quote:

Originally posted by zodiac9 What labels actually master their artist's tracks?

every real label. and even the small ones have atleast one experienced artist (as a label boss / a&r / just in the roster) to do the job semi-good.

and yeah professional mastering costs just too much, the prices i've heard are in the same level as what a remix payment would cost from a bigger name.

___________________
http://www.facebook.com/allendemusic

professonal mastering a wav file and sending back the file can cost as little as £25 per track. i have found an awsome place that charge £150 for 3 tracks and this allows you to sit in during the mastering process.

Oh yeah? Do tell! :-)

___________________
Simon Bostock
www.simonbostock.com

quote:

Originally posted by a98 every real label. and even the small ones have atleast one experienced artist (as a label boss / a&r / just in the roster) to do the job semi-good. and yeah professional mastering costs just too much, the prices i've heard are in the same level as what a remix payment would cost from a bigger name.

hhhmmm, I guess the label I deal with is not a "real" label. It's a small digital label. I've only dealt with that one so far. I do believe a label should make sure every track is properly mastered, even if the A&R or owner has to do it. There are a lot of labels that leave the mastering to the artist though, some of them aren't even that small. I know this first hand from chatting with producers I know.

quote:

Originally posted by richg101 professonal mastering a wav file and sending back the file can cost as little as �25 per track. i have found an awsome place that charge �150 for 3 tracks and this allows you to sit in during the mastering process.

I know about the $25 per track one, I wonder how good it is. Sounds like they do a rush job. Now the other one you mentioned, 3 tracks for $150 and you get to sit in, that sounds good. You can usually find a studio in your area that will let you sit in. A label has to be really confident in a track to spend even 25$ on production costs. A lot of medium to small labels have no production budget at all.

___________________
soundcloud

Youtube

quote:

Originally posted by zodiac9 hhhmmm, I guess the label I deal with is not a "real" label. It's a small digital label. I've only dealt with that one so far. I do believe a label should make sure every track is properly mastered, even if the A&R or owner has to do it. There are a lot of labels that leave the mastering to the artist though, some of them aren't even that small. I know this first hand from chatting with producers I know. I know about the $25 per track one, I wonder how good it is. Sounds like they do a rush job. Now the other one you mentioned, 3 tracks for $150 and you get to sit in, that sounds good. You can usually find a studio in your area that will let you sit in. A label has to be really confident in a track to spend even 25$ on production costs. A lot of medium to small labels have no production budget at all.

i doubt the guy who does the mastering @25£ is gonna spend massive amounts of time on tracks, but id bet money that it is a sideline job he does alongside maybe a studio job. if he gets four orders a week he can spent 15 mins per track and earn 100£ on top of his main wage. the place where i went for one mastering session made me feel a little down seeing him doing the work in 5mins and getting paid 4 times what i earn for an hour. he had the gear he needed and used it efficiently and i expect he spent the same time on SVD's grasshopper the week before! these guys are beasts behind the right gear.

i think £25 is worth it because i have heard music mastered by them and it sounds great in live sets. its worth £25 just for the impartial look at the tracks, and the 320k preview system allows the customer to check the quality before paying.

Not exactly on topic but can we stop calling it a loudness "war".

There is no war.

Let's just lump it together with war on drugs, war on terrorism, etc, and come up with something better, eh?

I dunno, it's senseless violence, and in the loudness war there are only victims and losers, no winners.

___________________
All rhythm evolves around a kick...

quote:

Originally posted by richg101 i doubt the guy who does the mastering @25� is gonna spend massive amounts of time on tracks, but id bet money that it is a sideline job he does alongside maybe a studio job. if he gets four orders a week he can spent 15 mins per track and earn 100� on top of his main wage. the place where i went for one mastering session made me feel a little down seeing him doing the work in 5mins and getting paid 4 times what i earn for an hour. he had the gear he needed and used it efficiently and i expect he spent the same time on SVD's grasshopper the week before! these guys are beasts behind the right gear. i think �25 is worth it because i have heard music mastered by them and it sounds great in live sets. its worth �25 just for the impartial look at the tracks, and the 320k preview system allows the customer to check the quality before paying.

OK, sounds good. I've never heard anyone comment on the results. They truly must be "beasts", as you say. Most of the tedius and time consuming work is done during mixdown when you think about it, EQing, compression, ect.

The next time I go label hunting, I will only go with one that is willing to have my tracks mastered. That should be the label's responsibilty. Keeping with the original topic here, I am going to do a little bit of simple mastering on my tracks when I submit them to labels. A little limiting to bring the loudness up, a bit of exciter on the high end, and maybe a teeny midrange boost. Like said here, it is a good idea to make your tracks sound as good as possible. So long as you don't ruin them with a bad mastering job.

___________________
soundcloud

Youtube

quote:

Originally posted by zodiac9 I am going to do a little bit of simple mastering on my tracks when I submit them to labels. A little limiting to bring the loudness up, a bit of exciter on the high end, and maybe a teeny midrange boost.

that's not exactly the right way to do it. to achieve the best sound possible you should be able to fix those frequency spectrum problems in the mixing stage, while you are making the track (and eqing the sounds).

doing eqing in the mastering phase is only needed if the mixing is done badly. but ofcourse if you happen to compress some of the bass frequences off, you can boost them back with an eq.

___________________
http://www.facebook.com/allendemusic

Anyway guys... We just have to produce amazing tracks...
Mastered or not, If it's a hit... it will be sign ;-)

quote:

Originally posted by a98 that's not exactly the right way to do it. to achieve the best sound possible you should be able to fix those frequency spectrum problems in the mixing stage, while you are making the track (and eqing the sounds). doing eqing in the mastering phase is only needed if the mixing is done badly. but ofcourse if you happen to compress some of the bass frequences off, you can boost them back with an eq.

eq is almost always done in mastering, usually with 32band eq or other mastering eq. what do ya think those eqs are for? thats far more controll than needed for single sounds.

___________________


https://soundcloud.com/ghostea stuff