how do you tell somebody their mix sucks and mastering wouldnt help?

[SDStudios]

this band is interested in having me master their music, i told them that i dont professionally master, and all i use is software mastering.. they dont seem to mind. but anyways i listened the one of their songs and the mix is horrible.. you can tell it was done on a low end home studio..

and me, not being as experienced as most of you guys i can make it slightley better than it is already but i think they should just have it re recorded, or mixed better.

should i just tell them that mastering wouldnt help much?

they want to record with me, but i dont want to say something to them that might put them off on recording with me.. should i just do what i can and give it back? i mean i dont want my 'master' to have them think i dont know what i'm doing and they should go to another studio..

[bob katz]

Originally Posted by SDStudios

this band is interested in having me master their music, i told them that i dont professionally master, and all i use is software mastering.. they dont seem to mind. but anyways i listened the one of their songs and the mix is horrible.. you can tell it was done on a low end home studio..

and me, not being as experienced as most of you guys i can make it slightley better than it is already but i think they should just have it re recorded, or mixed better.

should i just tell them that mastering wouldnt help much?

they want to record with me, but i dont want to say something to them that might put them off on recording with me.. should i just do what i can and give it back? i mean i dont want my 'master' to have them think i dont know what i'm doing and they should go to another studio..

Tell them as gently as possible, and remember that honesty is the best policy. It also helps to be pretty sure of your judgment, so you could try to get a second opinion before you tell them. One way to tell them is not to tell them their mix "sucks" but to give it a letter grade. Is it a C or below? If it's below a C then they really have no business doing their own engineering and the fact that they don't realize it already is quite revealing of where they are at.

But if it's at least a C grade you can tell them that the mix really needs to be improved because after a lot of work you could possibly get it up to a B-grade master, but really it should be a B or better mix (which can become an A master) to be noticed and appreciated by critical listeners. That usually wakes them up. Then prepare to recommend a good remix engineer who can help their mix before bringing it back to you for mastering. That approach can usually work, if you are confident in your assessment and tell them tactfully and honestly.

[Tropicana]

Originally Posted by SDStudios

this band is interested in having me master their music, i told them that i dont professionally master, and all i use is software mastering.. they dont seem to mind. but anyways i listened the one of their songs and the mix is horrible.. you can tell it was done on a low end home studio..

and me, not being as experienced as most of you guys i can make it slightley better than it is already but i think they should just have it re recorded, or mixed better.

should i just tell them that mastering wouldnt help much?

they want to record with me, but i dont want to say something to them that might put them off on recording with me.. should i just do what i can and give it back? i mean i dont want my 'master' to have them think i dont know what i'm doing and they should go to another studio..

Tell them always the true in a gentle way. If possible, show them through your own speakers so they can hear what you mean. Tell them the possibilities for mixing in your place or other studio's you know. In the end your client will be apreciate this more then you think. If not and he still want to master that tracks, then keep in mind the client also can be crazy. I had once a guy who mixed his tracks 100% mono. When I told him this he told me that he mixed as safe as possible because he had new speakers. I told him he mixed very safe and very mono. :-) But he still wanted to master it. Ok, but I told him that it would be a very mono sounded master. No problem he said. Two hours later he called me very angry to tell me there was absolutly no stereo image in his tracks.

This is what I mean with crazy.

Good luck and be carefull.

[Key]

Really you have to tell them. At some point when you are trying to accomplish something with music emotions have to be put aside. The thing is you should really keep it confined to the work area and not tell other people that they mix like ass haha already messed that one up.

I've been told this myself by a mastering engineer. I don't think he thought it was total garbage just had a lot of amateur mistakes that I may have been overlooking - some of it was just differences in artistic sensibilities and a generation gap. Basically my initial response to that ME might have come off as me disregarding his critique and me just saying well you don't get what I am going for. And maybe I was knee jerk defending my work. But as time went on I could definitely see what he was saying in a couple of places about my work and I adjusted.

Also sometimes less is more. One of my favorite collabs involved another producer who if it wasn't up to snuff he would just say something like "Cool but finish it" or "Yeah that's good bu make it better". Just putting it simply with the implication that you know the person can do better sometimes works and avoids the whole problem of self conscious defensive artists.

[Ben F]

At least it's just the mix. Worse when it's the song or the entire album.

Last time time that happened to me one of the mixes had the talkback mic enabled accidentally- and you could hear the guys in the control room laughing as the song faded out. Poor guy.

[surflounge]

mix it better to convince them
I've heard this done, and it really changes perception
Especially when the first mix was suppose to be good

[Darius van H]

It's worth remembering that your standards are not the same as everyone else's.

Just because you think something sounds horrible, doesn't mean that the band think the same.

If they come to you for mastering, they must at least think it's acceptable. So i would just master it, even if that means only turning up the volume a bit.

Some of my happiest clients were ones where i basically just turned up the volume and did little else.

However, if the mix is distorted, clipped or limited, then it could be worth trying to help them get a better mix.

But if it's just a case of a bad mix or band, i'd just go ahead and master it, while maybe giving some subtle hints that i think the mix could be better.

[Jesse Graffam]

"your mix sucks and mastering wouldnt help"

No, actually... if the mix sucks, we just get a new mix. And if that's not possible, extend your knowledge of how they can make it better next time, and you'll have a customer for life.

[Table Of Tone]

I normally find out first if it was recorded by the same person that mixed it.

If the mix eng is usually good, and someone else recorded it, I'll blame it on them and tell the mix eng that it sounds like s**t because of the way it was recorded, which is pretty much gonna be the case anyway, in that situation.

That way, the mix eng will still bring me stuff because he has not taken anything personally!
This is pretty important, especially if he (or she) is good!

Sometimes I'll just refuse to cut something that's obviously not gonna do me any favors having any association with it.

It normally goes in this order for me:

1. If the performance and recording are both bad, I definitely won't cut it!
2. If the performance is good but the recording is bad, I probably won't cut it.
3. Vice Versa, I definitely won't cut it!
4. If the performance and recording is good but the mix is bad, I'll cut it and try to fix it. Possibly asking for stems.
5. If all three are good, I'll cut it and be proud to be involved with it!

[pmx]

although it money shouldn't be decisive factor in making decisions, telling the client that fixing problems in a mix during mastering is costlier and also more compromising to the mix than having it done by the mixer and coming back again later to master it. give them some tips, let them hear other premastered projects snippets and make them feel comfortable that a higher grade mix is within reach. gives me a bit more spare time , and generally makes the client a lot happier in the end.

[IIIrd]

i agree with what Bob said, softly softly, advise them to revisit the mix and and point out where you think major improvements need to me made.
honesty is the best policy.

[Jerry Tubb]

Originally Posted by Darius van H

It's worth remembering that your standards are not the same as everyone else's.

Just because you think something sounds horrible, doesn't mean that the band think the same.

If they come to you for mastering, they must at least think it's acceptable. So i would just master it, even if that means only turning up the volume a bit.

Some of my happiest clients were ones where i basically just turned up the volume and did little else.

However, if the mix is distorted, clipped or limited, then it could be worth trying to help them get a better mix.

But if it's just a case of a bad mix or band, i'd just go ahead and master it, while maybe giving some subtle hints that i think the mix could be better.

I agree with Darius on this one.

JT

[kundevelop]

Originally Posted by Darius van H

It's worth remembering that your standards are not the same as everyone else's.

Just because you think something sounds horrible, doesn't mean that the band think the same.

If they come to you for mastering, they must at least think it's acceptable. So i would just master it, even if that means only turning up the volume a bit.

Some of my happiest clients were ones where i basically just turned up the volume and did little else.

However, if the mix is distorted, clipped or limited, then it could be worth trying to help them get a better mix.

But if it's just a case of a bad mix or band, i'd just go ahead and master it, while maybe giving some subtle hints that i think the mix could be better.

I agree on that post, mastering is a service. I pay for that...finish. Taste is subjective and depends on kind of music. when you need oil for your car you don't want to listen "I don't like your car".
ME on my opinion should not judge music and clients should not expect mastering to completely change everything in the better way.

[William Bowden]

I reckon it's best to voice your concerns. 99% of the time they'll thank you in the end anyway, I mean no-one wants anything to sound truly crap, and these days people can often re-call and fix things to some extent.

It sounds like in your particular situation you could easily say "Do you mind if I have a crack at re-mixing it first?". This may lead to a better result all round, and inspire them to use you for the next job.

On the other hand if it's the music as much as the mix you hate, well, life is too short!

Even though everyone is working to the best level of their talent, most people do want it to sound better - I'd have a chat with the band. Or you can 'turn up the volume' and take their money, but, I'll leave it up to you to decide whether that's a good approach...

And from a mastering perspective a truly shit mix is like a house of cards, touch anything and you may be in trouble!

The King

[Karloff70]

Originally Posted by Table Of Tone

I normally find out first if it was recorded by the same person that mixed it.

If the mix eng is usually good, and someone else recorded it, I'll blame it on them and tell the mix eng that it sounds like s**t because of the way it was recorded, which is pretty much gonna be the case anyway, in that situation.

That way, the mix eng will still bring me stuff because he has not taken anything personally!
This is pretty important, especially if he (or she) is good!

Sounds a bit odd to me, as if the mix guy really IS any good, he'd see it in a way of "if the recording is so bad I can't make it sound good, I won't touch it and if I DO touch it, from there on the responsibility of it sounding good is mine".........so if you say it sounds like shit, you're still saying HE's incompetent......lol. Just a thought.

[Darius van H]

If your busy, you don't have time to hold everyone's hand and play Sherlock Holmes on every 1 track mastering job (i don't, anyway)

But it's not just a question of taking the money and running. Sometimes people are paying for the experience that tells you to turn the volume up and do little else.

My job is to help the music communicate to it's intended audience. One of those (maybe less then obvious) ways, is to maintain the confidence of the client in their product so they can go out there and promote i.e. communicate their music to the outside world.

Having said all that, i've many times rolled my sleeves up and helped people out, beyond the call of duty, but if you're busy, it's just not possible every time.

[Table Of Tone]

Originally Posted by Karloff70

Sounds a bit odd to me, as if the mix guy really IS any good, he'd see it in a way of "if the recording is so bad I can't make it sound good, I won't touch it and if I DO touch it, from there on the responsibility of it sounding good is mine".........so if you say it sounds like shit, you're still saying HE's incompetent......lol. Just a thought.

I'm probably saying that they are skint rather than incompetent.

Most of the mix engineers and producers that I know are pretty quiet this year!

They are taking on pretty much anything that comes their way and it's not all good!
I feel for em because that's their only income!

The UK music industry has been knocked right down by the financial situation!

I'm fortunate and lucky because I design tube amps for a successful company, which, in mastering gives me the option to say "I'll pass on that one!"

Call me a cherry picker if you want but this was the only way for me to stop cutting c**p!

I don't want my name on stuff that's not very good.

No-one will move ahead and be respected in this business by doing that!

[Karloff70]

Originally Posted by Table Of Tone

I'm probably saying that they are skint rather than incompetent.

Most of the mix engineers and producers that I know are pretty quiet this year!

They are taking on pretty much anything that comes their way and it's not all good!
I feel for em because that's their only income!

The UK music industry has been knocked right down by the financial situation!

I'm fortunate and lucky because I design tube amps for a successful company, which, in mastering gives me the option to say "I'll pass on that one!"

Call me a cherry picker if you want but this was the only way for me to stop cutting c**p!

I don't want my name on stuff that's not very good.

No-one will move ahead and be respected in this business by doing that!

Fair point. I'm not in the "it is my income" shoes since a while back, so in current climate I see your point. But then there is a limit to the appeal of "doing it just to be doing it as an income" and having to take the shite.....lol....partly why I don't do it anymore.

[Thomas W. Bethe]

There are lots of charlatans out there that will take someone's money and give them little or nothing in return. There are also a lot of people that genuinely want to help the artist realize their dreams and will do what they can to help them. I assume that most of the members of this board fit into the the second category

There are people who really can't hear what you are able to do for their music because they are not listening for the same things you are. The artist maybe more worried that the lead singer will not be happy with the mastering because he will loose his bed partner if she is "not happy". Or that the bass player will not like the fact that you had to cut the bass since it is 14 dB hotter than anything else in the mix because the bass player is the one who is funding the project from his trust fund.

I cannot in all good conscious do very little to help someone and then charge them a lot for doing it. I can do as much as I am able and if the person is not happy with what I have done then we will have to work on the project until the artist is happy. That may involve the artist remixing the entire album or it may take longer than the artist thinks it should but if the artists wants a good sounding album they have to understand that to do a good job takes time.

I am very honest with clients. I tell them what I can do for their music and I also tell them were things are going to be difficult. If the mix is a total train wreck I also tell them that. I find that honesty is the best policy when dealing with clients.

Most people today are trying to do everything themselves from writing the music to shrink wrapping their CDs to sell. They cannot, unless they are very very good, do it all themselves and expect to come up with a superior product.

I am providing a service at the end of the project and the artist sometimes expects me to correct all the ills that have beset the project from the beginning. Sometimes I can work miracles sometimes I cannot.

I remember one artist that brought in the most heavily distorted tracks I have ever had to work on. The artist did not hear the distortion only that some of the consonants were not clear enough in the mix so you could not understand the words. She wanted the words understood because that is what mattered to her and all the distortion surrounding the mix do not matter. I gave her what she wanted but I also told her that because of all the distortion people would tend to turn off the songs prematurely and so all the work on getting the consonants to sound better would be for naught. That information was important to her and she said she would take the material back, remix it and bring it back in. The results were amazing and the material sounded GREAT and I was pleased but more importantly she was pleased and we had a good mastering session and the album turned out well.

If I had just taken her money and given back something sub par it would not have been good for her or for me and even though I would have been richer financially I would have trouble sleeping at night.

Good topic and LOTS of good keen insights.

[KRStudio]

I would tell them "I will do the best I can, but your mix has some issues."
Then they can decide to remix, or let you master.

[wado1942]

I've had a few instances like that. In a couple of instances, I convinced them to let me mix the project at least from stems. I remember one instance where the mix was absolutely awful. I told them the mix wasn't ready to be mastered. They were not willing to remix in any way, so I said I could do the job but they won't be happy with the results. They let it go.

[kenjkelly]

I didn't see any facts about the mix to define the statement that it was Horrible. What I'm thinking is that, if Horrible was due to tone being bad, like missing lows, honky soundy etc, then, if it is a home-studio, it could be that they just can't hear the true sound of the mix, and will never-ever get there in that environment. In that case, you might be able convince them of that truth, and, for a fee, remix the tracks it in your treated studio. They won't feel bad and you get extra paid work.

If Horrible is the result of an over-clipped attempt at making it loud, then you can ask them to remix with more dynamics (less loud-added) before you can work with it.

And, as someone suggested, if the tracking is bad, they will need to start over. But, is it bad because their equipment is not good, or is it the techniques? Unless something changes, a redo won't help. If you wish to take on the work you could sugest that your equipment or your techniques could help make it better, and make more money.

So, I think the definition of Horrible is important to your solution and in finding ways to fix the situation without insulting them (unless they need insulting).

Ken