Ableton Forum

I've read quite a lot about mastering to try and get some basic understanding of it, and one thing that sticks out in my mind is this 'Shit In, Shit Out' metaphor. "You cant polish a turd". How do you know at what stage a project is ready for mastering?

Sorry if this is a really stupid question, but it's something that's bugged me for a while now. I understand I cant do this part of the process myself. But I'd like to get to a position where I can send music away to be "finished". The main problem I have is, I dont like the idea of it coming back and not being to a great standard (because it wasnt good enough in the first place). I would also hate to send something off and returned with just an L2 or Ozone preset dropped on to it. I could do something like that myself.

So, when do you know its the right time? what standard do you have to get to in order for it to sound polished when it comes back?

Sorry for the noob question

The only person who can answer your question is you, you can gain other peoples opinions, but at the end of the day its your music, the time is right when you feel you cant take it any further, maybe you should do some reading up on mastering yourself, you can master in Live 8 now apparently, Tarekith has great tutorial on mastering, you should check it out, try listening to your music, side by side with a commercial release, that may give you some ideas, good luck, mastering is a bit of a nightmare.

Thanks for the reply Rob.

Its the A-B'ing with commercial tracks that confuses me the most! While I'm trying to get the best out of the project, I'm not skilled enough to get it to sound like commercial tracks (and that's why I'd like to send it for mastering). I'm trying to find out the quality I need to get to for the mastering engineer to finish it off (or even accept the job).

I've read that you should have no processing (limiting) on the master channel before you send it off, and that it shouldn't be peaking any more than -6db - in order to give the M.E plenty of headroom to do the job. If I take the chain off my current project it sounds like toilet paper being tapped with a cotton bud

At the other side of the spectrum, is it possible to spend more time than necessary on a project before sending it away? Why put more effort than is needed in to something when you could be using that time to start a new project? I like the idea of being efficient, however I'm a long way from that I reckon

well the simple answer is that you are ready for mastering when your mix is the best it can be. If you need lots of processors in your master channel to make it sound decent, there's probably something wrong in your mix or choice of sounds in the first place.

Thanks for the reply snakedogman

I see your point. However, I just apply enough to make it sound like a commercial release (limiter etc - I exaggerated a bit with my analogy) Which will be no different to what a mastering engineer will do. So at what point before the chain I add do I have to be at before I know spending the money will be beneficial?

If it was just a case of using the correct sounds in the first place, surely there would be no need to send anything off to be finished?

A good song is a good song. Mastered or not. Mastering is there to add the last bit of sparkle and volume to make your track match the "sound quality" of a commercial release.

Your job before mastering:

Write a good song

Be sure your mix is well balanced. By balanced, I mean the drums are all at the level you want, the bass sits nice in the mix, strings and keys are properly placed and the vocal is coherent and placed properly in the mix.

I think you may need some direct feedback from someone who has been through this process to help you get started. Why don't you post your mix when you think you're ready and ask for some feedback?

Tod

Hi Tod, thanks for the reply

Its the sparkle that I'm failing to achieve. I've tried reaching it with EQ and a whole host of plugins but its out of my reach. I know its all down to an experienced set of ears, of which I dont have. I'm fine with that (I'm still brand new to this). I'm also more than happy to sit down and learn (I have caught the bug it seems).

Oddly, I feel hindered in to putting 100% effort in to making a track because I'm not sure of where I'm going with it at the end.

Nice website by the way

When you do get something mastered, sit in on the session to learn what they do and see if you think you're getting your money's worth.

Hereya go:

http://www.digido.com/audio-faq/m/maste ... rence.html

Click on AudioFAQ on the same site, there's a bunch of really good answers and tutorials by a pro.

Thanks for that ciw, that's a good idea. I almost typed that there's no where local for me to do that, but I think I could look a bit further in to it first. I think I would prefer to send something off when I first take the plunge if only to get a better rate. I'd rather spend less while I'm still learning about it all - would sitting in with a session cost more?

Thanks for the link, posssu

I read Bob Katz 'Mastering Audio' book a while back. I found 'Mixing and Mastering' by Bill Gibson a lot easier to digest at the time. Maybe I should go back to Bob and see if I can pick up something new - I find that I keep picking up on new things after missing them completely the first time!

IMO the only thing you should place on your master channel while mixing is some sort of spectrum analysis tool, like the one that comes with Live. This way, you can correct whatever bass/treble exess or dynamic issues you might be having in the final stages of mixing - IF you can not already hear them. If your mix sounds bad/inadequate with no chain on you master track, read about mixing, not mastering A mix should sound beautiful, and as close to a professional product as possible, before mastering. When A/B testing while mixing, make sure you're not cranking Timbaland or Skream way up in iTunes, while listening to yourself at typically low mixing volume - keep them fairly equal. Also, keep in mind that professional artists often mix and master in different ways for different places, i.e. a radio/myspace mix often has way more intense high mid than an album version, to reach the ears of passive listeners in a different way.

Do you use a pair of fairly good studio monitors? If not, bring your project somewhere where you can do all kinds of fine tuning before you send it off to be mastered. Other general tips; mix at a speaking volume, and occasionally bring it way down/up to check for balance issues you weren't percieving. If you're like most producers, you like to mix while composing (to get a 'feel' for the track), and your perception will suffer a bit from this. Don't make your final mix at the end of a long day, wait till the next day, you'll hear everything alot clearer And, like others have mentioned, keep the mix peaking at -6db at least, and turn the volume up on your monitors/external mixer instead.

I am also in a learning process when it comes to this, so if anyone wants to elaborate on/argue with what I just wrote, please do!

Inch Lo wrote:Thanks for that ciw, that's a good idea. I almost typed that there's no where local for me to do that, but I think I could look a bit further in to it first. I think I would prefer to send something off when I first take the plunge if only to get a better rate. I'd rather spend less while I'm still learning about it all - would sitting in with a session cost more?

It should do. It didn't when I tried it (I have only gotten a tune mastered once) but the mastering engineer hadn't had someone sit in before and didn't realise how much extra work it would be - fair play to him he was really helpful to me AND honoured his original price if anyone wants a recommendation round Bristol I'll pass on his contact details.

The benefit of sitting in is that if your mix could do with improving you get detailed feedback on how. I would say that the benefit of what I learned from spending a few hours discussing my tune, and what to do with it, with a mastering engineer FAR outweighed the benefit of the actual mastering.

Hey boska, thanks for replying

I understand where you're coming from with the master channel, I usually mix to the best of my abilities then add a limiter etc to get the volume up and add a bit more punch. I'm not doing any major sound design on the master channel.

Its funny you should mention decent monitors as I've tried to stay away from the hardware debate. For all better gear helps, its not a major factor. I actually know several other producers that do a far better job than me on what I would consider laughable rigs - and mines not great, but where I've spent more in money, they've spent more in time. Time wins. Unfortunately getting any info out of these twats is harder than plating fog, so here I am, reading books and talking to the internet (for which I'm grateful for).

When your MIXES are complete. Assuming you are putting out an EP or album, or plan on doing such later. Even if you are planning a single release, it's better to master a bunch of them together so your future tracks/singles/EPs can be mastered to a consistent set of values.