How much longer will people pay for mastering?

[Thomas W. Bethe]

Originally Posted by NEWTON IN ORBIT

Perhaps.

Funny, because you then send the same mix out and pay a little extra for someone with experience, and you hear no complaints, and the master sounds very good.

And know (no?) "whining".

Thanks for letting me interject in the discussion,
john

If the mix is good then a good mastering engineer should be able to do wonders with it. Today with the variable skill level of many folks involved in music production it is hard to determine who should be responsible for the final QC. In the "olde days" everything was QC'd repeatedly from the tracking to the mix to the mastering. All the people involved in doing recording and mixing were professionals and knew how to self critique. Today that is not true for many people who are doing their own production.

Why would anyone release a CD with obvious mix problems on it when it would have taken a good mix engineer a couple of minutes to fix if it? The problem might be that the "mixer" the talent and the recording engineer are all the same person and they have been working on the project for so long that they are no longer objective.

One thing that has changed over the years is that records use to be made with the collaboration of a lot of talented people. Today one person does everything and the first time another human being listens to the results is when the client brings in their stuff for mastering.

FWIW and YMMV

Originally Posted by Thomas W. Bethe

In the "olde days" the mix engineer would have caught most of the problems I see before the tracks were sent off to be mastered. Today that does not seem to be the case.

People can sound however they want in the "newye dayze".

I think having hard times to accept that is leading nowhere else than possibly having to design a "shop's closed"-sign.

[Thomas W. Bethe]

Originally Posted by PatrikT

People can sound however they want in the "newye dayze".

I think having hard times to accept that is leading nowhere else than possibly having to design a "shop's closed"-sign.

Not sure what you are referring to???

If there is a problem that no one caught then it should be brought to the attention of the client. If the client wants to do something out of the ordinary it is their prerogative but they should also communicate what they are looking for or doing to the mastering engineer so the mastering engineers does not think it a mistake. Lots of people today want things to sound grungy or distorted for an effect. They may also want to play music backwards or chop up music so it is out of order for an effect. Some even put in tones or add noise for an effect. But you have to know what is going on and that means good communications between the mastering engineer and the client on ALL levels.

If a mastering engineer catches a potential problem I think they should check with the client before 1) trying to fix it or 2) not saying anything and just thinking that the client wanted it that way. a BIG for instance is count offs at the beginning of songs sometimes accidentally get left in figuring that the mastering engineer will remove them when he or she does that mastering. Sometime people leave them in to make the music sound more "real" like the listener is listening to a recording session. If you don't know which way the client wants the final project it is up to you as a mastering engineer to ASK the client.

Communication between all concerned is paramount to a good mastering session IMHO.

[mikedunn211290]

Originally Posted by Ace_TX

people convinced now that slapping some common plugins on your recording is mastering

personally i like someone unattached from my music to master it

So true, I think that it's at the point where someone goes 'Oh check this, it says 'mastering' on my plugin, I can master now!'
I don't enjoy mastering, will always use an external one (I sent work to Alex Newport, he's brilliant)

Mike

Originally Posted by Thomas W. Bethe

Not sure what you are referring to???

Mastering engineers personal preferences regarding mixing.

If we are interested in music with variety, individual artists with different messages and expressions and the joy of no two songs sounding exactly the same then that concept is pretty devastating.

If the client wants to do something out of the ordinary it is their prerogative but they should also communicate what they are looking for or doing to the mastering engineer so the mastering engineers does not think it a mistake.

I don't get it. Whenever someone does something with an open mind you instantly define that as an error?

What is a "mistake" really? I define such as something that clearly overshadows the music in such a degree that a normal listener would not hear the music, or at least be very distracted.

Is a guitar that sounds to be 10 dB's lower than the vocal a mistake? If you actually can hear and identify them both?

Lots of people today want things to sound grungy or distorted for an effect. They may also want to play music backwards or chop up music so it is out of order for an effect. Some even put in tones or add noise for an effect.

Yes, the year is 2011 now and the possibilities to make sound are endless and has been for decades.

But then maybe some ME asked U2 if "those guitars are intentional" back in the days of less shocking mix elements...

But you have to know what is going on and that means good communications between the mastering engineer and the client on ALL levels.

Once again I don't understand the drama here. You get to know what is going on once you press play. Should I call the guy up and ask why one song sounds like coming out from a can while the next is in full bloom?

Communication between all concerned is paramount to a good mastering session IMHO.

Sure, but the less you dig around in no real problems the less problems will arise.

Here is a Youtube clip I think I already posted elsewhere. It says a lot about definition of "problems" and "mistakes", objectivity and communication during mastering. The great Ron Murphy (R.I.P.), obviously a true professional:

YouTube - ‪Mastering at Sound Enterprises with Ron Murphy‬‏

[Thomas W. Bethe]

PatrickT

A lot of the people I work with are NOT top mix engineers. If I hear something that does sounds "strange" I will call them and ask if that is what they intended. Sometimes they say "yes" that is the way I want it. Sometimes they never heard what I am hearing due to monitoring problems or being too close to the project. In many cases the problem just "slipped by me" is their response.

I worked in a Conservatory of Music for 26 years. I worked with some of the most creative professors and students in New Music. They were always pushing the envelope of what was possible. I really looked forward to working with them and helping them realize their creations. One student wanted to reproduce square waves at 120 dBSPL and the frequency was 20 HZ. At the time we had no speakers capable of doing what he wanted. I explained the problem and we came up with a solution. He wanted to do something out of the ordinary and the equipment would not let him so we found a way around the problem. I still use that same deductive logic today in helping musicians realize their dreams.

If I just mastered everything that was presented to me I think I would be doing my clients a disservice. Most clients welcome someone with trained ears listening to their material and making suggestion. If what they did is what they want then I do my level best to make it sound great. If they listen to what I have directed them to and find it is OK with them then again I do the mastering. Many of my clients are working with small monitoring speakers in a non acoustically designed room and things can sound much different to them. They also maybe so close to a project that they cannot hear things a trained pair of ears will pick up.

I really don't want to interfere with someones artistic vision but if I can help them realize their artistic vision by pointing out some problems then I think I have done my job and earned their money.

The musicians can always disregard my advice and consul and tell me to "just do it" My ego isn't bruised but OTOH they may not get the full benefit of my experience. It is entirely up to them since they are paying me to do what they want. This is after all a "service" business.

Have a GREAT weekend.

Originally Posted by Thomas W. Bethe

If I just mastered everything that was presented to me I think I would be doing my clients a disservice.

I really think you would do the opposite, a service, if you "just mastered".

[MattGray]

Originally Posted by PatrikT

I really think you would do the opposite, a service, if you "just mastered".

There is plenty of people out there offering the 'service' but not as many producing a 'great product' with 'outstanding service'. Most times, going the extra mile will pay off for the benefit of the project. It's all in the communication, knowing how to handle situations when they arise & then doing the best job you can to please everyone involved. It's not as easy as it sounds...

However there is also many times when you get a great mix from a seasoned professional & you 'just master' it. I enjoy those days the most.

[Thomas W. Bethe]

Originally Posted by MattGray

There is plenty of people out there offering the 'service' but not as many producing a 'great product' with 'outstanding service'. Most times, going the extra mile will pay off for the benefit of the project. It's all in the communication, knowing how to handle situations when they arise & then doing the best job you can to please everyone involved. It's not as easy as it sounds...

However there is also many times when you get a great mix from a seasoned professional & you 'just master' it. I enjoy those days the most.

[Trakworx]

Originally Posted by PatrikT

I really think you would do the opposite, a service, if you "just mastered".

Well, most of my clients express gratitude when I go to the trouble of giving helpful feedback, even if they choose to ignore it. It shows that I cared enough, when it would have been less work for me to just master it and move on.

The goal, IMO, should always be to get the best final result no matter who's ego has to be bruised to get there. I call it professionalism.

J~

[bdenton]

Originally Posted by PatrikT

I really think you would do the opposite, a service, if you "just mastered".

When you send something out to be mastered, you're going to write a check (or hand over a credit card or whatever).

Very few people are willing to write a check to a mastering house for something they plan to only listen to themselves, for their own enjoyment.

So, when somebody is writing a check, they are probably wanting to end up with a product that has some level of commercial appeal.

When you hire a mastering engineer you're not just "renting" their equipment. Anybody with enough money can buy a "mastering rig"; you don't have to present your credentials along with your check.

By and large, people expect, and count on, the mastering engineer to use his/her skills, in addition to their equipment, to deliver a commercial level product.

I believe most people who hire a mastering engineer would want to hear about anything that might make the product more "salable". They are free to reject the mastering engineer's advice, or to tell him to ****, but most people would be grateful for the help they are essentially paying for...

Originally Posted by bdenton

When you hire a mastering engineer you're not just "renting" their equipment.

Of course not. You're hiring the ability of the mastering engineer to not standardize your art but to make it work through many ears anyway.

I believe most people who hire a mastering engineer would want to hear about anything that might make the product more "salable".

What sells is talent, performance, brave ideas and song craftmanship.

[IIIrd]

Originally Posted by MattGray

There is plenty of people out there offering the 'service' but not as many producing a 'great product' with 'outstanding service'. Most times, going the extra mile will pay off for the benefit of the project. It's all in the communication, knowing how to handle situations when they arise & then doing the best job you can to please everyone involved. It's not as easy as it sounds...

However there is also many times when you get a great mix from a seasoned professional & you 'just master' it. I enjoy those days the most.

And great mixes from non seasoned pro's too...great mixes of great music by great musicians , with good company, and "thanks that was easy" at the end...good days mastering.

[tomasrangel]

Originally Posted by daguv

Is the mastering industry doomed? Or will there always be a needed for the third party master-er?

I notice a lot of the dance producers are going it alone..

Mr. Einstein is saying to me now:
"This is so f.... relative!
What's your needs?"

[Thomas W. Bethe]

Originally Posted by PatrikT

Of course not. You're hiring the ability of the mastering engineer to not standardize your art but to make it work through many ears anyway.



What sells is talent, performance, brave ideas and song craftmanship.

You seem to equate mastering engineers with someone who is out to make the music sound the way they want it to sound or make it into a commercial formulation. Nothing could be further from the truth. Mastering engineers are trying very hard to HELP the musician realize their dreams. As part of the mastering they may hear things that they want to checkout with the musicians. It is all about good communication. Sometimes things slip through that are easy to fix but may have not been something the musician is aware of. If your mechanic looked at your car and found one wheel not fully attached wouldn't you want them to bring it to your attention. If you follow your logic they would not say anything assuming that it is the way you wanted it to be.

FWIW and YMMV

Originally Posted by Thomas W. Bethe

You seem to equate mastering engineers with someone who is out to make the music sound the way they want it to sound or make it into a commercial formulation. Nothing could be further from the truth.

This is a very complex statement from a man that in every second mastering thread spend loads of energy complaining about how bad, wrong and off his "non-professional" clients usually are and how much corrective processing that in some cases has to be applied to make things "decent".

I equate mastering to that in the most invisible, but musical, way bring people forward into public translation. For who they are and what they actually have accomplished. With zero negative side effects of the least possible processing, if any. I guess this is by far too simple for you.

[IIIrd]

Originally Posted by Thomas W. Bethe

You seem to equate mastering engineers with someone who is out to make the music sound the way they want it to sound or make it into a commercial formulation. Nothing could be further from the truth. Mastering engineers are trying very hard to HELP the musician realize their dreams.As part of the mastering they may hear things that they want to checkout with the musicians. It is all about good communication. Sometimes things slip through that are easy to fix but may have not been something the musician is aware of. If your mechanic looked at your car and found one wheel not fully attached wouldn't you want them to bring it to your attention. If you follow your logic they would not say anything assuming that it is the way you wanted it to be.

FWIW and YMMV

Absolutely, that is the crux of the whole operation, fix whats wrong, if necessary change the sound a little for the better..a} if the clients wants you to, and b} If the result is better, not just different. Then after that we make the masters...Thats our title..

"I equate mastering to that in the most invisible, but musical, way bring people forward into public translation. For who they are and what they actually have accomplished. With zero negative side effects of the least possible processing, if any. I guess this is by far too simple for you."

Too much candy coating old chap...

[Thomas W. Bethe]

Originally Posted by PatrikT

This is a very complex statement from a man that in every second mastering thread spend loads of energy complaining about how bad, wrong and off his "non-professional" clients usually are and how much corrective processing that in some cases has to be applied to make things "decent".

I equate mastering to that in the most invisible, but musical, way bring people forward into public translation. For who they are and what they actually have accomplished. With zero negative side effects of the least possible processing, if any. I guess this is by far too simple for you.

I am not trying to pick a fight with you.

Some of my clients are pros and I don't have to do much of anything when I master their materials. Some of my clients are newbies and are using very inadequate monitors and really don't know what they are doing. If they ask me "to make it sound great" I do what I can with what I am presented. If I have questions I ask them.

I am assuming from your previous posts that you just master everything that is presented to you, problems and all, and charge the client for your efforts. I really don't think this is at all fair to the client.

To master something that has easily fixable mix problems is basically taking money from a client for a "professional mastering job" but not doing anything to help them in return for that money.

I don't know how much more "simple" I can make it.

[Trakworx]

Originally Posted by PatrikT

I equate mastering to that in the most invisible, but musical, way bring people forward into public translation. For who they are and what they actually have accomplished. With zero negative side effects of the least possible processing, if any.

Nothing wrong with this equation - once the mix is as good as it can be - something MEs can sometimes help with via feedback. It's about helping, really.

Originally Posted by PatrikT

I guess this is by far too simple for you.

Statements like this destroy the poster's credibility IMO...



J~

[StewartFang]

I'm with Patrik here...

there is a lot of drama here...

...how much more do you really need to know after listening to a song for 3 minutes?...that is the way the producers presented it too you...now go make it louder and just as exciting to listen to...that's it that's your job...stop making it out to be something it's not...

harping about the clients inability to communicate is a huge excuse for having unhappy clients.

Would you like mix engineers to tell you how to do your job for you?

You are getting paid to stress about which way to go with it.....honestly....the sidestepping that goes on here....

[Thomas W. Bethe]

Originally Posted by StewartFang

I'm with Patrik here...

there is a lot of drama here...

...how much more do you really need to know after listening to a song for 3 minutes?...that is the way the producers presented it too you...now go make it louder and just as exciting to listen to...that's it that's your job...stop making it out to be something it's not...

harping about the clients inability to communicate is a huge excuse for having unhappy clients.

Would you like mix engineers to tell you how to do your job for you?

You are getting paid to stress about which way to go with it.....honestly....the sidestepping that goes on here....

I think you and Patrick are missing the whole idea behind what I am saying. I get a lot of mixers that are NEWBIES. They don't, in many cases, have any real idea of what they are doing. I am NOT talking about professional mix engineers I am talking about the person who is the talent, the recording engineer and the mixer all rolled into one. They sometimes make STUPID mistakes and if I catch one I call them up and ask about it. I don't change their mixes, I don't undo anything they are trying to do if there is a 60 HZ hum on the track I will call them and tell them about it. If they say it is cool then I don't worry about it. If they say get rid of it then I do that as well. I am not trying to step on the mixer's toes but instead help them. It is NOT about the artistic freedom of the talent or the mixer it is about HELPING someone and doing a good job for money.

IMHO this thread has reached the end of its usefulness so BYE BYE!!!

[mattg082]

Personally I see the value in using a ME. I might get a mix to sound really great, but have 6 others to do by a certain time. Rather than playing ghetto ME and spending a extra day or two on a song when I could be on the next I could just send it to the ME to worry about the issues I didn't catch...Then I feel confident in the end it was done to it's best. However it rarely in the budget for a band to pay for a ME I find.

To me a ME is someone who has been around for a long time and knows their stuff, has pro gear, a pro room, many work to their credit already and can be professional and on time. Sometimes that bass,mid or high is off a little and isn't translating as well as it could be...I didn't hear it in my room and might not...The Me catches the things that fell through the cracks and helps retain a quality work as well as the mixing engineer and bands reputation. I think that is money well spent rather than chasing your tail or obsessing over a mix too much sometimes. I wouldn't call a ME some kid in a bedroom slapping on a limiter and playing with ozone or some eq...which there are people who say they master and do just that! I think that's the impression some get when why not do it myself? To many people say they "master" on their buissness card or whatever and that floors me sometimes it's thrown around like nothing when to me it's almost a badge and profession to be taken seriously.

I mix into a comp on the 2 buss and use a limiter when a ME isn't involved and even widen sometimes,roll of some high or low end ect.(fab filter). Would I call it mastering? No..I'd call it finalizing the song. I'm paying for a MEs skill and facilities I don't have as well as insurance on a product. The better I've become at mixing and bigger my studio has grown the more I want to use one all the time! It's nice to have peace of mind. But then again like I was saying before it's not normally in the budget and if it's done it usually comes out of my pocket...MOst bands hear my mixes and I ask them but they don't think it's needed when looking at the extra money unless it was made to be shopped to a label and money is not the concern.

I do see a trend in dance music to not use a ME at all even on big releases...Most of those guys are gearheads to begin with and probably pretty OCD about everything they did from the ground up. Guessing use some uniform way of eqing low end after awhile and going from there. Deamu5 does all his own everything and his mixes sound great the way they are for that genre. I will say one thing that I do hate working with the younger crowd sometimes with mixing...It's a freaking headache how much power struggle and ego is going on instead of looking at the big picture! I did some radio songs for a album and the other guy who mixed the rest of the album was mixing for only 2 years on a profire and wanted to butcher my songs in what he called mastering! Even after finishing up with the band he still is nervous and wants to spend another few months on his already a year mixing it again...In short I would not send a mix to a guy like that, but encourage his determination and shrug off his ego.

[MattGray]

Originally Posted by Thomas W. Bethe

I think you and Patrick are missing the whole idea behind what I am saying. I get a lot of mixers that are NEWBIES. They don't, in many cases, have any real idea of what they are doing. I am NOT talking about professional mix engineers I am talking about the person who is the talent, the recording engineer and the mixer all rolled into one. They sometimes make STUPID mistakes and if I catch one I call them up and ask about it. I don't change their mixes, I don't undo anything they are trying to do if there is a 60 HZ hum on the track I will call them and tell them about it. If they say it is cool then I don't worry about it. If they say get rid of it then I do that as well. I am not trying to step on the mixer's toes but instead help them. It is NOT about the artistic freedom of the talent or the mixer it is about HELPING someone and doing a good job for money.

Just to add on to what Thomas has so eloquently written... In our profession we're dealing with artists, mix engineers & producers with a wide range of experience. From self produced artists with no formal engineering training or little to no experience to seasoned professionals who have been doing their thing well for many years.

A lot of of the clients with little experience ask to send me mixes prior to the the mastering session for a free mix evaluation to ensure they haven't made any obvious mistakes. In a lot of cases this has to do with A) lack of experience B) cheap small monitors/poor room acoustics C) not knowing what they're listening for or how to achieve the vision they have in their mind. These clients really appreciate all the help they can get from the mix evaluation right through to the finished master/product. Hopefully they learn some things along the way so they can produce a better mix next time round. For these clients it's not just about 'mastering' but also about education, they're always very grateful for help & even ask for stem mastering if they really can't get the sound from the mix that they're looking for. If it's beyond stem mixing I'll refer them to some professional mix engineers tailored to suit their budget.

Than you have guys that are far more experienced that don't want their mixes changed much at all, just a little EQ sweetening if needed & to make it louder usually is all that they ask for. Other times I've also been asked by the same professional mix engineers to do as much as I can to get the project sounding better as the artist didn't have the budget or the mixes were rushed for whatever reason so they're less than ideal.

In between that you may have semi-pro engineers who do a decent job of mixing & also appreciate the free mix eval or any advice on how they could make the mix better.

Some clients attend to oversee the whole process (which is recommended for new clients), but now I seem to be 95% unattended these days so people trust me to do the job to their satisfaction & a phone call or email is the only communication on these jobs. I also get a lot of clients providing reference masters either of their own self-mastered versions or of other bands to indicate the direction their looking for from the mastering.

It's the mastering engineer's job to meet the expectations of a WIDE range of clients who have varying skill sets &/or requirements.... so communication with the client & asking what their expectations is of me is paramount to getting the job done the way they expect it to sound. Which is ultimately what they're paying ME's to do whether that means they want it way louder than we would advise, brighter or boomier than what we'd advise it doesn't matter.. mastering is a service.. find out what the client wants, do it to the best of your ability & get paid for it if they like it.

Until you're doing mastering *full-time* professionally i.e. 2-300+ projects a year... you have no idea what's expected of the professional mastering engineer's role so why even pretend to know what we have to deal with or what's been asked of us?

As mentioned in this thread, there is a lot of crappy, hobbyist or fake mastering services around that are cheap & nasty, don't have a studio photo, don't have a gear list or even worse stolen studio photos, made up equipment lists who are doing the whole mastering community a disservice and tarnishing the whole concept of mastering. As with anything, do your research **BUYER BEWARE**. If it sounds too good to be true than it probably is...

[Sdelves]

For as long as someone can do it better than you, you will pay.




Actually trying to start a mastering website myself.

Home - Delves Audio

[StewartFang]

Of couse people should pay for mastering...but there is o much BS about communication here...here...listen to this music...make an informed decision and master it already...if you are good...it will be good most of the time...if you aren;t...then you'll continue to blame the client's ability to communicate

[MattGray]

Originally Posted by StewartFang

Of course people should pay for mastering...but there is so much BS about communication here...here...listen to this music...make an informed decision and master it already...if you are good...it will be good most of the time...if you aren't...then you'll continue to blame the client's ability to communicate

There are many ways to cook an egg... scrambled, poached, sunny side up, boiled, omelette... Shall I ask the chef to guess which way you'd like yours today? He might be an excellent chef & he can cook them any which way *egg-cellently* he may even take an educated guess the way you may like it first time, but wouldn't it save everyone a lot of hassle if you could just say which way you want it cooked in the first place? I think communication is vital especially when working with someone new for the first time. Once you've done a couple of eggs for someone you don't have to keep asking them which way they like it because you begin to form an understanding based on initial communication & mutual trust.

Same with mastering.. for instance if I master a track & I think it sounds best at -12dB RMS but the client says no I want it to be as loud as "insert pancake here" than that's a revision because I didn't ask. Obviously there are some things you should do without asking & by all means use your sense of musicality & experience to approach any project... but some people want more polish than others, some like it flattened, some like it more dynamic, some like it warmer, some like it brighter, some like it smooth others like it aggressive... it pays to ask a few things. Obviously when a client has no idea what they want.. get to work & do your thing & shape it the direction you think it should sound.

Don't knock communication though.. there is many ways to master a record & they all may have merit but it's up to you to cook it the way the client wants, expects & is paying for you to deliver it. The better the communication - the less chance of needing revisions

btw.. hope you don't mind but I *mastered* your post with the correct spelling & punctuation as I assumed it was a mistake :D lighten up Stew...

Originally Posted by Thomas W. Bethe

They sometimes make STUPID mistakes and if I catch one I call them up and ask about it.

The difference between you and me is that I could consider a mistake but never add "STUPID" to that equation.

It has been pretty clear by now that you really look down on the so-called non-professional clients of yours, bringing in those oceans of crap and mistakes, that still magically appears to sound like music, into your room. It has been publically stated, over and over again, by yourself that it is the case.

It is NOT about the artistic freedom of the talent or the mixer it is about HELPING someone and doing a good job for money.

It IS all about the artistic freedom.

Your defenition of a "good job" is probably to erase every trace of those small mixing speakers in that crappy mixing room, while I define a "good job" in making it remain sounding like small speakers in crappy room, only better and more pleasing to the public, if possible.

A recording is the recording. People are interested hearing what happened before your mastering. Not your mastering. People are interested in the identity of the music. Not your identity. I guess you in never considered how much your heavy counterforces might slow down, or even completely stop up, the development of "newbies".

Best Regards

[Trakworx]

Originally Posted by PatrikT

It IS all about the artistic freedom.

...

A recording is the recording. People are interested hearing what happened before your mastering. Not your mastering. People are interested in the identity of the music. Not your identity. I guess you in never considered how much your heavy counterforces might slow down, or even completely stop up, the development of "newbies".

Best Regards

Patrik, thanks for adding your identity and website.

Putting it in terms of artistic freedom presupposes that the ME has some kind of power over the mixer, when he doesn't. All the ME can do is make suggestions and it's still up to the mixer to take them or leave them. Freedom intact.

I question your authority to pronounce what people are interested in. My own experience proves that most newbies value and actively seek the advice of MEs.



J~

[AudioSoundzz]

Mastering is fine for many artists and not needed for others. I fall into the second category. I produce albums for a label collaborating with artists and for the most part we take our time. I work with many projects at any given time and can go back (in the box) and add new parts, improve the mix and add mastering touches as the album progresses. (We have a great Trident board and I do compare OTB, but the benefits of loading multiple projects every day way outweighs any sonic benefits of OTB for most projects).

Later into projects, I mix with the mastering in place so I do not have ugly surprises like oops, the high hat is too loud now that the whole mix is brighter or now the whole mix needs de-essings because air was added. Or, dang now that we added that final compression the main vocal is buried. Or, the whole mix sounds better with the center channel 1.5 db lower but now kick and bass are too low.

To me not mixing and mastering at the same time is train wreck waiting to happen. At least that is how it works for my creative work flow. I want control and no surprises. I and the artists can release the projects at our own pace and can have many people listen and give feedback. I am not afraid of input and ask for input along the way. It is a team effort and as they say their is no questioning taste. As a producer it is my job to sift through and get the gold which of course is my taste as well.

I know of no college degree in taste or what sells in the music business. Record labels professionals fail at this all the time. Mastering engineers do have fantastic gear that can enhance the sound a bit and for someone without mastering abilities it can help a lot, but many times, I would think they are correcting problems in the mix. Fashion influences what some mastering engineers feel obligated to do, even if it is flat ridiculous or at least annoying like the over compression of most the popular music today.

This is not to say the mastering engineers do not help many artists and labels who work in a more traditional ways or simply do not have mastering experience.

For one of our projects, the artist hired a focus group (about 150 people) to listen to the first version of a song and the mix we came up with. The company is used by Mcdonalds for commercials and they had a lot of great suggestions many of which we implemented. This kind of input for a commercial song seems relevant for some kinds of main-stream music as it was a cross section of the target audience. But it is not the way I work but in this special case it paid off. Just an interesting bit for GSs to ponder. Maybe this is the ultimate way to not lose objectivity?