|
Is it ok to master?
|
View this Thread in Original format
| kr00t0n |
So this guy I know recorded a demo mix, and has recently been hanging out with Adam White a fair bit, and Adam mastered his mix.
So he posted it on some forums, some people liked it, etc etc.
It's now going to be the guest mix on MOS radiothis thursday, after which he will be doing a demo cd run of the mix.
This made me think.
Doing a mix, it getting aired, that's all fine. But does using a mastered mix as a demo really set right?
I ask this because demos represent a number of things, track selection, ability to progress, beatmatching, transition abilities (cueing and harmonic mixing), and eqing. Crowd reading doesnt really sit with demos.
Now if a demo is supposed to be a representation of your abilities to mix, surely having the mix mastered is a bit of a cop-out in terms of eqing?
A mix mastered in a studio could sound alot better than how it would have originally sounded when played live, and should that really be allowed with demos?
And no, I'm not bitter :p |
|
|
| Mr.Mystery |
| I don't see any harm in that, but I don't really see the point either. I mean the tracks you are using are already mastered once, there should be no need to do it again (unless you're using vinyls to mix and want to remove crackles or something). |
|
|
| Fearless One |
| i'd master my demos if they would sound better |
|
|
| kr00t0n |
| quote: | Originally posted by Mr.Mystery
I don't see any harm in that, but I don't really see the point either. I mean the tracks you are using are already mastered once, there should be no need to do it again (unless you're using vinyls to mix and want to remove crackles or something). |
Not all tracks are mastered equally though, and the eq levels also affect each track, so if one of the tracks in the middle of the mix was lacking the low end bass of the 2 tracks on either side, it could be mastered and brought into line with them, making the mix sound better. Same can be said for if hi's are too soft, etc. |
|
|
| Mr.Mystery |
| quote: | Originally posted by kr00t0n
Not all tracks are mastered equally though, and the eq levels also affect each track, so if one of the tracks in the middle of the mix was lacking the low end bass of the 2 tracks on either side, it could be mastered and brought into line with them, making the mix sound better. Same can be said for if hi's are too soft, etc. |
Well yeah, but you can't really pick 1 track from the middle of the mix and adjust that, the changes you make affect the whole mix. Sure, you can match the levels but then you tend to lose the dynamics and the whole mix sounds squashed. |
|
|
| kr00t0n |
| quote: | Originally posted by Mr.Mystery
Well yeah, but you can't really pick 1 track from the middle of the mix and adjust that, the changes you make affect the whole mix. Sure, you can match the levels but then you tend to lose the dynamics and the whole mix sounds squashed. |
Odd, I've been able to make adjustments just with the selection area of a waveform with ease. |
|
|
| DJ NEMESIS |
| quote: | Originally posted by Mr.Mystery
Well yeah, but you can't really pick 1 track from the middle of the mix and adjust that, the changes you make affect the whole mix. Sure, you can match the levels but then you tend to lose the dynamics and the whole mix sounds squashed. |
sure you can. You can pick one track, one loop, or even one kick or high hat and individually adjust the low/hi or volume that's how people master dj mixes.
The thing that makes this not so bad, is that when you are playing live at a show there is a much greater room for error and you are not as likely to notice slight differences in level or eqing the way you do when listening to a mix at home or in the car. If you sound like crap though live then you're only fooling yourself by getting your pre-recorded mixes doctored when clearly it doesn't represent what you play live. |
|
|
| Derivative |
None of that is really mastering. Mastering these days is a blanket term that covers pretty much all post production but it shouldnt really.
Broadly speaking, the better the mixdown, the less need there is for post processing. And post processing doesnt fix a mixdown.
Pretty much the only thing you would only ever do at the mastering stage is dither and this is always the last process in the signal chain.
You do not dither twice because the results will completely up the initial dither and it will always sound worse. |
|
|
| teknomonki |
I tend to bang a smooth compression through the mix just to make sure its hitting 0dB and not raising the lower bits too high (i.e. not losing dynamic range).
EQ wise, a slight roll-off on the lower frequencies can sound better on low end speakers (which a lot of people have for home hi-fis or PC use).
TBH, a radio mix is squashed to death going through a couple of compressors before it is aired anyway so its kinda up to personal choice. |
|
|
| Boomer187 |
ive noticed tho that when people record mixes the quality is not that great. so I dont think there is a 1:1 transfer of track quality -> recorded quality.
I run all mine through mastering software, it makes the kick more powerful throughout and just makes the mix clearer. I first started doing it cause my recordings wouldn't bump in my car, now they do... |
|
|
| Derivative |
| quote: | | ive noticed tho that when people record mixes the quality is not that great. so I dont think there is a 1:1 transfer of track quality -> recorded quality. |
Incorrect.
In any digital system what you put in = what you get out.
The only time you lose any kind of 'quality' is converting from analogue to digital or from digital to analogue.
If a digital recording sounds worse after your master it in a digital system that means you dont know how to master at all and all you are doing is making the original recording sound ter with unnecessary or inappropriate post processing.
Mastering is not something you can do properly in your bedroom on your ty hifi speakers, on ty converters. You cant even call that mastering. Not without doing a great disservice to what mastering engineers actually do. |
|
|
| Boomer187 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Derivative
The only time you lose any kind of 'quality' is converting from analogue to digital or from digital to analogue.
|
there ya go
| quote: | Originally posted by Derivative
If a digital recording sounds worse after your master it in a digital system that means you dont know how to master at all and all you are doing is making the original recording sound ter with unnecessary or inappropriate post processing.
Mastering is not something you can do properly in your bedroom on your ty hifi speakers, on ty converters. You cant even call that mastering. Not without doing a great disservice to what mastering engineers actually do. |
well duh. |
|
|
|
|
