The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Brian Gardner and widening? Equalisers (HW)
Old 27th November 2009
  #91
Gear Addict
 
turtlerock's Avatar
 

Verified Member
err what will said only written by me

i have been working 7 days and nights a week for a few months and for another few months more on as many jobs a day as i have EVER done , just raising the cash for the new studio.
getting a chance to "start again " with a room and a signal chain without any real constraints other then i dont want to get it wrong is really quite a challenge , one day i have the new console setup down to a zen "near zero gear setup "

then later that day i do a truly horrible sounding record that needs more help then i can give it and i am off into the storeroom looking for a box i haven't used in two years !
and i am then mentally moving the studio plans to include 4 consoles !

if somebody actually knows how to pull back from owning all of the mastering boxes and just picking 3 desert island pieces maybe drop me a line , i would be most interested to learn your ways .
Old 27th November 2009
  #92
Lives for gear
 
Table Of Tone's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edward_Vinatea View Post
There are lots of "ME's" these days that have another particular sonic stamp: the one that ruins mixes. Work with the best minds in audio mixing and your options for the mastering work are very limited. Sometimes is just a matter of not ruining or tampering with the mix, and sometimes your role is just symbolic.

Regards,
Some producers say to me "keep it sounding exactly like the mix but just get some level on it so it stands up to other releases"

Some producers want me to put a stamp on it and say "do what you usually do, you know what I mean! Give it that sound"

The Penguin Cafe Orchestra told me, after I'd mastered their album "you've given it a sound! It's a really good sound! It sounds like a record and not like a CD"

One of the best compliments I've ever had!

Every mix is different right?
Old 27th November 2009
  #93
Lives for gear
 
Edward_Vinatea's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Table Of Tone View Post

Every mix is different right?
It sure is. However, any mixing engineer who is worth his salt will only give latitude mainly to boost levels, but not much to change eq. Those are the ones I was talking about. BTW, did you hear that song "No one knows" in mono? If you did, what do you think about how it sounds?
Old 27th November 2009
  #94
Lives for gear
 
Table Of Tone's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edward_Vinatea View Post
It sure is. However, any mixing engineer who is worth his salt will only give latitude mainly to boost levels, but not much to change eq. Those are the ones I was talking about. BTW, did you hear that song "No one knows" in mono? If you did, what do you think about how it sounds?
I know what you are saying but it's not always that simple.

Even some of the very best mix engineers will mix an album that, when put together as it is, will be needing some minor level and EQ tweaks as well, to make it flow.
So many albums made today are collections of recordings and even mixes from all over the place!
It's not always an easy task to put all that stuff together and that's what a lot of today's mastering involves.
I once had an album where no less than six different producers had, at some point been involved in!

It's a real rare pleasure when an album comes in from one residential recording session.

I haven't checked that tune in mono but I certainly will now you've mentioned it.

Cheers
Old 27th November 2009
  #95
Lives for gear
 

So I take it that most folks would agree that if a stereo "widener" makes no difference when checking in mono that it is not adding artifacts in stereo either.

If this is so, then my experience (not the Bedini) has shown that most HW and plugins do sound different when mono'd. However, there are a couple of plug ins that have virtually no artifact in mono. I always assumed that plain old M/S should be 100% compatible. Isn't that true? If not, what goes on?- and what does the Bedini do that M/S can't as regards mono compatibility?
Old 27th November 2009
  #96
Lives for gear
 
Table Of Tone's Avatar
 

Verified Member
OK!
I've just checked that QOTSA tune in mono and I don't have a problem with the way it sounds.
It obviously sounds less because it's pretty wide in places, but pretty much everything stereo does!
Old 27th November 2009
  #97
Lives for gear
 
Edward_Vinatea's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Table Of Tone View Post
So many albums made today are collections of recordings and even mixes from all over the place!
It's not always an easy task to put all that stuff together and that's what a lot of today's mastering involves.
I once had an album where no less than six different producers had, at some point been involved in!
Agreed. However, I wasn't referring to those tasks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Table Of Tone View Post
OK!
I've just checked that QOTSA tune in mono and I don't have a problem with the way it sounds.
It obviously sounds less because it's pretty wide in places, but pretty much everything stereo does!
You may find that some people like to check how their music sounds on old TV receivers with mono speakers which I think are being faced out by the digital ones that are coming out with stereo speakers. But, there are other things like mono AM radio and elevator music to deal with. Maybe somebody would like to add more on this subject, that would be nice. All I know is the less I spread side channels the least problems I have with my clients.

Regards,
Old 27th November 2009
  #98
Lives for gear
 
inlinenl's Avatar
 

Verified Member
thnx to this thread, and working on some 2-inch guitar production I find that image/widenesss does not mean just turning up the sides .. it just could be the opposite ...
Old 27th November 2009
  #99
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edward_Vinatea View Post
Agreed. However, I wasn't referring to those tasks.

You may find that some people like to check how their music sounds on old TV receivers with mono speakers which I think are being faced out by the digital ones that are coming out with stereo speakers. But, there are other things like mono AM radio and elevator music to deal with. Maybe somebody would like to add more on this subject, that would be nice. All I know is the less I spread side channels the least problems I have with my clients.

Regards,
Mono is also important in places like bars or shopping malls etc where speakers are so far away from each other you're ostensibly hearing mono by virtue of only hearing one side. However, this has nothing to do with the phase artifacts as a product of hearing L and R summed to mono, or has it?...... maybe some wideners compromise the sound as heard coming from just the L or R speaker only.....
Old 27th November 2009
  #100
Lives for gear
 
Edward_Vinatea's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by princeplanet View Post
However, this has nothing to do with the phase artifacts as a product of hearing L and R summed to mono, or has it?...... maybe some wideners compromise the sound as heard coming from just the L or R speaker only.....
Correct, that has nothing to do with what happens when both sides are summed. And yes, wideners will present some compromise. If someone doesn't believe this to be the case, please, join in the discussion.

Regards,
Old 28th November 2009
  #101
Lives for gear
 
Adam Dempsey's Avatar
 

Verified Member
First up, widening in mastering is anything but what I'd call common or a default process.

If it is applied, the mono should seem altered only insofar as the greater diff heard when switching your monitoring from stereo to mono.

Switch a widening process in/out while monitoring in mono. Do you hear a change?

Custom analogue spreaders I've used only add a user controlled amount of phase inverted L ch to R ch and vice-versa. Totally mono compatible.

Mono matters also for FM broadcast as the signal is transmitted M/S not L/R. A listener with poor FM reception will only receive the stronger (mono) signal.
Old 28th November 2009
  #102
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edward_Vinatea View Post
There are lots of "ME's" these days that have another particular sonic stamp: the one that ruins mixes. Work with the best minds in audio mixing and your options for the mastering work are very limited. Sometimes is just a matter of not ruining or tampering with the mix, and sometimes your role is just symbolic.

Regards,
Very true. A ME shouldn't have a sonic stamp. The "sound" is developed during the production. It is not their job to get creative.

You know when a great master comes back, you can sit down and say "it sounds like my mix but better"

I would never return to a ME if they decided to "widen" my mix. it just smears everything and changes the perceived balance. That is not what I call great mastering. But luckily the people I use these days wouldn't even dream about embarking on such a process.
Old 28th November 2009
  #103
Lives for gear
 
Table Of Tone's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by diezel_addict View Post
Very true. A ME shouldn't have a sonic stamp. The "sound" is developed during the production. It is not their job to get creative.

You know when a great master comes back, you can sit down and say "it sounds like my mix but better"
Where is "Better" gonna come from?
It's an ME's creative that makes "Better"!

If you ask for "The same as my mix", that's what you should get!
Not "Better"!

Do you see what I'm saying?
Old 28th November 2009
  #104
Lives for gear
 

With all due respect to my fellow slutz, most mixing is done by amateurs or at best "project" studios these days so most mixes would be far from ideal, even to the mixers themselves. It is foolhardy to be precious over an appalling mix, but the client is the boss I suppose.... Anyways, there is now more scope than ever for an ME with a "sonic stamp" to bring some sort of vibe to poor mixes. Just the idea of an ME agonizing whether or not to go for more than a .5db cut in the low mids to get rid of some mud for a dud mix that could do with a 5.0 dB cut is laughable. If you're not getting consistently great mixes, then you gotta get creative to inject life into crappy mixes. If you resist that idea cos it's not your job description, tough titty- The creative ME's shall inherit the earth. The times are a changing ....
Old 28th November 2009
  #105
Lives for gear
 
Silvertone's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by diezel_addict View Post
Very true. A ME shouldn't have a sonic stamp. The "sound" is developed during the production. It is not their job to get creative.

You know when a great master comes back, you can sit down and say "it sounds like my mix but better"

I would never return to a ME if they decided to "widen" my mix. it just smears everything and changes the perceived balance. That is not what I call great mastering. But luckily the people I use these days wouldn't even dream about embarking on such a process.
You know guys that certain processes we use in mastering alter the mid to side information (depending on what is panned where and how the processors might be reacting to it). I know for a fact that Chris (Muth) put the M/S function on his console as a corrective tool post processing. I've even seen him use it that way as well.

Many times (as all of you know who do this day in and day out)... to get the level we need and to have the mix stay the exact same way may involve many many steps and widening may just have to be one of them. There are way to many factors that are "program dependent" to make blanket statements like the ones in this post IMHO.

It's a "whatever it takes" business... personally, I took the hippocratic oath when I entered this field. It really should really be a requirement.
Old 28th November 2009
  #106
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Table Of Tone View Post
Where is "Better" gonna come from?
It's an ME's creative that makes "Better"!

If you ask for "The same as my mix", that's what you should get!
Not "Better"!

Do you see what I'm saying?
I think you misunderstood what I was trying to say. I don't like to hear the effects of mastering. thats all.

ask CLA, he will tell you the same thing.

I know most of you probably get crap mixes and you have no choice but to get "creative"..however a good mix should not require such creativity.
Old 28th November 2009
  #107
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by princeplanet View Post
With all due respect to my fellow slutz, most mixing is done by amateurs or at best "project" studios these days so most mixes would be far from ideal, even to the mixers themselves. It is foolhardy to be precious over an appalling mix, but the client is the boss I suppose.... Anyways, there is now more scope than ever for an ME with a "sonic stamp" to bring some sort of vibe to poor mixes. Just the idea of an ME agonizing whether or not to go for more than a .5db cut in the low mids to get rid of some mud for a dud mix that could do with a 5.0 dB cut is laughable. If you're not getting consistently great mixes, then you gotta get creative to inject life into crappy mixes. If you resist that idea cos it's not your job description, tough titty- The creative ME's shall inherit the earth. The times are a changing ....
Hi all

I guess I should have stated in my first post that I was talking about having a great mix to start with. You are right, most people mixing these days are weekend warriors or jsut don't have good ears, I'm sure these peoples mixes need to be butchered to get a slight improvement. However I am talking about what "pro" mix engineers I have spoken to want from mastering.

Kevin Shirley for example uses Ryan Smith at Sterling for the majority of his work because he doesn't "eff" with the mix. He was just sick of other ME's changing his mix in mastering.

I am not telling you not to do this or that, because that is what you do and if your clients dig it.. great! That's what it is about at the end of the day, client satisfaction.

I have been doing this professionally for long enough to know what I want.

at the end of the day it is all subjective, each to their own.

sorry to hijack the thread.. back to widening....
Old 29th November 2009
  #108
Lives for gear
 
Table Of Tone's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by diezel_addict View Post
I think you misunderstood what I was trying to say. I don't like to hear the effects of mastering. thats all.

ask CLA, he will tell you the same thing.

I know most of you probably get crap mixes and you have no choice but to get "creative"..however a good mix should not require such creativity.
If a CLA type, killer mix comes my way, I'm in paradise!
The mix eng won't be needing to worry!

We'd All like to pull back around 3db from release level, to be honest!
Well, I would anyway!
Old 30th November 2009
  #109
Gear Maniac
 
trmchenry's Avatar
 

a lot of that qotsa wideness comes from overdubbing guitar/bass parts and instead of running them on top of each other you pan one hard left and one hard right. almost sounds like mono most of the time but when homme decides to deviate just a hair you hear things get super wide.
Old 30th November 2009
  #110
Lives for gear
 
Ben F's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by princeplanet View Post
With all due respect to my fellow slutz, most mixing is done by amateurs or at best "project" studios these days so most mixes would be far from ideal, even to the mixers themselves. It is foolhardy to be precious over an appalling mix, but the client is the boss I suppose.... Anyways, there is now more scope than ever for an ME with a "sonic stamp" to bring some sort of vibe to poor mixes. Just the idea of an ME agonizing whether or not to go for more than a .5db cut in the low mids to get rid of some mud for a dud mix that could do with a 5.0 dB cut is laughable. If you're not getting consistently great mixes, then you gotta get creative to inject life into crappy mixes. If you resist that idea cos it's not your job description, tough titty- The creative ME's shall inherit the earth. The times are a changing ....
I agree with this 100%. Especially working with less than stellar mixes from home studios, which is becoming more common. Music is a creative art, and if the mastering process can make it sound better, then why not?

Of course if the mix is amazing then you do very little.
Old 30th November 2009
  #111
Lives for gear
 
Table Of Tone's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by trmchenry View Post
a lot of that qotsa wideness comes from overdubbing guitar/bass parts and instead of running them on top of each other you pan one hard left and one hard right. almost sounds like mono most of the time but when homme decides to deviate just a hair you hear things get super wide.
Nah!
It's not quite as simple as that!
Old 30th November 2009
  #112
Lives for gear
 
Table Of Tone's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben F View Post
I agree with this 100%. Especially working with less than stellar mixes from home studios, which is becoming more common. Music is a creative art, and if the mastering process can make it sound better, then why not?

Of course if the mix is amazing then you do very little.
Old 30th November 2009
  #113
Gear Maniac
 
trmchenry's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Table Of Tone View Post
Nah!
It's not quite as simple as that!
I didn't say it was just that one thing but more alluding to it being a culmination of thigs that make it sound the way it does. I think there's a lot more to it than a single magic box. All of us who have mastered a lot of tracks know it's 90% in the tracking/mixing.
Old 30th November 2009
  #114
Lives for gear
 
Table Of Tone's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by trmchenry View Post
I didn't say it was just that one thing but more alluding to it being a culmination of thigs that make it sound the way it does. I think there's a lot more to it than a single magic box. All of us who have mastered a lot of tracks know it's 90% in the tracking/mixing.
I won't touch the stereo image of mixes that won't gain any mojo from doing so!
All I'm saying is that, having worked on the same mix as BG.
I can tell you 100%, it wasn't the mix that made his version sound the way it did!
It was the way he used what he used!
I noticed a certain sound/style, and a bunch of PM's that came in to me from this thread, also said "I know exactly what you mean! Do you mind telling me where you found your Bedini?"
All of us are looking for that holy grail of tone!
That magic box!
We're all "home alone on the throne of tone"
"All alone in the danger zone"

We all know there is no magic box!
That goes without saying.
It's the operator!
Old 30th November 2009
  #115
Gear Maniac
 
trmchenry's Avatar
 

damn copyright infringement!

i'm really curious to hear the different versions. maybe I could call you up on the phone and you could let me hear them. lol.
Old 30th November 2009
  #116
Lives for gear
 
Table Of Tone's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by trmchenry View Post
damn copyright infringement!

i'm really curious to hear the different versions. maybe I could call you up on the phone and you could let me hear them. lol.
If the Bedini gets me the kind of widening I'm hoping it will, I'll definitely make some new AB comparisons of stuff I have permission for, and send you the links to em!
I'll also include the actual non-mastered mix of whatever I send.
Old 1st December 2009
  #117
Lives for gear
 
MattGray's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by William Bowden View Post
Hey Matt, well I guess you have to put it in perspective too. We were young kids trying to get noticed and also trying to learn about sound, so we both experimented pretty wildly with what little we had. And many times the clients loved it because things weren't as conservative as they are now - also mastering was younger too in many ways, vinyl was tricky, and cds - well no-one bought them. There also wasn't ANY internet, so there was a lot less focus on the gear other people favoured - you didn't have all these pretty pictures of overseas guy's rooms except for a rare photo in a mag. Also there was no chance of recalling any mix, none.
Fair points, I guess today we are almost too spoilt for choice & have a lot of literature, product info & reviews to help make gear selections. I've been fortunate enough to use that to my advantage when choosing the right stuff for my room. However I typically don't like to follow trends but prefer to get in various boxes that I'm interested in & try them in the context of my chain & pick what's generally the most interesting, complementary or versatile piece that fits with my chain.

Quote:
I actually think sometimes that we both experimented a lot and still do to this day
Experimentation is great for creativity, I love coming up with new ideas or ways to process things.

Quote:
Now we seem to be building simple houses with minimalist lines and yet some of those earlier 'weird' dwellings are kinda cool with a lot of character. Hmmm character.
I think adding a sonic 'character' can be often be achieved more effectively with a thin smear rather than a complete smothering. Having said that it's so mix dependent, some clients want you to completely rebuild or makeover their mixes, other clients want very little altered with their mix & then there is others which don't need any added character during the mastering process because they already have it in spades. so the mastering needs to be very transparent.

Quote:
That's why Rick and I still have far too much gear, both of us, whilst maybe only using a small palette daily, like to be able to delve into stranger colours if need be.
It's great if you can justify keeping boxes that only get used a few times a month. I don't think I can compete with that although I've only been collecting for about 8 years & this is Gear Slutz so I could be catching up at some point

Quote:
This is what's great about unattended sessions, you can have a go at a few things and sort out what's best. This can take time, maybe even time you can't charge for. When the client's sitting there you're often not able to do anything other than 'the old faithfuls' - and sure you'll produce a good master, but will it be an interesting master?
So with you on that one!

Matt
Old 13th December 2009
  #118
Lives for gear
 
Table Of Tone's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Well....I just got my Bedini!

A real "pretty" sounding thing indeed!
Old 13th December 2009
  #119
Lives for gear
 
MattGray's Avatar
 

Verified Member
and... what's the verdict? is it the missing link you hear in Brian Gardener's Masters? How does it effect the centre image? Can you hear any phase smear on transients? Is yours still stock or modified?
Old 16th December 2009
  #120
Gear Addict
 
joemeek's Avatar
i want bedini reports

soundfiles would be rrrrrreat!!
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
Aisle 6 / High end
12
valverec / Gearslutz Secondhand Gear Classifieds
24
WunderBro Flo / Rap + Hip Hop engineering and production
21
PistolP / Mastering forum
37
kraftrourke / Music Computers
8

Forum Jump
Forum Jump