Can you master with cheap monitors in an untreated room?

[Californian]

Originally Posted by Tube World

...but again my results everyone is happy with. That's all that really matters.

I just want to point out that this is a fantastic post.

[Glenn Bucci]

Originally Posted by Californian

I just want to point out that this is a fantastic post.

I agree as my clients are also happy with the final results they get at my studio. I do encourage them to however get their music professionally mastered after recording their music at my studio. The Mastering House is a great professional mastering studio just down the street from my area. However with being not educated on mastering, most say, oh you can do a good enough job. Yes I can do a good enough job after taking a break from the music for about a week. However if they could do a A/B with my mastered version and a place like the Mastering House, I think everyone would agree that the professional studio's version came out better.

Mastering is an art. But like anything detailed and specific, you really have to obtain more knowledge on it to appreciate it. As an example, I like having a pinot grigio for dinner when I go to a resturant. I know some general information about French, California, Long Island, Italian, and German wine. However I don't have enough knowledge to tell you which one, which company, and year of wine I really like and why? You need to obtain more information and try many wines out to find out. Same thing with camera's. Some like the nice point and shoot cameras and they are happy with their results. However if they took shots with a Nikon D90, understood how to use the camera and compared the difference with their nice $400 point and shoot, they would appreciate the Nikon more. The same thing can be said with mastering. Part of the problem with many clients is they are not trying to hear a uniform sound from song to song. They are not focusing on the bass freq's, and trying to hear if it is muddy, or rich and deep. They are just focusing on the vocals or a good guitar lead they put in the song. They want to make sure it is loud enough and the effect they put on their lead sounds good. Until things like learning to listen to music is on a deeper level and appreciated, many will continue to home master music. But I do understand Tube World's point on those $3,000 home studios and just mastering your own music for fun. For them, it may not be worth the cost for going to a professional studio.

[Bubbagump]

The difference: consistent repeatable results. You may get a reputation as a niche/flavor mastering guy with his own unique sound... say like a Dave Fridmann (not that he is an ME, but hopefully you see where I am headed). But to tackle anything thrown at you day in and day out consistently, a poor room and monitors are going to make things difficult.... however, you can dig your way to China with a tea cup if you are motivated and time is of no concern.

[mattg082]

If you like how it sounds that's all that matters...right? I mean great a pro can master it and save you a HUGE headache. I've been there and would rather pay the ME sometimes. If it sounds right to you and you did a great mix then I don't see why not at all. I come to the mastering forums and I understand the concept here but sometimes I wonder how much of it is bias based one MEs protecting their self worth and bragging. I have much respect for them though and they are very much needed and 80% of the time it's the way to go.

[lucey]

The lack of settling for 'good enough' and defending compromises with 'a singular client is happy' is what makes a mastering engineer a mastering engineer, while everyone else is simply processing tracks. A mastering engineer doesn't settle, and aims to make everyone not just happy, but truly excited. And not just for now, but forever.



And just putting myself in the artists shoes, if the record was recorded on the cheap, don't you really need the mastering help then? Money has been saved in tracking and mixing and great mastering can mask that, making the record much more competitive.

So I get it, I just don't agree in principle or in practice that settling is the way to do anything special ... and to me, there's no point in recording if you're not aming to be special. Just play music with your band, to your fam and friends, or in a local club, and have a good time! Maybe record it with a Zoom. Recording to multitrack for release is a craft, a tradition, it's work, and there's way too much mediocre music with mediocre engineering flooding the internets to bother with settling for good enough.

The cost of making a great record has never been lower. But the will required has perhaps never been greater, because it's too easy, too cheap, and thus too likely for the process to be taken for granted.

[Tube World]

Originally Posted by Glenn Bucci

Part of the problem with many clients is they are not trying to hear a uniform sound from song to song. They are not focusing on the bass freq's, and trying to hear if it is muddy, or rich and deep. They are just focusing on the vocals or a good guitar lead they put in the song. They want to make sure it is loud enough and the effect they put on their lead sounds good. Until things like learning to listen to music is on a deeper level and appreciated, many will continue to home master music.

Very True

[lucey]

Originally Posted by Tube World

Very True

The issues is way deeper than his point. It's not just that clients are focused on micro details. It's that they don't know what's possible. They're just happy to have it done!

When you say "my clients are happy" what does that mean? If I'm really hungry I'll eat anything and be happy. A client is often happy after mixing, or should be, with a great mix. So any mastering will do.

But when you've heard something amazing, it's like any form of taste ... you didn't know you were missing it until you've had it.

Ever met a girl or had a meal or saw some nature ... that put you in a whole new world as far as what you now consider the standard of "great"? That's taste for ya. It's acquired, and can't be explained. The new found level of joy is what mastering should be doing. It doesn't mean that a lot was done necessarily, maybe only a little was done, but the result of the whole record is a quality upgrade that has better taste than it did before.

This is all very subjective and esoteric I understand, but once you've heard a new level, you can never go back and be happy.

[HomeProducer]

You CAN master in an untreated room. Just take cheap JBL PC speakers (JBL Duet, 50 Euro). They are bright but quite revealing for hights and for mids. Take in addition some HD 25 and some Phillips headphones SBC HP 400. Both have so much bass (especially the Phillips) that faults can be heard most of the time PLUS if the bass is too strong or bass pulses too heavy the JBL speakers will start to distort when running the mix at maximum volume . To detect annoying higher mids, use some Sony MDR-E819V. PLUS some Typhoon sound system PC speakers, the most crappy sounding speakers on earth, even worse sounding than NS-10s, but perfect for the midrange, very true sounding (not kidding). Not that you get a very good master, but to avoid obvious and severe mistakes, this kind of combination is useful. Now your mastering process consists in switching from one system to the other and back . After a large number of iterations it is done.

[Tube World]

Originally Posted by lucey

The issues is way deeper than his point. It's not just that clients are focused on micro details. It's that they don't know what's possible. They're just happy to have it done!

When you say "my clients are happy" what does that mean? If I'm really hungry I'll eat anything and be happy. A client is often happy after mixing, or should be, with a great mix. So any mastering will do.

But when you've heard something amazing, it's like any form of taste ... you didn't know you were missing it until you've had it.

Ever met a girl or had a meal or saw some nature ... that put you in a whole new world as far as what you now consider the standard of "great"? That's taste for ya. It's acquired, and can't be explained. The new found level of joy is what mastering should be doing. It doesn't mean that a lot was done necessarily, maybe only a little was done, but the result of the whole record is a quality upgrade that has better taste than it did before.

This is all very subjective and esoteric I understand, but once you've heard a new level, you can never go back and be happy.

I agree with what your saying. People are so happy to go to a project studio and just get their songs recorded and to hear a product coming out of the speakers. Then to have it on a CD, they are thrilled. Mastering, oh yeah do that too and make it sound "professional". It's almost like getting a brand new car. You are so excited about the car, that the extra features you can add on at the end that you don't know what they really are, are not as important.

[Bubbagump]

Originally Posted by lucey

Recording to multitrack for release is a craft, a tradition, it's work, and there's way too much mediocre music with mediocre engineering flooding the internets to bother with settling for good enough.

The bigger question is where to find top engineering. Finding and using a good ME is easy. I can shoot files to the other end of the universe in minutes. The months of arranging, recording, mixing, etc. does not have such a low point of entry when dealing with people on the opposite ends of the globe. Frankly, I don't really know any place within the area that I would really want to work. I broke down and built my own space due to this... and it is no world class facility. Then there is the know how and give a damn... sharing of vision, etc. Unless you are very lucky, most recordists are very much on their own which is sad and liberating in a way. Certainly a matter of compromises and to your point, the ME is the last bastion of know how and give a damn.

[drumdrumdrumdrum]

I was doing a search for something else when I saw this thread title and had to laugh.

I have good monitors with a treated room but I would not even try to master my own stuff. I'll leave that to the pros.

Someone once told me, mixing is looking at each tree in the forest and coloring each leaf in, like autumn/fall, whereas master is looking at the entire FOREST.

I work way too detailed to be able to master music, plus there is all this technical stuff that is way to left brain for me. I still would like to know what unit gain 'truly' is, but their are many threads discussing the philosophical ideal of 'true 0 db' and such things. Way too technical...........

.....and mastering is NOT an extra thing you add onto the end. It is, arguably, the most important part of the recording processes.Good luck

[Surbitone]

Originally Posted by Remeniz

But after explaining to him why I didn't like it he shrugged and said it sound great on his set up.

That pretty much sums it up in a nutshell.

[HomeProducer]

to the original question

I can

Why because I had luck with room dimensions and the room is 8 meters long. I have just two bass traps, thats enough. Any additional trap JUST MADE SOUND WORSE! Imagine, I have never had that experience before.

[editronmaximon]

Yeah, you can do it.

Or, actually, I don't know if you can, but I can. This is assuming that we are not talking about monitors that are total garbage, and assuming there is proper mastering gear.

If I had to choose between a great room and great monitors, I'd go for the monitors and get the room out of the picture as much as possible. I have to admit that I've been in rooms where it was a real struggle, but I still got it done.

I have tracked and mixed in a lot of "high end" rooms designed by the big name guys, and you know what? They all different. Some of them are actually pretty weird. But you can pretty much get a good mix in any of them. There are many different "good mixes" for any given musical piece. So I might get one good mix at Capitol, and a different good mix at the Village. Or, one could screw the whole thing up at either place if one is just screwing things up.

I have great mixes that I did in my bedroom, with good monitors right in my face.

Now to mastering, same deal. The whole, "OMG you can't be objective" thing wears me out. Its b.s. If you can't stay objective, then you shouldn't mix either. You have to stay objective to mix. You have to stay objective through the whole process. Its not like you stay objective all good and fine while you're mixing the piece, and then all of a sudden you become stupid and unable to keep you head above water for mastering.

Just stay objective, and work on it.

What makes you think some "second pair of ears" is going to be "objective", anyway. He / she may have a whole set of other issues to screw things up with.

Nevertheless, there is no sane reason or requirement to have to do everything yourself either, and you can get really, really good results having a separate person master your project, if that person does a good job. Its just not a strict requirement or anything like that.

It comes down to what you want to do on any given project, and what you want to spend time on, and how much time you want to spend on it. Some people have no interest in mastering their own stuff, or anyone else's, and some people having no interest in mixing or tracking. Some people like to hang with the whole process. Whatever.

[macc]

Originally Posted by HomeProducer

to the original question

I can

Why because I had luck with room dimensions and the room is 8 meters long. I have just two bass traps, thats enough. Any additional trap JUST MADE SOUND WORSE! Imagine, I have never had that experience before.

You don't have any reflection treatment?

[Misja]

Offcourse this is possible. I ask you how many mastering houses have started that way. Working their way up as they got along. You might get in trouble with a shitty mix. But if the mix is good. Ask yourself should i really want to try and make it better. Get it up par the specifics needed these times. If the mix is indeed shitty it's better to fix the mix anyways. As mentioned before with what i strongly disagree. Mastering is the most important part in the recording path. Offcourse that's totally rubbish.

Classical conduct is: You have a producer That has a vision!! A recording engineer, A mixing engineer who makes the actual mix that has to be right else he should be degraded to recording engineer. When all that is done there is the master. When the mix is right he shouldn't have a big job at all. In modern times with tight budgets you see the first three stages glue together a lot and that means bad mixes. Fixing a bad mix is probably better done in a well treated room with good equipment. But never want that to begin with. This isn't what a master engineer should do. It's what sometimes is forced opun them.

[drumdrumdrumdrum]

Since I comment I've been keeping track of this thread.

I maybe wrong!!!! It seems most people believe you are able to master. I don't know your background or talents? Forgive my stupid comment.

Each to their own. Master is not for me. Too technical. I've spent ten years and only just begining to understand compression. Multi-band compression....... I have no doubt I would screw that up for sure. Maybe you will just take to it like a duck to water? Who knows?

[WBM]

NO WAY!!!!!!!!!