This may or may not be a stupid question I'm not sure.

But its like this. As my production skills get better and I'm almost 3 years in now I'm begining to focus A LOT on mastering and achieving professional sound quality.

This is the thing I can't understand. If you submit a track to be mastered professionally you're giving them *1* chunk of audio to run through their fancy hardware.
But when you're mixing a track you could be mixing between 10-20 different sound sources into one big mess. So as a producer you have access to each sound, you can equalize & compress them independently. So shouldn't your ability to achieve a professional sound from that standpoint (being able to manipulate a single sound) be much higher than if you send the whole mix to a mastering studio?

I see all this talk about analog this and analog that but how important is mastering really? How big of a difference does it make to a track if you already have a great mixing technique?
Just that sending a track off to be mastered seems limited in the idea that the masterer can only deal with one chunk of audio.

And my final question is - is there anyone here who sent a well produced track off to be mastered and can maybe submit the pre- & post versions? I'm really curious to see what all this expensive hardware can actually do to a track. I can understand the idea of mastering but not neccessarily the importance or potential. Any comments/opinions are appreciated. - Roxx

Mastering is an important step. It is not, however, the answer to getting a "professional" sound. I think a lot of beginner producers think that mastering is some sort of "magic bullet" that will rescue a poorly produced track and give them that "sound" they are looking for. Nothing can be further from the truth.

Mastering is generally aimed at increasing the apparent loudness of a track and giving the track that extra "sheen" and final polish. In a traditional album setting where you have 10 or 12 tracks on a CD, one of the jobs of a mastering engineer is to balance the various tracks across the album and make the tracks sound cohesive when listening from one track to the next.

Since EDM is more of a "one track at a time" affair, the mastering process is not overly concerned with continuity, but more with making the track as loud as possible without losing the dymanics of the track and having it sound "squashed" my over compressing it. There are also some minor balance issues that may be corrected in the mastering process for EDM, but if the mastering engineer has to make major boosts or cuts to the track at the mastering stage, it is usually indicitive of a poor mixdown or poor choice of sounds and/or arrangement.

You track should sound full and complete in it's pre-master state and the mastering process should only add the "icing on the cake" as it were. The mastering process should remain the final step in a long line of steps where YOU, as the producer, should have made every effort to have the track sound good before it is sent to the mastering house.

This does not mean that you can just slap a limiter on the track and consider it mastered. Part of the mastering engineer's job is to provide an objective set of ears and hear things that you may have missed. These should generally be minor problems and any major work needs to be fixed before the track makes it to the mastering house. A well-produced track should sound pretty darn good before the mastering engineer even touches it and most mastering engineers who specialize in dance music shouldn't need to work all that hard to get your music into its final "mastered" state.

What should not be overlooked is that a proper mastering engineer will have the equipment and expertise to identify how your track will sound across a wide variety of systems, from crappy consumer-grade speakers to a big club sound system. He or she should be able to balance your track in a way that allows it to stand out on any system it is played on. His or her role is very important in providing a good balance for your track and preparing it for its final media destination (vinyl, CD, etc.), but he should not be relied upon to fix your broken mix.

With a lot of artists, the sound they're hearing as they're working on their mix is almost indistinguishable from the mastered end result.

Mastering is there for fixing problems and raising gain in an inoffensive way. That's it. If there happens to be a heap of low-end rumble in your mix which you can't hear because of your listening situation, then a good mastering room will pick that up and a good mastering engineer will remove it.

But really, if you're listening to your track pre and post mastering and can notice an obvious difference, then that's something you could've taken care of in the mix. That does take some experience though, so it's good in the beginning to hear the difference and to ask the engineer why they made that change, and learn from what they say, so you can make that adjustment yourself in future.

From my perspective - tracks I release I always take to external mastering, but I make sure it's with a guy who'll give me what I want, not what THEY want and I make sure I'm sitting there during the process and finding out exactly what processors they're using and why they're using them. It's incredibly valuable information.

But what I don't expect or want, is for my tracks to sound different, post mastering. I don't always nail my mixes, there's always room for improvement, but ideally a mastering engineer you can trust will give your mix the thumbs up and raise the apparent level of the track in a non-destructive way. It's money well spent for the peace of mind of having a professional having heard it.

Long-term, your tracks should sound "mastered" while you're mixing/ producing.

what i've learnt from this board is that, as said above mastering is to fix problems and raise the level.

but problems should be fixed before you master i think.

maybe just a little compression and/or limiting to get the levels up.

but focus mainly on what you have and try and make that the best it can be!!!!

quote:

Originally posted by Eric J

/thread

i hear some producers dont master the track as a whole, but merely "master" each individual channels, Eric Prydz for example.

it seems to work ok for him. does anyone else do this or do they feel that mastering the track as a whole is essential?

my productions fail on the mastering front as im not very good at it yet! but i do feel that getting each channel spot on before you master it as a whole is essential

___________________

>>> Beatport Stuff <<<

Mastering in a EDM setting is barely 15% of the final sound, it's all about the quality of the mixdown and post production work and the sound you go for when doing this.

More than likely your not going to be concerned with getting versions ready for different media, or shaping the sound you want for an album to give your band and album a style (think of the range of songs you might hear on a rock album - slow to fast etc).

___________________
Kuroi
@ web/Kuroi Music
@ myspace/Kuroi Music

promo track: Mirco de Govia - Voller Sterne (Kuroi Remix)

quote:

Originally posted by Acton i hear some producers dont master the track as a whole, but merely "master" each individual channels, Eric Prydz for example. it seems to work ok for him. does anyone else do this or do they feel that mastering the track as a whole is essential?

In an ideal world, all masters would be done this way. I can't think of a mastering engineer who would prefer to master a stereo mix rather than the individual stems because they think they'd get a better sounding master. Yes, it's more work, but the end product can be much more detailed.

My ethics when it comes to production tend to be very utilitarian; I do what does the greatest good to the largest number of people and does the least harm to the smallest number of people.

___________________

www.jexmusic.com - My website

When I put a limiter and so forth on my Master Channel, there is always a significant increase quality. If I was to send a track off to be Mastered properly should I take off my own Mastering efforts or should I leave it as is?

___________________
We are the music makers. We are the dreamers of dreams....

quote:

Originally posted by thoughtlessjex My ethics when it comes to production tend to be very utilitarian; I do what does the greatest good to the largest number of people and does the least harm to the smallest number of people.

SOMEONE listened during ethics class

quote:

Originally posted by Blahzaay When I put a limiter and so forth on my Master Channel, there is always a significant increase quality. If I was to send a track off to be Mastered properly should I take off my own Mastering efforts or should I leave it as is?

thats a very good question!! im curious to know as well. anybody???