Who makes better mastering engineers - musicians or non-musicians?

[666666]

Just for discussion:

Who makes better mastering engineers, musicians or non-musicians?

Is one universally preferred over the other?

I've heard folks say that the "best" mastering engineers are NOT musicians - will have less technical bias and be able to hear more "outside the box"... perhaps be able to hear more in the way the average listener may hear.

However, on the opposite side of the coin, some could argue that being a musician would give a mastering engineer deeper insight into what's going on with the music, would provide a higher degree of technical assessment that would ultimately allow finer levels of tweaking.

I realize that in the grand scheme of things it really shouldn't matter at all whether a given mastering engineer is a musician or not, as long as they provide overall excellent and appropriate work, but I am curious as to what popular opinion is.

I remember one mastering session I had attended years ago, was a very well-known and respected mastering engineer (you all know his name but I do not wish to reveal it here)... it was obvious that he was not a musician. Interestingly, he had made a few very insightful and useful suggestions / tweaks that in my opinion only could have come from a non-musician. He was definitely hearing the music on a different level than I (a musician) and it was refreshing / helpful.

At the same time, he had made some comments that were nearly silly due to his lack of "musical" knowledge, if left entirely to his own devices he may have made some serious "errors"... fortunately I was there to explain the instrumentation and arrangement issues that he had been confused about, he was then able to deal with it appropriately.

This experience showed me that both the musician mastering engineer and non-musician mastering engineer can be valuable, both have something special to offer.

But if I had to pick just one...? Hmmm... not sure. Being a musician myself, I'd tend to lean toward wanting a musician mastering engineer because, in theory, such an engineer will be more sensitive to the things that are important to me, the musician / artist.

However, I do understand that what is truly most important is how the end product translates to the masses, and this level of musicial communication goes above and beyond the types of things that musicians are often concerned about in a recording. So with this in mind, a non-musician mastering engineer might be best in order to hopefully rise above the technical biases and tweak the program in a manner to best communicate with the untrained masses.

I'm still torn.

Some of the most highly regarded mastering engineers out there... are they musicians or not?

What type of mastering engineer would YOU prefer if you had to take a pick... in general.... musician or non-musician?

[drblank]

Originally Posted by 666666

Just for discussion:

Who makes better mastering engineers, musicians or non-musicians?

Is one universally preferred over the other?

I've heard folks say that the "best" mastering engineers are NOT musicians - will have less technical bias and be able to hear more "outside the box"... perhaps be able to hear more in the way the average listener may hear.

However, on the opposite side of the coin, some could argue that being a musician would give a mastering engineer deeper insight into what's going on with the music, would provide a higher degree of technical assessment that would ultimately allow finer levels of tweaking.

I realize that in the grand scheme of things it really shouldn't matter at all whether a given mastering engineer is a musician or not, as long as they provide overall excellent and appropriate work, but I am curious as to what popular opinion is.

I remember one mastering session I had attended years ago, was a very well-known and respected mastering engineer (you all know his name but I do not wish to reveal it here)... it was obvious that he was not a musician. Interestingly, he had made a few very insightful and useful suggestions / tweaks that in my opinion only could have come from a non-musician. He was definitely hearing the music on a different level than I (a musician) and it was refreshing / helpful.

At the same time, he had made some comments that were nearly silly due to his lack of "musical" knowledge, if left entirely to his own devices he may have made some serious "errors"... fortunately I was there to explain the instrumentation and arrangement issues that he had been confused about, he was then able to deal with it appropriately.

This experience showed me that both the musician mastering engineer and non-musician mastering engineer can be valuable, both have something special to offer.

But if I had to pick just one...? Hmmm... not sure. Being a musician myself, I'd tend to lean toward wanting a musician mastering engineer because, in theory, such an engineer will be more sensitive to the things that are important to me, the musician / artist.

However, I do understand that what is truly most important is how the end product translates to the masses, and this level of musicial communication goes above and beyond the types of things that musicians are often concerned about in a recording. So with this in mind, a non-musician mastering engineer might be best in order to hopefully rise above the technical biases and tweak the program in a manner to best communicate with the untrained masses.

I'm still torn.

Some of the most highly regarded mastering engineers out there... are they musicians or not?

What type of mastering engineer would YOU prefer if you had to take a pick... in general.... musician or non-musician?

It depends on what type of musician, what their background is in terms of what they listen to, etc.

One thing some musicians possess is the ability know about "feel" and tone. A concert violinist will know what a concert violin is supposed to sound like. They can tell the difference between different violins within 2 seconds. Pianists can tell the difference between one piano to the next. If the content is sampled, sequenced content, then I don't think it matters either way. I think that musicians do need to be in the process, but they do need to interface with a technical person that knows the products involved to get the sound that is going to make it a good mastering. I think what is real important is having a high quality monitoring system so that one can actually hear minute details in the mastering process. I see more studios using more audiophile speakers/amplifiers being used which is a good sign. I would personally bring in some, or all, of the other musicians involved in the project to get final approval if the project is important enough. I've been involved in projects where I wasn't involved in the mix down or mastering process and there were mistakes that i thought were made regarding my own tracks. But being a hired musician, I wasn't allowed to be part of the process. I think it is important that musicians become involved before the finished product is released as each musician may hear subtle things regarding their tracks that the others involved didn't catch. Just my two cents.

[jayfrigo]

I think a person who makes music for a living should be at least an occasional recreational musician; this includes recording, mix, and mastering engineers. You don't have to be very proficient, or a former pro player, but for an engineer to just flat out, not be interested in the making of music at all, makes me think perhaps post-production audio would be a better fit.

[Silver Sonya]

I don't think you need to play an instrument or be a virtuoso, but you have to be very intense about listening to music.

The biggest pre-requisite to being a great mastering engineer, in my opinion, is to be a huge devourer of music in your youth. Just an obsessive, passionate listener. Someone who pays great attention to the details.

Ideally, you start this as an instinctual thing when you are, say, ten years old and it just gets more intense with time --- possibly to the degree of tormenting you at some points in your life.

(If you ever choose music over sex, you need to see a psychiatrist. I have and I did.)

- c

[lucey]

It's about how we listen. Some people listen like a mixer, some like a mastering engineer, some like a player. Some musicians don't listen like engineers, some do.

[jdg]

i play guitar like an engineer. have been since i was 10.. kinda sad.

[finetuner]

It helps imho, unless your ears are slightly damaged by Marshall stacks, crash cymbals or monitor feedback stike

Some threads overhere concluded how important communication with the client is. I think being a musician yourself, helps to better understand the 'language' and recognize all kinds of effects or instrument details.
Helps in doing edits / repairs.

[lucey]

Originally Posted by jdg

i play guitar like an engineer. have been since i was 10.. kinda sad.

Oh, I bet it's nice ... works for Lanois.

[Jerry Tubb]

Originally Posted by 666666

Who makes better mastering engineers, musicians or non-musicians?
<snip>
Some of the most highly regarded mastering engineers out there... are they musicians or not?

IIRC both Bob Ludwig and Doug Sax were both musicians before becoming great mastering engineers.

The word engineer itself implies serious technical skill and understanding.

IMO the important thing is to have a good knowledge of both the musical and technical sides.

A good balance.

JT

[mischa janisch]

I don't think being a former musician is a prerequisite to become a great mastering engineer, but it sure helps to keep a not-so-technical viewpoint.
Besides being able to hear and judge (a true prerequisite) the most important ability to me is to grasp the emotional side, because that's what the listeners will relate to...

[Adam Dempsey]

Yes, it's balance, understanding, and that it helps with communication, having an emotional connection with the music, whilst remaining objective and fresh about it. From legato to staccato, pp to ff - perhaps not as essential as being in tune with the vibe of the thing and how to get the best out of it, but in tune with the client.
But I was a musician, and now I'm not (time commitments), so I guess I have both bases covered..

[inlinenl]

I always start singing when I'm a bit drunk .. does that count.
And when I was young and walked from school to my house I used to sing songs from donny osmond ...

[macc]

A healthy balance is best I feel. The very thing I enjoy about mastering is that it satisfies both sides of my self (two words ).

I’m an astrophysicist by education, but a head-in-the-clouds, expression-obsessed hippy when it comes to music (not that I make hippy music ). I’m equally fascinated by both the technical and musical aspects of mastering, and both sides of me get satisfaction from doing it.



Nice topic.

[Odeon-Mastering]

Hi,

my 2 cents at this.

I used to be a professional musician (luckily not on LOUD stages) and then I studied sound engineering.
One thing I know for sure is that all the engineers I met were musicians, some very talented and some not so much. (after all when I worked in the UK most ppl were reffering to engineers as "frustrated musicians" lol).
Few years ago , while working as a mixing engineer I took a master's course on music composition.
I feel very strongly that studying orchestration/instrumentation made me a better engineer. The above applies to mixing AND mastering(although I do not mix anymore). Another great thing about it, is that I had all the time in the world to interact with performers and actually be there when they were studying my scores on their instrument. I would recommend to everyone to spend their time equally on studying tecnhical AND musical subjects.

A piece of advice #: If you are a musician and engineer never show your client ALL your skills. I once got banned from a stage because i was a better guitarist than the band's guitarist and I showed off before the sound check. So I guess engineers are frustrated musicians but musicians are frustrated in general (some times)

As far as if musicians make better engineers I think I answered above (I have never met an engineer who hasn't been a musician one way or another)

Thnx

Apostolos Siopis

[Bob Yordan]

Originally Posted by macc

A healthy balance is best I feel. The very thing I enjoy about mastering is that it satisfies both sides of my self (two words ).

I’m an astrophysicist by education, but a head-in-the-clouds, expression-obsessed hippy when it comes to music (not that I make hippy music ). I’m equally fascinated by both the technical and musical aspects of mastering, and both sides of me get satisfaction from doing it.



Nice topic.

* 100


---

I am a software developer by education, and have played music since 80s.

I mostly write & produce songs (keyboard player) and mix & master.

I think mastering is both about listening with distance but also possiblilty
to hear details. Being a musican can be both an advantage & disadvantage, cause a musican has a good hunch of how it is played.
Thereby getting distracted and focusing on details in the playing.

[Edward_Vinatea]

IMHO being able to write, arrange, engineer, produce, edit and master has given an edge over the younger MEs. To be specific - being able to communicate with musicians in their music language - help producers with arrangement/editing and rookie engineers with audio engineering is worked out a lot better for me and my mastering process.

Best regards,

[Paul Gold]

I am the worlds foremost arranger for spoons. 50% of my work is on spoon and kazoo albums so I'm not sure how advantageous it's been.

[Thomas W. Bethe]

Eight years of classical piano has served me well.

When I go into a recording session with a classical producer it is always fun to see what each of us is listening to. I listen for balances, possible distortion, environmental noises, HVAC noise and anything else from the technical or "sound" side. Meanwhile the producer is listening to things such as the violinist using the third fingering instead of the second, or is not taking the repeat at the same tempo as the original or the flow of the music from one section to another, he is more concerned with the music side. We are both listening for wrong notes or flubs but sometimes I catch things that he or she does not and sometimes they catch things that I miss. It works well and always has.

I guess this carries over into mastering where I am worried about the whole picture and the musician or mix engineer is worried about the individual tracks or how the music sounds or how the whole concept is coming together. It is a good symbolic relationship and works well for me and most of my clients. The problems usually come when I hear something that sounds really really bad and the client is not even aware of it since he has long since put that "problem" out of his mind while he was playing the piece and or recording/mixing it.

I think you need to know a lot about how different genres are suppose to sound but don't necessarily need to get in there and be able to play what has been recorded. Being a musician helps but there are some great mastering engineers that I have read about that have no musical training at all and the only way they got their training was to listen to a lot of GOOD music as they were learning how to master.

What ever works!

[Storyville]

I generally like to have the musician present, because they know how their instrument sounds better than I do. After they leave, I do all the things I need to do to blend the instrument into the mix. I find musicians make the best musicians. But ultimately, who has a better eye, a painter or a photographer?

[Bob Olhsson]

Bob Ludwig and Doug Sax are both first rate trumpet players who could hold their own in any top symphony orchestra. Most of the truly great arrangers are also brass players. My personal theory about this is that these guys must have listened to a LOT of live music while counting rests!

I got through a couple years of college violin but it mostly allowed me to communicate better with musicians. College radio actually taught me more about mastering. Of course attending sessions with Ludwig, Sax and Grundman probably taught me the most other than feedback from the folks at the labels I worked at.

[narcoman]

Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson

Bob Ludwig and Doug Sax are both first rate trumpet players who could hold their own in any top symphony orchestra. Most of the truly great arrangers are also brass players. My personal theory about this is that these guys must have listened to a LOT of live music while counting rests!

I got through a couple years of college violin but it mostly allowed me to communicate better with musicians. College radio actually taught me more about mastering. Of course attending sessions with Ludwig, Sax and Grundman probably taught me the most other than feedback from the folks at the labels I worked at.

let's hope they're not deaf like most of the LSO brass players.

[thermos]

Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson

Bob Ludwig and Doug Sax are both first rate trumpet players who could hold their own in any top symphony orchestra. Most of the truly great arrangers are also brass players. My personal theory about this is that these guys must have listened to a LOT of live music while counting rests!

I got through a couple years of college violin but it mostly allowed me to communicate better with musicians. College radio actually taught me more about mastering. Of course attending sessions with Ludwig, Sax and Grundman probably taught me the most other than feedback from the folks at the labels I worked at.

Wow! Cool! Good to know about all youse guys. I know some great mastering engineers that don't play, but are huge music fans. Probably more so than a lot of players I know. I think it just takes really giving a s%%t, and obviously knowing all else that goes along with it.

[RedTuxedo]

When a mastering engineer figures out what key the song is in and then can follow the chord progression by ear so he can use that to get the frequencies of the fundamentals...

Musicians of that caliber make better mastering engineers...

Don't know too many, but know a few...

[turtlerock]

i cannot imagine how a non musician ME would get through the day without his brain hurting , you simply must understand music construction in this job


the amount of times a week a client says "Yes that section after the middle 8 before the outro peaks start the fade somewhere there" etc etc
or "let that riff play four times then cut it to the chorus "

you dont have to be a virtuoso but you simply must know the road rules

it cannot be that hard ... musicians can do it

[Jerry Tubb]

Originally Posted by Upawholestep

When a mastering engineer figures out what key the song is in and then can follow the chord progression by ear so he can use that to get the frequencies of the fundamentals...

Musicians of that caliber make better mastering engineers...

Don't know too many, but know a few...

One of numerous threads where DC and I debate that exact subject:

Frequency= note?

Perhaps you'll find it interesting.

Cheers - JT

[Thomas W. Bethe]

Originally Posted by turtlerock

i cannot imagine how a non musician ME would get through the day without his brain hurting , you simply must understand music construction in this job


the amount of times a week a client says "Yes that section after the middle 8 before the outro peaks start the fade somewhere there" etc etc
or "let that riff play four times then cut it to the chorus "

you dont have to be a virtuoso but you simply must know the road rules

it cannot be that hard ... musicians can do it

I guess it comes down to understanding music vs trying to BE the MUSICIAN. I have been at mixdown and mastering sessions where the engineer (who is also a musician) is trying to tell the musicians he or she is working with what they should do musically and that is really NOT their job even if they are GREAT musicians themselves.

There is an engineer near here that is a GREAT musician and a GREAT engineer. He has "golden ears" when it comes to recording and mixing and mastering but the one thing a lot of his clients get pissed at him for is that he is always trying to make value judgments and musical decisions while he is acting as their engineer. He has had a few clients walk out on him because they did not like him trying to impose his values on their music. Most of the times he was more than correct about the decisions but he was messing in areas that, as an engineer, he should leave well enough alone unless asked.

Not a good thing to do IMHO!

[24-96 Mastering]

Originally Posted by Thomas W. Bethe

I guess it comes down to understanding music vs trying to BE the MUSICIAN. I have been at mixdown and mastering sessions where the engineer (who is also a musician) is trying to tell the musicians he or she is working with what they should do musically and that is really NOT their job even if they are GREAT musicians themselves.

There is an engineer near here that is a GREAT musician and a GREAT engineer. He has "golden ears" when it comes to recording and mixing and mastering but the one thing a lot of his clients get pissed at him for is that he is always trying to make value judgments and musical decisions while he is acting as their engineer. He has had a few clients walk out on him because they did not like him trying to impose his values on their music. Most of the times he was more than correct about the decisions but he was messing in areas that, as an engineer, he should leave well enough alone unless asked.

Not a good thing to do IMHO!

I remember that conflict from working as in-house engineer. When working in a mid-size to smallish studio in a mid-size town, you get all sorts, and even when noone asked you, it can be quite painful to sit through 22 re-takes of a guitar solo the guitarist cannot possibly play. Or record the perfect take on detuned instruments. Or work for a day on a production idea you know isn't going to produce the effect they're looking for. Or listen to a band record a beautiful song that is completely destroyed by a cliche middle 8. Etc.

But I agree, it's not your place to make that call unless they asked you to produce or specifically want your input. And holding back always requires a great deal of self control. I was always sure I'd get the artist's trust sooner or later, but patiently waiting for that trust to build, for the moment I could carefully start giving input (if beneficial) on the artistic side of things was a repeated test of patience.
That may sound arrogant but it was just the reality of the day-to-day operation in a studio in which most artists would only be in for a couple of days.

[Raymond Leggs]

Musicians tend to make better sounding recordings, although a person like me likes EXTREMELY LOUD BASS! which is a tutt

[Rubito]

I guess it's theoretically possible one could be a great mastering engineer without being a musician or having any musical knowledge, but I haven't seen it yet. Most of the best in the game are also really good musicians with a really solid background.

I'm also of the "delegate and trust" variety. I think a ME should sit down with a client and discuss what the goals are of the proyect and then work alone for the most part. I think musicians and god forbid other engineers backseat driving most of the time just cheapen the product. You know what they say about too many cooks.

[Bob Olhsson]

The biggest challenge in audio production is the fact that we tend to hear less and imagine more with every listening. (This, by the way, is why there can be no such thing as "self-mastering.")

A real trap for experienced musicians is that they tend to be satisfied when they can hear everything, it's all in tune and rhythmically together. This is often achieved at the expense of both character and focused communication with the listeners who are mostly non-musicians.

A mastering engineer needs to be able to tell when to leave something alone, i.e. what the intent of the mix was so that any changes only focus the intent better rather than diluting or otherwise altering it. We generally work with the presentation of mixes and only "fix" things that were obviously unintended. I'd say a passion for listening to great music and great audio is far more important than experience as a musician. Ludwig and Sax are two of the most passionate music and audio fans that you'll ever meet. That's undoubtedly also why they became great players but it isn't necessarily why a lot of people become great musicians.