The latest "What evils would you tell your clients to stop hoisting on you " Thread!!

flatfinger · 21st December 2007, 01:09 AM

What do mixers need to stop doing???
Most common and annoying pratfalls??

Thanks fer the reminders !

Darius van H · 21st December 2007, 04:55 AM

The one thing that really winds me up is:

Split mono files instead of stereo interleaved. I just don't see the logic in it......maybe some people think it sounds "wider"!

lucey · 21st December 2007, 05:14 AM

clipping

Boomshanka · 21st December 2007, 12:09 PM

To live with your mixes for a bit, check in different systems/environments, tweak, live with it a bit more. Get it as good as possible to your vision, ignoring overall CD level (or if need be maximize/limit just your listening copy).

Then book your mastering.

Avoid booking your CD launch until you've got your discs replicated (and you can even use 'em to promote to media & industry). It can make the whole process much more relaxed and enjoyable for all concerned.

brethes@mac.com · 21st December 2007, 12:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darius van H

The one thing that really winds me up is:

Split mono files instead of stereo interleaved. I just don't see the logic in it......maybe some people think it sounds "wider"!

No logic or malice involved. It just happens to be the default format for Pro Tools stereo files. Pro Tools being the industry standard for mixing these days, I guess this is what your clients use!

Darius van H · 21st December 2007, 12:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brethes@mac.com

No logic or malice involved. It just happens to be the default format for Pro Tools stereo files. Pro Tools being the industry standard for mixing these days, I guess this is what your clients use!

Just because that's the default setting, doesn't make it the right thing to do.

"No logic involved" .....hmmm, so people are doing this stuff without recourse to logical thinking?

VictorQ · 21st December 2007, 01:07 PM

I've actually been told, that stereo split is better to hand in for mastering. Can't think of any reasons why (unless you have a lossy codec like BWF MPG on there for kicks

).

Thomas W. Bethe · 21st December 2007, 01:34 PM

Bringing in mixes that have already been through a compressor or L-2 type device and are already smashed with the RMS to Peak level being less than 4 dBU.

Adding lots of weird EQ, effects or reverb before sending it in for mastering.

Waiting until the last minute to get the mastering done and then having one foot out the door to send it off for replication.

Not listening to the final mixes on lots of different systems and tweaking it BEFORE sending in for mastering.

Expecting the mastering to work miracles on the mix when the mix is not really ready for mastering,

Expecting the mastering engineer to do the final mixing while mastering, "could you bring up the snare drum and take down the guitar and put the vocalist in the middle of the mix as we are mastering?"

Expecting the mastering engineer to do the impossible... "the bass amp has a problem and every time it is played loud it distorts could you take out that distortion but leave in the distortion from the guitar because that is the way we want it to sound?"

Not budgeting enough for the mastering and say "gee could we do this today and we will pay you when we get the first 1000 CDs sold?"

Not giving the mastering engineer a clear vision of what you want the final CD to sound like. "we know this is heavy metal but could you make it sound like a James Taylor CD?" or "this is the best we have ever played this song but it sounds to tame could you make it hard driving and LOUD?"

Not really understanding what mastering is all about.....

inlinenl · 21st December 2007, 01:53 PM

not mix until 05:00 am the night before

.. and then drop in at 12:00 while we made the app. at 10:30 ( session until 17:00 ) yes it has to be ready today ..... next week is the release party ...

OK lets rollllll

lucey · 21st December 2007, 02:45 PM

Running late is a big one I forgot to mention.

(Last week I did a record with 8 studio tracks, 4 live board mixes from 05, and 4 live board mixes from 06. Many of the board mixes had drop outs, major L/R level shifts, clipping, in mono, etc. The call was at 12n, uploading still needed and the 'deadline' was supposedly 5 pm, although it was moved back. So 16 tracks, that each needed love, and a very particular musician client on eq, on some amazing music with very talented players that we both wanted to showcase.)

PatrikT · 21st December 2007, 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flatfinger

Most common and annoying pratfalls??

To "compare" mixes to mastered recordings.

Don't.

Best Regards
Patrik

Jerry Tubb · 21st December 2007, 03:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flatfinger

What do mixers need to stop doing???
Most common and annoying pratfalls??

Tambourines & HiHats in general.

JT

glassmaster · 21st December 2007, 05:02 PM

"Stop bringing me all this work, and the money to pay for it. Can't you see I'm busy posting important manefestos on Gearslutz"

johnlink · 21st December 2007, 05:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PatrikT

To "compare" mixes to mastered recordings.

Don't.

Why not?

brethes@mac.com · 21st December 2007, 06:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnlink

Why not?

Because it puts pressure on mixing engineer to deliver mixes for approval that are as loud as mastered ones, wrecking the dynamics with limiters, clipping, over-compression or all three!

Wouldn't be so bad is then they would supply a clean version for mastering together with the approved suqashed one, but more often than not these days this doesn't happen...

johnlink · 21st December 2007, 06:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brethes@mac.com

Because it puts pressure on mixing engineer to deliver mixes for approval that are as loud as mastered ones, wrecking the dynamics with limiters, clipping, over-compression or all three!

Because it is the mastering engineer's job to wreck the dynamics with limiters, clipping, over-compression or all three, right?

Quote:

Wouldn't be so bad is then they would supply a clean version for mastering together with the approved suqashed one, but more often than not these days this doesn't happen...

That makes sense, but then I would change the original statement to "Don't compare your mixes to masters that have been squashed (i.e., ruined)".

John Link

brethes@mac.com · 21st December 2007, 06:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnlink

Because it is the mastering engineer's job to wreck the dynamics with limiters, clipping, over-compression or all three, right?

John Link

Yes, exactly! We like to think we can do it better with less damage.

PatrikT · 22nd December 2007, 03:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnlink

Because it is the mastering engineer's job to wreck the dynamics with limiters, clipping, over-compression or all three, right?

How funny. But how boring to see the same rant all over again. Does it help people around here? I think not.

Why not start with "automation"? I would suggest that wise automation when mixing could take away about 80% of mastering processes.

How easy to ride those gains instead of trying to tweak bad digital compressor algorithms on every channel/bus possible.

Best Regards
Patrik

masteringhouse · 22nd December 2007, 05:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flatfinger

What do mixers need to stop doing???

Waiting to "fix it in the mix and or mastering". Get the best performance and tracks from the start. The rest will fall into place. (assuming the mix engineer was tracking)

Masterer · 22nd December 2007, 05:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnlink

Because it is the mastering engineer's job to wreck the dynamics with limiters, clipping, over-compression or all three, right?

Only if that's your request.
It's certainly not the guitarists job!!
Ha!

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnlink

That makes sense, but then I would change the original statement to "Don't compare your mixes to masters that have been squashed (i.e., ruined)".

If you have to say that, it'll likely be ignored anyway.

illacov · 22nd December 2007, 05:08 PM

Dont mix loud and monitor quiet.

Guys feel if they dont need to turn their speakers up during mixing that the track is perfect.

Then you see they have 28 different plugins compressors and crap all over their 2 buss and they think it sounds "awesome."

Then you see that on a scale from 1 to 10 their monitors are on level 2 or 3.

You try in vain to explain to them that somebody WILL listen to that song at much different level and hear HASH, but they dont think you understand they're professionals (because they have clients). Used car salesmen have "clients," too, but they still sell bullspit cars to people.

Another one is thinking that because its Wednesday, you'll trigger kicks for them off their 2 track since it has no kick anymore due to being SQUASHED in the mix phase.

These are some things that come to mind.

I hate to master my own material. I've hired out once and I had a good experience with the house I chose. And I will continue to hire out because of that good experience.

But I can definately tell you that both sides of the table is full to the brim of hopeless know it alls who dont know squat.

I love it when kids get their trust fund and buy into the whole ridiculous claim that as long as you have a good room, you can have absolutely shitty tools and get great results.

SO the guy spends oh 100,000 grand on construction. Gets a state of the art computer. MOTU converters for monitoring and Mackie Active Monitors to master their clients material with! Not one decent hardware compressor in site! Not one mediocre eq in site! Not even an Alesis 3630! To top it off with, one kid's studio had a Soundworkshop desk in it. He only MONITORED with it. This was a 52 input board folks. Only 2 channels ever saw use!

Then they have the nerve to charge money!

Best part is seeing that their legit copy of ProTools (LE) is using only the finest CRACKED plugins.

SO I guess this is a two way post. Dont be a stupid mix engineer with pompous overtones and also dont be a clueless mastering engineer with retard overtones.

I love it how I occasionally meet aspiring mix engineers who learned everything from the Fruity Loops forum, you say maybe u should try Bob Katz book or look up some decent info on Gearslutz, they do play by play stuff.

They say gear who??

Damn we need a magazine or something guys.

Peace
Illumination

jamsmith · 22nd December 2007, 06:34 PM

I am a little hazing on the "don't compare your mix to a mastered one?" If that is supposed to mean don't try to replicate the mastering processes during the mix, I hear that. To me that is almost like saying make your mixes suck so we can fix it. I have heard testimony of legendary MEs tell of great engineers who required very little tweaking during mastering. As an engineer, I have been proud of some stuff I have had released with no mastering at all (yes, and vice versa!) which indicates that much of the required result CAN be done with a mix. And how do we recording engineer achieve that result? Those of us not blessed with magic ears generally have a CD of similar material commercially released for comparison.

Now I fully agree that a mix engineer should be creating a mix that is proper for the mastering stage. But delivering a mix with proper dynamics and eq to a matering engineer is a crime?

Also confused about "Adding lots of weird EQ, effects or reverb before sending it in for mastering." The EQ part, yes, but the effects and the reverb, those are the creative domain of the producer/mix engineer. It that is they the mix is supposed to sound, thats is it. The MEs job is to make THAT translate well to other systems. I used to record Death Metal. As horrid and out of sonic balance it sounded to the ME is irrellevent. Fortunately I never attended any of the mastering sessions as I would hate to have been the one to inform the ME "That is how is it supposed to sound" as he tried to "compensate" for the massive massive bass, fuzzy, buzzy highs, and almost complete lack of mid range.

bob katz · 22nd December 2007, 07:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VictorQ

I've actually been told, that stereo split is better to hand in for mastering. Can't think of any reasons why (unless you have a lossy codec like BWF MPG on there for kicks

).

A good mastering studio can deal with anything. Sequoia, Sadie, and Pyramix can insert either stereo or interleaved files in the same session (edl). That said, interleaved files are preferred because:

guaranteed no accidents or errors if one channel is accidentily slid against another. Yes, we can and do group the channels, but "never turn your back on computers".

It takes a very slight additional effort to insert split files into SADiE or Sequoia but it's not a "deal-breaker".

The other advantage of interleaved files is they take less time to up load and you don't lose a channel due to "negligence".

That's about it. In the end we prefer interleaved but don't reject dual mono! I'd rather get the ORIGINAL dual mono files from a Pro Tools guy than something which he converted to interleaved himself just in case there was some error.

BK

Ecktronic · 22nd December 2007, 07:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Darius van H

The one thing that really winds me up is:

Split mono files instead of stereo interleaved. I just don't see the logic in it......maybe some people think it sounds "wider"!

I heard from the Pro Tools classes that the reason for using split mono over stereo interleaved is that its meant to dither better!
Dingy split mono!

Eck

Ecktronic · 22nd December 2007, 07:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brethes@mac.com

Because it puts pressure on mixing engineer to deliver mixes for approval that are as loud as mastered ones, wrecking the dynamics with limiters, clipping, over-compression or all three!

Wouldn't be so bad is then they would supply a clean version for mastering together with the approved suqashed one, but more often than not these days this doesn't happen...

I don't see anything wrong with comparing mixes to mastered mixes for reference. Although you can only do what the recorded tracks are capable of as the master reference mix will have different sounding/quality recordings.

Why not turn the volume of the master down when its in your mix session so it matches the volume of your mix?

Eck

brethes@mac.com · 22nd December 2007, 11:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamsmith

I am a little hazing on the "don't compare your mix to a mastered one?" If that is supposed to mean don't try to replicate the mastering processes during the mix, I hear that. To me that is almost like saying make your mixes suck so we can fix it. I have heard testimony of legendary MEs tell of great engineers who required very little tweaking during mastering. As an engineer, I have been proud of some stuff I have had released with no mastering at all (yes, and vice versa!) which indicates that much of the required result CAN be done with a mix. And how do we recording engineer achieve that result? Those of us not blessed with magic ears generally have a CD of similar material commercially released for comparison.

Now I fully agree that a mix engineer should be creating a mix that is proper for the mastering stage. But delivering a mix with proper dynamics and eq to a matering engineer is a crime?

OK, for all those who missed the in-joke, this was only meant as a reference to the ever growing trend of sending in for mastering mixes that are as loud or louder than the loudest current loud big seller release. In other words: in the context of the Loudness War!

This wouldn't be a problem if those mixes were great and didn't need anything else done to them. Unfortunately, these would also be the mixes that would need quite a lot of help, but due to the excessive squashing and distortion would totally tie the hands of the mastering engineer...

Obviously comparing mixes to similar material commercially released can be a good thing and a useful learning tool the same way as using reference CDs for mastering can be useful. Great mastering always starts from great mixes. Squashed mixes just for levels sake is not a good start in the right direction...

Thomas W. Bethe · 23rd December 2007, 02:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamsmith

I am a little hazing on the "don't compare your mix to a mastered one?" If that is supposed to mean don't try to replicate the mastering processes during the mix, I hear that. To me that is almost like saying make your mixes suck so we can fix it. I have heard testimony of legendary MEs tell of great engineers who required very little tweaking during mastering. As an engineer, I have been proud of some stuff I have had released with no mastering at all (yes, and vice versa!) which indicates that much of the required result CAN be done with a mix. And how do we recording engineer achieve that result? Those of us not blessed with magic ears generally have a CD of similar material commercially released for comparison.

Now I fully agree that a mix engineer should be creating a mix that is proper for the mastering stage. But delivering a mix with proper dynamics and eq to a mastering engineer is a crime?

Also confused about "Adding lots of weird EQ, effects or reverb before sending it in for mastering." The EQ part, yes, but the effects and the reverb, those are the creative domain of the producer/mix engineer. It that is they the mix is supposed to sound, thats is it. The MEs job is to make THAT translate well to other systems. I used to record Death Metal. As horrid and out of sonic balance it sounded to the ME is irrelevant. Fortunately I never attended any of the mastering sessions as I would hate to have been the one to inform the ME "That is how is it supposed to sound" as he tried to "compensate" for the massive massive bass, fuzzy, buzzy highs, and almost complete lack of mid range.

Let me relate a story....

I had a client that brought in some tracks that he had recorded and mixed. They sounded dreadful here but he said they sounded good at his place. He asked me if I would come to his studio and see why they sounded good to him in his place and bad here. I was happy to help.

His studio was in the basement of his house and was very well done. There were two rooms and a control room and a vocal booth. He had spent the money to do things correctly including sand filled cement blocks between the two studios and the control room and the vocal booth. He had built rooms with in rooms after the walls went up. All in all a very nice studio setup and he had even included sound locks on all the studios. One small problem. His control room was about 8 feet deep and 20 feet long. He had his monitoring along the long wall and one speaker was about three feet from his left ear and the other speaker was about 17 feet from his right ear. He was using all top quality home stereo speakers and an integrated amplifier. I noticed that he had two Soundcraft eq's in his setup with the familiar smiley eq set on them and the monitor output of his 24 by 8 Mackie board was fed into the EQs and then into the monitor amplifier which also had active tone controls and a bass boost/loudness control both of which were on. The 2 track output of his Mackie board went into a Behringer all in one Swiss army knife processor and then into a Behringer compressor limiter exciter and then into his DAT machine. I listened to the tracks that he had brought in for mastering and they did indeed sound better than the did in my studio with my ALON IVs and my Bryston 4 B amplifier in an acoustically treaded room. (his control room was all cement block with NO carpeting on the floor and a plywood paneled ceiling). He had obviously mixed for his space and could not hear the problems with the sound since one speaker was within three feet of his head and the other was 5 times the distance. The moral of this story is. If you can't hear what you are doing don't add a lot of "effects" to the mix because when you get it to a 'real" studio is will sound like $HIT. Also if you add on a lot of effects to the two track master and then have the mastering engineer try to make it sound good in his or her room you maybe in for a nasty surprise. FWIW AND MTCW.

I am not saying that mastering engineer should try and change things that are done for effects if that indeed is what you wanted to do BUT make sure

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
latest song: "Rebound Girl" (Powerpop)	gotpop	Work in progress / advice requested / Show & Tell / Artist showcase	3	30th November 2007 09:41 PM
Stop buying "Redneck"made...	Dirty Halo	The moan zone	103	18th November 2007 11:49 AM
"The Clients need to smoke Pot"	draudio2u	Mastering forum	2	15th November 2007 05:08 PM
"Microphone Placement in Live Recording", or , "Stop reading labels and Listen!"	Waylon	Remote Possibilities in Acoustic Music & Location Recording	13	2nd November 2007 05:13 PM
Best "one stop shopping" for heavy guitar info?	beautyfish	So much gear, so little time!	2	3rd March 2007 04:55 AM

21st December 2007, 01:09 AM	#1
flatfinger Gear nut Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 93	The latest "What evils would you tell your clients to stop hoisting on you " Thread!! What do mixers need to stop doing??? Most common and annoying pratfalls?? Thanks fer the reminders !

21st December 2007, 04:55 AM	#2
Darius van H Lives for gear Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Amsterdam Posts: 874	The one thing that really winds me up is: Split mono files instead of stereo interleaved. I just don't see the logic in it......maybe some people think it sounds "wider"! __________________ now: www.wisseloordmastering.com soon!: www.amsterdammastering.com

21st December 2007, 05:14 AM	#3
lucey Lives for gear Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: the present Posts: 8,932	clipping __________________ Brian Lucey Magic Garden Mastering "beauty resists capture" "the economy is a wholly owned subsidiary of the ecology" - unknown

21st December 2007, 12:09 PM	#4
Boomshanka Gear addict Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Melbourne - Australia's music capital. Posts: 382	To live with your mixes for a bit, check in different systems/environments, tweak, live with it a bit more. Get it as good as possible to your vision, ignoring overall CD level (or if need be maximize/limit just your listening copy). Then book your mastering. Avoid booking your CD launch until you've got your discs replicated (and you can even use 'em to promote to media & industry). It can make the whole process much more relaxed and enjoyable for all concerned. __________________ Adam Dempsey new website: Jack the Bear's Deluxe Mastering MySpace Is adding presence the same as subtracting absence?

21st December 2007, 01:07 PM	#7
VictorQ Gear Head Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Copenhagen Posts: 50	I've actually been told, that stereo split is better to hand in for mastering. Can't think of any reasons why (unless you have a lossy codec like BWF MPG on there for kicks ). Last edited by VictorQ; 21st December 2007 at 01:07 PM. Reason: could have been slander

21st December 2007, 01:34 PM	#8
Thomas W. Bethe Lives for gear Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Oberlin, Ohio Posts: 569	Bringing in mixes that have already been through a compressor or L-2 type device and are already smashed with the RMS to Peak level being less than 4 dBU. Adding lots of weird EQ, effects or reverb before sending it in for mastering. Waiting until the last minute to get the mastering done and then having one foot out the door to send it off for replication. Not listening to the final mixes on lots of different systems and tweaking it BEFORE sending in for mastering. Expecting the mastering to work miracles on the mix when the mix is not really ready for mastering, Expecting the mastering engineer to do the final mixing while mastering, "could you bring up the snare drum and take down the guitar and put the vocalist in the middle of the mix as we are mastering?" Expecting the mastering engineer to do the impossible... "the bass amp has a problem and every time it is played loud it distorts could you take out that distortion but leave in the distortion from the guitar because that is the way we want it to sound?" Not budgeting enough for the mastering and say "gee could we do this today and we will pay you when we get the first 1000 CDs sold?" Not giving the mastering engineer a clear vision of what you want the final CD to sound like. "we know this is heavy metal but could you make it sound like a James Taylor CD?" or "this is the best we have ever played this song but it sounds to tame could you make it hard driving and LOUD?" Not really understanding what mastering is all about..... __________________ -TOM- Thomas W. Bethel Managing Director Acoustik Musik, Ltd. Room with a View Productions Oberlin, OH 44074 www.acoustikmusik.com

21st December 2007, 01:53 PM	#9
inlinenl Lives for gear Join Date: May 2005 Location: Netherlands Posts: 683	not mix until 05:00 am the night before .. and then drop in at 12:00 while we made the app. at 10:30 ( session until 17:00 ) yes it has to be ready today ..... next week is the release party ... OK lets rollllll __________________ Greetings/Regards Wim Bult www.inlinemastering.com The Netherlands

21st December 2007, 02:45 PM	#10
lucey Lives for gear Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: the present Posts: 8,932	Running late is a big one I forgot to mention. (Last week I did a record with 8 studio tracks, 4 live board mixes from 05, and 4 live board mixes from 06. Many of the board mixes had drop outs, major L/R level shifts, clipping, in mono, etc. The call was at 12n, uploading still needed and the 'deadline' was supposedly 5 pm, although it was moved back. So 16 tracks, that each needed love, and a very particular musician client on eq, on some amazing music with very talented players that we both wanted to showcase.) __________________ Brian Lucey Magic Garden Mastering "beauty resists capture" "the economy is a wholly owned subsidiary of the ecology" - unknown

21st December 2007, 05:02 PM	#13
glassmaster Gear Head Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Boulder, CO Posts: 66	"Stop bringing me all this work, and the money to pay for it. Can't you see I'm busy posting important manefestos on Gearslutz" __________________ David Glasser Airshow Mastering Boulder, CO Mastering for CD, DVD, and SACD http://www.airshowmastering.com

22nd December 2007, 05:08 PM	#21
illacov Gear addict Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: USA Posts: 408	Here's one from a fledgling engineer.... Dont mix loud and monitor quiet. Guys feel if they dont need to turn their speakers up during mixing that the track is perfect. Then you see they have 28 different plugins compressors and crap all over their 2 buss and they think it sounds "awesome." Then you see that on a scale from 1 to 10 their monitors are on level 2 or 3. You try in vain to explain to them that somebody WILL listen to that song at much different level and hear HASH, but they dont think you understand they're professionals (because they have clients). Used car salesmen have "clients," too, but they still sell bullspit cars to people. Another one is thinking that because its Wednesday, you'll trigger kicks for them off their 2 track since it has no kick anymore due to being SQUASHED in the mix phase. These are some things that come to mind. I hate to master my own material. I've hired out once and I had a good experience with the house I chose. And I will continue to hire out because of that good experience. But I can definately tell you that both sides of the table is full to the brim of hopeless know it alls who dont know squat. I love it when kids get their trust fund and buy into the whole ridiculous claim that as long as you have a good room, you can have absolutely shitty tools and get great results. SO the guy spends oh 100,000 grand on construction. Gets a state of the art computer. MOTU converters for monitoring and Mackie Active Monitors to master their clients material with! Not one decent hardware compressor in site! Not one mediocre eq in site! Not even an Alesis 3630! To top it off with, one kid's studio had a Soundworkshop desk in it. He only MONITORED with it. This was a 52 input board folks. Only 2 channels ever saw use! Then they have the nerve to charge money! Best part is seeing that their legit copy of ProTools (LE) is using only the finest CRACKED plugins. SO I guess this is a two way post. Dont be a stupid mix engineer with pompous overtones and also dont be a clueless mastering engineer with retard overtones. I love it how I occasionally meet aspiring mix engineers who learned everything from the Fruity Loops forum, you say maybe u should try Bob Katz book or look up some decent info on Gearslutz, they do play by play stuff. They say gear who?? Damn we need a magazine or something guys. Peace Illumination __________________ http://www.myspace.com/clamweezy http://www.myspace.com/thegoonies2

22nd December 2007, 06:34 PM	#22
jamsmith Lives for gear Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Atlanta, GA Posts: 1,044	I am a little hazing on the "don't compare your mix to a mastered one?" If that is supposed to mean don't try to replicate the mastering processes during the mix, I hear that. To me that is almost like saying make your mixes suck so we can fix it. I have heard testimony of legendary MEs tell of great engineers who required very little tweaking during mastering. As an engineer, I have been proud of some stuff I have had released with no mastering at all (yes, and vice versa!) which indicates that much of the required result CAN be done with a mix. And how do we recording engineer achieve that result? Those of us not blessed with magic ears generally have a CD of similar material commercially released for comparison. Now I fully agree that a mix engineer should be creating a mix that is proper for the mastering stage. But delivering a mix with proper dynamics and eq to a matering engineer is a crime? Also confused about "Adding lots of weird EQ, effects or reverb before sending it in for mastering." The EQ part, yes, but the effects and the reverb, those are the creative domain of the producer/mix engineer. It that is they the mix is supposed to sound, thats is it. The MEs job is to make THAT translate well to other systems. I used to record Death Metal. As horrid and out of sonic balance it sounded to the ME is irrellevent. Fortunately I never attended any of the mastering sessions as I would hate to have been the one to inform the ME "That is how is it supposed to sound" as he tried to "compensate" for the massive massive bass, fuzzy, buzzy highs, and almost complete lack of mid range. __________________ Screamin' Michael Jamsmith - www.jamsmith.com "You CAN polish a turd, but you just end up with a shiny turd."