The Definition of Mastering

Yuno said:
I don't have any in my library.

An unmixed track can range from sounding like total and complete trash to simply sounding a bit busy, in a bad way. It all depends on how everything is tracked and recorded.

Unless the recording engineer and producer really know their stuff. In which case a track can come in sounding pretty durn mixed.

An unmastered and mixed track sounds fine. It will be balanced and everything will have it's own space in the soundscape. In today's industry it would sound perhaps a bit duller and of course quieter.

Unless the client requests the mix be loud and bright. If the mix is how it needs to be a good mastering engineer won't change anything.

A mastered track sounds like the mixed track except it's usually brightened, the dynamic range is reduced (it's much louder usually), and any stray mix issues are sure to be fixed by either the mastering engineer or the quality control engineer.

Mix issues would be addressed by the mastering engineer in what is known as "pre-mastering". Other QC would include things like removing clicks and pops that were missed in the mix phase - a lot of times an assistant engineer gets that gig. But a mastered track only sounds brightened if the mastering engineer brightens it! "Mastering" doesn't do anything - mastering engineers do things.

On the sample level, things might be quite a bit different. Usually during the mixing and mastering process, everything is in 24 bit or higher resolution. Before the mastering job is finished, an engineer usually adds dither and shrinks the track resolution to 16 bit (in most cases). Assuming they are preparing the music for CD duplication. There's no bit rate for cassette or vinyl!
Click to expand...

There we go.
 
Thank you for this information. I hope it helps me become a better beatmaker and producer.
 
Mastering is basically what D-Bags choose as jobs in audio... seriously think about it... they pick apart every recording they get, point out every flaw and "fix" it... all the while changing the original vision of the artist and mixing engineer... they pretty much get a check to wreck days, weeks maybe even months of recording to make it; in their own eyes superior... And the thing is that mastering is no longer necessary... plain and simple, it hasn't been a necessary step since vinyl... the problem is that someone told every artist that mastering is ABSO-effing-LUTELY necessary, so they kept paying the mastering engineers and the profession didn't go the way of the 8 track and scientific recording (when they first started making records the engineers simply set levels so that they were unable to clip and that was it, no creativity... simply ge the thing onto the cylinder)
 
BeatComMusicGRP said:
Mastering is basically what D-Bags choose as jobs in audio... seriously think about it... they pick apart every recording they get, point out every flaw and "fix" it... all the while changing the original vision of the artist and mixing engineer... they pretty much get a check to wreck days, weeks maybe even months of recording to make it; in their own eyes superior... And the thing is that mastering is no longer necessary... plain and simple, it hasn't been a necessary step since vinyl... the problem is that someone told every artist that mastering is ABSO-effing-LUTELY necessary, so they kept paying the mastering engineers and the profession didn't go the way of the 8 track and scientific recording (when they first started making records the engineers simply set levels so that they were unable to clip and that was it, no creativity... simply ge the thing onto the cylinder)
Click to expand...
I don't know what ME ripped you off. Mastering is good for getting an objective ear listening to a track that a mixing engineer has already become too close to to recognize any slight imbalances. Not to mention it's two completely different mindsets: mixing vs. mastering.

You aren't "undoing" a mixing engineer's job by mastering. I recommend Bob Katz' book.
 
BeatComMusicGRP said:
Mastering is basically what D-Bags choose as jobs in audio... seriously think about it... they pick apart every recording they get, point out every flaw and "fix" it... all the while changing the original vision of the artist and mixing engineer... they pretty much get a check to wreck days, weeks maybe even months of recording to make it; in their own eyes superior... And the thing is that mastering is no longer necessary... plain and simple, it hasn't been a necessary step since vinyl... the problem is that someone told every artist that mastering is ABSO-effing-LUTELY necessary, so they kept paying the mastering engineers and the profession didn't go the way of the 8 track and scientific recording (when they first started making records the engineers simply set levels so that they were unable to clip and that was it, no creativity... simply ge the thing onto the cylinder)
Click to expand...

Not just mastering engineers, douche bags reside in all walks of music production - from song writer, to musician, to arranger, to mix engineer, to tracking engineer, mastering engineer, producer, A&R, hell even the fans can be assholes sometimes.

Some mastering engineers "fix" things, others actually fix things. Some mastering engineers "enhance" things, others actually enhance things.

Mastering in terms of preparing recorded music for reproduction is still very necessary. And will always be. The difference is that the DIY is 100% accessible for digital releases - you really don't need any kind of prep know-how to put out an mp3.

Mastering in terms of a second skin of mixing, isn't always necessary, but mixes will almost always benefit from a good mastering engineer. But the engineer has to be experienced, and also has to vibe with the mix correctly.
 
I think Enhancing is a great way to put it. I believe its like putting the icing on the cake.. Making sure that the cake is filled with some damn good jam and has solid sponge before hand!
 
WeissSound said:
Some mastering engineers "fix" things, others actually fix things. Some mastering engineers "enhance" things, others actually enhance things.
Click to expand...

Completely agree with you! It is important that mastering engineers do not use tools just because they have them: a lot of the mastering process comes down to being respectful of the original music and being honest with what you (as the mastering engineer) are adding to the mix (whether it is an improvement, an unnecessary addition, or actually a reduction in quality). The same mastering process will not necessarily work for completely different styles of songs too.
 
Over Dose said:
I bet this still won't stop somebody from asking this question on here, sadly. *sighs*
Click to expand...

of course not. mastering is beastly. i lucked out when i came up with a preset to master my tracks. very unconventional but it gets the job done for now until i can afford to get everything i make mastered. but the crazy part is this, some of my idols do the exact same thing with their mastering plugins. i'm sure they have pros make their final "commercial" releases but at least i am on a good path.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top