 2 cents on it when i do.

 

[2GooD Productions]

i agree with it being all about feel. sometimes you can mix "the life" out of a song.

Thats a very good point, I have many times overmixed something till its a lot worse than what I started with. Im a lot more experienced now but sometimes I still scrap complete mixes and start again from the beginning.
The "take a break and listen another day" tip is so valuable, I have been bugging to a mix one day only to find it sounds like shit the next day.
I think formant said it, but knowing the response of your monitors is so very important. Play commercial CD's and study how they sound, from bass all the way to hi hats to just see how the frequencies are translated by the monitors.
When you have a good idea of what your monitors are capable of, you can then have a good basis for what the speakers can do, for example not trying to squeeze more bass than they are capable of.
I say this because I have just started using new monitors, and I am still learning the capabilities of them, Im finding my mixes on the new monitors are far too bassy when I play the tracks on other monitors.
The monitors Im using now are Focal CMS65's, I find them lacking in the low end, but the mixing environment is terrible. A small square box with no sound treatment, its a fucking nightmare.
Trying to explain to the boss that a good mix cannot be acheived under those conditions is hard work. All I get from him is "more bass". The standing waves are a cunt too. Depending where you put your head the bass can be really loud or nonexistent.
I really need to add a sub to the setup tho. That might at least keep him quiet demanding more bass.

 

[2GooD Productions]

From this you realise that there are indeed no silver bullets or the best utility for mastering but that some tools are right for some jobs and the lesser you need to use, the better.

Yes I agree, every plugin you add technically deteriorates the sound quality, so dont add anything that isnt necessary, nor anything that doesnt counteract the degradation created by the plugin itself.

Personally my basic chain is...

EQ > Compression(Usually multiband) > Limiter

All other plugs are used during the mixing stage
X-Noise, X-Click, Delays, Stereo Widening/Narrowing, compression, distortion & more eq's. Plus anything else I might find useful.

 

[thedreampolice]

Even Bob quotes and confirms that there is no "magic silver bullet"... either he's referring to werewolves or saying that nothing is set in stone. He also talks about the evolution of mastering...anyway, if thats your bible sobeit!

That's because every song is different. But there is a standard way to approach things, even if technology changes.

 

[2GooD Productions]

What Is Proper Mastering?
Most Common Answer - The way John Doe does it!
My Answer - I've researched this until I was blue and have yet to NOT find conflicting answers. I did find solid guidelines to "Proper Mastering" but there is no bible on it, anywhere! Why? Because Mastering is a evolutionary process, it's changed and constantly continues to change. Masters don't do what they did in the early days of recording, so in my opinion, instead of calling it "Proper Mastering" it should be called "Modern Mastering" on something similar. Whats even more confusing is when everything was analog, it wasn't good enough so we went digital. Now the trend is digital analog! Basically, we want 0's and 1's to do what resistors and capacitors did back in the day...lol.

In answer to that question I would say this....

Mastering was created as a means to get music onto vinyl, which had its limitations, I wont go into the details of the limitations as there are a few, but the mastering engineers job was to compensate for the limitations of vinyl and have the vinyl sound as close to the original music as possible. The mastering engineer was born.

In modern times the role of the mastering engineer is to get the total sound level right(RMS and peak levels as high as possible without being perceptably distorted) and to make a master that translates well across various formats, ...ie radios, headphones, car, digital download, cd, hifi systems.

If the music is high volume(hence the highly compressed music of today) and translates well across all different formats, then a good master has been achieved.

Of course its not just that simple, each engineer has his own ears and own creative way of adding polish to a track, which makes some engineers very highly sought after.

 

[Formant024]

In answer to that question I would say this....

Mastering was created as a means to get music onto vinyl, which had its limitations, I wont go into the details of the limitations as there are a few, but the mastering engineers job was to compensate for the limitations of vinyl and have the vinyl sound as close to the original music as possible. The mastering engineer was born.

In modern times the role of the mastering engineer is to get the total sound level right(RMS and peak levels as high as possible without being perceptably distorted) and to make a master that translates well across various formats, ...ie radios, headphones, car, digital download, cd, hifi systems.

If the music is high volume(hence the highly compressed music of today) and translates well across all different formats, then a good master has been achieved.

Of course its not just that simple, each engineer has his own ears and own creative way of adding polish to a track, which makes some engineers very highly sought after.

In addition, this is called premastering, mastering is where you make sure that master transfers 1 on 1 to the designated media, providing PQ codes/redbook for the glass master and isrc coding to track publishing.

 

[Formant024]

Mastering is actualy really boring stuff hehe