Did someone say "futuristic?"

[Lipskimusic]

When you say you mix in mono I guess it means you monitor in mono on one Auratone only? Are you using any other monitors before finalising your track?

That's correct, one Auratone. It's something I had heard in the past and recently read again in the book "Your Mix Sucks" at http://www.mixedbymarcmozart.com/ The idea behind it is that most people who hear your music will not be paying attention to it and probably listening on crappy speakers. Unless we're doing trailers, that's also true for most of the underscore we write.

I do have a pair of cheap M-Audio monitors that I listen to before anything goes out the (virtual) door. New monitors are high on MY list. Most of my critical listening is on headphones. Sometimes I will tweak something based on listening to the monitors, but usually I'm pretty happy. I want my mixes to sound clean and crisp, but I also don't feel like I have the luxury of time to agonize over the mastering.

I used to be worried about how my music would sound on other systems in other places, but I have been pleasantly surprised that most of what I do now translates well on other players and in other speakers. I can't say enough good things about the Sonarworks plugins for giving me more confidence that I'm hearing a true representation. (http://www.sonarworks.com/headphones)

It seems Neumann has a new pair of new monitors in their 'lower' range They seem to also have some sort of room measuring tool which might come in handy...

[mainman]

Sounds great Art! You do seem to have the mastering part dialed in well. Congrats on the forward after the dry spell. I know the feeling all too well.

[Telefunkin]

Hi Art,

I am mostly a master-by-presets kind of guy. I mix (set levels) at low volume in mono through a Auratone clone (Behritone). Then each track has an instance of Izotope Neutron on it and I let the "Track Assistant" optimize the sound. Usually the only tweaking I do is if some sounds are masking other sounds. After that, I export to wav and load it up in to Ozone 7 standalone and pick the preset that I think sounds the best.

I'm still a little curious about this. Let's say a music library wanted a track that you'd mastered that way, plus several alt versions. Would you create the alts then simply master them all using the same preset as you used for the main mix? That would make sense, but for the sake of argument, imagine that the full mix included prominent drums but you also chose to provide an alt version without any drums. Wouldn't mastering using the same presets have the potential to give completely different results in those two cases? I admit its an extreme example, but I've been asked for soundbeds, and they can be quite different to the full mix. I just wondered how you handle that.

[Lipskimusic]

Hi Art,

I am mostly a master-by-presets kind of guy. I mix (set levels) at low volume in mono through a Auratone clone (Behritone). Then each track has an instance of Izotope Neutron on it and I let the "Track Assistant" optimize the sound. Usually the only tweaking I do is if some sounds are masking other sounds. After that, I export to wav and load it up in to Ozone 7 standalone and pick the preset that I think sounds the best.

I'm still a little curious about this. Let's say a music library wanted a track that you'd mastered that way, plus several alt versions. Would you create the alts then simply master them all using the same preset as you used for the main mix? That would make sense, but for the sake of argument, imagine that the full mix included prominent drums but you also chose to provide an alt version without any drums. Wouldn't mastering using the same presets have the potential to give completely different results in those two cases? I admit its an extreme example, but I've been asked for soundbeds, and they can be quite different to the full mix. I just wondered how you handle that.

I am curious, too

[artturner]

Great question!

Given my extremely limited experience with libraries (or library in my case), I'm mostly just thinking out loud here. If someone wanted alternate versions to use in a production, I assume they would want the to sound compatible from a mastering standpoint, so I would probably keep that in mind. When I delivered alternate versions to the library, I think I used the same mastering presets, but it also happened be a chamber orchestra period drama cue, so there wasn't a huge difference in instrumentation or levels.

On the other hand if I was providing stems for a producer to mix themselves I would probably provide those unmastered.

In the end, I would hope the library would tell you exactly what they want. Otherwise, I would just have to ask.

[Telefunkin]

Thanks for the reply Art.
Its a question I've had for a while and still haven't really got the answer clear in my mind yet. We could even send tracks away to be mastered, but the alts situation could be really awkward then. Personally, I set the mastering plugins (any compression, final EQ, limiting, metering) on the full mix output, then edit the mix whilst leaving those set. You might argue that those plugins too are in danger of responding differently if the mix components change. Perhaps the answer is to avoid extreme settings so there's 'damage limitation'. I'd welcome further insight though if anyone else is offering, but perhaps I should start a new thread. Sorry to hijack yours.

[Tunesmith]

I like your track very much! Very engaging, unique! Hope you go a long way with it! Also thank you for sharing your mastering/mixing technique.

Linda