| How do you do your mastering? |
| I send my stuff off to a pro mastering house |
|
10% |
[ 1 ] |
| I get a mate to master it for me |
|
0% |
[ 0 ] |
| I do my own mastering |
|
70% |
[ 7 ] |
| What the hell is mastering? |
|
20% |
[ 2 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 10 |
|
| Author |
Message |
Kassen
Janitor
Joined: Jul 06, 2004
Posts: 7678
Location: The Hague, NL
G2 patch files: 3
|
 Posted: Sat Jun 14, 2008 4:55 am Post subject:
|
  |
|
Erm, no, shifting to MP3 is definitely a very bad idea in this context. IMHO mp3 is only acceptable as a final stage to any process, and then only for convenience sake (considering OGG and FLAC and their sound quality). MP3 is cool for distribution and there file size counts but for getting material to you masterer it's a one time transfer anyway so I don't think file size matters all that much. I'd actually go with 20Bit 96KHz or something in that order of magnitude wave, assuming all involved parties have soundcards taht can take such files but then again who doesn't these days.
Really; if you spend hours (or days? weeks?) of time and love on your music you shouldn't entrust it to some mp3 encoder, at least not in that stage.
_________________
Kassen |
|
|
Back to top
|
|
 |
blue hell
Site Admin
Joined: Apr 03, 2004
Posts: 24423
Location: The Netherlands, Enschede
Audio files: 297
G2 patch files: 320
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 14, 2008 5:01 am Post subject:
|
|
|
| Uncle Krunkus wrote: | | [...]shifting to an MP3 is not going to enhance the process very much. |
You could switch to FLAC (lossless but still a good size reduction) or to the Apple lossless format (ALAC) in an m4a file.
_________________
Jan
also .. could someone please turn down the thermostat a bit.
 |
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
Jyoti
Joined: Mar 07, 2008
Posts: 618
Location: Derby, UK
Audio files: 3
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 14, 2008 6:13 am Post subject:
|
|
|
| Uncle Krunkus wrote: |
It would be difficult though to do that kind of auditioning over the net, as I assume shifting to an MP3 is not going to enhance the process very much. It may give an overall impression of the mix though, and help with compositional and structural opinions.
|
I just listened to your Forbidden Planet track and it was good enough quality for me to hear relative balances and of course melody and arrangement but it was a bit crunchy sounding. I have no idea if that's in the original or compression artifacts, it sounds like the latter but who knows? (My signal flow here, in my sitting room, is MB Pro -> MOTU 828 mk2 -> coax S/PDIF -> Denon AVR-3806 -> B&W DM 603s.)
I liked the mix, the production etcetera but I have no idea what it sounds like in mastering terms.
_________________
My music: here! |
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
Jyoti
Joined: Mar 07, 2008
Posts: 618
Location: Derby, UK
Audio files: 3
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 14, 2008 6:19 am Post subject:
|
|
|
| Kassen wrote: | | I'd actually go with 20Bit 96KHz or something in that order of magnitude wave, assuming all involved parties have soundcards taht can take such files but then again who doesn't these days. |
Seconded! I get tremendously frustrated when a friend sends me an mp3 to tweak - I can't magically undo the crunchiness that's already there.
CDR with as high quality files as you can produce, every time.
| Quote: | | Really; if you spend hours (or days? weeks?) of time and love on your music you shouldn't entrust it to some mp3 encoder, at least not in that stage. |
And I've heard some appalling encodes at high bitrates. There are some... suprising encoders out ther. 
LAME seems to be the best encoder but, again, that's purely my subjective opinion:
http://lame.sourceforge.net/forums.html
_________________
My music: here! |
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
Uncle Krunkus
Moderator
Joined: Jul 11, 2005
Posts: 4761
Location: Sydney, Australia
Audio files: 52
G2 patch files: 1
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 14, 2008 6:47 am Post subject:
|
|
|
| Kassen wrote: | Erm, no, shifting to MP3 is definitely a very bad idea in this context. IMHO mp3 is only acceptable as a final stage to any process, and then only for convenience sake (considering OGG and FLAC and their sound quality). MP3 is cool for distribution and there file size counts but for getting material to you masterer it's a one time transfer anyway so I don't think file size matters all that much. I'd actually go with 20Bit 96KHz or something in that order of magnitude wave, assuming all involved parties have soundcards taht can take such files but then again who doesn't these days.
Really; if you spend hours (or days? weeks?) of time and love on your music you shouldn't entrust it to some mp3 encoder, at least not in that stage. |
I didn't mean actually using anything which has gone through the MP3 sewer pipe! Come on! I'm not that silly! 
I just meant that trying to get someone else's opinion of a track when they may be on the other side of the world might mean sending them an MP3. Does that make it too difficult for them to advise on the "post processing" (not mastering) that has been done? I'm not talking about getting a file to the mastering process, just auditioning the current state of the process.
_________________
What makes a space ours, is what we put there, and what we do there. |
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
Forum index » How-tos » Production - engineering/mixing
FAQ
Calendar
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Chat Room
