Nothing is really "magic", is it?
I seriously doubt mastering is something that isn't logically explainable and analyzable, and I'd like to know more about it. What is it besides normalizing, compression, and eq'ing?
Offline
Nashville, Tennessee
it is logically explainable, but its more a matter of just having the right ears for the job. basically what you are trying to do is make sure that each of the instruments is distinct and distinguishable and sounds good. this could be from minor adjustments to more drastic ones. for example, you might reverb a snare to make it a little less sharp or to have it slide into place a little better, or boost the 80-200hz range on a kick to give it a little more punch. having each EQ peak in a different place as well as panning and other techniques are all part of this. Thats all part of mixing though for myself, where actual mastering is doing the production of the completed track as a whole. In that section of post production, I mainly focus on eq and dynamics, making sure your compression isnt ruining everything by boosting and cutting things it shouldnt be, and finally bringing it up to a normal volume level. Maybe a touch of reverb to warm it up. Then you listen to it 5 zillion times and make sure you still like it.
Sorry, just kind of a quick overview of my personal process... Its different for a lot of people and i know a lot of people would do it differently.
Offline
BOSTON
freedrull wrote:
Nothing is really "magic", is it?
I seriously doubt mastering is something that isn't logically explainable and analyzable, and I'd like to know more about it. What is it besides normalizing, compression, and eq'ing?
smiletron's explanation is spot on, but i'm telling you... a good mastering engineer *is* magic. i work at an indie rock label for a little while and got the opportunity to sit in on some mastering sessions with top engineers and i will tell you that the level and sophistication of their hearing is just plain unreal. adding +/- .1 decibel on a tiny frequency band to get more presence out of one note of one instrument or another in one section or another... *painstakingly tedious*, yet seemingly effortless.
also, there is a hardware component... various processing methods and hardware imbue the sound with distinct (if somewhat ambiguous?) characteristics, and the skilled mastering engineer knows what hardware in what combination will get the "most" out of any sonic situation. also, many build their own custom processing hardware to have more control over variables that may be glossed over in large run manufacturing.
/awe
Offline
Normally a mastering house has a super talented guy with golden ears working with gear worth millions.
The standard processing he/she does to the already mixed material, is applying multiband compressor and EQ. Doesn't sound like much but it usually makes all the difference in getting commercial/professional sounding album.
Nowadays any ol' granny and her dog claims they're mastering by slapping a Waves L2 limiter on the master bus in their bedroom studio. 
I guess the VST era has it's pro's and con's...
If you're going to release a commercial album, don't get tempted by skipping the mastering stage by being cheep or go the DIY route. You'll be surprised of what a pro can do.
If you're interested in some hardcore audio mastering knowledge, get a copy of "Mastering audio" by Bob Katz.
(There are pdf's of this book floating around the web.)
Last edited by tRasH cAn maN (Jan 9, 2010 10:42 am)
Offline
New York City
freedrull wrote:
Nothing is really "magic", is it?
nah, it is science!
As explained above, a guy with a really good ear and equipment worth a shit ton. But you need to know how to tweak the EQ and stuff properly.
Offline
Nashville, Tennessee
akira^8GB wrote:
freedrull wrote:Nothing is really "magic", is it?
nah, it is science!
As explained above, a guy with a really good ear and equipment worth a shit ton. But you need to know how to tweak the EQ and stuff properly.
its not even as much about equipment... the better the equipment the less work it takes, thats all 
Offline
Nashville, Tennessee
and like bright primate said, it takes ears. you listen to music with good production and you make it sound like that. listen harder! if you're going to do it yourself, take albums that you know have good production and listen to them on the speakers you are going to be mixing on, and take note of small things! the eq and levels of different things! if you need to dig up some kind of software spectrum analysis thing and look at where the eq peaks and all! and practice
Last edited by smiletron (Jan 9, 2010 12:46 pm)
Offline
Psydney, Australia
All this said, since LSDJ (or gameboy, for that matter) music tends to have a bit of a characteristic sound, are there any simple guidelines that we could all use to just make our own songs a tad more decent? A boost here, a cut there? A way to warm up and expand the limited output of the gb to make it a bit more listener- and device-friendly?
Offline
Nashville, Tennessee
add a touch (just a touch) of reverb and make sure your levels of your instruments are right coming out of the gameboy itself.
Offline
Plano, TX
Hey, smiletron! I'm getting a .wav of a WIP track of mine ready.. as soon as I find somewhere to upload it I will send you a direct message over Twitter. Thanks a lot for this, by the way.
I like the discussion this has brought on too, it's really fascinating to see everyone's different opinions and methods for the process.
Offline
Nashville, Tennessee
you can just email it to me, my email is in my profile! (woot new features)
Offline
Plano, TX
Okay, I'll have to break it up in a .zip since Google only allows 20MB attachments as far as I know.
Offline
tokyo
tRasH cAn maN wrote:
Normally a mastering house has a super talented guy with golden ears working with gear worth millions.
The standard processing he/she does to the already mixed material, is applying multiband compressor and EQ. Doesn't sound like much but it usually makes all the difference in getting commercial/professional sounding album.Nowadays any ol' granny and her dog claims they're mastering by slapping a Waves L2 limiter on the master bus in their bedroom studio.
I guess the VST era has it's pro's and con's...If you're going to release a commercial album, don't get tempted by skipping the mastering stage by being cheep or go the DIY route. You'll be surprised of what a pro can do.
If you're interested in some hardcore audio mastering knowledge, get a copy of "Mastering audio" by Bob Katz.
(There are pdf's of this book floating around the web.)
Sweet, I'll check out that book, thanks!
Offline
Milton Keynes, England
i've been doing lots of production work on most of the stuff i've been making for the past few months. it's alot of work and generally takes more time than the actual composing ...and it still ends up sucking 
i still have alot to learn.
and as lowgain said, by the time you're done you're kinda sick of your own songs haha.
Offline
Miami, FL
akira^8GB wrote:
I don't agree, specially putting mix/master like if they were the same.
There's a way I want tracks to sound, so definitely it is me who has to make the final mix. Nobody else will do it the way I like it. But yes, when the final mix is down, off it goes to the mastering black mage
Oh they're definitely not the same at all! They are totally separate.
I was speaking in terms of being in a band. When it comes to electronic music it's a bit different. I like to mix my own material although from time to time I don't mind handing off my projects to someone else just to see what they come up with.
Offline
The Mountains
I often use the "cookie" analogy to explain the recording process -
1. Recording/tracking: you get all of the right amount of your ingredients together and put them in a bowl
2. Mixing: you stir that shit up and spoon it onto a tray
3. Mastering: you bake your cookies until they are cookies
It is a bit of a different process when dealing with gameboys, but the concepts are essentially the same. I have used both methods- recording everything at once, and recording each channel seperate. Can't say really which method is "better," because depending on what is going on in your song one way might work better than another, or it may make no real difference.
So after you record your song, you have your finished "mix" which you would then take to "mastering." I don't spend any extra time or money in mastering gameboy music because it is so lo-fi anyway, but a good thing to do before you start burning CDs is look at the overall level of your track and see what you can do to make it as close to 0 dB (maximum) as you can get it (this is where knowledge of compressors and limiters come in handy).
A typical mastering chain will consist of EQ > compressor > limiter. It is important to note that they work in whatever order you put them in, and the limiter should always be the last item in the chain.