| Author
|
digital Mastering
|
H2O
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
16
Posts :
352
Posted : Dec 20, 2004 21:47
|
|
I trust your sense of humor, Undertow. |
|
|
Colin OOOD
Moderator
Started Topics :
95
Posts :
5380
Posted : Dec 20, 2004 21:47
|
|
Colin OOOD
Moderator
Started Topics :
95
Posts :
5380
Posted : Dec 20, 2004 21:55
|
|
PsYx
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
12
Posts :
339
Posted : Dec 20, 2004 21:56
|
|
PsYx
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
12
Posts :
339
Posted : Dec 20, 2004 21:57
|
hmmm....seems Colin was ahead of me....but still 
|
|
|
|
Spindrift
Spindrift
Started Topics :
33
Posts :
1560
Posted : Dec 20, 2004 22:26
|
Seriously though....to master while you mix might work for Simon....
Generally it should be strictly avoided though.
Mastering is not really about making the track sound good, it's about making sure levels and frequency balance is matching between tracks on a release and releases in general.
Mixing is when you make it sound good.
So unless you are planning to release it only on an album or is expecting all the other tracks to be mastered to match yours leave mastering to the mastering engineer.
By using master plugins on your main out or going thru a finalizer on a track you are planning to get released means that your track will sound worse than other because it's very likely it will be processed two times unless you do a perfect job.
And of course an artist should be able to make a rough master yourself for listening and playing on PA's, but to not keep a unmastered copy is really a mistake.
In the trance scene I would bet most the releases is mastered by artists nowadays, but not mastering their own tracks always.
Sometimes they master their own albums, but to put together a compilation with each artists mastering their own tracks would be a very bad idea.
 (``·.¸(``·.¸(``·.¸¸.·`´)¸.·`´)¸.·`´)
« .....www.ResonantEarth.com..... »
(¸.·`´(¸.·`´(¸.·`´``·.¸)``·.¸)``·.¸)
http://www.myspace.com/spindriftsounds
http://www.myspace.com/resonantearth |
|
|
|
Elad
Tsabeat/Sattel Battle
Started Topics :
158
Posts :
5306
Posted : Dec 21, 2004 02:59
|
i make the track > save it 32bit 96000 unmasterd> render in wavelab with minor compression and multimaximaizer to 16bit 44100 > burn my own copy and for friendz > if label want specific track they get 32bit 96000 unmastered
too bad i know it just now...
www.sattelbattle.com
http://yoavweinberg.weebly.com/ |
|
|
|
ZilDoggo
Started Topics :
4
Posts :
663
Posted : Dec 24, 2004 13:54
|
Quote:
|
On 2004-12-20 20:57, UnderTow wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2004-12-20 20:14, H2O wrote:
Because "Pro Tools" has the best sound engine.
|
|
Bullshit.
As for seperate mixing and mastering stages, I keep them seperate but I was reading Posford's page yesterday and he says he mixes into the TC finalizer. So I guess he does mixing and mastering in one go. See what works best for you ...
UnderTow
|
|
no, that's not nessesarily right.,
he propably does it to be able to preict what is going to happen to the sound after track compression.,
but it is very propable that he records it without the finalizer and hands the whole thing over to a mastering house.,
the point with mastering is that it requiers completely different equipment than for producing music..
you need a good fine-tuned room.,
you need some seriously priced reference monitors..,
you gonna need someone with incredible ears,.
that's why mastering is not done by artists.,
so forget about mastering unless you have a LOT of money and near perfect ears.
greetos.,
aka., |
|
|
|
H2O
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
16
Posts :
352
Posted : Dec 26, 2004 01:55
|
|
Guys i was laughing about better sound engine. I don't know what is sound engine at all and never saw Pro Tools in my whole short life. |
|
|
|
high tek
Started Topics :
3
Posts :
20
Posted : Dec 27, 2004 03:02
|
i agree that "the best" way of getting your track mastered properly and sounding good is through a mstering professional with nice gear.
but
lets face it - not all of us can afford to have every track mastered profesionally - especially if you make lots of tracks or keep going back and adjusting/changing/adding sounds to the tracks.
it would be nice to be able to do a "acceptable" mastering job, so you can play your tracks at a club/party whatever.
one time i finished a track and played it less than 2 hours later at a party.
so now that we all agree (im sure) that mastering is better done by a pro - its safe to say that its OK to try it yourself too........and discuss some techniques.
i dont like when people say: "get it done profesionally...dont even try yourself"
fuk that.
nothing wrong with learning some basics and applying them.....it may not be "the best" but whatever.
------
some programs:
T-racks 24.
this is a mastering program, but ive never liked it.
izotope ozone is another similar program with a different interface (t-racks has a analogue look)
ive seen this and played with it, but nothing serious.
..it was..........ok, nothing special
master X5 is a powercore plugin, and apparently a replica of the finalizer.
i never tried this but heard good things about it.
anyone using this?
------
creating a "mastering layout" in cubase/logic and using your favourite plugins is probably the most popular approach, and is what im doing lately, but im not sure if stereo files are the best option for processing.
i wanted to know if anyone does something different.......maybe grouping certain sounds and processing them individually - before summing them is a better idea?
so for example you seperate you kick+bass and complress/eq that group.
the process your hi hats in another group.
loops in another group.
maybe more groups for lets say low freq fx, and another for mid/high freq fx.
?????
peace
|
|
|
|
Darius
Started Topics :
7
Posts :
100
Posted : Dec 27, 2004 03:59
|
I not agree with the ideea that the mastering should be done by a profi sound engineering. Sometimes the track loose his original feeling and it sounds more rigid when it is mastered by somebody else than the artist.
Just imagine that you are a painter and you give your paintings to be finalized by somebody else. Be serious, this is not art anymore.
Immagine "Mona Lisa" finished by other painter than "Leonardo Da Vinci".
--------------------------------------------------------
ZilDoggo wroted:
you need a good fine-tuned room.,
you need some seriously priced reference monitors..,
you gonna need someone with incredible ears,.
that's why mastering is not done by artists.,
---------------------------------------------------------
Be serrious man ! If you don't have all this, especially the "incredible ears" than you are not an artist.
Just like "The_Guardians_Of_Truth" wroted: you ar just an amatour playing some strange sounds on soft synths, just like a child.
Not everyone who just released 1-2 tracks on some compilations is an artist.
Real artists do their own mastering even if they don't have profi equipment.
Take for example Atma & R'tur album. It was made on a Pc 500mhz, 64SD Ram, Creative live audiocard and it was mastered on home listening spekers not studio monitors.No 24bit and no 96 or 48khz quality.
Well this album sounds better than 80 % of the psytrance albums on the market.
But they are real artists...they have more than 10 years of trance music behind and they are proffesional musicians in real life.
If you find it, get it ! You will see the difference!
BooM !!!
|
|
|
|
H2O
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
16
Posts :
352
Posted : Dec 27, 2004 04:11
|
Sound design is not Music production. Let's take Da Vinci's Mona Lisa, it was painted by Da Vinci then restoration done by De Marco and show done by designer who know to represent pictures in right place and right time. Restoration, Painting and Design are different tasks done by different profession ppl.
Now you mess music and sound design. Atma & R'tur by your own opinion is great music piece but is it sound well?
What Zildoggo means are perfect situation which usually not happening in psychedelic music scene.
Mastering basically it is some sort of standart creation, when you have a compilation you want to hear all tracks same volume, same equalisation and same compression in order to enjoy music but not to run and fix these features according to your speakers setup. So someone should level compilation or album. Music production is an art, damn hard one, if artists would master their music at home it would lead you disorder. Which leads you once again to conclusion that mastering and music should be done by different group of ppl. |
|
|
|
Darius
Started Topics :
7
Posts :
100
Posted : Dec 27, 2004 11:46
|
[quote]
On 2004-12-27 04:11, H2O wrote:
"Atma & R'tur by your own opinion is great music piece but is it sound well?"
............................................
Well that was the ideea. It's sounds very well, as music and as sound quality in the same time. And this was just an example. There are a lot of other examples: Juno reactors - Shango. Most of the traxx from this album are not even mastered, just recorded live. Well thei ar real artists as well. And one more thing..i don't mess music with sound design. The sound design is a modern "thing" created in ideea to make music sounds better and to sell it better. But this has nothing to do with art, it is pure commericial.
We alwais complain that in the last years the psytrance sceen is becomeing more commercial everyday. All the albums, all the compilations sound the same..Same Bass drums, same bassline, same shit...where is the problem then ??? We miss a good mastering, or we miss the good artists ??
If every track on a compilation is made to sounds the same with others how you will know witch one is better or witch artist is better. There will be no difference between the artists, just a big stupid music mass production.
I think music has to stay as an art form not as a commercial buissnes.And psytrance music to remain also in this side of music not in the commercial side.
There is too much bullshit music on the market now. To much one month made albums.
Maybe that'S why most of the Labels loose money releasing cheep artists.
They better listen twice an album before release it on the market. |
|
|
|
H2O
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
16
Posts :
352
Posted : Dec 27, 2004 13:41
|
Who are you to decide is it sound good or not? I say it sound low quality, i heard it on studio monitors. Bullshit sound. So now your opinion against mine. How is that?
This is a small example of thing called personal taste.
I think you should read material what is master about and then talk here one again. I assume you think it is different tasts than one we talking about. |
|
|
|
high tek
Started Topics :
3
Posts :
20
Posted : Dec 27, 2004 21:04
|
mastering is not changing the track....just making it louder, cleaner, and more up to par with other tracks' dynamics.
if u want to let someone else do that - its fine.
if you dont - its fine too.
i think its stupid to say one way or another...whatever works for you......like h20 said: personal taste.
if u want to compare the mona lisa to a track: this is stupid. but if you have to, think of mastering as framing the piece: putting the actual canvas into the frame.....nothing else - not adding any paint to it.
========
i guess this thread has somewhat evolved into a debate of who should be doing the mastering....
its too bad - i was hoping it would be more about people talking about ACTUAL MASTERING and some techniques of how they approach/do it, what software, compression, EQ, grouping, whatever.
|
|
|
|
