Audio Mastering Engineer with question for Mix Engineers

[Chris Graham Mastering]

Chris, in my experience, there are very very few mixes that don't need at least some compression, and only in certain genres. The point of the compression isn't to fix a sub-par mix, it's to glue the mix together. 99% of the time, how awesome the mix is doesn't really have anything to do with if it will be compressed in mastering, it can sometimes effect how much it's compressed, but even then, that's more of a genre issue that an "awesome mix" issue.

I find that when an ME asks for mixes with less compression, it's not uncommon for the mix engineer to get offended. I think we can see from the varied responses to this thread that that's going to be true some of the time.

[cgarges]

So, you'd rather get uncompressed mixes than ask what the mix engineer and/or artist or producer expect from mastering, making the assumption that you're going to be compressing the mixes, regardless? I'm not getting defensive or anything, I'm just asking.

I've actually (more than once) asked for a master to be redone without additional compression because the compression was fine when I sent it to the ME. I know at least one person on here who can vouch for me on that. The same guy has also done projects for me where he deemed it unnecessary to compress my mixes any further. That's part of the reason why that guy continues to get work from me and my clients.

Chris Garges
Charlotte, NC

[Chris Graham Mastering]

I trust you Chris, and I'm sure there are times when it's appropriate to not compress in mastering with certain styles of music. Most mastering engineers work multible genre though, and I find that having uncompressed mixes generally makes for a smoother mastering experience.

I think there's less potential for delays, and for people getting offended that way. More than a few times I've gotten great mixes from clients, with less than great master buss compression.

[cgarges]

I can't begin to comprehend a mastering engineer that would be afraid to address me with a concern.

Chris Garges
Charlotte, NC

[kingtoad]

As a mastering engineer, I tend to find that the best mixes I receive, on average, have master bus compression where appropriate and in these cases I tend to only compress an extra 0.5db or so, or often not at all.

Mixing into a compressor is very different to applying one after the fact - you can't really predict the effects of compression on the mix unless you actually mix into the comp. In this case it seems silly to then remove the compressor before sending to mastering.

Of course, all of this applies to good mix engineers who actually understand compression - and I mean genuinely understand all of it's nuances, not just the general concept behind it. When the mixer is less experienced I tend to find it is relatively obvious and these mixers are not, in my experience, offended if I mention something that might help their mix.

Mixing into limiters is something that I do sometimes encounter and it can be a problem (especially when the loudest sections of the song are up at -3db RMS as happened to me recently!), but most often when I am sent limited mixes it's due to a misunderstanding, such as the mix engineer not realising that the tracks were to be mastered.

I feel like I am rambling and not making a lot of coherent sense. Sorry, it's late on this side of the pond!

[JohnDavisNYC]

Ok... I let this thread go for a while, but I kinda gotta jump in at this point.

First off Chris, I'm not trying to attack you, so sorry if it comes off that way... just saying that up top, in case I get carried away with my typing.... this is going to be a bit like a 'choose your own adventure'...

1. A real mastering engineer works with the mix they are given, and makes it sound as good as it can on the intended delivery format.

2. If there is a glaring problem with the mix, then the mastering engineer should approach the client and explain that he/she is finding issues with the mix that are preventing a good master from being made.

3. The client should then reflect on this and discuss this with the mix engineer. If the client and mix engineer agree that the mix should be 'fixed' (and there is the budget for a remix or recall) then the engineer should deliver a 'fixed' mix to the mastering engineer in a timely fashion so that he may continue preparing a good sounding master, be it .WAV for digital, a PMCD, or lacquers...

4. If the client and mix engineer decides decide that, no, there is nothing wrong with the mix and it sounds the way they intend, or there is no budget/time/whatever for a remix/recall, then go back to 1.

anyways... the choose your own adventure version of mixing and mastering a record is kinda short, I guess.

These days I nearly always mix with a compressor on the mix bus, and I've NEVER had a mastering engineer ask me for uncompressed mixes. I'm usually using a Drawmer 1968, with the meters just barely tapping... 'heavily compressed' for me is like 2db of reduction....

Asking for a mix engineer to deliver mixes without compression before hearing the mixes in question is kinda lame. It's like asking for stems. Fuck no, I'm not giving you stems so that you can change the mix in the mastering studio.. and just as I'm not going to tell you not to EQ or limit or de-ess my mixes, I expect the same mutual respect from the mastering engineer to not tell me to not compress my mixes, or use reverb, or distort the drums, etc.... if there is a problem with my mixes (like se?or spaceecho outlined) then by all means I want to hear about it and fix it if possible, but I also 100% expect to be able to do my art, and allow the next person downstream in the process to do theirs.

Open communication between a mix engineer and mastering engineer is what helps everyone make better products. This sounds more like: 'Hey dude, I know compressing the mix is helping you make a great mix, and it's exciting and grooving and all that good stuff... but just make it safe... I got this.'

And the final thing, which I should put my flame suit on for....

1: How many of the mixes that you are working on are mixed on analog desks with REAL compressors and eq's and reverbs and delays and all that nice stuff?

and 2: how much of your compressing, eq'ing, and limiting are you doing with analog or digital hardware, and what is your monitoring chain. I ask that not to start a digital/analog war, just because you don't list any gear or have any pictures of your mastering room on your website (that I could find).

I wouldn't be surprised if most ITB mixes with a plugin comp on the 2mix are falling apart when you put a limiter plugin on it, and the quality of the monitoring environment is absolutely crucial.

Again, I hope none of that was taken as an attack.

Respectfully,
John

[cgarges]

Well put, John.

Chris Garges
Charlotte, NC

[Waltz Mastering]

I find that having uncompressed mixes generally makes for a smoother mastering experience.

Are you referring to novice mix engineers here or mixers who are good at their craft.

With people just starting out, basic instrument balances and eq are usually an issue before compression really comes into the picture. With mixers with experience you'd have to respect their judgement and master accordingly. I think trying to dictate what a mixer does unless you are specifically asked for advice is a slippery slope.

[fossiltooth]

Hey guys, I'm super pleased that so many people have responded with a variet of viewpoints on the subject! I'm a little confused by the comment below:

so sure, it might not be leaving a lot for the mastering engineer to do. but that isn't the goal - the goal is to make amazing mixes.

My point with sending mixes to an ME that have been compressed is that, yes your mix might be better as a result of it, but it ties the hands of the mastering engineer

Refer to the quote above if you want an answer to that question.

A mastering engineer should add a touch of 5k and 12k and take away a dib-dab of 500; or add a tiny touch of 700 and soften around 2k - that kind of thing. Maybe add a little more compression if things could sit better or sound fatter. That's really all. ME's are a QC. The best ones are worth it because they've heard a million records in their room and know how to make it sound like your record lives in the same world.

I also agree with 99.89% of what John from the Bunker says, as usual. With one tiny exception though: Digital compressors have come a long way, and today (finally) there are a few that are as just as good for me as analog ones. There are digital compressors that can easily do what an SSL bus comp does at -1db to -4 db GR. I've heard a Tube Tech emulation that sounds great up to -4db (and maybe a little less so afterwards). The real problem you might be facing is that with the lower price of entry, you're more likely to get people using digital tools who aren't as committed or don't now what they're doing.

The old analog v digital debate (not that I want to go there) is a little outdated for me these days. I like both, and like John, I prefer not staring at screens whenever possible. It leads to better sounds. And it's quicker too. But I've got to say, I've been listening to Chris Shaw's mixes ITB, and they sound as great as anything he's done. I like to think that the ones I do are pretty ok too.

Anyway, back to mastering: Your job is QC, a little frequency balancing and perhaps some level-averaging and tone. Make it a little taller, deeper and wider if you can. Make it a little smoother or a little more upfront. Help us choose versions. We thank you for it. But please: Also know your boundaries.

[chris harris]

With so many people offering to "master" records these days, for next to nothing (I'm one of these people), many of them feel a pressure to "wow" the client and put a sonic stamp of some sort all over everything (I'm NOT one of these people). Lots of mastering sessions seem to start from the assumption that home recordists couldn't possibly get what they want out of mixing, and that they're coming to the mastering engineer to "make it better". I think it's really important to communicate with the client to determine if that's what they actually want. If anything, I start from the assumption that they have spent loads of time getting the mixes right where they want them, and my job is to not fuck that up.

[MoreSpaceEcho]

Asking for a mix engineer to deliver mixes without compression before hearing the mixes in question is kinda lame.

agreed. if i was a mixer and a ME asked me that, i would be offended/annoyed and would probably take my business elsewhere.

[DontBuyTheHype]

Imagine you built a Ferrari using your skills and many years of experience but before the new owner takes delivery of the vehicle the local home garage mechanic tells you (the builder) not to tune the engine on the vehilce because he can do it better for the client than you can. After all he wants to make his contribution and he needs to look good for his client to sell his $50.00 tune up on this $100,000 car.

This is precisely what many local mastering companiers are doing.

Now if the builder was a hobbiest who built the car at home then the mechanic would have a reasonable offering that would be a good service for the builder. As would a local mastering company for a home recording artist. And true the home recording artist does not likely know how to properly use compression on the master bus.

However, it is a fact that Most Grammy Award Winning Producers & Mixing Engineers use Master Bus Compression.

I do mixing and mastering for a wide variety of clientele but seldom do both on a project. However, I consider myself more of a mix engineer. Even though I do reasonable well on mastering I still advise my clients that the large professional mastering houses will do a better job than I.

The problem is anyone can buy a computer, software and cheap monitors and call themselves a mastering engineer. I'm sorry, I know I will offend some people but it's true. Real mastering takes many years of ear training as does learning the art of mixing. Real mastering is a lot more than compression and EQ. Ask Bob Katz, Bob Ludwig, or any engineer at Sterling Sound. These local mastering companies wouldn't have a clue how to approach mid-side processing or even have knowledge of its existence.

Some of these local mastering companies supply online samples that fool the listener into believing their mastered product sounbd better. I will acknowledge that some do it unknowingly but some know exactly what they are doing. What am I talking about?

It's a simple scientific fact that every audio engineer should be aware of. When comparing two audio sources our hearing thinks the louder version sounds better. Even if it's the exact same sample only slightly louder. These mastering companies do a before and after mastering sample where the after is always louder so the ear naturally prefers it. I have actually downloaded some of these samples into Protools and evened out the levels so you can get a true comparison. It's astonishing to hear how some of these cheap local mastering companies have ruined mixes with their so-called mastering. As engineers we need to be aware of this principle in our mixing so we can make sure our ears aren't fooling us. (Fab Dupont has an excellent video on this at PureMix.net.) While I may come off as arrogant in this post because this is such a hot button for me; I view myself as an eternal student of the arts in music and engineering. After 25+ years I am always seeking to learn more. However, I am tired of people misrepresenting themselves in the fields of mastering and studio recording whether done intentionally or not. Then you have a guy who is only doing mastering because he can only afford a computer and has very little experience comes along and tells me how to mix. Mostly because he doesn't know how to master. And then he wonders why someone is insulted. If you're a hobbiest go ahead and use the local mastering guy. But if your a professional send it to a proferssional. And $25 a song is not a professional. Guaranteed!

Chris, I hate to mention this but the samples on your site all use the louder after mastering sound. Therfore, the first choice the ear picks is the louder. However, if you listen at the same levels you'll find the some of your mastering brings out harshness in the mix. On some of them the hi-hat is noticably louder. A properly set multiband compressor or a de-esser would probably help that problem. Sorry, I feel I have to be honest.


I remember one client where I had just finished mixing a project he was going to take with him to the golden globe awards and I went along with using a cheap, quick and local mastering company. The master came back butchered and sounded like he tossed and L2 maximizer on it and slammed it to the peak. The songs EQ and loudness lacked the continuity you would expect on a project. I ended up cancelling my other clients so I could do an emergency mastering job for him barely making his dealine for production. Fortunately, the mastering turned out well and client was happy.

I know some of you are going to be angry at what I just said and it would probably be worse if I said it on gear slutz where all the newbies seem to know-it-all. But you can take it for what's been said and go improve your skills and learn to put out a better product or you can just go on whining about how we aren't leaving enough work for you to do. (mastering shouldn't be that dramatic of a change anyway). Why not recognize your limitations and build on your skills instead of trying to look like something you're not? Drop the the fader on your mastered versions and compare them at the same volume. Are you really making them sound better? Or are your ears just being fooled? You might be surprised at the results. Sometimes it may be as simple as adjusting your attack and release times. Go ahead and try it. It will make you a better mastering engineer.

[JohnDavisNYC]

nice first post. high five.

[Nick Sevilla]

However, it is a fact that Most Grammy Award Winning Producers & Mixing Engineers use Master Bus Compression.

[Walks in, soft drink in hand, scratching belly....]

Hello, did someone call?

To answer this in short.

I use Master Buss compression. And also, I don't use Master Buss compression.

I will now invoke the true, tested, and Timeless TapeOp answer :

"It Depends"...

Here, try to find out what I did on each of these albums, and post your guesses here:

http://www.nicksevilla.com/nicksevilla. ... ammys.html

http://www.nicksevilla.com/nicksevilla. ... ammys.html

http://www.nicksevilla.com/nicksevilla. ... ammys.html

[Walks out, scratching buttocks, spilling a little soda on the floor...]

[MoreSpaceEcho]

And $25 a song is not a professional. Guaranteed!

is $35 a song a professional?

*hopes*

also, dammit sevilla, i just mopped the floor in here. clean that soda up.