Dubstepforum.com

So I've been wondering, would it be an outlandish request to ask a mastering engineer to let you know exactly what processes they used on your track?
Also, would it be kosher to request they use certain processes, such as analog limiting or analog gear?

I just don't know where the line in the sand is, but I want to be sure the guy is dong more than an ozone limit in 30 seconds.

That should be fine with any ME (that is not a jackass).

Hell most decent ME will let you sit in on the session.

3za wrote:That should be fine with any ME (that is not a jackass).

Hell most decent ME will let you sit in on the session.

This, you can just ask what processes they used and what was bad with the mix and stuff if you can't sit in on the session (I know a lot of people get it done online these days!). After all; if they give you advice on how to mix better for their mastering then you'll get better quality masters!

just ask. a big part of any audio project is the dialogue between involved parties.

You could ask before you pay if they will be using anaologue gear. It would hopefully be posted on their site?

It would be best to make specific what you want from the master, rather than sending it back.

Sharmaji wrote:just ask. a big part of any audio project is the dialogue between involved parties.

^^ this.

In my opinion, any ME worth paying for will want to initiate a dialogue anyway. *EVERY* single ME I've worked with asked pretty detailed questions about what my musical objectives were with the pieces I wrote, what I felt I wasn't able to achieve with my mixes that I was hoping to achieve through mastering, how I wanted the tracks to relate to each other sonically (especially for albums)...etc.

I've worked with ME's who were 100% software - but they weren't shy about it at all. They explained what they had and how they worked with pride, never resenting that I had questions. If I had reservations they showed me before & after examples of their work.

Anyone who is legit is gonna be happy to have an open discussion.

sketchyderek wrote:So I've been wondering, would it be an outlandish request to ask a mastering engineer to let you know exactly what processes they used on your track?
Also, would it be kosher to request they use certain processes, such as analog limiting or analog gear?

I just don't know where the line in the sand is, but I want to be sure the guy is dong more than an ozone limit in 30 seconds.

it is not outlandish for the client to ask about the process or request particular processes where available...they will be paying for it afterall

Agreed that you should be able to inquire but any of this before proceeding, it is your money afterall. Someone that actually cares about giving you the best results would be happy to discuss it. Usually an ME with analogue would already use what is appropriate for the track if they have the hardware but doesn't hurt to ask.

It is fine for a client to ask, although the exact tools used will make a bearing on the sound.
i.e. a 1kHz boost of 2dB with a Q of 1.8 on my custom Sontec eq will not sound the same as Fabfilter.... etc. etc. ad infinitum

Simply passing stereo material through a high end piece of kit with valves and transformer circuit ( for example) can enhance yet it is not possible to replicate. A mastering chain is interdependent on it's constituent components, that couples with the engineers detailed knowledge, hearing acuity and familiarity with a high res monitoring situation produces the best sonic results.

There are no secrets it's all eq, compression, signal paths, and other fine tweaks using what should be the best possible gear.

Accuracy of monitoring is all. It is the proficiency of the engineers judgment and tools that bring together the subjective enhancement and technical correction.

As mentioned the more information provided to the mastering engineer the better.

cheers

SafeandSound Mastering
online mastering studio

There's nothing weird or rude about wanting to know exactly what the ME's done to the tune.
I don't see the point in asking for specific analogue (or not) gear to be used though. I'd go with the ME's personal judgement on what he wants to use because he's the ME.

£10 Bag wrote:There's nothing weird or rude about wanting to know exactly what the ME's done to the tune.
I don't see the point in asking for specific analogue (or not) gear to be used though. I'd go with the ME's personal judgement on what he wants to use because he's the ME.

Alla this.

Same ting with the mixing engineer.
If it's completely digital music, I would just mix and master it myself though.

You're assuming MEs use their own judgement by default. They often say they are pressured by the market, artists, producers and labels to master for loudness. For this idea to work, you'll have to spefically request that your mastering engineer improve subjective sound quality, and not specifically master for loudness.

Which arrives at the original conclusion, that you should communicate with your ME.

jonahmann wrote:You're assuming MEs use their own judgement by default. They often say they are pressured by the market, artists, producers and labels to master for loudness. For this idea to work, you'll have to spefically request that your mastering engineer improve subjective sound quality, and not specifically master for loudness.

I wouldn't say it's an assumption. Each ME has different ears and tastes.
Loudness is obviously a big factor but all processing is done subjectively and if an ME isn't using their (hopefully good) judgement to improve the sound of the mix then I don't see why they've even been enlisted.

The point I was making though was: as the producer, to request the use of specific gear, be it analogue or digital, Neve or Behringer, when you've enlisted the judgement and ears of a professional mastering engineer who should be (by definition) better at choosing what piece of gear or processes/techniques will give the best sound for the final mix, would be counter-productive.

If a mastering engineer said to me "yo dawg, I like the 808's in your track, but could you go back and re-do it all with a 909 instead because I think they sound better?" I'd probably go elsewhere.
If I was an ME and a producer said "dawg, can you master my tune with a Roland Space Echo and a Speak and Spell please? I know you've got a Pultec but I like the Speak and Spell sound" I'd probably take other work which I could use my own judgement on.

jonahmann wrote:Which arrives at the original conclusion, that you should communicate with your ME.

Absolutely this. And there's absolutely nothing wrong with asking your ME what he did. Can help you improve your future mixdowns.

Get a good working relationship with your ME most would have their facebook page or email on their site . Get a conversation going and establish for yourself that they can be trusted. Ask for their previous work if it's good they will be happy to share it with you. Ask for a kit list and maybe an example sample A/B of what they can do with your track after mastering. If it's your first master your having done by the ME they shouldn't be too worried about if you don't want to buy the full master after as end of the day they are trying to win your custom.

How long does mastering usually take? I sent 5 tracks in and haven't heard back from the engineer in 4 weeks...

Laika wrote:How long does mastering usually take? I sent 5 tracks in and haven't heard back from the engineer in 4 weeks...

for the 1st round, an hour or 2 for a single, half a day for an EP, a day for an LP. longer if there's stem mastering, overdubs, cuts between mixes, etc, but...


yeah 4 weeks is not right. You as a client need to follow up!

OP there's been plenty of times (PLENTY) where the quick ozone job sounded better than anything analog. The end result is all the matters. If a guy has a massenberg EQ that's sitting there, bypassed, and the eq in fruity loops fits the song better-- there ya go. you're paying that guy to make that call.

As someone already mentioned I think the key to maximizing customer satisfaction is communication. A high level of communication could eliminate the need for attended sessions and put both parties on the same page.

You also have every right to at least ask what gear the mastering engineer is using.

Yeah as said it's a balance between them knowing what is a good master and you telling them what sounds you're after

mastering engineers do get pressure to cut really fucking loud records for dnb though pretty much the whole time. I know a mastering engineer who isn't a huge fan of how loud he's asked to cut dnb specifically sometimes

I'd personally go for dynamics over loudness and would request as much. It should actually make the loudest parts sound louder within the track that way. If an ME ignored my request I'd be pissed off, but if they explained what they did and why I'm less likely to be annoyed knowing they were working with what I asked.

Perfectly acceptable to ask what was done to your track. I pride myself on explaining to every client I work with exactly what processes I used, which tools I used to achieve it and why I did it in the first place (probably the most important)

From the sounds of what you're saying though this is more for trying to prove that they are actually producing quality results and as you say not just putting it through ozone and picking a preset?

If that's the case and you are doubting that I'd look elsewhere, there are plenty of quality Mastering services out there that will provide samples of their work or demonstrations of previous work. Use your ears and decide for yourself what you like.

At the end of the day it's what works for you and what is needed for the track. If a track needed x1 preset from ozone and it took 30 seconds to implement and was all that was needed (extremely unlikely! ) then it would be a waste of time having it run through various outboard pieces tweaking away to get something 2nd place. The point is though that you are sending your track to someone who is experienced enough to make the judgement call of what's needed, they'll be able to choose the right tool/s for the job and implement them in the best possible way to achieve the most effective results from your music. These guys know their tools very well (or at least should do!) and will most likely know better what will work for a track so don't worry about guiding them through their own setup. If you specifically want it to be run through outboard and have a legit reason why then feel free to let 'em know I'm sure they won't mind your input but at the same time if they are qualified and know what they're doing then let 'em get on with it