The Definition of Mastering

[mcanty]

I record in a studio. I know basically what mastering is.............I think. Maybe I don't.Can one of you studio nerds (I say this with all respect) give me a definition of mastering that a 5th grader would understand?

[mcanty]

In other words, I do not mix / master my own songs, a studio engineer does

[ibanez468]

The final process your tunes go through. The source material is processed using equalization, compression, limiting, noise reduction and other processes. Subsequently, it is rendered to a medium such as CD or DVD. This mastered source material is also put in the proper order/sequence at this stage. Mixing is one discipline, but mastering is totally another, which is usually left to the devices (I mean that literally) of a mastering engineer. When you purchase commercial CD's, what you're listening to had gone through this final stage. That's why it sounds loud, tight, punchy, all of the things your ears like to hear in a piece of music, depending on what kind you listen to, of course. HTH.ibanez468PS -- Another way you might look at it is, just like you process individual tracks when you're mixing (adding eq, compression, limiting, noise gates, etc.) mastering is kind of the same thing, with the exception that now each completed SONG gets processed using much more expensive equipment specifically designed in most cases to handle this task. I'm speaking on a pro level versus something we might do in our own studios. Huge difference between the 2. The equipment these engineers use to master with, costs thousands & thousands of dollars. ONE piece of high-end equipment they use could easily cost several thousand dollars, compared to the type of stuff we normally purchase. If you ever get a hold of a Sweetwater catalog, take a look at some of the processors in there. Stuff that looks like it would do the trick, but I could never afford, unless I was making the proper paper.

[kouly]

There is of course a new school of thought that sees that with the power of computers where they are now, very well written software can replace all the specialized hardware. We are seeing it in virtual instruments. Of course you can't code a good engineer but I have had great results from the program I use,(Peak Pro). If the engineer can understand the goals for the music then the rest is just a choice of tools. Peak Pro has been used by bands like Crystal Method to Master their own stuff. What it really comes down to is understanding what you want to achieve. There are a few great software tools but all the good ones (like the hardware) are going to cost you.

[mazz]

The best tool for mastering is a mastering engineer with years of experience and tons of projects under their belt. Mastering a CD to make it sound cohesive is an art. Mastering is a different skill set from engineering or mixing and usually mastering engineers use completely different gear than we're used to seeing in our studios. Granted, they may use some of the same software but the difference is, they really know how to use it subtly and tastefully and they have the speakers, the room and most importantly, the ears, that can reveal things we'll never hear that are affecting the sound quality of the mix.I think it's a valuable exercise to learn more about mastering but when it's a CD you've spent months and years working on, spend the extra money and have an experienced mastering engineer put the final touches on it. You'll be glad you did!Mazz

[milfus]

I have to agree with mazz whole heartedly, Unless you actually study mastering, and have the environment and equiptment, you are best off sending it somewhere, I am actually fully trained as a mastering engineer, and because of equiptment/room limitations, I wouldnt even master my own songs here. For a truly good master, you need a room with special accoustics, and really good speakers, and a boat load of audio knowledge. its like if mixing is farming, you can grow a real good crop, and itd taste good, and having the best possible ear of corn will be ideal, than mastering would be more like bio-engineering, they could mix the actual dna of the corn, make it grow out of almost anything, and if you are a really awesome farmer, you might know some of the biology, but generally, if you want it perfect at that kind of level, you need a scientist.

[mazz]

I like your food analogy. In keeping with that, I'd say that, for me, a mastering engineer is like a great chef. They can take the same fresh ingredients available to anyone and create an incredible meal. I can create something that tastes pretty good but they can make art out of it, from the tastes all the way to the presentation.MMMMMMMMMMMMMMazz

[weapon]

Unfortunately the louder the better has become an industry standard, in order to keep up and not sound "wimpy" you have to keep up with and out do the next guy, this may have it's downside but it is also a good thing. The way I look at it, it forces people to come up with new techniques and ideas in order to propell the recording process to new levels. And we can complain about it all we want, that's our right, but no one asked us to be musicians, we chose to do this, no one invited us. So we have to not just meet the industry standards, we have to exceed the industry standards, people that do this are the ones that become great.

[mazz]

I agree with you weapon. The thing is, we've lost, in pop music at least, the natural dynamics of music which add a certain dimension of emotion to the experience. The mastering "tools" available these days allow us to make every sound as loud as every other sound and that sonic barrage ends up fatiguing the listener since the body isn't programmed to respond to that unnatural condition. Humans aren't used to hearing the average level and the transients at the same amplitude.Hopefully some room to breathe will become the "new" aesthetic in the near future.Cheers,Mazz

[weapon]

I agree, sometimes I'm get exhausted from listening to certain albums. So good point.