a question on mastering.

Posted on

http://www.reverbnation.com/2ndg
Member Since: Nov 27, 2007

Ok,
not that im attempting to do any mastering, but, there's always talk about getting your mix as close as you can to what you want before doing the final mixdown.

Ive only really just started importing a song from a pro cd into my project and comparing it to what i have there, and really there is always quite a difference in the sense that there always seems to be alot more of a glaze of bass frequencies that almost borderlines on muddiness compared to what i have done.

now, i was of the opnion that shooting for as close to zero muddiness as possible was always the idea.

so really im asking, does that glaze, as i put it, go on during the mastering stage?
am i correct in what im doing with my mixes, as long as im not pulling out too many frequencise that make up the body of the sound?


[ Back to Top ]


Typo Szar
Member
Since: Jul 04, 2002


Jul 21, 2009 09:10 pm

yeah, to be honest ive had this dilemma as well. I tryin to do my own mastering and i find that alot of the stuff ppl love about commercial cds is a result of mastering to such an extent it seems a bit crazy to try to achieve it during the mix.

my example would be sweetening/excitation (which im personally struggling with) doing it during the mix really limits wat u can do on the master, but then again ur perception really changes when hearing a warm/saturated tune to when its dry and thus u start to hear details or rethink things.

ive gotten into the habit of having a small chain of mastering-ish effects on my master out that i switch on from time to time and i try to find a happy medium between the dry and the treated mix, but yes i do think the concepts of a good mix and a good finished product r different and that when ur mixing ur trying to really get evreythign in its right place and clear and well balanced so that the master can then give it all the bells and whistles

http://www.reverbnation.com/2ndg
Member
Since: Nov 27, 2007


Jul 21, 2009 09:41 pm

if this is the case crux, then, i guess knowing what those bells and whisltes are is the key.

im really trying to keep as much as body as possible on all instruments, but it definatley still falls way short of what a mastered version sounds like. (Eq wise)

Obviously a mastered version of something will naturaly be different to a mixdown, but there is definaltey something on these mastering versions that just isnt in the ball park of what a mixdown is.

question is how much eq is going on to the mix during mastering.
that way maybe we can rest a bit easier during the mixing part.
i dont think using a mutliband will bring up those frequencies alone.

MASSIVE Mastering, LLC
Member
Since: Aug 05, 2008


Jul 21, 2009 10:31 pm

Quote:
bass frequencies that almost borderlines on muddiness


That's the key - Not muddy - As much as can be had before muddiness, but still with a solid foundation and good translation.

Generally - GENERALLY - those things are tweaked and cemented during the mastering phase - Not created. Monitoring and room treatments, headroom and good core sounds. That's the whole game.

http://www.reverbnation.com/2ndg
Member
Since: Nov 27, 2007


Jul 21, 2009 11:30 pm

when you say "not created"
are you're talking compressing those frequencies or in that area to bring them up, and then maybe getting rid of any hang on cruddy ones in that same area by notching em out?


Typo Szar
Member
Since: Jul 04, 2002


Jul 22, 2009 03:37 am

i think thats wat mixing is about, the phrase getting it "good" might be misleading. Its more about getting everything in its place, clean, sorted. all ur frequencies r working well with each other, placemen tis all there. i think thats the sound ur looking for, so good is "clean" and organized.

now when u think "good" sound as exciting and alluring, i think thats in the mastering stage.

MASSIVE Mastering, LLC
Member
Since: Aug 05, 2008


Jul 22, 2009 11:27 am

[quote]when you say "not created"
are you're talking compressing those frequencies or in that area to bring them up, and then maybe getting rid of any hang on cruddy ones in that same area by notching em out?[/quote]

I mean that the low end is "there" -- It's not "manufactured" (for lack of a better term) by synthesizing some sort of additional low end signal (MaxxBass, BigBottom and what not) and certainly not by compressing the low end using maul-the-band compressors - On the contrary - My main compressors were modified to allow the side-chain to *ignore* the low end to prevent it from pumping the signal.

Low end is (conservatively) 75% of the energy. It's 75% of the problematic frequencies in a poorly-treated room. It's 75% of the power going to the woofers on improperly placed speakers. By far, it's the hardest thing to "get right" in a recording/mixing/mastering situation. Unless it's *right on* AT THE SOURCE - the best that you can hope for is to make it "somewhat acceptable" later in the process.

As far as the mastering stage in general - You can't take a muddy mix and make it clear. You can "fool the ear" into making it sound more clear by reducing certain frequencies, you can increase certain frequencies to make an anemic mix sound more full, etc., etc., but the idea is to have all that handled long before the mastering guy ever gets a chance to hear it. Just like everything else. The best sounding projects I've ever worked on didn't really sound appreciably different when they left as when they came in.

Paraphrasing Massenburg: "I pay my mastering guy a whole lot of money to tell me that I did a good job and burn me a disc."

Czar of Turd Polish
Member
Since: Jun 20, 2006


Jul 22, 2009 02:12 pm

Hehe, I love the Massenburg phrase, made me lol quite hard :)

http://www.reverbnation.com/2ndg
Member
Since: Nov 27, 2007


Jul 22, 2009 07:53 pm

ok MM, all that makes more sense to me than you'll ever know, (well, figuritively speaking of course)
it really helps.

and yeah Mual the band compressor, i shouldve known better than to mention that, i know you hate it.
Hey if you hate it, then i take that with good reason as youve detailed.

im sure this has been a topic before, lately, but i guess its made more sense to me this time. giving me a % on the bass and power worked for me too.

I was never 100% on how much bass (freq) i should have on things ie; guitars, bass etc before tracking, and now i know, im actually falling somewhat short in certain bass frequencies.
and that's typical of me, someone says, limit your bass freq. when recording, and i LIMIT it, way too much. On everything.
then i find myself trying to smash some on everything in the mix.
Not having anyone to show me the how and why can make things harder for sure.


Cheers. MM.

MASSIVE Mastering, LLC
Member
Since: Aug 05, 2008


Jul 22, 2009 09:43 pm

[quote]and yeah Mual the band compressor, i shouldve known better than to mention that, i know you hate it.
Hey if you hate it, then i take that with good reason as youve detailed.[/quote]

I don't hate them at all - MBC's are a perfectly reasonable tool with a perfectly reasonable purpose.

It's just that people rarely ever use them for the right purpose...

Related Forum Topics:



If you would like to participate in the forum discussions, feel free to register for your free membership.