Mastered Vs. Unmastered

Hi folks...I was wondering about the importance to you about having your music mastered...I want to hear ppl's opinion about the importance of mastering in there own careers and hobbies. If anyone has any songs or beats that have both a "mastered" version and the "un-mastered" version...I would love to hear what kind of a difference Mastering makes to the tracks so that I may closer replicate that sound IN THE BOX before sending it to get mastered...any help will be greatly appreciated!

Any one with a decent listening envioronment and faithful reproduction system can do a good job at getting individual track levels loud for CD.

More important is the job of the masstering engineer with regards to an entire album. Levels, EQ, and Width need to translate and comply over a dozen tracks. As the producer / engineer, your involvement in the project over time will mean that you can no longer make these decisions objectively.

Finally, mastering for vinyl is a different thing althogether and important parameters need to be adhered to in order to get the best possible cut - definitely outsource this if you are unsure.

So, as far as my opinion goes - if you want to master one or two tracks, go for it. Follow red-book spec as well as fundamentals of digital audio and you should be OK. For an entire album, outsource it. The ME will usually do all the boring stuff for you like PQ sheets and metadata.

Mastering a song is NOT as important as having a GOOD MIX of your songs! Mastering is more about the level (volume & eq) of the whole picture compared to mixing (getting the overall sound, levels, panning, eq, compression of each track correct)

I have some mixes that sound better than some 'mastered' tracks...

Shostakovich wrote:Any one with a decent listening envioronment and faithful reproduction system can do a good job at getting individual track levels loud for CD.

More important is the job of the masstering engineer with regards to an entire album. Levels, EQ, and Width need to translate and comply over a dozen tracks. As the producer / engineer, your involvement in the project over time will mean that you can no longer make these decisions objectively.

Finally, mastering for vinyl is a different thing althogether and important parameters need to be adhered to in order to get the best possible cut - definitely outsource this if you are unsure.

So, as far as my opinion goes - if you want to master one or two tracks, go for it. Follow red-book spec as well as fundamentals of digital audio and you should be OK. For an entire album, outsource it. The ME will usually do all the boring stuff for you like PQ sheets and metadata.

OK wrd! Great response Shosta...I DEF agree wit you about the mix...super important...and I understand wat u mean about the album as whole too! Thanx alot fam...

Mike Boogie wrote:Mastering a song is NOT as important as having a GOOD MIX of your songs! Mastering is more about the level (volume & eq) of the whole picture compared to mixing (getting the overall sound, levels, panning, eq, compression of each track correct)

I have some mixes that sound better than some 'mastered' tracks...

What do you use to mix? Are you using Hardware or Software? What kind?

I use ProTools for my mixing and 'mastering'. I say 'mastering' because I am not a mastering engineer in any way, shape, or form. When I master, I slap a nasty Master Limiter with a Linear EQ on my master fader and go to town.

I have been working mastering albums (for CD) for artists and bands in my region for about a year and a half now, and I will throw my 2 cents here. A good mix is crucial for your music to sound good. Here as everywhere else the GIGO rule applies. Garbage in, Garbage out.

I can improve most any track a client passes me, but I simply cannot make a beautifully mastered album from poorly mixed songs.

Worst case scenario is when someone passes me a track that is poorly mixed AND they have tried to do some mastering on it themselves--usually just compressing the $hit out of it...

Mastering is easiest when I get a single really well mix audio file for each song, of an album. Second to this is mastering from stems. Sometimes an artist will pass me a vocal track and beat track for each song, or even more subdivided pieces of the beat, and that way I can make more fine adjustments to specific trouble areas without messing up other stuff.

Inevitably though, mastering is an art of compromises.

DJ Plan A wrote:...AND they have tried to do some mastering on it themselves--usually just compressing the $hit out of it...

Good mixing skills...$hitty mastering...

My Bad

Mike Boogie wrote:
Good mixing skills...$hitty mastering...

My Bad

haha. That comment was not aimed at you. I hadn't seen your last post when I started writing.

Fung45 wrote: Mastering engineers are worth it. They have better ears than you. They have better plugs and hardware than you. They know what they are doing. They have way better acoustic environments than you. Pay for mastering.

yeah plus... they dont think the track is all that cause they dont have any ego attached to the project.. or how ever you wanna look at it... they are likely to be less biased.




but really, you gotta be making some good cash off of what you are paying for though.

Fung45 wrote: Mastering engineers are worth it. They have better ears than you. They have better plugs and hardware than you. They know what they are doing. They have way better acoustic environments than you. Pay for mastering.

I think i would have to agree with that

My team and I send our work out to be mastered. They have the honest ear having never heard the tracks. We mix and balance it all before hand. We send Inst track file , drum track file , sample track file, synth track file , keys track file , and vocal track file.
So with the 6 tracks we send its a better "master" due to the lack of global changes to freq because its all broke down into the 6 tracks.

ghosty wrote:My team and I send our work out to be mastered. They have the honest ear having never heard the tracks. We mix and balance it all before hand. We send Inst track file , drum track file , sample track file, synth track file , keys track file , and vocal track file.
So with the 6 tracks we send its a better "master" due to the lack of global changes to freq because its all broke down into the 6 tracks.

Yes. This process, called "mastering from stems" allows a lot of detailed control, so that the person mastering can also make some subtle adjustments to the mix. I know this setup allows me to turn out a better mastered product than just mastering from a stereo wav or aiff for each song--unless the mixes are just pristine to begin with. Of course, it takes a lot more work, but often worth it.

some really good points covered here,

but may i add that mastering is about getting the track or tracks sounding `universal` and balanced, by that i mean that they sound good on any system on any format.

heres an example:
have you always wondered why when you mix your track it sounds amazing, so you rip it to cd to quicky take it round to your mates, put it on in the car n the way and it sounds different? ok maybee its just me you think?....so you get round to your mates and put the cd in his stereo and hit play...

it starts and... what? wtf?! ..it sounds shit!!! your mates laugh and you say "you should hear it on my monitors, it sounds shit hot! your system is no good man!"

well thats exactly where mastering is needed, yes to get the tracks uniformed for album play and get the coding and track gaps etc sorted ready for print to cd (as previously mentioned above)

but more importantly the track will become the best it can be,
by that i mean it will be EQ`d, Compressed , limmited, enhanced full stereo imaging, widened or whatever else. by a fully trained sound engineer in an acoustically treated environent (and i mean a neautral balanced mathematically worked out treated room with absorbers, diffusers and bass traps etc....not just the odd bit of foam stuck randomly on a wall)
also the high end mastering engineers use mainly outboard gear with single compressors and analogue mixers in the £10,000 and upwards bracket per single piece of equipment!

mastering is a science and is about listening, making the track the best it can possibly be by altering the overall feeling and sound as little as possible to the origional mix, but it will sound 100% better when performed correctly.

but having said that theres nothing wrong with trying to master tracks yourself to use as demos but try and definately get a good mix first.
the source sound must be as good as possible.
was that last take really your best?
is that guitar really in tune?
are you sure you shouldn`t quantize those kicks , they sound a bit off?!

there are no rules, experiment and enjoy.

but if you create a great track and mix it properly, a qualified mastering engineer would make it sound far better and uniformed so it plays just as good be it on a car stereo, a radio, your hi fi, your mates gheto blaster, in earphones, on computer speakers, or in a shopping mall.

understanding mastering is having amazing ears and expert knoledge of all acoustics, outboard gear, mixing, and effects known to man.
even the best mastering engineers learn new stuff all the time.


mastering is not a plug in!

respect
E