I have been trying to master some tracks I made on Live with iZotope 5. I have watched a bunch of tutorials and tips and have myself spend genuinely long hours figuring out what each aspect of the mastering chains do (dynamics, eq, maximizer, etc.) I have reached a certain stage where the production quality sounds OK but still really doesn't satisfy me. I try to be meticulous with mixing as well since I know that is also crucial to mastering. But even after having mixed and mastered for a couple of hours I don't seem to be satisfied with the end result. Some tracks I really want to put on my SoundCloud or Bandcamp. But with that mediocre production quality some part of me still doesn't want to let go without that good production quality.
So with these issues plaguing my mind I was reading an issue of Beat Magazine that I bought from Berlin where an article talks about production quality in the new age. To summarize, the article argues that nowadays producers only care about production quality and not actual musical quality. Music becomes a product, something to consume, without really being moved, people only use it to consume. The Internet raises musical output but also diminishes musical diversity. When every track has the same sound/production quality they just all sound the same - almost uniform. In contrast, the article argues, some really low production quality records (there was mention of Cure for instance) were artistically unique because of their muddy or distorted quality. The article even mentions of Interstellar and how its soundtrack was meant to overshadow the sound of dialogue in the film. Nolan wanted to convey the chaos and complexity in space with such a daring step on sound quality.
This makes me conflicted. I really do care more about musical/artistic quality than just sound quality but I also want my music to be like I envision it to be. I guess I am just frustrated that I can't master and mix well so I am trying to convince myself that it's OK to release something of low sound quality.
Do you think that's wrong? I am just really confused and would like to know what the FP community thinks on this.
So with these issues plaguing my mind I was reading an issue of Beat Magazine that I bought from Berlin where an article talks about production quality in the new age. To summarize, the article argues that nowadays producers only care about production quality and not actual musical quality. Music becomes a product, something to consume, without really being moved, people only use it to consume. The Internet raises musical output but also diminishes musical diversity. When every track has the same sound/production quality they just all sound the same - almost uniform. In contrast, the article argues, some really low production quality records (there was mention of Cure for instance) were artistically unique because of their muddy or distorted quality. The article even mentions of Interstellar and how its soundtrack was meant to overshadow the sound of dialogue in the film. Nolan wanted to convey the chaos and complexity in space with such a daring step on sound quality.
This makes me conflicted. I really do care more about musical/artistic quality than just sound quality but I also want my music to be like I envision it to be. I guess I am just frustrated that I can't master and mix well so I am trying to convince myself that it's OK to release something of low sound quality.
Do you think that's wrong? I am just really confused and would like to know what the FP community thinks on this.