|
Are you doing your own mixing and mastering? (pg. 6)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| TranceLover007 |
| quote: | Originally posted by cryophonik
There's an entire subforum and a dedicated thread for getting feedback. You'll probably have better luck there and we can keep this thread on-topic, rather than using it for our self-promotion or another useless analog-vs-digital debate. |
Please use those wise words from Dave and stay on topic - I think we already spend quite amount of time talking about you and your production my friend ;)
Cheers,
Darek |
|
|
| Rjen |
| quote: | Originally posted by evo8
Very popular label, no doubt about that, used to be a big fan of them myself.
But your track wont make onto Drumcode or any of these other big labels unless its hella loud - download any of their top tracks and throw them into wavelab for a look....
Bart Skils - Hypnotizing (i like Bart Skils :D) -5.61dB RMS |
I don't really understand what you mean with loud. But I assume you are talking about compression. It is custom that the record label makes it that loud. I mean if you sent a song. It is drumcode that makes it so loud. That is why ALL Drumcode songs sound that loud. But its a pity they do this. Because it kills all the dynamic of a track. But Sometimes hard limiting does serve a purpose. I have one song that has a gain reduction of -8 in the limiter. And that is like really weird high. Its usually not a good thing to do this. But for some strange reason this really made everything glue nicely with the Bassdrum. Maybe that is why Drumcode does it. Because there songs are basically just one entire big bass drum. with some background noises haha But usually my advice would be. If you want something to be louder. Just turn up the volume of your stereo :P
And for the trance people that never heard of Drumcode. It sounds like this. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GmCpFPjumEs |
|
|
| Rjen |
| quote: | Originally posted by TranceLover007
Please use those wise words from Dave and stay on topic - I think we already spend quite amount of time talking about you and your production my friend ;)
Cheers,
Darek |
That is why I removed some of my previous post. Again I apologize. And thank you for saying it so kindly. I do appreciate it. |
|
|
| evo8 |
| quote: | Originally posted by TranceLover007
Please don't try to do that -> just go for your own sound, your own style character and see what will happen - you probably will have much more chances of creating something worth of listening then another copy of "X" sounds or worst the "Y" track/song - just an idea.
Cheers mate,
Darek |
Good advice... |
|
|
| Rjen |
| quote: | Originally posted by AlphaStarred
That's fine, I was just giving an example. What I meant was the analog sound, in general.
Then don't. I didn't say it was necessary, I commented on your track, gave you some feedback, illustrated an example, and suggested a nice machine in case you were curious/interested.
Actually,they certainly will, but it depends on the label, and not necessarily whether your sound is like 90's dance music. There are often marked/subtle differences between analog tracks and software tracks.
Good luck on your search, then, and best of luck to you on your musical journey and getting stuff released/beatport top 10, w/e it is you're interested in. I do think you're talented and if you ever get frustrated with software/sound design, just remember what I said about possibly incorporating some hardware into your setup, if you're ever able to. ;) |
Oeh what a full analyzis of everybeing said haha. I think we both don't need to find our words to literal. I never suggested that people said that I need to buy hardware. I was mearly try to state that I personally think that you can achieve a analog sound with just software. But I do respect that you have another opinion. Its hard for me to imagine a record label rejecting a song. because it just doesn't sound analog. But perhaps it also depends on how somebody would define analog. I can imagine a label rejecting a song because they like something to sound oldschool. But don't get me wrong. I was not offended. And I appreciated the advice. And if I could afford it. I would have been interested.
But I think I will let the forum rest for a while. I am sort of new at all this forum stuff. And I feel that I am overshadowing this initial. topic. What is. Are you doing your own mixing and mastering?
And I think the answer is most of us do. One person said he removes the stuff on his master before sending it to a label. Some people feel that using analog stuff really contributes a lot to the overall sound.
But I think that it is important to realize. That if you have a good song what is just mixed and really good EQ-et. Then in theory you don't need to master it. Every song will be compressed in the end. There will always be a limiter on the master. But usually a record label determines them selfs if they want something louder yes or no. Meaning that if you don't ad a limiter. or anything at all for that matter on the master. IT should not really matter. If you just have a very good mixed/EQ song. In the end. The master is just to improve what you have. But if you have something that is good to begin with. Then you should just leave it alone.
Mastering can really improve a song. But if you first focus on getting good in mixing and EQ-ing the song it self. Then mastering will eventually come very naturel to you. And you will be really surprised how really NOT special it is.
I think these are some wise end words to leave you all.
I wish you all peace, love and most of all Great music :P |
|
|
| aquila |
| quote: | Originally posted by Raphie
you can, Red Cloud will be on Beatport next week
And since I really like your tracks, you can always ask for a TA buddy quote ;) |
I'm going to try and save up a budget for my next album - if it happens. Just got to get past this "what now?" mentality now that my goals have been reached. |
|
|
| LoveHate |
| what happened to clooney ? :( |
|
|
| soulstar606 |
| quote: |
And this is because in the past I have been shocked about how much nonsense people say on forums. |
so keep remembering that.:)
as far as mixing goes...if by mixing you mean,punching midi patterns into a coomputer screen and then ordering reordering them and turning knobs and dials up or down...i do that
as far as mastering....if you mean, continuing to turn more knobs and dials up or down until it sounds like a song on beatport top ten.......i do that also... |
|
|
| Dj Dizzy |
i mix my own songs and i used to master them but recently i've stopped mastering my songs. the more reading and practice i put into mastering, the more i realized how i was getting really far away from the joy of music-making. so a few months ago i started sending my songs off to get professionally mastered and was so happy with the results that i decided i don't want to master any of my songs anymore.
there are alot of mastering engineers out there, so you want to be sure you're getting a good one. i prefer to send to someone a little more "old school" in their techniques... meaning they're using hardware instead of software and they're not going to squash it just for the sake of making it as loud as possible. they'll make it an acceptable volume but they'll preserve the dynamics and pass the song through some nice pricey hardware. the hardware is just my preference, i'm not saying that software is inferior for mastering because a good master is dependent upon the engineer first and foremost. but i prefer the sound of a song that was passed through valves over a song that was passed through a plugin. |
|
|
| Raphie |
| quote: | Originally posted by Dj Dizzy
i mix my own songs and i used to master them but recently i've stopped mastering my songs. the more reading and practice i put into mastering, the more i realized how i was getting really far away from the joy of music-making. so a few months ago i started sending my songs off to get professionally mastered and was so happy with the results that i decided i don't want to master any of my songs anymore.
there are alot of mastering engineers out there, so you want to be sure you're getting a good one. i prefer to send to someone a little more "old school" in their techniques... meaning they're using hardware instead of software and they're not going to squash it just for the sake of making it as loud as possible. they'll make it an acceptable volume but they'll preserve the dynamics and pass the song through some nice pricey hardware. the hardware is just my preference, i'm not saying that software is inferior for mastering because a good master is dependent upon the engineer first and foremost. but i prefer the sound of a song that was passed through valves over a song that was passed through a plugin. |
seems you did find the right guy. |
|
|
| cryophonik |
| quote: | Originally posted by Dj Dizzy
there are alot of mastering engineers out there, so you want to be sure you're getting a good one. i prefer to send to someone a little more "old school" in their techniques... meaning they're using hardware instead of software and they're not going to squash it just for the sake of making it as loud as possible. they'll make it an acceptable volume but they'll preserve the dynamics and pass the song through some nice pricey hardware. the hardware is just my preference, i'm not saying that software is inferior for mastering because a good master is dependent upon the engineer first and foremost. but i prefer the sound of a song that was passed through valves over a song that was passed through a plugin. |
I agree and, just generally speaking, I also think that the old school hardware MEs probably tend to be a little more detail-oriented in their approach, spend more time, have better listening systems and environments, etc., whereas I think you're probably more likely to get more of a "fast food" approach with the ITB guys. Again, that's just my general impression, and it surely doesn't apply across the board. |
|
|
| stewart.m |
| i mix a little as i go but that is it because i have not got a clue |
|
|
|
|
