Fade out - do it in the mix or save it for mastering ?

[gainreduction]

What's your ME point of view when it comes to songs that have a fade out ending ?

You want it already done in the mix or you wanna be in control of it ?

I can see the point in it affecting compression etc.

I also know a few nightmare stories about producers listening to their fresh copy of the printed and released album just to find out that the fade out doesn't exist..

[pingu]

I think its best for the mix engineer to end the song the way he/she wishes.

Basically i feel its a mixing decision.

[bob katz]

Originally Posted by gainreduction

What's your ME point of view when it comes to songs that have a fade out ending ?

You want it already done in the mix or you wanna be in control of it ?

I can see the point in it affecting compression etc.

I also know a few nightmare stories about producers listening to their fresh copy of the printed and released album just to find out that the fade out doesn't exist..

This requires a sensible two-way street between the mixing engineer/producer and the mastering engineer. Personally I'd rather you do it both ways! Why?

1) Because fadeouts can paint you into a corner. You can do them well, or you can do them poorly, but either way they paint you into a corner. Sometimes it's a good corner. Sometimes it's bad. But why paint yourself into a corner?

2) Because when you do it poorly (usually by accident, but often because you haven't been listening in a quiet enough room to hear how you cut off the tail) and if I can demonstrate a better fade, why did you paint yourself into a corner? You can run the last 30 seconds of the faded song unfaded and send both versions for mastering.

3) Because in the context of an album, when it's being assembled, sometimes if you:

a) change the order or

b) consider the order in the light of day

you might regret your decision to fade song #3 instead of finding an ending. Or the place where you faded because rhythmically it goes better into the next song as a segue or as a space or whatever.

The number of times where the mastering processing has adversely affected a previously-made fade so that I wish it had been done again? I'd guess about 2% around here. But that's enough to give you second thoughts about fading in advance.

Bottom line: send two versions to the mastering engineer, or simply the last seconds of the song without the fade. COMMUNICATE, COMMUNICATE, COMMUNICATE. E.G. "The producer insists that this is the very best fade in the world and we worked very hard on it." My response: "I totally respect that. But anyway, I always listen and see if in context with the assembled and mastered album there are any unforseen issues, just in case."

This is the same kind of response and approach I'd take to people who like to space their own albums out and send me a template of the spacing they like. This can be very helpful sometimes, and it does realize an artistic intent that's very important to the artist. But it can be very restrictive BECAUSE, it turns out that in the context of the leveling and dynamics of the mastering by a sensitive mastering engineer----a very new and exciting "album feel" develops that can minutely or majorly change your perception of the spacing. In the end, I suggest that you use spaces and even fades as guides, and start the two-way street of COMMUNICATING with the mastering engineer. Neither side should ever "just assume, " on any artistic issue, including countoffs, noises, etc. Pick up the phone, and call. That goes for both guys!

That's my take!

[MASSIVE Master]

I'm a fan of having (if they choose to) the production team send in a CD as they see it as far as spacing and fades - I'd *rather* do the fades (as an existing fade will probably change due to any dynamics processing in the chain anyway) but if they insist on having them in there, I urge them to keep them "on the long side" of what they want. That way, If I'm just "cleaning up" the very low level stuff, it's easier not to change the feel of the fade.