Who needs mastering nowadays if you're a good producer?

___________________
image removed - over max allowd file size (50kb)

quote:

Originally posted by nec Who needs mastering nowadays if you're a good producer?

Did you even bother to read this thread? Do you even know what mastering is?

quote:

Originally posted by nec Who needs mastering nowadays if you're a good producer?

This just points out how much ignorancy is out there about Mastering, did you know, Mastering should not be done by the same Producer who mixed it, and Produced it? Is a golden rule, ask to any sound enginner, you can youtube some conferencies, you will hear is one of the first things they tell you, the reason is because you usually are so used to the sounds you worked with, that you dont have a clear image of the sound, and you tend to miss things.

Kopi =o.

___________________
My forum for Down Tempo/Ambient/Chillout Music Producers.
www.chilloutworld.com
Where the world spins sligthly slower ...

Though I agree, that getting your track finalized by someone else, will be beneficial - There are some high profile names out there who supposedly master their tracks themselves. Sander van Doorns mixes sound fantastic imo, and he does all that work himself.

quote:

Originally posted by kopi_luwak No, I want it done better, that's the point of mastering, to reach the higuest level, is stupid to think that to pay for mastering is stupid, that not may work for you, because digital sales sell bad, etc, is other think. We are talking about if you want to release your stuff with the best quality posible, and to give your track best chances to success, or just another average sound track in the digital shops. If we are talking about digital releases, then I think I understand you, but for CD releases, mastering is absolutely mandatory, for me, even mixing from a professional sound enginner, you dont want to get your CD out there, and to listen to the CD's done by other Producers properly mixed and mastered in a studio, and to realize yours is good, but just not as good as could be, you have to reach the higuest quality you can get if you want to fullfill all your chances to success. Other issue about to think like you is, that the quality of the productions you hear now out there are not as good as it used to be in the past, practically all the tracks you hear now in the sets, audiojelly,etc, were mixed and mastered by the producers who made the tune, the overall sound of the productions dicreased a % compared with the days when there were only major labels with a quality standart. As I stated before, my mix is good enough, but I am not even close to what a sound enginner can do with years of experience and good hardware. Other think is, you send a CD to Cafe del Mar for example, and your mix&mastering is not the best, they could just ignore it, usually big labels want something already done to be pressed, a CD properly mixed&mastered by a sound enginner, is your best card, for your material. Kopi =o.

This sort of thinking holds me back when I'm producing. What your saying, is that your sound quality has to be perfect to get a label interested, thats just not true. If the song is good the label will tell you its good, and either offer mastering or tell you to go back and do it better.
Also, an obsession with sound quality can be to the detriment of music quality; so often here I hear a track which is beautifully professionally mastered but has no real musical value. Its just lacking something which moves people. Obviously someone has worried about sound quality so much that the entire song has become an engineering exercise, not a creative one. Good mastering isn't what makes your tracks stand out on beatport or whatever, the thing that makes your tracks stand out is their own beauty, which shines through even the poorest mastering.
It also seems to me that a lot of your method is motivated by fear. You seem to think that you'll get your CD in a record shop and find that it wasn't as good as someone elses. I find that if I get into thinking like that I don't get anywhere. At any rate its not about being "as good" as someone else, its about making music which is individual and original. Comparing your music to other people's is a bit pointless.
And I think that productions today sound just as good as they did at any stage in the past, in fact, I think that they have become far more complex and technically refined. Of course mastering will make your track a little more polished, but it won't make a track stand out. It won't make it a better track and it won't make people like it better. The only thing to avoid is bad mastering, good mastering is not that essential and certainly not worth shelling out for yourself. As I say, if the label thinks the track needs it, let the label pay. Otherwise, "Reach the highest level" through your own musical talent.

___________________
New Mix: March 2010 Promo
Soundcloud|Facebook

quote:

Originally posted by kitphillips This sort of thinking holds me back when I'm producing. What your saying, is that your sound quality has to be perfect to get a label interested, thats just not true. If the song is good the label will tell you its good, and either offer mastering or tell you to go back and do it better.

I said will increase your chances, and btw, I am talking about big labels like Cafe del Mar, not digitals, anyone can sign up anything in a digital label.

quote:

Also, an obsession with sound quality can be to the detriment of music quality; so often here I hear a track which is beautifully professionally mastered but has no real musical value. Its just lacking something which moves people. Obviously someone has worried about sound quality so much that the entire song has become an engineering exercise, not a creative one. Good mastering isn't what makes your tracks stand out on beatport or whatever, the thing that makes your tracks stand out is their own beauty, which shines through even the poorest mastering.

This is just ridiculous, sorry, I am talking about the overall package obviously, if you have something great, melodically, harmonically, etc, the next step is to have something great in the enginnering area too, no ones is talking about to do wonders with a crappy track, or that an amazing track will be a failure because was not Mastered by a professional, etc, is not that I focus only in the *quality sound*, I care for the OVERALL package, dont make non sense please.

quote:

It also seems to me that a lot of your method is motivated by fear. You seem to think that you'll get your CD in a record shop and find that it wasn't as good as someone elses. I find that if I get into thinking like that I don't get anywhere. At any rate its not about being "as good" as someone else, its about making music which is individual and original. Comparing your music to other people's is a bit pointless.

Again, you are just saying non sense, we are talking about the MASTERING, the enginnering work, not the music, who on earth is talking about to compare my music? My music is other business, I am comparing the enginnering work, get the picture I am talking about if I release a CD, that took me years of hard work, I will take the same care to have it perfectly mixed&mastered by a Professional if I can increase the quality, to acomplish the best level for my project, not because fear, because I am looking for the higuest quality in all the levels posible for my project, when I refer to the sound, not sounding as good as the CD's out there in a music shop for example, I repeat you, I refer to the Mastering process, the final stage process.

quote:

And I think that productions today sound just as good as they did at any stage in the past, in fact, I think that they have become far more complex and technically refined. Of course mastering will make your track a little more polished, but it won't make a track stand out. It won't make it a better track and it won't make people like it better. The only thing to avoid is bad mastering, good mastering is not that essential and certainly not a worth shelling out for yourself. As I say, if the label thinks the track needs it, let the label pay. Otherwise, "Reach the highest level" through your own musical talent.

Are you caring to read? Jesus, we are talking about the enginnering work, you keep talking about the music, if the music is good, will stand out, no matter the sound enginner, etc, etc, read the topic *Who has money to pay for Mastering*, we are not talking about if the track is the 8 wonder, or not, we are talking about the Mastering!

good mastering is not that essential and certainly not a worth shelling out for yourself.
Not for you, that's obvious, for me, as the title says, who has money to pay for Mastering, I do, if does not worth shelling out for you, does not make it wont worth for me, and have worthed every penny btw.

quote:

"Reach the highest level" through your own musical talent.

I will assume you have read actually all the thread, I have said several times, my skils are not even close, compared with what a sound enginner can do, I know my limits, and when I decide to hire a sound enginner, is because I know my limits, and I want more, thats why I care to pay to a sound enginner to do the Mastering, as this thread title is, I have money for Mastering and I will pay for it.
In overall, so you understand, what this thread is about, if there's a % that can be improved, hell yeah I will pay to fullfill it, now, that is not necessary today, for a digital release, small releases, etc, for you, has nothing to do with what I said.

PS: I heard some of your music, sounds pretty clean, I liked it pretty much Breaking Down actually, but it could be improved much more, the vocal mixdown is not very good, above all compression, your stereo image is pretty reduced, you need to use more of your stereo image,above all with your guitars, they are too centered, you need to play more with the stereo image so your vocals can breath more, your guitars should be less prominent, your music would benefit with some sound enginner mastering, and Mixdown work, not saying your music, mix, is bad at all, just that the sound could be improved.



The overall peak countour is unbalanced, compression is required here, as you can see in the image, so you can boost up the overall sound, but with this cimage you will be very limited, (Mastering), also you will see the stereo image a bit boxed as I commented before, you have three clips you should take care of too, this track is a good candidate to be properly Mastered.

If you want to, I could get *Breaking down* properly Mixed&Mastered with a sound enginner friend of mine, and we do a before and after, then let's the rest of the members to judge how many % the quality sound got improved .

Kopi =o.

___________________
My forum for Down Tempo/Ambient/Chillout Music Producers.
www.chilloutworld.com
Where the world spins sligthly slower ...

Last edited by kopi_luwak on Oct-31-2007 at 04:56

Ok man, I guess at the end of the day, if professional mastering makes you feel better about releasing a track, then go for it. If I make a piece of music, I find it unproductive to obsess about little things and to me mastering is a relatively little thing. But as I say, everyone works in a different way, so if mastering is something you go in for in a big way, then I'm not saying you don't have a right to pay someone. I'm saying I wouldn't ever pay myself, although obviously if a label offered I wouldn't say no.

I appreciate your effort to look at my stuff too, and your kind words. "Breaking Down" was really an experiment and actually one of the worst mixed tracks I've ever made so I wish you'd picked another example If anything, I'm suprised theres ONLY three clips, because I would have thought there would be more!

That song was made when I was only just learning how to mix and program synths, I've developed a lot more in just the few months since I made it. I'm not sure whether a mastering engineer would have helped that song, because it was fundamentally flawed. The original sound sources were quite poor, I had no pop shield for the vocals, and the guitar sound was fairly shoddy because I was just getting used to a new guitar... It could be cleaned up of course, but I don't know whether it would be worth your friend's time to work on such a flawed track... If you have faith that it could sound really good, and be an amazing track, then I would certainly take you up on your offer(free mastering is fine in my book! I just wouldn't ever pay) but only if you think the track's worth it, I don't want to waste people's time on something which is just a way of settling our dispute.

___________________
New Mix: March 2010 Promo
Soundcloud|Facebook

Actually is a very nice track, send me the stems, no compression, effects please, DRY, and I will give you the hand with the sound enginner, and I could help you to get it signed too .


I did a very fast before and after with your track, doing some very basic stuff, you will notice your mix sounds a bit muted&flat compared with the one I did, also I corrected the clippings, you can hear the sample:

The order is:

Original - Kopi Mastering, Original - Kopi Mastering.

http://download.yousendit.com/BA81E20C68757457

You will notice more the sound diference in the second verse.
I did not touch your version at all, so is as you had it on soundclick.

A sound enginner would improve this track alot as I told you before, then I am positive we have a great track here .

Kopi =o.

___________________
My forum for Down Tempo/Ambient/Chillout Music Producers.
www.chilloutworld.com
Where the world spins sligthly slower ...

quote:

Originally posted by kitphillips Also, an obsession with sound quality can be to the detriment of music quality; so often here I hear a track which is beautifully professionally mastered but has no real musical value. Its just lacking something which moves people. Obviously someone has worried about sound quality so much that the entire song has become an engineering exercise, not a creative one. Good mastering isn't what makes your tracks stand out on beatport or whatever, the thing that makes your tracks stand out is their own beauty, which shines through even the poorest mastering.

Very well said. I think producers forget this and lose their way. Some of my favorite old school death metal and hardcore punk songs are poorly mixed and mastered. I was on a nostalgia kick last week, and I was listening to some of the metal and punk I listened to in the late 80's. The production quality is pretty poor, but it doesn't matter because the songs are great and stand the test of time.

It is nice to hear a song with great production, but great production will never compensate for mediocre music.

quote:

Originally posted by zodiac9 Very well said. I think producers forget this and lose their way. Some of my favorite old school death metal and hardcore punk songs are poorly mixed and mastered. I was on a nostalgia kick last week, and I was listening to some of the metal and punk I listened to in the late 80's. The production quality is pretty poor, but it doesn't matter because the songs are great and stand the test of time. It is nice to hear a song with great production, but great production will never compensate for mediocre music.

Please read what I said in my previous post, so you are updated.
We are talking about the Mastering process only, not about if a mediocre tune will become a master piece, or that an oustanding tune wont become a master piece because was not properly mixed&mastere.
If people just would care to read, there would not be useless off topics like this.
At the end we agreed, that Mastering can do a great track, even better, not that will do wonders with a piece of crap, or that a great track wont be good because was not mastered. Mastering is intended to reach the best of your music, this is what all this thread is about, if there is a %, even if is a really small %, that can be improved, why dont do to improve it if you have the money and you want to reach the best level posible? Now that if you dont have the money or you are happy with your sound, the dont hire a professional for to master your track, the rest of the comments are just off from this topic.
The thread title is very simple:
Who has money for Mastering.
I already asnwered I do, and why I will pay for the service in my previous post.
I dont see what else you could discuss here, it is very simple.

Kopi =o.

___________________
My forum for Down Tempo/Ambient/Chillout Music Producers.
www.chilloutworld.com
Where the world spins sligthly slower ...

quote:

Originally posted by kopi_luwak Please read what I said in my previous post, so you are updated. We are talking about the Mastering process only, not about if a mediocre tune will become a master piece, or that an oustanding tune wont become a master piece because was not properly mixed&mastere. If people just would care to read, there would not be useless off topics like this. At the end we agreed, that Mastering can do a great track, even better, not that will do wonders with a piece of crap, or that a great track wont be good because was not mastered. Mastering is intended to reach the best of your music, this is what all this thread is about, if there is a %, even if is a really small %, that can be improved, why dont do to improve it if you have the money and you want to reach the best level posible? Now that if you dont have the money or you are happy with your sound, the dont hire a professional for to master your track, the rest of the comments are just off from this topic. The thread title is very simple: Who has money for Mastering. I already asnwered I do, and why I will pay for the service in my previous post. I dont see what else you could discuss here, it is very simple. Kopi =o.

Yes, we understood what you are saying. What we are saying to the original poster is, if you are willing to spend the money on mastering, then do so. I'm sure we all have money for mastering, the point is, is it worth it or not. Will the return be worth it. If you are willing to take the loss, then great. Perhaps you will make the money back, perhaps you won't, maybe you'll break even. If producing is just a hobby for you, and you are willing to spend money on it without gaining anything back, that's fine too.

Finally, we are saying (to the original poster) don't worry about mastering so much, just come up with some music that moves people. To the original question again, I believe a rare gem of a hit will rise to the surface, materstered or not. A record label is looking for good tunes, good songwriters, not mastering. A proper label should be mastering their artist's tracks anyway to ensure quality control.

quote:

Originally posted by zodiac9 Yes, we understood what you are saying. What we are saying to the original poster is, if you are willing to spend the money on mastering, then do so. I'm sure we all have money for mastering, the point is, is it worth it or not. Will the return be worth it. If you are willing to take the loss, then great. Perhaps you will make the money back, perhaps you won't, maybe you'll break even. If producing is just a hobby for you, and you are willing to spend money on it without gaining anything back, that's fine too. Finally, we are saying (to the original poster) don't worry about mastering so much, just come up with some music that moves people. To the original question again, I believe a rare gem of a hit will rise to the surface, materstered or not. A record label is looking for good tunes, good songwriters, not mastering. A proper label should be mastering their artist's tracks anyway to ensure quality control.

Fair enough .

Kopi =o.

___________________
My forum for Down Tempo/Ambient/Chillout Music Producers.
www.chilloutworld.com
Where the world spins sligthly slower ...