Do some mixes not need mastering?

[JakeKalka]

I've recorded some tracks myself for practicing. I've noticed I run into strange mastering issues. By all means, i'm not a pro mastering engineer but I know whats up. Here's my issue, The songs I record myself, Sound great even with just minimal mixing. I try mastering it, and then end up making it sound worse. I compare the unmastered version with pro mixes and it's comparable. But the ones that are mastered are just god awful. Can a mix be good enough to not even need mastering?

[Jesse Graffam]

Sure. But in order to decide that, you really have to hear it on an accurate, flat, and transparent system, in a room just as descriptive.

Another thing to remember is it's sometimes the case where even a flawless master will end up sounding worse than the mix... when played back in the room it was mixed in.

Originally Posted by Bob Olhsson

I find I can easily "improve" everything when all I'm really doing is compensating for the shortcomings of the monitoring.

http://www.gearslutz.com/board/5124122-post22.html

[Adam Dempsey]

A great mix may not need processing, but it's pretty darn rare that no mixes within a given release won't need something, for cohesiveness, or to correct things resulting from mix room/monitoring inaccuracies.
Mastering's largely the stage of ascertaining these things in a no-guesswork environment.

[Waltz Mastering]

Originally Posted by JakeKalka

I've recorded some tracks myself for practicing. I've noticed I run into strange mastering issues. By all means, i'm not a pro mastering engineer but I know whats up. Here's my issue, The songs I record myself, Sound great even with just minimal mixing. I try mastering it, and then end up making it sound worse. I compare the unmastered version with pro mixes and it's comparable. But the ones that are mastered are just god awful. Can a mix be good enough to not even need mastering?

If your own mastering is making your mixes sound worse than what you start with,.. you could either leave the mixes as they are or have someone else take care of the mastering for you.

[Gizzmo0815]

When I was a kid I used to go to my grandfather after I did something dumb and hurt myself and say "Grandpa, when I press on this it hurts!" And he'd always say "Well then stop pressing on it."

I'm inclined to say the same thing here when you say that when you master your song it sounds like crap. "Well then stop mastering it."

If your "mastering" is making the song sound like crap. Then you're probably not doing something right. So try something else...

I'd also guess that you don't have NEARLY the same quality equipment or room that a mastering engineer should probably have. Nor the training and background to do the types of things they might do to your songs to make them sound better.

So you're probably not really "mastering" anything. You're most likely still mixing at this point. Which is fine...just as long as you understand that.

From Wikipedia (I hate quoting it, but it's not bad in this case):

The mastering engineer is responsible for a final edit of a product. An audio mastering engineer audio mastering (especially in music) should have complete knowledge of audio engineering, and may hold an audio or acoustic engineering degree. Most audio engineers master music or speech audio material. The best mastering engineers might possess arrangement and record production skills, allowing them to 'trouble-shoot' mix issues and improve the final sound. Generally, good mastering skills are based on experience which can be the result of many years of practice.

The music mastering studio is very different from a normal audio recording studio. In fact, all the equipment and gear found in most recording and mixing studios can actually hinder the acoustics of a room to accurately monitor sound (by this token "mastering" in your bedroom is bound to be problematic). Thus, the correct room acoustics and arrangement of the equipment inside a mastering studio is an important factor since the mastering engineer (ME) needs to hear in detail each mix. This room design should be non-environmental or with a minimum room interference. By working with an experienced mastering engineer, the recording artist is also open to more creative opinions and technical advice.

[sammyp]

Originally Posted by JakeKalka

I've recorded some tracks myself for practicing. I've noticed I run into strange mastering issues. By all means, i'm not a pro mastering engineer but I know whats up. Here's my issue, The songs I record myself, Sound great even with just minimal mixing. I try mastering it, and then end up making it sound worse. I compare the unmastered version with pro mixes and it's comparable. But the ones that are mastered are just god awful. Can a mix be good enough to not even need mastering?

i'm not a pro either but it sounds as if you may be over doing it in your mastering....are you over EQing just because you think this is what a mast. eng would do?

[JakeKalka]

Thanks for the replies guys. I understand my room is not very suitable, and like I said. I don't have the experience a real mastering engineer does. My whole situation is im recording bands, and they don't have even close enough money to get it professionaly mastered. If they did, I would MAKE them take it somewhere else. That way the band is no longer my problem
But the truth is crappy local bands that think $20 an hour is overpiced will NEVER go to a pro mastering facility so they want me to do it. Normally, like from the tip above, I just don't master. I may tell the band "Yeah dude, it's done, I mastered and everything, here's your CD
I guess I just wanted to know if it's a bad thing that I normally don't master.

[Gizzmo0815]

Nope. I think it's perfectly ok. Part of an audio engineer's job is to be the technical expert on the sound. So if you've done everything you can to make the mix sound as good as you can. Then you've done your job. If they inquire about mastering, another part of your job is to be able to explain to them what mastering is and what it can accomplish for their music, and to let them know that it comes at a premium.

That's where the whole home studio thing can get really fuzzy. It's pulling apart all of the old dividing lines between recording, mixing, mastering, production. UNFORTUNATELY it's probably not the best thing for the music. FORTUNATELY it allows people who normally would never be able to learn about this stuff to experience it.

[mischa janisch]

Originally Posted by JakeKalka

I compare the unmastered version with pro mixes and it's comparable. But the ones that are mastered are just god awful. Can a mix be good enough to not even need mastering?

Of course a mix can be good enough to not need processing. But I'd reinvestigate your evaluation process if you can't find a mastered track that doesn't sound 'god awful' in your mix environement. Chances are that either your monitoring is flawed or your taste is entirely different to the rest of the world...

[KyleDiSanto]

All mixes, IMO, need mastering. They need to be objectively assessed. What happens after that -be it processing or no processing at all...its part of the process.

Like many have said on this thread already, its about listening to your mix in a "un-questionable listening environment" by a set of trained and objective ears.

Many times, when you try to "master" your own mixes, its best to do nothing at all.

[mischa janisch]

Originally Posted by masterminder

many, many mixes don't really need mastering.

but that never stopped anyone.

I know it sounds like splitting hairs - but you really need to differentiate mastering and processing in this case.

You wuld bring up a valid point many would agree upon if you would rephrase it:
"...don't need processing", but the way you wrote it is like saying: "Many people don't need health checks." The only problem is - you will only know afterwards...

Every new album will benefit from a check-up before it is released, but it depends on the producer/artist/ME if they go for heavy handed treatment by default, choose to use less invasive methods or do nothing at all.

[kundevelop]

if you consider bith depth reduction & SRC part of mastering almost all mixes need to be mastered: who still mix in 44.1khz 16bit? probably nobody.
better doing it in the right way then truncate it brutally.


dr kun

[Kayo]

Originally Posted by mischa janisch

Every new album will benefit from a check-up before it is released, but it depends on the producer/artist/ME if they go for heavy handed treatment by default, choose to use less invasive methods or do nothing at all.

I agree with that notion, more so, than the reverse..
Rarely, actually for now it's stands at "never", have I found a track ... a legit well carved mix, that is… that did not benefit from a bout of mastering or a touch of the “other perspective” or stream lining the album coherently for sale etc.. Never!

As a personal observation and opinion only, “no mastering required” is still a myth.
KAyo

[fhmastering]

IMHO, mixing and mastering should be addressed as 2 separate processes. I look at it like an art show.

Mixing: is the process of taking individual elements of a song and making it whole to create the best possible sound for the song. Just like painting a picture.

Mastering: is the process of taking individual songs (or paintings) and creating an exhibit. It is a mixing process that involves songs instead of instruments where the songs flow properly from the 1st to the last leveling the volumes, eq, etc... in order to enhance the experience of the listener so that they do not have to change the volume, eq, etc... from song to song.

With that being stated, an individual song may or may not need processing. But hearing your comment, it sounds like you had a brick wall limiter on your master fader, (bringing the mix up to a competitive level). If that is the case, you have squashed the song pretty hard before it was taken to the mastering stage. The result is trying to compress/limit & or eq a song that has no where to go. Resulting in a better mix without mastering.

My suggestion is to mix with the limiter on, but turn it off for the mix down. Take that version and have it mastered (or master it yourself). I am almost positive that you will be happier with the results.
Rob Follis
fhmastering.com

[CJ Mastering]

IMHO, mixing and mastering should be addressed as 2 separate processes. I look at it like an art show.

Thats not an opinion, thats just fact. They are 2 different processes