I've heard people comment that there was no difference in the sound after mastering.

[RedTuxedo]

There have been so many of my clients that have responded to my mastering with "Wow, it sounds great. Something actually happened in mastering. Every other time I sent it to get my project mastered, I could not hear a difference when it came back."

I was flattered most of the time, but after hearing this after the umpteenth time, it started making me curious. The last few times this has been mentioned, I asked to hear the originals and then the mastering. They were right. Someone charged them way over what I charge and just took their money without any effort. tutt

Finally, I sent something to one of these mastering companies to test it out. It came back almost the same as when I sent it. Just a little louder. No chances taken, no "extra set of ears" from the extra service that I expected from a top notch facility. I expressed my thoughts on the matter with the company and they came back with "We try to be as transparent as possible. We only do what is necessary."

I'm really not wanting to come across as to big for my britches. I don't believe in the loudness war. My masters don't even come close to wining that battle. I just try to get the music sounding the best I feel it can.

Is there some unwritten rule somewhere that I was never plugged into? I never came up under another mastering engineer. Learned it on my own. Been doing it full time for well over 10 years with plenty of major label stuff and grammy nominations under my belt.

Just really curious about the mastering mindset that doesn't get their hands dirty. I get a return about twice a year, and I fix it to their liking. It amazes me that so many of my clients are astounded by what I think should be the service offered.

[jdg]

i've heard ppl say they're still hungry after a meal....

[WBM]

Originally Posted by Upawholestep

There have been so many of my clients that have responded to my mastering with "Wow, it sounds great. Something actually happened in mastering. Every other time I sent it to get my project mastered, I could not hear a difference when it came back."

I was flattered most of the time, but after hearing this after the umpteenth time, it started making me curious. The last few times this has been mentioned, I asked to hear the originals and then the mastering. They were right. Someone charged them way over what I charge and just took their money without any effort. tutt

Finally, I sent something to one of these mastering companies to test it out. It came back almost the same as when I sent it. Just a little louder. No chances taken, no "extra set of ears" from the extra service that I expected from a top notch facility. I expressed my thoughts on the matter with the company and they came back with "We try to be as transparent as possible. We only do what is necessary."

I'm really not wanting to come across as to big for my britches. I don't believe in the loudness war. My masters don't even come close to wining that battle. I just try to get the music sounding the best I feel it can.

Is there some unwritten rule somewhere that I was never plugged into? I never came up under another mastering engineer. Learned it on my own. Been doing it full time for well over 10 years with plenty of major label stuff and grammy nominations under my belt.

Just really curious about the mastering mindset that doesn't get their hands dirty. I get a return about twice a year, and I fix it to their liking. It amazes me that so many of my clients are astounded by what I think should be the service offered.

Mr redtuxedo, you since to be so good, may be most of the ppl wear black tuxedo but you're a different animal, I bet you mix and mastering is the same for you, good luck with your deaf major labels.
and if you so good post some names so we can salute you.

[kreeper_6]

Originally Posted by jdg

i've heard ppl say they're still hungry after a meal....

If it was Chinese...then for sure!

[Yeah, right...]

Originally Posted by WBM

Mr redtuxedo, you since to be so good, may be most of the ppl wear black tuxedo but you're a different animal, I bet you mix and mastering is the same for you, good luck with your deaf major labels.
and if you so good post some names so we can salute you.

Huhhh...?

[jdtrbn]

I wouldn't be surprised after all the stuff I've heard from some mastering services. At least they didn't boost 6db at 7khz and add 10db with L2.
Mastering is like chinese food, you can get it anywhere but it's rarely good...

[macc]

^ That's not entirely fair really.

Someone on here (Riccardo?) once said 'half of people expect things to come back sounding the same, the other half expect it to come back sounding different. Make sure your ME knows which side you're on' or something to that effect.

[aivoryuk]

this is where communication is very important

[cooker]

Originally Posted by Upawholestep

Finally, I sent something to one of these mastering companies to test it out. It came back almost the same as when I sent it. Just a little louder. No chances taken, no "extra set of ears" from the extra service that I expected from a top notch facility. I expressed my thoughts on the matter with the company and they came back with "We try to be as transparent as possible. We only do what is necessary."

I don't find it easy to make the source louder (even a little) but sound the same (but thats maybe just me).

Anyway, maybe you're good at what you do with mastering or the service you tryed was very bad. Or maybe you don't make things loud but make them sound like loud masters and clients like that as its more familiar to them.

I'm not defending a company I don't even know of but did you write them what you wanted? I mean there are rock bands who wants keep dynamics (you know they're dealing with all sorts of people daily) so wouldn't it make sense if someone would try to keep things as same as possible since its the mix that determins the sound character?

By the way, there are cases that someone steals pictures from another studio and post them on their website. Also there are small studios that charge rediculous money for squashing the mix with a limiter (easy to fool a newbie). I hope that didn't happen to you.

I don't think 1 engineers 1 example should be bring such comments for mastering easyly.

[MASSIVE Master]

Half of it comes down to communication. Otherwise, it's really only recently when the clients "want it to sound different" IME. 10, 15 years ago (when it was mostly professional recordings coming in), the clients would freak if you "changed" their mixes (unless there was something wrong with them and they were pi$$ed off at the studio they mixed at).

I don't want to sound "old fashioned" but the job used to be trying to make the recording translate well and bring a sense of cohesiveness to the project as a whole.

"Not sounding that different" might not account for the five 1/2dB EQ cuts, the 2dB of gain reduction on the mid info, the 1/2dB on the side, the dB or three of carefully implemented limiting, volume curves and what not. It might not account for how much tighter it sounds on a big system, how much smoother on a small system, how much more focused the low end is on a system with a poorly calibrated subwoofer, how much less boxy on a boom-box, etc.

No doubt, the "fix it" situations happen (more and more frequently over the years for that matter). But otherwise, it's still stacking nickels to make dollars.

[Waltz Mastering]

Your post reads like a giant ad for your service...

Why are you so good and all other mastering facilities suck? That's a tough one.; )

There have been so many of my clients that have responded to my mastering with "Wow, it sounds great. Something actually happened in mastering. Every other time I sent it to get my project mastered, I could not hear a difference when it came back."

I was flattered most of the time, but after hearing this after the umpteenth time, it started making me curious. The last few times this has been mentioned, I asked to hear the originals and then the mastering. They were right. Someone charged them way over what I charge and just took their money without any effort.

Finally, I sent something to one of these mastering companies to test it out. It came back almost the same as when I sent it. Just a little louder. No chances taken, no "extra set of ears" from theextra service that I expected from a top notch facility. I expressed my thoughts on the matter with the company and they came back with "We try to be as transparent as possible. We only do what is necessary."

I'm really not wanting to come across as to big for my britches. I don't believe in the loudness war. My masters don't even come close to wining that battle. I just try to get the music sounding the best I feel it can.

Just really curious about the mastering mindset that doesn't get their hands dirty. I get a return about twice a year, and I fix it to their liking. It amazes me that so many of my clients are astounded by what I think should be the service offered.

Is there some unwritten rule somewhere that I was never plugged into?

Do no harm.

[Darius van H]

The big guys like Bob Ludwig sometimes do extreme things, take risks, put their neck on the line - that's why they are who they are and get paid accordingly.

[Thomas W. Bethe]

Communications is the key.

When I started in business 15 years ago most of the stuff I mastered was coming to me via professional recording studios and it was fairly easy to master it and for me to make it sound good.

Those days are long gone and much of the material I get now is recorded and mixed in someone's basement or bedroom. Some of it sounds GREAT some not so great and some is just terrible. Sometimes the client wants things done to the music that is impossible to do in mastering like taking a soft ballad played on an acoustic guitar and make it into a Rock and Roll master piece. Or they want things changed like removing the lead singer who is no longer with the band or fix the guitar players bad playing or fix the drummers lack of skill in playing two notes in perfect time. Those are not something I can do as a mastering engineer.

What I can do is make what they have given me sounds better and more cohesive. I can also make it LOUD if that is what they are after. I try and communicate with the artist and make sure that what I am doing or not doing to their music is what they ultimately want.

I have had a couple of albums recently that were so well done I had very little to do and the clients were pleased that I didn't have to do much. I have had a slew of other albums where the incoming material was sooooooooooooooooo badly done I had to do a lot of "sonic surgery" just to get it to the place were I could master it. In one case someone had added 10 dB of boost at 100 Hz and 10,000 Hz because the salesmen at GC told him to do just that to make his CD sound "special". Well it sounded "special" but not good.

I think good communication between the mastering engineer and the artist is essential and I think it starts with the pre mastering discussion and flows along as the project develops. Some artists are very demanding in what they want from the mastering and sometimes what they want maybe impossible to do. Others are so scared of mastering that they sit passively in the mastering session and it is very hard to draw them out and have them comment on what is being done. I am always happy when the person knows what it is that they want done and can communicate their needs in a clear precise manner.

I also get the client that says everything is GREAT when they leave here and then later they call up and say that after talking to their significant other or their band members or their recording/tracking engineer that they want multiple changes done. When pushed further they say they are pleased but their recording engineer or someone in the band wants things changed and so they are obliged to inquire if those "suggestions" can be implemented. In one case after doing the mastering the young person called up after about a month and said his 90 year old grandmother was not happy with the mastering and could he get his money back? It turns out that his grandmother was funding the project and he had spent all the money and now wanted to get the money back from the mastering session so he could afford to get the CDs duplicated. I told him that if his grandmother would come to the studio and show me what she did not like I would redo the parts she was upset with. I never heard from the "artist" again.

Picking a good mastering engineer (and there and many GREAT ones on this web board) is crucial to the success of any project and if you and the mastering engineer are not seeing eye to eye (or more likely ear to ear) then it is time to start looking around for someone more in tune with what you are trying to accomplish.

Upawholestep, If you are as good as you say you are then you have found a way to give your clients what they want. You should continue doing what you are doing if you want to make your business a success. Unfortunately I see many posts on this web board saying basically the same thing as your original post. " I sent or my client sent their material away to have it mastered by a big name mastering engineer and when it came back it did not sound good so I took it and made it sound incredible" (sometimes followed by the words "with Ozone or T-Racks"). Since the members of this board never get to hear the original or what someone else mastered or what you mastered it may have more to do with what is in the mind of the beholder than it has to do with what really happened. Also since people use the phrase "big name mastering engineer" we never get to know who they really sent their material to and maybe the "big name mastering engineer" was not as big a name as they suggested. Anyway if you have found the secret to keeping your clients happy then go with it.

Best of luck!

[Ecktronic]

If someone is looking for a Master to sound like a certain style of band then a lot of work can be needed sometimes on the Mix or if the Mix is not a great Mix. Especially if givin stems.
But the ME is not just there to change the Mix ready for commercial release. They can also be very helpfull at giving Mix advice to get the best possible outcome.

Obviously a bit of clipping and/or limiting will be used most of the time.
If a Mix is really good then no EQ, comp, noise reduction, editing, automation, fades etc might not be needed.

ME's charge for their expertise in listening to a Mix to see if there can be anything done to make the Mix work on the majority of sound systems.
So if nothing is needing done apart from a bit of limiting and/or clipping then it shouldn't cost that much. Maybe £50 a song for a well known ME as a rough estimate.
But all ME's will work in different ways.

The album I got Mastered by Heathmans Mastering Studio in London a few years ago by Dennis Smith, he Mastered the cover of "Mad World" by Gary Jules that was in the film "Donnie Darko" which reached number 1 in the UK charts!

(It seems that either Heathmans has closed down now, or the website is temp down)
He did a good job, but there wasn't a big difference in the Mix to the Master. The album was a smoother to the ears and he was good at keeping space in the Mix while pushing the RMS Average to around -10dB and at points to around -8.5dB RMS Average.

That album cost about £1300 to Master 11 songs, around 45 mins of audio.

Eck (G)

[Cellotron]

Originally Posted by Ecktronic

If someone is looking for a Master to sound like a certain style of band then a lot of work can be needed sometimes on the Mix or if the Mix is not a great Mix. Especially if givin stems.
But the ME is not just there to change the Mix ready for commercial release. They can also be very helpfull at giving Mix advice to get the best possible outcome.

Obviously a bit of clipping and/or limiting will be used most of the time.
If a Mix is really good then no EQ, comp, noise reduction, editing, automation, fades etc might not be needed.

ME's charge for their expertise in listening to a Mix to see if there can be anything done to make the Mix work on the majority of sound systems.
So if nothing is needing done apart from a bit of limiting and/or clipping then it shouldn't cost that much. Maybe £50 a song for a well known ME as a rough estimate.
But all ME's will work in different ways.

The album I got Mastered by Heathmans Mastering Studio in London a few years ago by Dennis Smith, he Mastered the cover of "Mad World" by Gary Jules that was in the film "Donnie Darko" which reached number 1 in the UK charts!

(It seems that either Heathmans has closed down now, or the website is temp down)
He did a good job, but there wasn't a big difference in the Mix to the Master. The album was a smoother to the ears and he was good at keeping space in the Mix while pushing the RMS Average to around -10dB and at points to around -8.5dB RMS Average.

That album cost about £1300 to Master 11 songs, around 45 mins of audio.

Eck (G)

Heathmans closed about a year ago.
Some of the engineers (including Dennis Smith) and equipment from Heathmans are now at this new studio:
Finyl Tweek - Finyl Tweek

Best regards,
Steve Berson

[Franco]

Originally Posted by Thomas W. Bethe

Communications is the key.

Sometimes the client wants things done to the music that is impossible like taking a soft ballad played on an acoustic guitar and make it into a Rock and Roll master piece.

Agree 100%

Recently, I had a potential client contact me (I declined the job) and said he wanted me to make his project sound louder and wider than the mixes he had, which were already maximized to death, after I spent some time listening to them all.

I tried to explain how I basically had no room to work with and they just didn't understand how I would not be able to remove the distortion and make it sound louder and wider, he said the guy who mixed the album was not returning his calls so a revision to the mixes was not an option. I believe they are now looking for someone who would happily lie to them and take their money.

[ONDRAY]

I think you should always hear some difference after mastering. But on the other hand, ME's will usual notice more subtle changes then the avereage Joe. So to an ME it could be a world of a difference, but to Joe Blow it may be "what did you do?" Sometime it may be that the ME just fixed the Low end to play well on all systems etc... cause the mix was already good.

But communication is the key. I'll often ask a new client what he's going for and what he expects from my mastering before I spend time mastering. Sometimes I'll let them know after I hear the mixdown that I'm gonna do an extreme master. If this is the case, I'll also give them a more regular master for them to choose from. So far, they like the extreme mastering all the time.

[Ecktronic]

Originally Posted by Cellotron

Heathmans closed about a year ago.
Some of the engineers (including Dennis Smith) and equipment from Heathmans are now at this new studio:
Finyl Tweek - Finyl Tweek

Best regards,
Steve Berson

Cheers for the info Steve.
I should check the new Mastering studio.

All the best,
Eck (G)

[macc]

It's the same studio

[Tropicana]

Originally Posted by Upawholestep

There have been so many of my clients that have responded to my mastering with "Wow, it sounds great. Something actually happened in mastering. Every other time I sent it to get my project mastered, I could not hear a difference when it came back."

I was flattered most of the time, but after hearing this after the umpteenth time, it started making me curious. The last few times this has been mentioned, I asked to hear the originals and then the mastering. They were right. Someone charged them way over what I charge and just took their money without any effort. tutt.

I know exactly what you mean. Many "masteringhouses" have all the gear but in the end it is only loud. Most of the time it sounds also dull and flat. Or even over-compressed.
Sometimes I think they don't hear it or they don't care. You should tell your customers to ask first for a mastered sample. Just 2 minutes of a track. If they don't give this kind of service I think you should look for another mastering company. We give minimal 2 samples of one track. Its always a matter of taste. As a mastering company you have to accept this. And a second version with a little bit more high or low is not that difficult. After they make the choice you know exactly what they want for the next tracks.

[Ecktronic]

Originally Posted by macc

It's the same studio

Do you know why they changed their name at all? if it's most of the same engineers and same studio?

Would be interesting to find out why.

Cheers macc.
Eck (G)

[macc]

Different ownership I suppose...?

They're definitely in the same location and it's largely the same people, that's all I know for sure. Great studio there, visited a few times when it was Heathmans. Rolls Royce rooms.

[Ecktronic]

Originally Posted by macc

Different ownership I suppose...?

They're definitely in the same location and it's largely the same people, that's all I know for sure. Great studio there, visited a few times when it was Heathmans. Rolls Royce rooms.

Thanks again macc.
Yeah I've not been there but seen the pictures of the studios and they look pretty tasty.

Eck (G)

[masterizer]

Originally Posted by Upawholestep

There have been so many of my clients that have responded to my mastering with "Wow, it sounds great. Something actually happened in mastering. Every other time I sent it to get my project mastered, I could not hear a difference when it came back."

I was flattered most of the time, but after hearing this after the umpteenth time, it started making me curious. The last few times this has been mentioned, I asked to hear the originals and then the mastering. They were right. Someone charged them way over what I charge and just took their money without any effort. tutt

Finally, I sent something to one of these mastering companies to test it out. It came back almost the same as when I sent it. Just a little louder. No chances taken, no "extra set of ears" from the extra service that I expected from a top notch facility. I expressed my thoughts on the matter with the company and they came back with "We try to be as transparent as possible. We only do what is necessary."

I'm really not wanting to come across as to big for my britches. I don't believe in the loudness war. My masters don't even come close to wining that battle. I just try to get the music sounding the best I feel it can.

Is there some unwritten rule somewhere that I was never plugged into? I never came up under another mastering engineer. Learned it on my own. Been doing it full time for well over 10 years with plenty of major label stuff and grammy nominations under my belt.

Just really curious about the mastering mindset that doesn't get their hands dirty. I get a return about twice a year, and I fix it to their liking. It amazes me that so many of my clients are astounded by what I think should be the service offered.

If you've already got a great mix, why change it? That being said the mixes being sent in must have something to be desired, we don't push it too much in mastering, many times we will use very small eq adjustments. It is possible that the ME decided that all that was needed was a 0.2db high shelf ect. You might not be able to hear it, but it may have improved the sound in the ME's mind. On the other hand, the ME may have just changed the gain and you got back a louder version of what you sent in.

The real goal for you is to mix a finished product so we don't have to "finish" it in mastering. We'd love it if all we had to do was transfer the files to their final medium!

[Ecktronic]

Originally Posted by masterizer

If you've already got a great mix, why change it? That being said the mixes being sent in must have something to be desired, we don't push it too much in mastering, many times we will use very small eq adjustments. It is possible that the ME decided that all that was needed was a 0.2db high shelf ect. You might not be able to hear it, but it may have improved the sound in the ME's mind. On the other hand, the ME may have just changed the gain and you got back a louder version of what you sent in.

The real goal for you is to mix a finished product so we don't have to "finish" it in mastering. We'd love it if all we had to do was transfer the files to their final medium!

Personally I enjoy when I can Master a Mix to make it sound better, apart from maybe the volume boosting.
The great Mixes are easy to Master which in a way takes the passion and fun out of Mastering for me personally, but a bad Mix can be very tricky to get sounding good and can be a nuisance, but it's part of the job to get the best possible results.

Eck (G)

[Table Of Tone]

Originally Posted by jdtrbn

I wouldn't be surprised after all the stuff I've heard from some mastering services. At least they didn't boost 6db at 7khz and add 10db with L2.
Mastering is like chinese food, you can get it anywhere but it's rarely good...

Now Now!

[Table Of Tone]

Originally Posted by Tropicana

I know exactly what you mean. Many "masteringhouses" have all the gear but in the end it is only loud. Most of the time it sounds also dull and flat. Or even over-compressed.
Sometimes I think they don't hear it or they don't care. You should tell your customers to ask first for a mastered sample. Just 2 minutes of a track. If they don't give this kind of service I think you should look for another mastering company. We give minimal 2 samples of one track. Its always a matter of taste. As a mastering company you have to accept this. And a second version with a little bit more high or low is not that difficult. After they make the choice you know exactly what they want for the next tracks.

You wanna hear how some of those mixes sounded when they came in!

Stuff thats been badly recorded with mic pre-amps clipping!
Limiters being over used in the mix.
Snares that sound more like 70's TV tennis.

Who gets the blame for ALL of that stuff?

Take a guess!
Ahh....the penny has just dropped!

Yep!
The mastering engineer!

[24-96 Mastering]

Originally Posted by Waltz Mastering

Your post reads like a giant ad for your service...

Why are you so good and all other mastering facilities suck? That's a tough one.; )

Now don't be unfair... he did say he doesn't want to come across as too big for his britches



But seriously, Upawholestep, everyone thinks that they're great and that (some of the) the competition sucks, mostly because one is primarily getting work from those who weren't thrilled with the results of other places or who couldn't communicate their preferences. I.e. you'll get the customers that were lost, not their long time satisfied clients... which they will obviously have, otherwise they wouldn't be able to stay in business.

And as for getting one's hands dirty: In mastering, everyone (hopefully) does what they think needs doing the best way they can. You think they didn't do enough or you think they did too much = you disagree with their taste, judgment or abilities. Whether different engineers tend to generally be more or less drastic in their approach is a fair question (one that I have asked myself before too). But thinking that anyone is just lazy and overcharging, i.e. implying that they do bad work on purpose is incredibly naive. There's always two sides to every story, and maybe in the view of some of your previous clients, you needlessly meddled with a great mix. Maybe they then went and told your competition about that. You never know...

[Tropicana]

Originally Posted by Table Of Tone

You wanna hear how some of those mixes sounded when they came in!

Stuff thats been badly recorded with mic pre-amps clipping!
Limiters being over used in the mix.
Snares that sound more like 70's TV tennis.

Who gets the blame for ALL of that stuff?

Take a guess!
Ahh....the penny has just dropped!

Yep!
The mastering engineer!

Yes and no. When I say that I know exactly what he means I am talking about my own experiences. I mastered thousands of albums and part of what you say is true. But then again, as a mastering engineer you can repair a lot of bad sounding mixes. But I also remastered many albums which were mastered in the first place by some masteringhouses from who you have to expect that they do a decent job at least.

I dont think the topic starter was trying to put his competition down.
After more then 15 years in the mastering business I came to the conclusion that many artists and a&r's looking more to the gear a masteringhouse has then that they listen to the results of it.

When a mix is so bad I tell my client to do it over or give him the service to mix it in our place.

[MikeyMike]

The job of the Mastering Engineer is to make the recording sound it's best not just increase the volume of the material. If the recording at hand is terrible from the get go and can't be made to sound professional, then the mastering engineer need to state that or refuse to work on the material. Most engineers today are lazy, cheap, and have no formal training so they have no idea what a good recording truly sounds like. They like the proper gear, knowledge, and the proper training, unfortunately. Find a reputable Mastering Engineer/Mix Engineer/Tracking Engineer. You get the best of all three worlds combined. It's good to have an engineer who isn't scared to let you have it and tell you what is required of you to have a stellar recording. Most people today got plugins and are so money hungry that they'll tell you anything to get a dollar. Use common sense and choose people who got the credentials. If their is no difference in sound after mastering then either the track was mixed by one helluva engineer or the Mastering Engineer just said fuk it