Current Popularity Of Analog Mastering?

[Bugstone]

I am interested to know from professional mastering engineers what percent of professionally mastered music sees the analog domain to some extent. I am curious how much of the mastered music in 2010 undergoes d to a and then a to d conversion in mastering. It does not matter how many analog devises are used. I just want to know how many see at least one analog device. My second question is do you see a shift towards purely digital mastering each year? I am not asking which you think is better (I don't want to start World War III again here). Is now 50/50 or what?

Thanks a lot.
Bugs

[Caput]

Originally Posted by Bugstone

I am interested to know from professional mastering engineers what percent of professionally mastered music sees the analog domain to some extent. I am curious how much of the mastered music in 2010 undergoes d to a and then a to d conversion in mastering. It does not matter how many analog devises are used. I just want to know how many see at least one analog device. My second question is do you see a shift towards purely digital mastering each year? I am not asking which you think is better (I don't want to start World War III again here). Is now 50/50 or what?

Thanks a lot.
Bugs

It is not some thing I say I ask for, but all the ME I work with have some analogue and good not plug digital (example, Weiss DS) . More now than 6 years ago use some plug too like Flux. I dont change my ME much in 6 years and that is the only change I see in them.


SB

[jdg]

98/2

[MASSIVE Master]

I can only go with what goes through here -

95% analog, 5% digital only. Maybe 3 or 2%...

I even offer an "incredibly tight budget" digital-only service (that hardly anyone ever requests).

[The Orbit Room]

If we count the D/A, A/D and a small hand full of "surgical" plug ins, we would be about 95% analog, 5% digital.

There are some times we will do a ITB mix layback to tape and then recapture it back ITB, but I don't know if that really counts as and analog percentage point.

Thanks for asking and Have Fun!

[Waltz Mastering]

I'm one box/bax away from running full analog processing - except for the occasional bwl and eq.

[OMNIFEX]

Originally Posted by Bugstone

I am interested to know from professional mastering engineers what percent of professionally mastered music sees the analog domain to some extent. I am curious how much of the mastered music in 2010 undergoes d to a and then a to d conversion in mastering. It does not matter how many analog devises are used. I just want to know how many see at least one analog device. My second question is do you see a shift towards purely digital mastering each year? I am not asking which you think is better (I don't want to start World War III again here). Is now 50/50 or what?

Thanks a lot.
Bugs

The only way I can see purely digital mastering in my future is if I gave up my
board, and equalisers. I know that won't happen despite knowing how to make my own plug-ins to my specifications.

On the whole digital masterig only will be the standard in the years to come. Hopefully by then, those who are giving digital mastering a bad name will either learn from their mistakes or move on to something else.

Cheers!

[Bugstone]

Thanks, I had no idea that it was that high a percent analog. Are film sound tracks mastered more commonly in the digital domain? Are film sound tracks generally more compressed than just music (if that is possible in these days of the loudness wars)?

Thanks,
Bugs

[macc]

Originally Posted by jdg

98/2

I dunno if you were joking or not, but it's probably something like that here.

[SSMastering]

I'm doing around 35% analog processing just from putting most tracks through the mixer summing bus and API compressor.

When I can afford a good analog mastering eq, that will change.

I sometimes put mixes through the Waves hardware box, it's the only digital outboard gear I have.

[Strobian]

I always use something analog in mastering. I'm using digital limiters the most for digital tools.

[jdg]

Originally Posted by macc

I dunno if you were joking or not, but it's probably something like that here.

i dont have a sense of humor, you insensitive clod.

[jdg]

Originally Posted by Bugstone

Thanks, I had no idea that it was that high a percent analog. Are film sound tracks mastered more commonly in the digital domain? Are film sound tracks generally more compressed than just music (if that is possible in these days of the loudness wars)?

Thanks,
Bugs

the film world is totally different.
its been along time since i've done any of it, but the audio production cycle of a film/picture is totally different then of "regular" music.

maybe someone else with more experience can chime in

[24-96 Mastering]

Originally Posted by SafeandSound

The tab in my browser makes for an interesting change in thread title. (truncating "og Mastering")

Haha... same here. Well spotted, sir.

[Masterer]

Originally Posted by Bugstone

Thanks, I had no idea that it was that high a percent analog. Are film sound tracks mastered more commonly in the digital domain? Are film sound tracks generally more compressed than just music (if that is possible in these days of the loudness wars)?

Thanks,
Bugs

Film sound is typically more dynamic, unless you are referring strictly to soundtracks sold separately as CD's. Even then they tend to be a little more dynamic. Especially the score stuff.

[I.R.Baboon]

I've mastered albums in 1hour ITB and the client was extremely happy and commented on the warm analog sound!

I've also (only once) pretended to master analog with the client present, (including tweaking the knobs on my analog gear) while actually doing all processing with plugins!

Whatever it takes to get the job done my friends.

[macc]

Originally Posted by jdg

i dont have a sense of humor, you insensitive clod.

aaahahahahahaaaaa!!!

[Andy Krehm]

98 to 2!

I only set up a digital chain when a conversion to analog and back causes distortion that I can not attenuate by gain staging. It could be a weird transient in an instrument or a case of having to do something with an already mastered track or slammed mix. In either of these cases, all digital is sometimes the way to go.

I have been mastering for a relatively long time and have some amassed nice outboard digital. When I resort to digital, my chain is a Weiss EQ 1, Weiss DS1 comp, TC 6000, K-unit along with the MDW plug-in, if I need a different EQ.

I mention this because to my ears, as good as it is, this chain is only stricly functional in my world and doesn't give me the same beauty and quality of sound that I get from my analog rig. Mind you, those digital units are always interfaced and available with my analog rig and that is where I like them best!

[Adam Dempsey]

> 95% for me here.

Originally Posted by I.R.Baboon

I've also (only once) pretended to master analog with the client present, (including tweaking the knobs on my analog gear) while actually doing all processing with plugins!

I hope your clients appreciated your honesty.

[mixerguy]

Originally Posted by I.R.Baboon

I've mastered albums in 1hour ITB and the client was extremely happy and commented on the warm analog sound!

I've also (only once) pretended to master analog with the client present, (including tweaking the knobs on my analog gear) while actually doing all processing with plugins!

Whatever it takes to get the job done my friends.

Well - what it takes for ME when I master is a bunch of great sounding analog gear..... to get a sound that plugins can't get.

I also don't try to deceive my clients, ever.

[Jerry Tubb]

very close to 100% here... analog rules.

but just this month did one classical saxophone project where I didn't alter the audio at all, just rearranged it a bit inside the DAW, and burned masters.

JT

[Ben F]

Mostly analogue for tone and ergonomics, mixed with some specialised plug-ins for more precision stuff. Compilations, especially if they have been previously mastered, stay ITB. Could do most jobs with a very limited amount of gear/processing but it's nice to experiment with sound. Mouse and keyboard are used mainly for editing and fades, gear used for tone shaping!

Keeps the left/right brain thing happy.

[Cellotron]

Originally Posted by jdg

98/2

Obviously an extremist! I'm a more balanced 97/3 here.

Best regards,
Steve Berson

[finetuner]

hahaha, same here

[lowland]

I rarely do all-digital, though one thing I find handy about having the HEDD as my analogue loop send and return is I can do a quick comparison by a click of the Process knob from the '24 bit A/D' position to 'digital' and back, thus removing or reinstating the analogue element.

Even on a purist classical violin/piano album I did recently the artist preferred the sound of a trip through some transformers (me too) when offered options, even though no direct EQ or compression was applied.

[da goose]

Originally Posted by I.R.Baboon

I've mastered albums in 1hour ITB and the client was extremely happy and commented on the warm analog sound!

I've also (only once) pretended to master analog with the client present, (including tweaking the knobs on my analog gear) while actually doing all processing with plugins!

Whatever it takes to get the job done my friends.

just wondering, what about the rendering? digital rendering is done in seconds, analog is in real time.. how did you explain that then to the attending client?

95/5 here i guesss, i also offer 100% ITB mastering (mid-end) but i get hardly no requests for that and if i do, most people decide to go to the hi-end (analog) mastering anyway.
It just sounds better after all..

[IIIrd]

Originally Posted by da goose

just wondering, what about the rendering? digital rendering is done in seconds, analog is in real time.. how did you explain that then to the attending client?

95/5 here i guesss, i also offer 100% ITB mastering (mid-end) but i get hardly no requests for that and if i do, most people decide to go to the hi-end (analog) mastering anyway.
It just sounds better after all..

I do 99% analgoue. The only time I use a digital only chain is if I've been presented with silly loud bricks for waveforms as a source.

If I were to do most of my mastering digitaly ITB then my clients would start asking questions.

[csl]

Currently all-digital: UAD, Sonnox, PSP et al within Wavelab, though I'd like to expand into a small analogue chain before too long. Mainly for ergonomic reasons (plus perhaps a little egonomics! Then I can call myself a proper ME) as it's difficult to deny the immediacy of solid equipment.

[Odeon-Mastering]

Originally Posted by I.R.Baboon

I've also (only once) pretended to master analog with the client present, (including tweaking the knobs on my analog gear) while actually doing all processing with plugins!

I cannot believe that....I do not know any respectable professional (in any field) who would deceive their clients in such a manner.

Welcone to my ignore list

On Topic.
The clients are always happier with the analog sound and I like the ergonomics and the lack of need to watch a screen and operate a mouse/keyboard. So 99% of the times some analog processing will be applied, if some tone shaping is needed.

[lu432]

Its about 50 - 50. My Room does all the work