Quote:
|
Originally Posted by bob katz My god... that was in the days (and I hope those days are still here) where I might receive a very conservatively mixed jazz record and maybe there were 1 or 2 isolated peaks, and the record was so well recorded that you just couldn't hear the L2 operating. But the more you start using the L2 into frequent gain reduction and the more you start trying to raise the level and the limiter is starting to act on the RMS levels and not just the peaks, the harsher it sounds and the more artifacts you hear.
On modern rock which has come in mixed aggressively and you're then trying to push it further (god forbid) I doubt you can tolerate more than 1 to 3 dB from the L2!
Now, back to the topic of "pseudo mastering." I'm a bit confused. I guess you're talking about using some plugins or hardware to make a master in the mix room for clients who cannot afford real mastering?
Because there's another use for the term "pseudo mastering". That's when the mix engineer gives the client a "pseudo-mastered" CD so they won't feel inadequate when they take it home. I feel this is one of the most dangerous and abused current practices. It makes it REAL hard for the mastering engineer. Whatever you do, iuf you feel you must do this practice, whether for political or other reasons, please carefully consider the level you are sending the CD to the client and make it at least 3-4 dB lower (in perceived level) than Radiohead...... please!
To avoid painting the mastering engineer into a corner, or just to reduce the whole spinning wheels of explanation that can ensue.
I just mastered an excellent alternative rock group which does not play like Radiohead but Radiohead is one of their heroes, but neither their mix nor the playing nor the arrangement was suitable to "become radiohead", and this group is a very acoustically-oriented rock band. I wasted at least an hour just going through the whole "competitive" game because of a pseudo-mastered CD that was too hot for its own good and screwing up this band's sound, but you know, you put two CDs in the player, and for the first 20 seconds, the louder one often wins, dammit.
When I brought them up to Radiohead level, the harsh edge from the processing was obnoxious. The group doesn't have any "power guitars" so the message just did not suit the music. Fortunately, saner heads prevailed and they listened to my advice and we cut back, sweetened it up and all is now well. But what a waste of time, all because of a pseudo-mastered CD.
BK |
Hey Bob... I COMPLETELY agree with you on this.. most all of us here are on the same page when it comes to today's loud recordings. As I said above, it sucks but that is the world us little guys live in. You can close your eyes to it but it will still be there when you open them back up again.
A comment then a question if I may.
The comment is that my usual mode of operation is to cut a CD with mashed up levels if the client's eyes glaze over when I tell them about the importance of mastering. If I don't do a mashed up cut it is my reputation on the line. BUT I always also cut a clean version so I do have the option to give to a good ME if I can talk the client into it (I don't mean "talk the client into it" in a negative way... you know).
Anyway the question is, since I have to do this from time to time and I know that I have a safety sitting around in my hip pocket how hard can I push the L2?
I am not kidding myself, I am not an ME and I would not use the L2 at all if my ears had any say in the matter. Because I like it better without the L2 I need to use my eyes and forget what my ears tell me... How much on the L2 do you think is safe? I mean I can't even get up to the point where most nation stuff is with an L2 before it craps out on me so what is a good safe bet if I
have to fake it?
Thanks!!