Posting Samples of your work on your mastering site - Necessary?

[macc]

I didn't want samples on my site for exactly the reasons you mention. They're just as likely to discourage as encourage really, IMHO anyway... Everyone wants or likes it different.

I was harangued into it to be honest, people (really) just kept banging on and on about it so I caved in. I still really don't like having them on there and they're out of date etc. But then even tonight a bloke told me he trusted my judgement implicitly (!) based on those samples and sent me some work. It's a real boon working for people who are evidently half-deaf.

[UpNSmoke]

"I was harangued into it to be honest, people (really) just kept banging on and on about it so I caved in."

That's pretty much the position I'm in too and I just don't get it, - personally, I would rather send an ME some of MY work and see what she or he can do w/ that as opposed to listening to samples from other mixes...

As far as your comment about working with people that are half-deaf - I totally understand. I find some of these snobby mastering threads about how the 'little guy' is underpricing the 'real' ME studios completely laudable! - I mean, come on now! Do you really think the average youngster that just wants something to put on their Myspace is going to send their mixes to Bob Ludwig to master?!

There's different markets for different people, but that's a topic for a whole other thread..thanks for the reply

[macc]

Start it then

Well... finish your dinner first

[jdg]

im still trying to figure out how to put up samples of how great i can burn CDs.

[Pete Lyman]

I don't see the point. I think having a discography and client list is much more useful. Besides, how can you evaluate these clips on laptop or computer speakers? Especially if they're mp3's? Is anyone going to take the time to burn a cd to evaluate the clips? If someone is going to do that I bet they know enough to get a mastering referral from another musician...

[lucey]

I put up some samples after a few potential clients asked for it. I was unsure if it was a good idea, but it does seem to make some people feel more confident, and they say so. Everyone else ignores it I'd hope. Most of my regulars don't seem to read my site much at all.

Bottom line, I try not to care about how I come across, only what I can do for the people who are interested in being a client. So if it looks too mid-level for someone who is browsing then I'm not on their radar anyway. I have a number of ex-big house in NYC clients, ex-digital guy in Fla clients, ex-certain moderator clients ... posting a handful of examples doesn't change that. I figure you either like me or you don't, you have heard good things or not about the work ... all long before you get to the website. A few samples are there to inform and build confidence in the fence-sitters only.

I really don't know if the absence of samples is going to raise a profile, how could anyone say? I just know that it's not keeping away my best clients and a few potential newbies are comforted, so it was worth the hassle.

[inlinenl]

it helped a lot when starting off ..... don't know how many got turned off by listening to them ... but got positive feedback from clients .. the sample page is now gone while i'm doing an update on the webspace .. client list is now there ... but for sure will make a smaller sample-page again asap. Maybe it's more to be aimed at the indy clients.

[yareck]

Clients are often sending several emails to miscelanous mastering studios asking for demo mastering. Considering 40 or 50 emails sent, statistical chance that my service will be choosen is like 1/50. I thought putting some samples would be good investment instead of working for free. Sometimes

[inlinenl]

Originally Posted by Pete Lyman

I don't see the point. I think having a discography and client list is much more useful. Besides, how can you evaluate these clips on laptop or computer speakers? Especially if they're mp3's? Is anyone going to take the time to burn a cd to evaluate the clips? If someone is going to do that I bet they know enough to get a mastering referral from another musician...

well if those mp3's 256 pop out off the laptops as brilliant sounding and punchy ...... the work is done ... all those guys with their macbook pro's audit on their laptop and first sound impressions never die ...

[macc]

Actually, on this topic, how do people handle these things sonically?

That is to say, on my site I thought it was pretty fair (and the least bother for me admittedly) to have a normalised 'before' and then the after.

While it is probably fairest of all to have 'before > level matched after > full after', if people are listening to clips as we're discussing, don't they just want the 'wow' factor? Nothing wrong in giving that, is there, using it to one's advantage...?

[Silvertone]

I tell clients that it would do no good to have samples. Send me YOUR project and let me hear a couple of those tracks. If I feel the need I might do a partial master and load them back to my ftp site for the client to hear. What good is it to give them samples of someone else's project? That tells them nothing really.

For example... you can make the un-mastered song sound bad and the mastered song sound great... but who are you really fooling then?

[inlinenl]

Originally Posted by Silvertone

For example... you can make the un-mastered song sound bad and the mastered song sound great... but who are you really fooling then?

yeah .. smart one , I never thought off that ....

[Riccardo]

Originally Posted by Silvertone

I tell clients that it would do no good to have samples. Send me YOUR project and let me hear a couple of those tracks. If I feel the need I might do a partial master and load them back to my ftp site for the client to hear. What good is it to give them samples of someone else's project? That tells them nothing really.

For example... you can make the un-mastered song sound bad and the mastered song sound great... but who are you really fooling then?

I feel exactly the same.

[MASSIVE Master]

I have some samples up that are a mix of stuff that actually sounded good when it came in *and* very problematic projects just to give an idea "to the uninitiated" of what's potentially possible along with a paragraph or so of some detail specific to the track. More "educational" than "audition" -- At least, that was the intention...

[ONDRAY]

I'm just starting out, but for the first year I had samples up as 320mp3's. I took them down to see if business declined and it really didn't change much. If a client asks for samples I have a page link with a flash mp3 player I send them, but I have yet to send anyone this link. I simply tell them that their mixdown and music is different from the other guys and the final master relies on their mixdown, not the other guys. So I ask them to send me a track, I'll master a clip for free, If they like what they hear then we'll proceed.

I like how this has worked so far because I know who is actually interested in getting their tunes mastered. If you have someone go to your site and listen to the samples and never contact you, then you never really now how many people are interested in your services, plus you loss the chance to add that personal selling tactic.

[DSD_Mastering]

Over the thousands of clients we've had... exactly 2 have asked for samples.... They couldn't afford us anyway!


Regards,

[Sunbreak Music]

I also did when first starting out. Not really for any other purpose than to show I had worked on some really great stuff--and wanted people to know these folks had trusted me with their art and were happy with what I delivered.

[mikeroephonics]

I mastered a punk-ish rock album back in Spring, and before I got the job, they sent out a song to me and three other studios to hear which sounded best. So, I think demos have their place, but surely are not necessary. I keep 4 slots open on my demos page, and I switch up the songs every now and then.

One thing that is problematic with demos is finding one that's actually worth listening to in the first place. I have LOADS of "music" that I'd never dream of my putting on my demos page (mostly vulgar rap and just lame stuff in general).

-Mike

[UpNSmoke]

Hey All! I just wanted to say thanks for all the great replies...

While you ALL had very valid and excellent points - I've decided to do what ONDRAY suggested and just keep a sample page for future clients that request it, with a disclaimer at the top stating how I truly feel about the nature of mastering samples, ie. that mastering samples are not representative of how their project is going to necessarily sound after the process is complete..

BTW, Bruce@Puget Sound - Love your mastering room - very tasteful and elegant!

And Pete@Infrasonic - Shadow Hills mastering comp AND Inward EQ side-by-side! Now that's slutty!

[UpNSmoke]

"One thing that is problematic with demos is finding one that's actually worth listening to in the first place. I have LOADS of "music" that I'd never dream of my putting on my demos page (mostly vulgar rap and just lame stuff in general)."

Mike, I gotta tell ya brother, this is one of the biggest problems I've encountered throughout the years and it's inspired me to create a whole new thread on the subject - specifically in regards to (c)rap music - Keep your eyes peeled, I think you're going to get a kick out of it...

Michael

[MASSIVE Master]

Heh... A lot of people ask me why I have no HH/Rap samples on the page. You already know why. I'm pushing it (the "offensive barrier") with a punk sample already...

[Adam Dempsey]

Originally Posted by UpNSmoke

I've decided to do what ONDRAY suggested and just keep a sample page for future clients that request it, with a disclaimer at the top stating how I truly feel about the nature of mastering samples, ie. that mastering samples are not representative of how their project is going to necessarily sound after the process is complete..

It's also totally, completely out of context with the larger picture unless you're mastering nothing but singles, in which case the initial argument still applies.
What if track 1 of an album is not sonically indicative of where the album as a whole needs to go?
To paraphrase an analogy I once heard.. it's a little like needing a professional house painter then asking a bunch of them to send you a low res photo of a painted a door on which to judge their work.

I'd rather promote our service, personalising it to the client's needs. If they really need to hear something and can't visit in person we can always send a sample electronically, but it's done with a degree of communication/consultation, not shooting on the dark.

[perx]

as a client to 4 diffirent ME´s (3 found through GS) - I say having samples or atleast a client list is important.

My music is mostly diffirent styles of club oriented techno - and knowing who (what other artists/acts) an ME has worked with helps alot.

In my search, some ME´s did send me samples of their work (pre mastering version of a song + post) through regular snail mail, but I feel they lost my business since is its a slow approach in todays fast moving business. When I get a track signed to a label I only have a week or so max to get the complete mastered version to them.

All of the ME´s I am working with now, had a clearly visible client list on their site, which initially caught my attention - and they all could provide samples. After listening to their samples, and once again checking out their client list I was confident in that they could do the best mastering possible for me. And I have not been wrong so far..

Samples on a website is nothing new, in software you have their trials - where you can download and test their product. Other more service oriented companies might offer a limited time free of charge service period or a money back guarantee. Hell.. Even porn sites offer downloadable samples..

I dont see why any ME wouldnt want to showcase their work. If you are GOOD, then you should SHOW it.. right?

As an ME client and someone that do my main business ONLINE, I think an ME could loose out on some potential new clients if he/she doesnt show samples of previous work.

[24-96 Mastering]

Originally Posted by perx

I dont see why any ME wouldnt want to showcase their work. If you are GOOD, then you should SHOW it.. right?

Unless the artists are _completely_ unsigned AND give you written permission, it's illegal.

Besides, samples seem somewhat removed from your actual project. The best way to prove that you're good (if that is needed at all), I believe, is to just offer a complete satisfaction guarantee. I.e. we know you will love the master we will make. If not, don't use our master and get your payment back in full. (Which I haven't seen happen yet, btw.)

I think an _honest_ client/album list and some testimonials are better than public before/after files for proof of ability. If the client wants to hear your work, they can check out some CDs / tracks you did on itunes or if they really want a before / after, you could privately post (via passworded ftp link) some before and after examples that will be somewhat similar to the client's specific style.


Oh, and here are simple (sarcastic) instructions for great before / after samples:

1. don't consider album context with regards to tonal balance or dynamic / level restrictions
2. make a BIG difference, don't consider the client's taste
3. work from bad mixes with things that can easily be fixed (and don't tell the client to fix it in the mix, even if beneficial, because your before/after wouldn't be as impressive)
4. after you're done, make your "before" sound worse with a tinny EQ, by adding noise, by narrowing the stereo image and if you really want to get into it, slow/pitch it down by 0.3% or so.

(Alternatively, just download the most impressive before / after examples you can find anywhere on the web and just do step 4.)

Et voila! You have awesome samples on your site by being a pretty bad mastering engineer and a very sleazy person.

(Not saying that people who have examples on their sites are bad engineers or sleazy, this is sarcastic... just saying that imo it's not necessarily proof and - from my POV - seems reasonably irellevant to the client's project.)

[Virtalahde]

I had samples on the website in the beginning, for a short period. Permissions asked every time.

Samples are out of the context IMO. A credits list should tell something (if you remember to keep updating it, unlike some green hoppin' llamas) and I believe a demo job can tell something.

But there's a downside to demo jobs, too. They're often out of the context also. It's not rare that I do the actual job in a little different way when I actually hear the place the track is placed at an album. Another problem is also that it IS a DEMO, afterall. I think people shouldn't expect 100% quality in free work, more like 75%. It's there just to give an idea of the tonal balance I might aim for, and to see if we agree at all. It's not the last word on the sound either.

What's the most important point in regarding demos... Word of mouth. I don't think I get that much customers that say they popped at my website by accident and want to know more. A vast majority say they liked something I did or got a recommendation from a past customer. The website-comebyers can easily check out the client list and see if there's anything familiar. Hell, maybe run a little search through myspaces and see if there's something in common with them all.

[Sunbreak Music]

Just to clarify, the samples I posted were of the final products--not before/after.

I wouldn't do anything to potentially embarrass any of the engineers I work with.

[lucey]

It's true that the only things you can post are the lesser known acts, no major label work, but those are the kinds of mixes from the kinds of artists that want to hear the samples in the first place ... so it's the right product for the right audience.

I definitely don't see samples as "proof" of anything. They're simply there for any surfers to be comforted by hearing something. People are often insecure if they were not referred or have not heard something you'd done previously, so it can help. Maybe they think I'm too cheap to be good ... or too expensive to be worth going beyond Diskmakers. To me the arguments against are about positioning. I'm happy living edge of the mainstream business. I don't expect those that are bent on working with a name brand engineer to be interested, so the ones that are interested become a nice treat for me and them both.

Maybe I shouldn't have that page, it's hard to say.

[perx]

Originally Posted by 24-96 Mastering

The best way to prove that you're good (if that is needed at all), I believe, is to just offer a complete satisfaction guarantee. I.e. we know you will love the master we will make. If not, don't use our master and get your payment back in full. (Which I haven't seen happen yet, btw.)

if you can offer "complete satisfaction guaranteed" then im guessing you´ll be picking up those potential customers that are looking for online samples. :-)

I think the answer to the question asked here is really to be found if you look at it from the customers point of view.

- A customer wants his single or album mastered.

- So Who should he trust for this job? How does he know the company he is interested in using would do a great job at this?

This is really the main issue here. Samples provide one more layer of "security" for the customer. He can hear some samples and see if he likes the sound.

"satisfaction guaranteed" is ultimately the best way to make a customer feel secure in his decision to choose someone. he cant loose out on this one. :-)

What I would like to point out is this:

Samples (for me) doesnt have to be a link to actual AUDIO FILES.
It can be that the ME lists the Artists+album names in his client list.

Then the potential client can then buy a single or the whole album (if he doesnt already own it) and listen to how it sounds.

ALL of the ME´s I am working with now had a GOOD client list on their sites that showed which artists and which of their albums they mastered. Since alot of the artists listed was known to me, and I knew how good those albums sound - it was a no brainer.

What I do not like is when an ME simply lists artists without any reference to the project, single or album he worked on... That makes it hard for me to be able to atleast try and get a sense of how good his work is.

Having a detailed client list is key here, atleast from this (me) customers point of view. ;-)

Ps. any ME here with lots of experience in mastering techno music AND have a good client list to show - PM me your info! :-)

[24-96 Mastering]

Originally Posted by perx

What I do not like is when an ME simply lists artists without any reference to the project, single or album he worked on... That makes it hard for me to be able to atleast try and get a sense of how good his work is.

Having a detailed client list is key here, atleast from this (me) customers point of view. ;-)

I have that on "recent projects" on my myspace page, but I really should add specific disc names on the regular web site. As you say, it's useful indeed. Damn, that's going to be a lot of work... Thanks for the idea, perx.