|
New to mastering (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| ReclusNdangrmnt |
| Indeed, mastering is just packaging the track for mass consumption, so it will sound good everywhere. |
|
|
| vikernes |
| quote: | Originally posted by Acton
But back to the original question, most tunes are mastered on the master channel, but there is nothing wrong with fine tuning all the individual channels if it creates the desired results. As an example, I believe this is the way Eric Prydz works. |
You have no idea what mastering is do you? Read this book first http://books.google.com/books?id=EB...result&resnum=4
| quote: | Originally posted by Subtle
Importance of a good sounding track:
Mastering 10%
Mixing 90%
|
:)
"Attention to detail. The last 10% of the job takes 90% of the time."
- Bob atz |
|
|
| Acton |
| quote: | Originally posted by vikernes
You have no idea what mastering is do you? Read this book first |
Yeah, you're right. I have absolutely no idea what mastering is :rolleyes:.
And yeah, I guess Prydz is doing it all wrong as well, I'll let him know.
Edit* Just for clarification, I'm referring to the master channel, or the audio file exported from the master channel, if that's what you were moaning about. |
|
|
| floyd741 |
| um, what the hell are mastering and mixing? |
|
|
| sixofour.604 |
Mixing is the aspect of production where you eq each individual sound if it needs it, you ballance the volume levels of each sound, and you apply the FX and such.
Mastering is taking the resulting .wav, and removing clips, or setting an RMS, or basiclly doing anything else that should have been done in the mixing stage, but wasn't. |
|
|
| derail |
| quote: | Originally posted by floyd741
um, what the hell are mastering and mixing? |
Start off with sounds that work well together. This takes years of experience to learn, and makes mixing and mastering much, much easier.
Mixing is taking these sounds, setting appropriate levels, applying audio processes/ effects (EQ, compression, reverb, delay and so on) to best realise your sonic vision. Most of the work will already have been done by choosing sounds that work well together, but at this stage you improve on it - you make the song bigger, lusher, brighter, louder...whatever your creative vision is.
Mastering is done when you have the song sounding exactly the way you want it to sound. Typically, the stereo mix is sent to another engineer, as much to run the mix past another set of professional ears as the work they're going to perform. This step is to make the song sound more "correct" - if there's an imbalance at a particular frequency due to it not being caught at the mixing stage, a mastering engineer should notice and correct this. They also will balance out songs for an album, try to create a consistent sound for the album across all the songs. Ideally, mastering won't change the sound at all. |
|
|
| Kismet7 |
| quote: | Originally posted by BOOsTER
send me a track of yours to master, I will do it for free and I will also do two versions, one with mastering hardware at my school's studio one at my home studio with software, you won't be able to tell the difference...I'll even bet on that if you like! |
I dont know if I trust you ;p
And I dont feel like turning this into hardware vs software debate, because we know how that turns out. |
|
|
| mfitterer1 |
Seriously there are some clueless statements being made here. And I believe it is the reason why aside from maybe one or two of the people speaking in this thread, nobody has made any stand out tracks production wise.
Mastering is THE MOST IMPORTANT stage of music. With that said it also takes the most time. It is what adds the things that stand out in a listening experience. Sheen, punch, loudness, and balancing of dynamics.
I'd say if we were using the beatport trance top 100 as an example (albeit a bad one but im sure most people here use it, so it works for that purpose) 25/100 tracks have been properly mastered.
You can turn an average product into something great if you know what you're doing. |
|
|
| Raphie |
| Or the other way around, if you have no clue what you're doing....... |
|
|
| Acton |
| quote: | Originally posted by mfitterer1
Seriously there are some clueless statements being made here. |
Yeah I know, check out this one...
| quote: | Originally posted by mfitterer1
Mastering is THE MOST IMPORTANT stage of music. |
|
|
|
| Subtle |
| quote: | Originally posted by mfitterer1
Seriously there are some clueless statements being made here. And I believe it is the reason why aside from maybe one or two of the people speaking in this thread, nobody has made any stand out tracks production wise.
Mastering is THE MOST IMPORTANT stage of music. With that said it also takes the most time. It is what adds the things that stand out in a listening experience. Sheen, punch, loudness, and balancing of dynamics.
I'd say if we were using the beatport trance top 100 as an example (albeit a bad one but im sure most people here use it, so it works for that purpose) 25/100 tracks have been properly mastered.
You can turn an average product into something great if you know what you're doing. |
It can all be done in the mixing stage, except for the loudness of the track. |
|
|
| sixofour.604 |
You can make a track loud in mixing. What I understand in terms of loudness and mastering, is that you set an rms when you have multiple tracks going into a set or album, setting an rms for them all makes their volume levels even.
To be honest, I cannot think of anything done in mastering that can't be done in mixing. Even if you are producing all of the tracks in your set or album, you should be able to get a standard rms. That is part of building an album.
All of this assumes you have good enough speakers and such. It doesn't take thousands of dollars to get the right equipment to make your mix sound good on 95% of all systems.
People who enjoy quality music don't give a if its mastered or not, many would prefer an unmastered track, vs a track that was ed up because of the mastering job[and it even reflects more on the artist...why did the engineer have to do so much work? Does the artist not know what he is doing so much that he has to send his tracks to be fixed by some guy who only messed them up more?]. I listen to and enjoy music I ripped from youtube. And I know I am not the only one.]
Even my own music, I have around 10 tracks right now that clip, having them sent to being mastered made them worse 90% of the time. And it had nothing to do with the engineer. It was my fault my own music was ed. If I had done it right, i wouldn't have had a problem, nor would i need the tracks to be mastered. |
|
|
|
|
