Goals of Mastering ?

[Thomas W. Bethe]

Originally Posted by twwalsh

dude you are really hung up on this thing. we are talking about totally different things. you are so invested in this MASTERING vs HOME MASTERING vs NO MASTERING vs INTERNET MASTERING argument that you can't see the nuances of any discussion!

i think mastering is important. i do it for money!

best wishes.

So do I....see Acoustik Musik

[jinksdingo]

You got one mix as you like it and that is well done. What about other mixes?
Do you intend to put out a CD of more than one mix?
Probably your going to have more material to go on the CD.
Every mix is different especially mixes done in different studios.
Compiling your mixes so these present well on a CD is primarily a function of Mastering including those benefits already mentioned in this thread

[Peakly]

Originally Posted by Boomshanka

Still, more often than not a painting needs framing and to be correctly lit.

That's cool. I like that way of looking at it. If people can't hear the music because it's just poorly recorded, for any reason whatsoever in the process, then it's a screw up.


"maybe they're more engaged with creating things and satisfying themselves than trying to impress a bunch of jerkoffs in suits."

I agree. And it goes with this:


"When could anyone NOT be heard if they put their mind to being heard?"

Unfortunately, those jerk offs in suits, with the bottom line as their guru, often succeeded in promoting music that was terrible, and ignoring music that was great. Thank goodness the internet is helping to break up music "businesses" that have done at least as much harm as good. Sure there's a lot of music on the internet that sounds bad. But there's also some smoking stuff. The hard part is figuring out how we're all going to get paid! Intellectual property is taking a beating right now.


"I keep forgetting that today everybody just clicks around myspace for ten hours a day and finds a song they like every week or so..."

That may be true for a few people. But most of the people I know don't have time to sit in front of a computer for very long. I'm talking about all ages of people - teens, twenties, thirties, whatever. They know how to get around the internet pretty quick, and get a few songs they like downloaded and transferred to their mp3 players, or burned onto CDs.

[dcollins]

Glue Sniffing and Pills

??

DC

[dcollins]

Glue Sniffing and Pills

??

DC

[masteringhouse]

Reasons why you should have your music mastered (from discmakers)

Generally some good info that has already been said here, though glue and pills may help you to get through the video.

[twwalsh]

Originally Posted by masteringhouse

Reasons why you should have your music mastered (from discmakers)

Generally some good info that has already been said here, though glue and pills may help you to get through the video.

i absolutely believe in mastering. i was arguing against the reasoning that in the modern age the main goal of mastering is to impress the "gatekeepers" of the music industry. that part of the model is changing.

good mastering makes your record better...that's a good enough reason.

[bugs]

Originally Posted by bringmewater

I have a finished mix that sounds great on my near fields, far fields, in my car, on pc speakers etc.... All the instruments sound balanced, in their proper place, it's 13 on the K-meter and overall sounds very commercial.

So......what would be the goals of a world class Mastering Engineer having received this mix ? What else is left to be done ?

Thanks for the insight.

I think the mastering stage should make the track sound better than it desires to sound.

[masteringhouse]

Originally Posted by twwalsh

i absolutely believe in mastering. i was arguing against the reasoning that in the modern age the main goal of mastering is to impress the "gatekeepers" of the music industry. that part of the model is changing.

good mastering makes your record better...that's a good enough reason.

I won't argue that. There are millions of "gates", a label, myspace, a person's pockets, etc. Mastering should help to impress everyone of them. I think Bob O's point was (and I believe that you agree) that some gates are more exclusive than others. Showing up in a suit and a tie is more likely to get you in to some of those.

[jamsmith]

Originally Posted by twwalsh

off the top of my head:

during the 25 years MTV was king. ugly and fat people couldn't get heard.

at the dawn of rock and roll in the 50s. black people couldn't get heard.

10 years ago - anyone whose music would appeal to less than 15,000 people. not even the smallest record label would invest in them.

So its great for shlock. Black folks couldn't get heard, but we still ended up with Hendrix. Today, instead of getting with Chas Chanlder and Eddie Kramer, he may just have put out some some crappy homemade tastes and gone nowhere.

And for all the artists heard today, can someone point to any group that could possible compete with either Earth Wind and Fire or Led Zeppelin?

Even in polls of young people, classic rock bands still dominate.

There are some acts in Atlanta who are incredibly awesome, in the real "golden age", they would be signed and touring. One guy has amoung his fans Joe Satriani, Eric Johnson, and Steve Morse. But he plays clubs here locally.

Consider this. We get a basket with talents. You can only fit so much talent in the basket. Few with enormous musical talent are great self-promotors. People with great self-promotion skills but fair-to-middling musical skills rule in the electronic age.

About the only major star that could compete if they started today is probably Prince.

[Bob Olhsson]

The problem today is that Madison Avenue is controlling exposure based on focus group demographic statistics. This has even drifted into live venues which was the traditional end-run around advertising supported media. There's a complete disconnect between music fans and what can get exposed because the folks who pay the bills always choose the music.

Somebody WILL find today's end-runs around commerce that will connect with fans. It just requires creativity as opposed to following the crowd.

[Thomas W. Bethe]

The Madison avenue types that control much of the music industry are NOT primarily musicians and have publicly stated on numerous occasions that they could be selling shoes, farm tractors or widgets because they are MBAs and or lawyers and their job is to make money and they really don't care what product they are selling.

Music, as WE all know, is not a widget nor a farm tractor nor shoes and their way of dealing with the music business shows that they lack the most basic understanding of what people today are looking for. Things like focus groups are fine if you are selling appliances or hair shampoo but are an unnatural way of looking at "products" when it comes to music.

Record companies today are still primarily run on models that worked in the 60s and 70s but have little relevance today. They have NOT kept up with the times and when confronted with things like peer to peer file sharing they choose to litigate instead of finding ways to give the fans what they really wanted which was access to the songs they wanted to hear and not what some record exec decided should be on an album. When I-Tunes was first proposed the record companies balked at the very idea of selling tunes over the Internet because it is did not fit the model they had in place. It has proved to be a fantastic revenue source for them but they fought it tooth and nail at the beginning.

Peer to peer file sharing also opened up music to a whole lot of people that were more interested in the music than they were purchasing it. Stealing songs over the Internet hurt not only the record companies but individual up and coming artists because with lessening revenues record companies could no longer afford to take a chance on a new unproved artist so they went with ones that were proven money makers or they created new artist from scratch like they did with the boy bands.

The music industry today is in turmoil. It is a mess and is getting worse not better. It will eventually have to evolve but how long that will take and in what direction it will go is anyone's guess.

MTCW

[masteringhouse]

Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson

The problem today is that Madison Avenue is controlling exposure based on focus group demographic statistics. This has even drifted into live venues which was the traditional end-run around advertising supported media. There's a complete disconnect between music fans and what can get exposed because the folks who pay the bills always choose the music.

Somebody WILL find today's end-runs around commerce that will connect with fans. It just requires creativity as opposed to following the crowd.

Coffee, sandwich, CD?

[twwalsh]

Originally Posted by Thomas W. Bethe

The music industry today is in turmoil. It is a mess and is getting worse not better.

What exactly does this statement mean? From my perspective, artists and record labels are having trouble making money through the traditional channels of recording distribution. Is it really a surprise that after 50 years the model needs some adjustments?

The MUSIC industry isn't in turmoil. The RECORDING industry is in turmoil. Bands can still depend on performance and merchandise income as well as licensing and publishing. If you are a talented artist and can generate a demand, there are a lot of other ways to make money than mechanical royalties. I can tell you from experience that mechanical royalties have always been just pennies on the dollar and don't amount to much in practice. When I was making a living as a musician, royalties were a small part of the picture.

Bands will always need recordings as an artistic expression and as a promotional tool. But it's become clear that monetizing these recordings is very problematic in the current culture and technological landscape.

[twwalsh]

Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson

The problem today is that Madison Avenue is controlling exposure based on focus group demographic statistics.

Madison avenue? This corporate music world that you're referring to is such a small part of the picture. I'd wager that less than one percent of the active and successful artists out there fit into this group. How many of the professional mastering engineers on this board work in this realm? I'd wager fewer than 10%.

Today's entertainment world is all about niches and the long tail. The "mainstream" is a thing of the past. It doesn't exist anymore and there's no need for a corporate infrastructure to support the 50 artists who are household names.

Anyone with a computer can find music that speaks directly to them. They don't turn on the radio to hear what the A&R gods have decided to give them. Terrestrial radio is dying and MTV is a soap opera channel.

[Peakly]

Originally Posted by Thomas W. Bethe

If you want to perform then perform but don't get that confused with making it!

Making what?

Just wondering - would Britney Spears be considered a success story by the "recording/music industry?"

[jamsmith]

I wouldn't go as far as the Prophets of Doom. I think radio is better than it has been since FM became commericialized. I hear a lot of good stuff from groups like Disturbed, System of a Down, Sixx AM, etc. Rock radio is really mixing it up these days playing not only new releases, hits, and classic hits but a lot of old school favorties that you use to hear on AOR FM.

Frankly a lot of this "independent" music to me sounds like dog shit. I was never a fan of "college radio. While I don't like the way they do business, a major label still gets an artist teamed up with great producers and great engineers in great recording environments. And they do manage to bring in some hit writers from time to time to add some weight to the albums.

[joeaudio]

Originally Posted by bringmewater

I have a finished mix that sounds great on my near fields, far fields, in my car, on pc speakers etc.... All the instruments sound balanced, in their proper place, it's 13 on the K-meter and overall sounds very commercial.

So......what would be the goals of a world class Mastering Engineer having received this mix ? What else is left to be done ?

Thanks for the insight.

When the EQ is perfect and the levels are already there
we add a stereoizer.

[Thomas W. Bethe]

Originally Posted by twwalsh

What exactly does this statement mean? From my perspective, artists and record labels are having trouble making money through the traditional channels of recording distribution. Is it really a surprise that after 50 years the model needs some adjustments?

The MUSIC industry isn't in turmoil. The RECORDING industry is in turmoil. Bands can still depend on performance and merchandise income as well as licensing and publishing. If you are a talented artist and can generate a demand, there are a lot of other ways to make money than mechanical royalties. I can tell you from experience that mechanical royalties have always been just pennies on the dollar and don't amount to much in practice. When I was making a living as a musician, royalties were a small part of the picture.

Bands will always need recordings as an artistic expression and as a promotional tool. But it's become clear that monetizing these recordings is very problematic in the current culture and technological landscape.

Monetizing

1. To convert into money.

2. To convert from securities into currency that can be used to purchase goods and services.

If an artist is going to make it ( meaning making a living off their music) then they have to be able to sell their product to someone so it has to be marketable. Part of making it marketable is to have it mastered by someone who knows what he or she is doing, who has a good monitoring environment and who has the best equipment for the job. It has NOTHING to do with freedom of expression, with bands or artists being able to play what they want or any with someone singing off key and saying that it is artistic expression.

The music industry is an industry and just like any other industry has to make money to stay in business. Whether you are making widgets or promotion the career of the latest pop sensation what it costs you to produce and market the product has to be covered by sales or YOU GO OUT OF BUSINESS. Yes the old model of a record company does not work any more, yes there are alternative methods of distribution, yes you can make money selling your self produced album on the Internet and yes things they are a changing. But even if the distribution channel changes and even if record companies as we knew them go the way of the dodo bird the artist will still need to put their best foot forward and part of that "image" is well done, listenable, memorable music that is well played, well recorded, well mixed and well mastered. Putting out something that is self satisfying to the artist but sounds like sh!t is NOT IMHO going to make that music saleable or commercially viable. To say that anyone can put their music on the Internet is like saying that anyone can draw a picture or take a photograph and put it on the Internet but so what? If no one sees or listens to it then you have basically wasted your time and energy and even though YOU like it if no one else does then it is like so much bird droppings on my car. They may be artistically pleasing to the birds but are not lasting and can easliy be washed off and forgotten.

Have a great day and play some good music and chill.

[Peakly]

Originally Posted by Thomas W. Bethe

Putting out something that is self satisfying to the artist but sounds like sh!t is NOT IMHO going to make that music saleable or commercially viable.

It is definitely harder to sell something that isn't good. But it can be done, as evidenced by tons of bad music that has been "sold" to the public over the years.

[bringmewater]

I know what you mean. I even find that listening a week later the mixes sound totally different. Perspective is very hard to get. Thanks for all the tips.

Originally Posted by lucey

"I have a finished mix that sounds great on my near fields, far fields, in my car, on pc speakers etc.... All the instruments sound balanced, in their proper place, it's 13 on the K-meter and overall sounds very commercial."

I often get this line from mixers ... and after they hear what can be done, the mixes are suddenly not as great as they were last week. Perspective and potential, it's part of the service we offer.

Then again, maybe you're one of those rare projects where your mixes cannot be topped by processing them further, and are so even as to not need to be adjusted to work with each other, or the world. Cool.

[joelpatterson]

Someone should conduct this experiment: get a haircut. Then, immediately walk around the corner to a barbershop, and ask this question: "Do you think I need a haircut?"

Asking a forum full of mastering engineers whether something needs to be mastered, in the abstract... there's something absurd about it, I can't put my finger on it....

[Thomas W. Bethe]

Originally Posted by Peakly

It is definitely harder to sell something that isn't good. But it can be done, as evidenced by tons of bad music that has been "sold" to the public over the years.

I am not a musician and I don't play one on TV. I took 8 years of classical piano which as always helped me with editing and the understanding of music but I no longer play. My associate is a musician. He plays drums, guitar and keyboards and also sings. We lately have been having a discussion of what makes a hit CD and have come up with the following.

Good songs - ones that have heart and invoke a feeling. You can remember them easily and you want to listen to them over and over again. The lyrics should be interesting and fit with the music. The music should stand on its own without the lyrics and if you listen to the music over and over again you get something different from it each time you listen. The music should be well recorded and mixed and there should be no easily definable problems with the music or the way it was recorded. The songs should be well mastered (we are both mastering engineers) and the album should be a unified collection of songs instead of a bunch of songs that are simply put on one CD. The artwork on the album should be in keeping with the material and the whole package should be unified so you are buying a package and not something that was thrown together by different people all of whom were not communicating with each other.

I am not sure to what you are referring when you say "is evidenced by tons of bad music that has been "sold" to the public over the years." but it seems to me that people buy what they like and if given the choice will normally choose music that speaks to them on some level. Sure there has been some music that was oversold, so to speak, by hype and by the artist name power alone that failed to live up to the public's expectation but most music is purchased to be enjoyed and listened to over and over again.

I remember very well when the CD of "Thriller" came out and there were lines at all the Best Buys and people were camping out similar to what happens today when a new game or play-station is released. It was a break through albums the likes of which we have not seen lately. I know the first CD with "R" rated lyrics was also snapped up by people who were amazed that they could purchase something that was a bit risqué from a major retailer.

Music today is very fractured. It has a number of genres and sub genres and literally goes from Bach to Rock and beyond and is going though a major changes in the way it is produced and marketed. Hopefully from this rather chaotic state it is in at present it will become something much better in the future. I certainly hope so since many or our jobs depend on a strong music industry.

[datune]

Originally Posted by jamsmith

And for all the artists heard today, can someone point to any group that could possible compete with either Earth Wind and Fire or Led Zeppelin?
..........
About the only major star that could compete if they started today is probably Prince.

What a boatload of ***. How about Michael Jackson? Madonna? For crying out loud, Bjork can sing way better than both EWF and Led Zeppelin will ever be able to. And don't even get me started on people like Pink (have you heard ever heard her singing Accapella? I swear you'd be AMAZED!) How about Queen? You seriously think Queen could not compete if he started today? Come on...

Anyway, my point being is that your oppinion is so biased that it's added value to this discussion is basically void.

Regarding today's music industry, just look what we are being served from the MAJOR labels and it's TOP A&R idiots.
On the other hand, let's not forget that it's the BUYERS who actually support the choices from the A&R's. (For example, Britney could not be successfull without all the morons actually buying the records, how many morons bought and supported the record Paris Hilton released, how many times has it been played by MTV? All the top radio stations around the world, they all played it. You can't only blaim A&R's, after all, they only feed what the general masses longs for (as much as I hate it though).

[mstrom]

Originally Posted by bringmewater

I have a finished mix that sounds great on my near fields, far fields, in my car, on pc speakers etc.... All the instruments sound balanced, in their proper place, it's 13 on the K-meter and overall sounds very commercial.

So......what would be the goals of a world class Mastering Engineer having received this mix ? What else is left to be done ?

Thanks for the insight.

I'm no pro but I was in a similar situation a while a go. We where really happy with the mix and the songs. Only thing I thougt it lacked was a litte bit depht.
The mastering session was much better than i expected. First we discussed with the ME about what we were looking for. Listened some references and then started listening our stuff. His first reaction was that the mix in general was good but it lacked some depht. Right on the money I thought. We ended up limiting very little but the results were much better that I hoped for. I think that it makes no difference how little or what you need to achieve with mastering. It will still serve your cause and make your record sound better.

Good luck with you project

Mikko Virta
Välilyönti records

[masteringhouse]

Originally Posted by joelpatterson

Someone should conduct this experiment: get a haircut. Then, immediately walk around the corner to a barbershop, and ask this question: "Do you think I need a haircut?"

Joel, judging from the pic in your avatar you need a haircut. :-)

Speaking of haircut analogies, I recently went to a professional stylist with a "reference" picture of what I wanted. When I left I looked nothing like Brad Pitt. Should I ask for my money back?

[Boomshanka]

Originally Posted by datune

(For example, Britney could not be successfull without all the morons actually buying the records, how many morons bought and supported the record Paris Hilton released, how many times has it been played by MTV? All the top radio stations around the world, they all played it.

Although that's a subjective term... If by "all the top radio stations" you mean the major commercial ones, you'll find that they exist as a business, to make a buck... to play commercials. The music content is essentially the filler.
Here, the top stations in my opinion (as far as the real music scene goes) are the diverse, publicly funded indie ones run largely by volunteers, or the national, government radio network with more diverse programming from midnight-6am.

[Ecktronic]

Originally Posted by bringmewater

I have a finished mix that sounds great on my near fields, far fields, in my car, on pc speakers etc.... All the instruments sound balanced, in their proper place, it's 13 on the K-meter and overall sounds very commercial.

So......what would be the goals of a world class Mastering Engineer having received this mix ? What else is left to be done ?

Thanks for the insight.

Simply put, sending off your mix for mastering gives someone with a fresh set of ears to check the mix to see if anything in the mix could be changed to make it better, and also to enhance the sound (if need be) using sometimes any of the following processes:
EQ, compression, Noise Reduction, limiting, and even sometimes multiband compression.

Eck