The budget breakdown

Recording Techniques, People Skills, Gear, Recording Spaces, Computers, and DIY

Moderators: drumsound, tomb

cjogo
re-cappin' neve
Posts: 676
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2004 4:06 pm
Location: Carmel
Contact:

Post by cjogo » Thu Mar 31, 2011 4:15 pm

We include a one-pass mastering .... and suggest the artist :: just distribute the tunes electronically :: we suggest they place more of the budget ~ towards the recording/tracking /mixing ......... has worked so far. Average 8 hour day >> $750- 1k is our cut. But, our overhead is is fairly hefty ...
whatever happened to ~ just push record......

MoreSpaceEcho
zen recordist
Posts: 6671
Joined: Wed May 07, 2003 11:15 am

Post by MoreSpaceEcho » Fri Apr 01, 2011 11:09 am

[cough]one pass mastering isn't mastering[/cough]

cjogo
re-cappin' neve
Posts: 676
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2004 4:06 pm
Location: Carmel
Contact:

Post by cjogo » Fri Apr 01, 2011 2:32 pm

MoreSpaceEcho wrote:[cough]one pass mastering isn't mastering[/cough]


No > but fits the budget -- and $$ stays in house.. plenty of controls in the DEQ 2496 /Finalizer and additional post parameters with the Masterlink. Our clients totally understand if they bring along their favorite label CD for a sample (that cost $50k) >> there is no way they expect the same quality as a total cost project of $3K ~~
Last edited by cjogo on Fri Apr 01, 2011 11:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
whatever happened to ~ just push record......

User avatar
@?,*???&?
on a wing and a prayer
Posts: 5804
Joined: Wed May 07, 2003 4:36 pm
Location: Just left on the FM dial
Contact:

Post by @?,*???&? » Fri Apr 01, 2011 2:51 pm

MoreSpaceEcho wrote:[cough]one pass mastering isn't mastering[/cough]
I totally agree. Neither is self mastering.

Neither is mastering without embedding ISRC codes as well as delivering less than Red Book Standard CDRs to manufacturing.

cjogo
re-cappin' neve
Posts: 676
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2004 4:06 pm
Location: Carmel
Contact:

Post by cjogo » Fri Apr 01, 2011 6:40 pm

@?,*???&? wrote:
MoreSpaceEcho wrote:[cough]one pass mastering isn't mastering[/cough]
Neither is mastering without embedding ISRC codes as well as delivering less than Red Book Standard CDRs to manufacturing.
The Red Book standard is one of the features that makes the Masterlink so desirable ':lol:'
whatever happened to ~ just push record......

cgarges
zen recordist
Posts: 10890
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2003 1:26 am
Location: Charlotte, NC
Contact:

Post by cgarges » Sat Apr 02, 2011 6:37 am

@?,*???&? wrote:Neither is mastering without embedding ISRC codes as well as delivering less than Red Book Standard CDRs to manufacturing.
A few of the "high end" mastering guys I've talked to have told me that they only embed ISRCs in between five and twenty-five percent of the records they master. I'm all for it and I am registered to get codes for the rest of my life, but it's not as common as some people think it is. In fact, one mastering guy I know used to take care of it for his clients (back when registering was free), but stopped doing it and his clients have not really been asking about it or even known what ISRC codes are. Again, I think it's a great idea, but I hardly think we're at the stage where it's not really mastering if ISRC codes aren't embeded. If a mastering guy CAN'T do it, then yeah, there's kind of a problem there.

Speaking if ISRC codes, I was wondering this recently, just because I don't know the answer: Do ISRC codes follow file format changes? Like, for instance, if mp3s are made from a master where the codes are embedded, do those codes follow the mp3s? How about if WAV files are made from an AIFF master? I'm assuming the answer is "yes," but I just don't know for sure.

Chris Garges
Charlotte, NC

User avatar
Nick Sevilla
on a wing and a prayer
Posts: 5555
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:34 pm
Location: Lake Arrowhead California USA
Contact:

Post by Nick Sevilla » Sat Apr 02, 2011 8:12 am

@?,*???&? wrote:
MoreSpaceEcho wrote:[cough]one pass mastering isn't mastering[/cough]
I totally agree. Neither is self mastering.

Neither is mastering without embedding ISRC codes as well as delivering less than Red Book Standard CDRs to manufacturing.
And is is definitely NOT mastered until you have a BARCODE.

:D

Sorry... could not resist.

@cgojo : who is this "we" you keep mentioning? You always post in the plural. Maybe this is juts a quirk of yours.
Howling at the neighbors. Hoping they have more mic cables.

cjogo
re-cappin' neve
Posts: 676
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2004 4:06 pm
Location: Carmel
Contact:

Post by cjogo » Sat Apr 02, 2011 10:02 am

@cjogo : who is this "we" you keep mentioning? You always post in the plural. Maybe this is juts a quirk of yours.
Two studios on West Coast and one semi-retired now ( opened in the late 80's ) in the Midwest---- all the same systems. Roland/Kurzweil/Masterlink.
whatever happened to ~ just push record......

User avatar
@?,*???&?
on a wing and a prayer
Posts: 5804
Joined: Wed May 07, 2003 4:36 pm
Location: Just left on the FM dial
Contact:

Post by @?,*???&? » Sat Apr 02, 2011 12:01 pm

cgarges wrote:
@?,*???&? wrote:Neither is mastering without embedding ISRC codes as well as delivering less than Red Book Standard CDRs to manufacturing.
A few of the "high end" mastering guys I've talked to have told me that they only embed ISRCs in between five and twenty-five percent of the records they master. I'm all for it and I am registered to get codes for the rest of my life, but it's not as common as some people think it is. In fact, one mastering guy I know used to take care of it for his clients (back when registering was free), but stopped doing it and his clients have not really been asking about it or even known what ISRC codes are. Again, I think it's a great idea, but I hardly think we're at the stage where it's not really mastering if ISRC codes aren't embeded. If a mastering guy CAN'T do it, then yeah, there's kind of a problem there.

Speaking if ISRC codes, I was wondering this recently, just because I don't know the answer: Do ISRC codes follow file format changes? Like, for instance, if mp3s are made from a master where the codes are embedded, do those codes follow the mp3s? How about if WAV files are made from an AIFF master? I'm assuming the answer is "yes," but I just don't know for sure.

Chris Garges
Charlotte, NC
Chris, your answer lies here:

http://www.usisrc.org/faqs/general.html

****EVERYONE ON THIS BOARD SHOULD READ THIS****

User avatar
JGriffin
zen recordist
Posts: 6739
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2003 1:44 pm
Location: criticizing globally, offending locally
Contact:

Post by JGriffin » Mon Apr 04, 2011 10:43 pm

@?,*???&? wrote:
cgarges wrote:
@?,*???&? wrote:Neither is mastering without embedding ISRC codes as well as delivering less than Red Book Standard CDRs to manufacturing.
Speaking if ISRC codes, I was wondering this recently, just because I don't know
the answer: Do ISRC codes follow file format changes? Like, for instance, if mp3s are made from a master where the codes are embedded, do those codes follow the mp3s? How about if WAV files are made from an AIFF master? I'm assuming the answer is "yes," but I just don't know for sure.
NC
Chris, your answer lies here:

http://www.usisrc.org/faqs/general.html

****EVERYONE ON THIS BOARD SHOULD READ THIS****

So according to that, ISRC codes don't survive the conversion from Red Book CD files into mp3s. So the next question is: do iTunes, CD Baby etc. Re-embed those codes in the id3 tags as the site suggests? If not, then 1) how does it get accomplished and b) what good is the ISRC Code if downloadable mp3s don't carry them?
"Jeweller, you've failed. Jeweller."

"Lots of people are nostalgic for analog. I suspect they're people who never had to work with it." ? Brian Eno

All the DWLB music is at http://dwlb.bandcamp.com/

User avatar
Dr Rubberfunk
pushin' record
Posts: 229
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 3:01 pm
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Post by Dr Rubberfunk » Tue Apr 05, 2011 4:05 am

dwlb wrote:
@?,*???&? wrote:
cgarges wrote:
@?,*???&? wrote:Neither is mastering without embedding ISRC codes as well as delivering less than Red Book Standard CDRs to manufacturing.
Speaking if ISRC codes, I was wondering this recently, just because I don't know
the answer: Do ISRC codes follow file format changes? Like, for instance, if mp3s are made from a master where the codes are embedded, do those codes follow the mp3s? How about if WAV files are made from an AIFF master? I'm assuming the answer is "yes," but I just don't know for sure.
NC
Chris, your answer lies here:

http://www.usisrc.org/faqs/general.html

****EVERYONE ON THIS BOARD SHOULD READ THIS****

So according to that, ISRC codes don't survive the conversion from Red Book CD files into mp3s. So the next question is: do iTunes, CD Baby etc. Re-embed those codes in the id3 tags as the site suggests? If not, then 1) how does it get accomplished and b) what good is the ISRC Code if downloadable mp3s don't carry them?
In the UK at least, labels and/or distributors ('digital aggregators') collate the ISRC codes, along with a ton of other metadata into massive spreadsheets to provide to itunes et al with all the info to embed.

User avatar
JGriffin
zen recordist
Posts: 6739
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2003 1:44 pm
Location: criticizing globally, offending locally
Contact:

Post by JGriffin » Tue Apr 05, 2011 8:23 am

Dr Rubberfunk wrote:
dwlb wrote:
@?,*???&? wrote:
cgarges wrote:
@?,*???&? wrote:Neither is mastering without embedding ISRC codes as well as delivering less than Red Book Standard CDRs to manufacturing.
Speaking if ISRC codes, I was wondering this recently, just because I don't know
the answer: Do ISRC codes follow file format changes? Like, for instance, if mp3s are made from a master where the codes are embedded, do those codes follow the mp3s? How about if WAV files are made from an AIFF master? I'm assuming the answer is "yes," but I just don't know for sure.
NC
Chris, your answer lies here:

http://www.usisrc.org/faqs/general.html

****EVERYONE ON THIS BOARD SHOULD READ THIS****

So according to that, ISRC codes don't survive the conversion from Red Book CD files into mp3s. So the next question is: do iTunes, CD Baby etc. Re-embed those codes in the id3 tags as the site suggests? If not, then 1) how does it get accomplished and b) what good is the ISRC Code if downloadable mp3s don't carry them?
In the UK at least, labels and/or distributors ('digital aggregators') collate the ISRC codes, along with a ton of other metadata into massive spreadsheets to provide to itunes et al with all the info to embed.
Aha. Thanks!
"Jeweller, you've failed. Jeweller."

"Lots of people are nostalgic for analog. I suspect they're people who never had to work with it." ? Brian Eno

All the DWLB music is at http://dwlb.bandcamp.com/

User avatar
@?,*???&?
on a wing and a prayer
Posts: 5804
Joined: Wed May 07, 2003 4:36 pm
Location: Just left on the FM dial
Contact:

Post by @?,*???&? » Tue Apr 05, 2011 9:51 am

dwlb wrote:
Dr Rubberfunk wrote:
dwlb wrote:
@?,*???&? wrote:
cgarges wrote:
@?,*???&? wrote:Neither is mastering without embedding ISRC codes as well as delivering less than Red Book Standard CDRs to manufacturing.
Speaking if ISRC codes, I was wondering this recently, just because I don't know
the answer: Do ISRC codes follow file format changes? Like, for instance, if mp3s are made from a master where the codes are embedded, do those codes follow the mp3s? How about if WAV files are made from an AIFF master? I'm assuming the answer is "yes," but I just don't know for sure.
NC
Chris, your answer lies here:

http://www.usisrc.org/faqs/general.html

****EVERYONE ON THIS BOARD SHOULD READ THIS****

So according to that, ISRC codes don't survive the conversion from Red Book CD files into mp3s. So the next question is: do iTunes, CD Baby etc. Re-embed those codes in the id3 tags as the site suggests? If not, then 1) how does it get accomplished and b) what good is the ISRC Code if downloadable mp3s don't carry them?
In the UK at least, labels and/or distributors ('digital aggregators') collate the ISRC codes, along with a ton of other metadata into massive spreadsheets to provide to itunes et al with all the info to embed.
Aha. Thanks!
True. If you log on to ISRC.org, you will see that CD Baby is one of the many that procure ISRCs and provide them. It appears the foremost reason they do this is for client material that doesn't have it. Sales and download credit go to CD Baby- not the artist. From Soundscan specifically, those sales count toward CD Baby and not the artist. There's been some discussion in the past about this on this very board. I've had to re-assign UPCs in the past so that the label- not the distributor/aggregator is credited. Ironically, that was for a disc that did not have ISRCs provided at the time of mastering, but did have a UPC.

You can see how artist accountability and the producer/engineer/mastering engineer/label all play a role into how thoroughly all of this is documented. In this era of DAWs and the artist monkey-ing with the controls, a complex situation can get even worse.

And doesn't this seem like it could go 'Malkevich-Malkevich' pretty quickly if the artist has ISRCs and CD Baby assigns their own codes?

cgarges
zen recordist
Posts: 10890
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2003 1:26 am
Location: Charlotte, NC
Contact:

Post by cgarges » Tue Apr 05, 2011 5:15 pm

It sucks that so many of those digital distribution sites don't allow you to upload your own mp3s if you're also uploading WAV or AIFF files. It sure would be nice to maintain a bit of QC. It also sucks that the file size limitations on most of those sites won't allow you to make hi-res audio files available.

Chris Garges
Charlotte, NC

User avatar
lifeintime
gettin' sounds
Posts: 106
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 5:10 pm
Location: South Bend, Indiana
Contact:

Post by lifeintime » Sun Apr 10, 2011 8:17 am

Great thread...
Helpful to know the ISRC embedding information.
I almost spit my coffee onto my keyboard when I read this CG comment.
Ahhh... the power of the English language.
cgarges wrote:Sometimes I really do wish you were the dumbass you pretend to be.CG
What? No Gravy???

soundcloud.com/LifeInTimeMusic

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 49 guests