Ted Jensen.. Whose Watched Him?

[Analog]

As a hard rock fan and a mastering engineer, you got to respect Ted Jensens's work. He has a way of making things uber loud, but it still has a bit of a transient punch in the drums. He also is a master at low end and his upper midrange is smooth without being dull. I'd love to hear about any experiences that anyone has had who has watched him do his thing. For one thing, I would love to know what his final peak limiter is. Its no L2, thats obvious. Also, I've heard from quite a bit of people that he uses a multiband. I'm curious how and where in his chain he uses this, and what he did with it! Maybe he smoothes out his upper mids with it? I don't know, but I do know that I don't have enough cash to sit in with the man. I've posted this on a mastering forum but didn't get any real answers. I'm not thinking that by simply applying the same peak limiter as Ted that I'll master like him, but it would be fantastic to know!

My boss uses the Timeworks limiter and it sounds cool, but it makes the transients sharper because of its clipping nature.. I've noticed Ted's transients are still rather roundish sounding. Hopefully this thread will pull up some interesting things and perhaps give me new things to try out.

[Kiwiburger]

http://www.digitalprosound.com/artic...le.jsp?id=7676

Seems to suggest it's in-house custom built stuff.

[beats workin']

my experience working with ted, was that , like all of the "greats" it looks as if he's not really doing anything at all. a few tweaks here, an adjustment there. all the while, he's describing what we should order in for lunch. (it's on them- at those rates it should be....)
it was primarily a jazz record and at the end, when i asked him if he was going to compress it a little, he said, "why?"
he listened once thru for each tune, made adjustments along the way, then printed it. whole cd in about 7 hours.
really nice guy.
david lawrence

[music friend]

Agreed- he can get mixes incredibly loud!
Not long ago I sat in at a mastering session at famous mastering house in LA where one of the MEs was trying to get a mix as loud as Ted Jensen, and was struggling to get close. I've heard (maybe read somewhere on these boards?) that he drives his A/D convertors (Lavry gold?) into to red quite a bit.

-cd

[wwittman]

Whatever Sterling does to get things loud, it isn't OBVIOUS...

I've mastered with Ted many times and I have to agree , he actually seems to be doing very LITTLE...
just very TASTEFUL and artful...
he likes his TubeTech EQ's and also has API 550b mastering versions... but he didn't actually do any compression in the room the last few times I mastered with him...

George Marino is my 'regular' mastering guy and he actually tends to do a bit more EQ than Ted, at least with my stuff... but also does very little, if any, compression.
George, I know, is using the Chandler Neve clones now in his desk...

but these guys also know how to get the most out of their gear and how to hit their chosen A-D just enough to get it loud but CLEAN on the disk.

[Jamz]

While I've never worked with Ted Jensen I did have the pleasure of working with George Marino last May. Amongst other pieces of gear he used a Focusrite 315 Blue Series eq, a very early Massenburg eq, Chandler LTD-2s. His work is subtle but calculated and felt. "Tasteful and artful" works equally well for Mr. Marino as a description. He still uses index cards to mark down his adjustments as he did 2 decades ago. Great guy and great ears.
Whether the material was loaded in from 1" tape (rented from Dreamhire) or Pro Tools system it all ended up in Sequoia with an L2 on the master. George is fairly conservative regarding the L2 IMO. When the client asked about the level of the Velvet Revolver Cd he said it came in that loud.
While in Strerling's kitchen area grabbing coffee I also overheard another ME Chris Gehringer mentioning the L2 to his client.
Each ME at Sterling has his own personalized set up. Whether it's custom designed stuff i.e. MUTH, very rare high end gear or the L2 I think the difference (not to sound like a cliche) is in the ME.

[andredb]

I've worked With UE Nastasi which i feel has the same Background and workflow...
It's 90% in the EQ and very very little compression overall.
I also asked "are you not gonna compress it??" and he said "why?? it already sound great!!"
This said i got very loud and clen Masters...
And most of all this stuf sound great in every single place i've played it....

I was told that Jensen changes is gear very often and tests new stuff all the time...

hey, isn't the SS kitchen great!!!

[Analog]

andre, did he use the L2 as well? I'm very shocked to hear that they use the L2 at Sterling. Can anyone confirm if Ted uses it in his Sequioa workstation as well? I assume they don't use it past 2db and get most of the level from slamming the prism converters as far as they can go. The L2 past 2db really ends the idea of having attack on kick and snare.

The whole "no compression" thing makes sense to me. The other day I was doing a master and fiddling around when all of a sudden it sounded really good, open, and loud. I went to check the compressor (Manley Vari Mu) and noticed that it wasn't doing ANY compression, just tube output gain to load the A/Ds. Now if I do compression, its .5 db more for the sound of the Manley circuitry. This has a been a great find and its fun to know that the Sterling guys skill is more in the eq and careful loading.

So another big question for william, andre, or anyone else who has had the privelage of using a Sterling guy like George or Ted... what converters do they use? Prism? Which one, the dream 8 channel or the 2 channel? I'd be interested in renting it to see how far you can slam it.

[thethrillfactor]

Originally Posted by Analog

I'd be interested in renting it to see how far you can slam it.

These days its a Lavry Gold.

Its designed so you can slam it hard and it still sounds good.

[Analog]

So they all have the Lavry Golds instead of the Prism? Interesting stuff. Thrillfactor, when was the last time you were at Sterling and which engineer did you use? Can you share any experiences and if you saw that L2 in action as well?

[Bang]

I would be astonished to find out that Ted Jensen uses the L2. If he does use it, I'd imagine no more then a db or two and that most of his level is from A/D push. But I'd like to hear the answer to this as well.

[Mike Caffrey]

The secret to making things loud is in not limiting the L/R channels of your mix.

Find the peaks, remove them without a limiter, then just turn the whole thing up.

Peaks are the "problem" that prevent you from increasing the perceived volume. The L1/L2 will remove peaks, but it's not addressing the source of the problem, it's more of a band aid, and as a result there's a limit to how much voluming maximixing you can do before you start to hear problems.

It's definitely possible to match Sterling's volume without any limiting from the L1/L2 at all. (Which of course will sound better).

[Analog]

Here is a big question that I don't think anyone will be able to answer but the man himself... When using the Lavry Gold, aside from slamming the input, does he engage the 6db digital saturator/limiter that emulates tape? Because the combo of well balanced eq/overloading input/lavry digital saturation/2 db of L2 would make sense as to how he gets really loud without sounding too mushed up.

[jwnc]

Mike: So the idea is to make a 2 track bounce and then maybe do some on screen volume automation (drawing the peaks down) so you can then just turn it up? So in turn you are manually adjusting the peaks but good editing...

Does that sound right?

jason

[xaos]

A friend of mine was a staff engineer at sterling up until a couple of years ago. He told me that they typically ran the signal out of the masterlink (yep I said masterlink), did the analog processing, then slammed the prism converters to get it loud. No limiting other than the converters. He did a ton of editing and said the wave forms looked pretty wel squared off. He called it "the sterling way" and thought it was funny that I even asked. There were a coupe of other sort of secrets that he thought contibuted to their sound a lot more than what is being discussed here. Have a look at the Muth stuff.

[Analog]

In those recent years it appears they switched to Lavry Golds. The loud wars have also increased in the recent years so I assume they now tag on 2db of software limiter (can anyone confirm Ted uses the L2 plugin??). But I'd love to know if he uses the Lavry 6db digital tape saturator.

[Kiwiburger]

Originally Posted by jwnc

Mike: So the idea is to make a 2 track bounce and then maybe do some on screen volume automation (drawing the peaks down) so you can then just turn it up? So in turn you are manually adjusting the peaks but good editing...

Does that sound right?

jason

I'm fairly certain he means to fix things in the multitrack channels, before the 2-bus.

Or if that isn't what he meant, it's what I believe in doing anyway.

You have far more opportunity to fix things on a track by track basis than you do on a stereo mix.

E.g. - why knock the whole mix down, if the peak is actually a thump on a high hat mic that should have been shelved in the first place?

[Mike Caffrey]

Originally Posted by jwnc

Mike: So the idea is to make a 2 track bounce and then maybe do some on screen volume automation (drawing the peaks down) so you can then just turn it up? So in turn you are manually adjusting the peaks but good editing...

Does that sound right?

jason

No.

If the snare peaks 4dB above everything else, do something that gets rid of speficially that peak only, then turn the whole mix up. If you run the whole mix through a stereo limiter that snare peak is going to squash the entire mix, yes just for a second, but if the snare is peaking, why would you limit the guitars as well? That's what the L1/L2 will do (so will the volume automation you're talking about).

Xaos's comment about see the Muth stuff is a big part of the answer, although not the only part.

[Darius van H]

Well said, Mike......the "Sterling loudness" is achieved at mix time, not mastering.

The few time i've worked on mixes of the quality what Sterling receives every day, it was easy to match their loudness.

No big tricks required.

I'm sure Ted also has to work on some real crap which he can't get good volume on, but of course we never hear those CDs, do we?

[Casey]

Just to tie together the ideas of good arrangements, eq, and clipping ADs it's probably worth mentioning the psychoacoustics of perceived loudness. Boring yes, but it is at the root to some degree of the mastering art, including getting things really loud. If this is old territory, I apologize, and it's time to move along to the next reply.

If you have ever looked at your stereo wave form, and it looks like a solid block, it can raise the question, how on earth can a well mastered disc sound any louder? There simply isn't any more loudness left in the bits I have! Well this is true, but this only accounts for the overall level of the signal. It does not take into account how the level is distributed across the frequency spectrum. The ear saturates within a dozen or so frequency bands. So if at any time the majority of the level is within one of these bands your ear just limits the gain that your brain perceives. But now take the level and spread it across two bands, and your brain will now perceive a large level increase. If you take the available level and spread it as best as possible across all of the bands, then the brain will percive the level as being far higher than the level that we started out with that was restricted to a single band.

So how to best maximize level. Well as is almost always pointed out it starts with arrangement, tracking and mixing. So a good mix starts out with elements that fill the bands to begin with. Of course this is a huge issue, but off topic. Then there is distortion through out the chain. Harmonics spread the energy over the frequency spectrum. EQ of course. Then clipping, which in a way is different from ordinary distortion. Clipping (or as was mentioned "all those square waves") cause level to be scattered randomly (almost infinitly) across the frequency spectrum. So it's not just that clipping uses up the bits, it's also a tool to fill all those frequency bands that may not be filled to the brim yet.

I know of at least one tool (the Sony inflator) that tries to be a bit more careful in how it uses harmonics to fill in the bands. It can be a useful tool, but I think the science has a way to go yet. But still it's an acknowledgement that distortion and clipping are heavy handed tools that can be sharpened up to be a bit more effective. It's possible that some of the custom mastering gear (by chance or by design) is optimized in this regard.

So with a good mix, proper eq, and a healthy dose of harmonics, it's possible to get louder than loud and still not compress real hard. Which I think is the crux of the whole biscuit.

[Mike Caffrey]

Originally Posted by Darius van H

Well said, Mike......the "Sterling loudness" is achieved at mix time, not mastering.

The few time i've worked on mixes of the quality what Sterling receives every day, it was easy to match their loudness.

No big tricks required.

I'm sure Ted also has to work on some real crap which he can't get good volume on, but of course we never hear those CDs, do we?

That's probably partly true, but my point is that digita limiters have a limit to how loud the can make things because when you affect the entire mix there's a limit to how much you can do before you start getting diminishing returns. There are other ways, and they will vary with each mix, of addressing the peaks that prevent you from making the mix louder just by printing it louder.

[andredb]

Originally Posted by Darius van H

Well said, Mike......the "Sterling loudness" is achieved at mix time, not mastering.

The few time i've worked on mixes of the quality what Sterling receives every day, it was easy to match their loudness.

No big tricks required.

I'm sure Ted also has to work on some real crap which he can't get good volume on, but of course we never hear those CDs, do we?

90% true....

I also think this guys are all humans.. they could have their BAd days too...

Also
No L2 for UE, just the limiter from the Db Technologies Converter (labeled LAvry NOW) LE3000s

[Darius van H]

Originally Posted by Casey

Just to tie together the ideas of good arrangements, eq, and clipping ADs it's probably worth mentioning the psychoacoustics of perceived loudness. Boring yes, but it is at the root to some degree of the mastering art, including getting things really loud. If this is old territory, I apologize, and it's time to move along to the next reply.

If you have ever looked at your stereo wave form, and it looks like a solid block, it can raise the question, how on earth can a well mastered disc sound any louder? There simply isn't any more loudness left in the bits I have! Well this is true, but this only accounts for the overall level of the signal. It does not take into account how the level is distributed across the frequency spectrum. The ear saturates within a dozen or so frequency bands. So if at any time the majority of the level is within one of these bands your ear just limits the gain that your brain perceives. But now take the level and spread it across two bands, and your brain will now perceive a large level increase. If you take the available level and spread it as best as possible across all of the bands, then the brain will percive the level as being far higher than the level that we started out with that was restricted to a single band.

So how to best maximize level. Well as is almost always pointed out it starts with arrangement, tracking and mixing. So a good mix starts out with elements that fill the bands to begin with. Of course this is a huge issue, but off topic. Then there is distortion through out the chain. Harmonics spread the energy over the frequency spectrum. EQ of course. Then clipping, which in a way is different from ordinary distortion. Clipping (or as was mentioned "all those square waves") cause level to be scattered randomly (almost infinitly) across the frequency spectrum. So it's not just that clipping uses up the bits, it's also a tool to fill all those frequency bands that may not be filled to the brim yet.

I know of at least one tool (the Sony inflator) that tries to be a bit more careful in how it uses harmonics to fill in the bands. It can be a useful tool, but I think the science has a way to go yet. But still it's an acknowledgement that distortion and clipping are heavy handed tools that can be sharpened up to be a bit more effective. It's possible that some of the custom mastering gear (by chance or by design) is optimized in this regard.

So with a good mix, proper eq, and a healthy dose of harmonics, it's possible to get louder than loud and still not compress real hard. Which I think is the crux of the whole biscuit.

Nice post - it's rare that someone says anything interesting about sound on this forum .

[jwnc]

Mike,

Ahh ok thanks that makes sense now. I think I like alot of other people probably relie on the mastering stage to gel everything togethe when it should be done in the mix and the mastering is the last bit of sweeting.

jason

[Analog]

I'm sorry fellas. A good mix doesn't make itself loud. It has to go through some process to make it loud. Granted if the mix is balanced frequency wise it will be easier to push without overloading a certain frequency (like the 200Hz area), but it needs something to actually make it loud.

The guys at Sterling have techniques to make things loud without making them sound like squashed mush. I'm thinking it has a lot to do with the Lavry Gold stuff, thanks to andre. The Gold only has one limiter, and its post A/D and adds about 6db of gain, GOOD gain, its supposed to emulate tape emulation and I can hear that a bit. My boss actually asked Dan Lavry to make a pro tools plugin with the same algo. I guess Ted uses the Golds saturating digital limiter as well. Andre what did you mean by LE3000?

[Masterer]

Originally Posted by xaos

A friend of mine was a staff engineer at sterling up until a couple of years ago. He told me that they typically ran the signal out of the masterlink (yep I said masterlink), did the analog processing, then slammed the prism converters to get it loud. No limiting other than the converters. He did a ton of editing and said the wave forms looked pretty wel squared off. He called it "the sterling way" and thought it was funny that I even asked. There were a coupe of other sort of secrets that he thought contibuted to their sound a lot more than what is being discussed here. Have a look at the Muth stuff.

Interesting theories... and yes the Muth/Dangerous stuff is very nice.

I don't know anybody using the Masterlink on a regular basis, except maybe when a project was "printed" to the Masterlink. There are no secrets, no black boxes and no "Sterling Way". Each guy does his own thing in his own unique way. The only thing ubiquitous is the quality of the studio build. From power to signal chain to acoustics, everything is top quality and as tweeked as possible [power supply mods, some custom gear etc]. Anybody can build a great studio and of course many have. Really, it's just a bunch of guys with a lot of experience in great rooms doing the best they can on every project, trying to deliver something the client will approve of.
Oh, and contrary to popular belief, the goal is not to make the loudest record in the world. That much I can say for Ted and the rest of the guys.

Peace.

[Darius van H]

Originally Posted by Analog

I'm sorry fellas. A good mix doesn't make itself loud. It has to go through some process to make it loud. Granted if the mix is balanced frequency wise it will be easier to push without overloading a certain frequency (like the 200Hz area), but it needs something to actually make it loud.

The guys at Sterling have techniques to make things loud without making them sound like squashed mush. I'm thinking it has a lot to do with the Lavry Gold stuff, thanks to andre. The Gold only has one limiter, and its post A/D and adds about 6db of gain, GOOD gain, its supposed to emulate tape emulation and I can hear that a bit. My boss actually asked Dan Lavry to make a pro tools plugin with the same algo. I guess Ted uses the Golds saturating digital limiter as well. Andre what did you mean by LE3000?

How do you know?............how many before/after examples of Sterling mastering have you heard? (serious question)

[Masterer]

Originally Posted by Darius van H

How do you know?............how many before/after examples of Sterling mastering have you heard? (serious question)

Quite a few actually. I've been a working there for seven years.

[Darius van H]

Originally Posted by Masterer

Quite a few actually. I've been a working there for seven years.

Cool!.....what's your name?

I'm just trying to make the point that the main work of "loudness" is done before master-time.......of course the guys (at Sterling or wherever) turn up the volume skillfully and with the least possible damage, but I know (from painfull experience) that lack of knowledge and experience can lead one to imagine there are some magic bullets when really, it's just hard work+intelligence+time.

[Masterer]

Originally Posted by Darius van H

Cool!.....what's your name?

Chris Athens.