quote:

Originally posted by Eric J I think you may be missing the point here. Mastering is not what makes tracks sound great. Proper composition, sound selection/design, arrangement and mixing is what makes tracks sound great. Mastering's primary benefits are mostly about getting a 3rd party perspective on your music and squeezing every last ounce of headroom out of your track (especially in the modern era). If you want your music to sound better than you need to work at composition, arrangement, sound selection and mixing. These are the things that make tracks great. If you think someone else has the skill to make your music sound better than you can make it, you'd be better served hiring a mix engineer, sound designer and/or composer, because any or all of these people are going to have a much larger impact on the final output of your product than any mastering engineer. Mastering engineers are important to be sure, but far too often they are credited with being able to make OK tracks sound great, and that is simply not the case. No amount of mastering is going to do that. You have all the power you need to make great sounding tracks, its just a matter of time, patience and experience.

you sound like a teacher thatsa complimnentand im drunk pal

___________________
http://www.facebook.com/pobsky
http://twitter.com/pobsky

my music is where i want it be right now, hope you all feel that way

___________________
http://www.facebook.com/pobsky
http://twitter.com/pobsky

quote:

Originally posted by chrisspob you sound like a teacher thatsa complimnentand im drunk pal

Lol I did wonder while reading your posts.

This thread has a link to the interview and he's pretty much saying what I waS thinking about stuff on the master out and what Zombie0729 seems to also do. It seems I'll keep doing what I'm doing for now and keep my master out free as possible and work on the individual tracks as much as possible.

http://www.tranceaddict.com/forums/...8&forumid=48&s=

quote:

I will say, for me personally, I think the answer lies in a dry master bus and a shitload of sub-groups. I used to just throw a bunch of mastering plug-ins and multi-band compressors on the master bus and tweak the presets and hope for the best, without really doing any sub-groups. (Actually, every record I put out in 2004 had a mild chorus effect on the master bus for stereo widening! I went a bit nuts there for a while.) I was basically using these tools as a fix for the whole mix, when I should have been working on very small sections of it individually. It worked okay for what I was doing at the time, but my standards are higher now and I really want to do everything professionally and properly.

If you know a bit about mastering and the label says they are going to find a studio to master it, it might be a good idea to send over your mastered version and an unmastered version so the studio engineer gets an idea of the sound you're looking for and can use that as a rough idea when doing their stuff.

___________________
www.misterfalconmusic.com

I hope my point isnt lost here. I'm not looking for my tracks to be mastered. My query was whether to keep on producing without using dynamic devices on the master out or just use them if it sounds good.

I basically want to avoid squashing the signal and improve my mixing skills essentially, until I feel happy to use anything on the master output.