Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Will Russell]

Well, I did it. I mastered someone's CD today and made it so loud that I can't stand to listen to it. I was paid to take perfectly good mixes and ruin them.

The client was working with me, and despite my attempt to educate them, demonstrating the effects of compression and limiting on the transients of kick and snare, and despite the fact that they heard the difference and preferred the less compressed sound, they felt compelled to make their CD as loud as the (really bad sounding) competition out of fear. Fear of losing their first big shot at "making it" because their CD was not as loud as everyone else. "I can't afford to be the first one to break the trend" my client said.

So, how do we stop this insanity? How do we convince a client to agree to more responsible levels? I am so depressed and angry right now I could scream...

[NoWo]

Will Russell wrote on Fri, 31 March 2006 21:41

Well, I did it. ... I am so depressed and angry right now I could scream...

Why?

We are all paid to do exactly what a customer wants ( Does this remind you of the oldest job in the world -:))) ).

Loud is not naturally bad.

The pitty thing is, if someone will tell your customer that his loud CD is overcompressed and sounds nasty this will come back to you. The good thing is you have his money, and in the end this is what counts.

Best wishes

Norbert

[Will Russell]

Hi Norbert,

I think you may have missed my point. Of course loud is not naturally bad,
but I do believe that loudness at the expense of fidelity is a crime. I believe that when a client prefers a less compressed mix but feels compelled to compromise the sound they want in order to compete in the loudness wars that something is horrible wrong.

Sure, we are all simply service providers and I agree that if the clients leaves with what they asked for and pays up that my job is done, but getting paid is not all that matters to me.

[Arf! Mastering]

What amazes me about all this is just *how* bad stuff is sounding.    Fallout Boy's new release, and countless others, make Britney Spears' 2003 release seem like conservative audiophile high fidelity by comparison.   The industry has gone from bad sound to worse - much worse.  What if food tasted this bad?  What if magazine pictures looked this ugly?  What is it about music that lets it survive such abuse?  Music - the new battered wife.

[NoWo]

Will Russell wrote on Fri, 31 March 2006 22:19

... but getting paid is not all that matters to me.

...and it is not for me either. I understand you completely, maybe I am even more extreme like you. Customers who book me made their first mistake, because from that moment on I will follow them forever with newer and better versions of what I did originally, even if it has already been released. Isn

[Oldfart]

Hey Will,
     my heart goes out to you, as most of us have been there.

These days one of my 1st question to a client is : "what's your priority? Sound quality or volume?"  (then I quote someone who I forget penned) "Pick one, cause you ain't going to have both."

But I'm seeing signs of encouragements lately. Two of my latest clients have chosen the quieter versions (upon hearing the result of exceeding what I proposed).

I've only ever lost 2 from my complaining !!!!!

Another line of mine these days is: "Hey I can ruin your sound just as well as anyone else".

Oldfart

[jtr]

AlanS wrote on Fri, 31 March 2006 13:37

The industry has gone from bad sound to worse - much worse.  What if food tasted this bad?  What if magazine pictures looked this ugly?  What is it about music that lets it survive such abuse?

Most of the chain restaurants I've been in oversalt their food ...way beyond reason. Turn on the Food Network and watch Emeril splash handfuls of salt over the dish being prepared.

As for magazines, the general news magazines DO look that ugly.

I'm not helping here , am I?

Good songs will always survive somehow, no matter what we do to them.  

[Pingu]

Dont feel too bad man.

Its not your fault.

[Thomas W. Bethel]

I did a saxophone mastering job last month. It was really nice. The client said it was jazz when I mastered it. Then he decided what he really wanted it to be was "R&B" and had me smash the sh!t out of it until the peak to average levels were HIP HOP in nature.  I had him listen to it while I was "making it loud" and he kept wanting more and more level. Then he was not happy that it lost all its dynamic range. "I wanted it LOUD not smashed". The original mastering I did sounds GREAT! (IMHO) but after smashing it at the client's insistence it does not sound good to my ears. Who's fault is it. Not mine I did what the client wanted both times. Not the musician, says he, I want it to be loud but not smashed, not me says the producer I had no say in the matter.

Oh well the joys of the current focus on LOUD IS BEAUTIFUL no matter what it sounds like.

Recently a client played me some MP3s of his material and said he wanted the mastering to sound just like that on the CD. Ok so I will take his material, make MP3s out of them, playback the resultant files and it record them onto a wave file and burn it on the CD. If that is what he wants that's what he will get.

The dumbing down of the sound of American Music. The sound of MP3s as a preference for a CD release. I am wondering what that will sound like when someone makes it into an MP3?

I did listen to some really good bluegrass today by a Grammy wining artist that will be coming in for mastering in the coming months and the first words out of his mouth. "I don't want this smashed or over compressed" -YES-

[brett]

the mp3 question is the real question. no one buys CD's. The inductry in the 80's wanted better sound than cassette, We got CD. Then they wanted free and were willing to give up fidelity... we got napster and gnutella networks. Then the industry suid napstaer and the result was iTunes and new legal Napster. The customers have horible ears!!!! they want it loud, and they want it new. They wont be listening to it a month from now anyway. Even Apple's lossless compression sounds like crap. I have downloaded tracks from itunes and they sound terrible compared to the CD versions or vinyl I used to own. So, if it is the radio and the ipod that people are listening to, it really doesn't matter how good you can make it sound on your $10k speakers. It's going to get broadcast on the radio, which sonically sucks, and downloaded via mp3 or equivilant to some dumb kids ipod.

Take their money and laugh about it until we all have true hi-band width internet and HD radio and playback systems.

[dcollins]

brett wrote on Fri, 31 March 2006 18:47

Even Apple's lossless compression sounds like crap.

Not sure I'm getting this.

DC

[MASSIVE Mastering]

Quote:

Well, I did it. I mastered someone's CD today and made it so loud that I can't stand to listen to it. I was paid to take perfectly good mixes and ruin them.

I hate to say that most of us could probably have typed that same sentence in the last week.  

[Catalin Truta]

AlanS wrote on Sat, 01 April 2006 00:37

The industry has gone from bad sound to worse - much worse.  What if food tasted this bad?  What if magazine pictures looked this ugly?  What is it about music that lets it survive such abuse?  Music - the new battered wife.

They do. The food is crap (chemicals and all that) and the pictures (an everything in the visual area) are far beyond what one could call art.
And the music is on the same route, unfortunately. But I sincerely believe it can still be saved...
There are some people who are still doing art (David Hykes is one of them, but there are others; of course this kind of music is very different from the usual stuff being discussed here).
Even the term "industry" has nothing to do wih art.

[dino g]

The references to food and photography hit real close to home with me.
I'm a lighting cameraman and audio guy, and most of my family is in the culinary industry.
The loudness war in music, certainly seems to come from the same mentality that accepts
lousy food and ugly pictures. In thirty plus years, I have been witness to a de-evolution of my craft into a quick and dirty, disposable medium. The correlation with audio mastering in my industry is the idea that people believe they can run out with a cheap video camera, shoot a couple of things under available fluorescent lighting, and hand it to an editor to make it look professional. Sorta sounds familiar don't it?
This all didn't happen over night. It's like hearing loss, happening over a long time, little bit by little bit. Once gone it's gone forever. When I'm told that there isn't time to do something I have always done, I know another tool has been taken away.

At the same time, my brothers Neapolitan Pizza place, which offers a hand made product using only  premium imported ingredients and meats from local organic farmers, has been packed since the day it opened. Even though it's quite pricey. It's all about what people your targeting. My brother has a perfect location, and a high income clientele who appreciate the superiority of his product. In the music industry,  fifteen year olds are the leading demographic, and unless their expectations change, it's only going to be more of the same.

I was recently asked by a young producer, why I needed a light meter.
#%$$&*#$!!!!!
dean

[Andy Krehm]

Will Russell wrote on Fri, 31 March 2006 15:41

Well, I did it. I mastered someone's CD today and made it so loud that I can't stand to listen to it. I was paid to take perfectly good mixes and ruin them.

Will:

I certainly understand your angst over this but let's not forget in all this that there are ways to make tracks louder without totally compromising the dynamics. And my comments are meant to be general b/c I don't know what gear you have available to you.

Myself, I cannot seem to find a way to do this well with an all digital setup and my digital tools consist of great gear such as 2 Weiss units, TC 6000, K-unit, etc., but I am able to get some competitively loud masters, with decent dynamics, by using some good tube gear in combination with the outboard digital units.

The trick here is to get your signal gain staged up through some analog gear, sometimes using the functions, ie, compressing/eq, sometimes not, or sometimes just a bit, and hitting the ADC with the signal almost as loud as the final master. I use an analog peak limiter before the ADC and a digital limiter afterward, but just a bit.

If you've been following the Ted Jenson post on Gearslutz, another technique is to clip the ADC. And as is continually pointed out on all the mastering webboards, the quality of the mix can make the job easy or really, really hard and sometimes, just impossible.

I absolutely cannot get the same results with my digital  chain, but perhaps that's just my engineering shortcomings.

So, IMO, if one is running a mostly plug-in mastering set up, one is not going to have the flexibility to match the engineers that have a full pallet of gear to chose from. Maybe some of the time you can do a great job, but not consistently with a lot of different material.

Perhaps one day the computer power and modeling will be good enough to replace all our great outboard gear but until that day arrives, there is a reason why top of the line mastering houses have suspiciously similar gear lists, not to mention very experienced ME's!

Because of the work I do and people I work with, I have had the opportunity to hear mixes/masters, before and after, of  a number of ME's including a few really good ones, such as Ted Jensen and Doug Sax, and you would be surprised how much louder they made the masters and with very little significant change of dynamics.

While I share Bob Katz's sentiment re the volume escalation to some degree, I'm in agreement with Brad Blackwood, Dave Collins, etc., in that we really have to give the customer what they want. We can offer options but proselytizing to clients will limit your work opportunities!

In the case of the Ted master, there was absolutely no instruction from the producer or the record company (a Major) to make the masters loud yet Ted's was significantly louder than the average modern master. I know because my friend/client gave me a copy in case I wanted to try mastering it before he sent me Ted's final version. In the case of the Doug album master, which was a combination of pop and retro swing music , he was told that it didn't have to be a loud master but it came back quite loud!

And here's another good one. Ted was told that his mix was going to be a radio single and that the rest of the album wasn't mixed yet. So, since we have read and visually seen what the Orban radio compressors do to hypercompressed masters, and given that Ted probably has probably mastered as many radio hits as anyone, why would he go out of his way to make this radio master so loud? Is concern for loud masters on radio an urban or Orban myth?

Every master of mine that I have heard on the radio has sounded good so I have no explanations. The only thing I would say is that I have noticed that some radio stations uniformly sound more compressed and distorted than others (in which case everyone's masters sound degraded) but some seem to know how to handle modern masters well enough.

There is an AM sports station in Toronto that is playing a couple of jingles that I mastered and I am very pleased with the way they sound. I didn't try to make it the loudest one on the block but I set the output level so that is would fit in with other music that I have heard on that station. Would you believe that the station requested mp3 files! I made the highest possible quality mp3 files and it still sounds good but I guess we have to keep in mind that it's AM radio. Anyone else have comments or observations that would explain any of this???

Andy,

Silverbirch Productions.

[bigaudioblowhard]

I've been viewing TJ produced CD's as waveforms in a DAW for years. Its a bit of fun viewing the waveform as I listen to it and through my own skill backwards engineer what he's doing.

Recently his waveforms changed in a general kind of way. I think he has moved on from just clipping the ADC.

Chris Athens may have given it up, but not perhaps, the whole story.

Look guys, you just land that sucker where 'you' think it sounds awesome. TJ has been at it for like 30 years and he's not even fifty.

Build it and they will come.


bab

[Ben F]

brett wrote on Sat, 01 April 2006 12:17

the mp3 question is the real question. no one buys CD's. The inductry in the 80's wanted better sound than cassette, We got CD. Then they wanted free and were willing to give up fidelity... we got napster and gnutella networks. Then the industry suid napstaer and the result was iTunes and new legal Napster. The customers have horible ears!!!! they want it loud, and they want it new. They wont be listening to it a month from now anyway. Even Apple's lossless compression sounds like crap. I have downloaded tracks from itunes and they sound terrible compared to the CD versions or vinyl I used to own. So, if it is the radio and the ipod that people are listening to, it really doesn't matter how good you can make it sound on your $10k speakers. It's going to get broadcast on the radio, which sonically sucks, and downloaded via mp3 or equivilant to some dumb kids ipod. Take their money and laugh about it until we all have true hi-band width internet and HD radio and playback systems.

I still buy CDs, and vinyl, it must sell otherwise record companies would cease to exist.

What about the smart kids with ipods?

[Bobro]

I was in Los Angeles more than 10 years ago, on the "cleanest day in 35 years". It was remarkable- still hazy, but radically better than when I was there in '70s, with burning eyes and an asthma attack.

On that day I realized that life is full of compromises, but it takes radicals and weirdos to reach happy mediums. Guys chaining themselves to trees, reading the Lord of the Rings and taking it seriously and so on. (Read it again and notice what concrete evil the bad guys actually do). "Back to nature" may never happen, but a lot of hippies made a lot of noise for a long time to make compromised but concrete advances in environmental conditions.

So when it comes to squashing and autotuning and all that, I pull no punches. "What- you like to lick the asses of bully cops?" Because that's really what it's all about- brutal conformity. My aunt described working in the factory under Stalin- "loud repetitive music on loudspeakers all day long". Every time I go to the shopping mall I think of her.  

Then I get "Whoa you're actually right, but..." and there's a compromise. But it can take radical stances against the machine to effect even happy mediums.

Go ahead and laugh.    

-Bobro

[Thomas W. Bethel]

Bobro wrote on Mon, 03 April 2006 04:11

I was in Los Angeles more than 10 years ago, on the "cleanest day in 35 years". It was remarkable- still hazy, but radically better than when I was there in '70s, with burning eyes and an asthma attack. On that day I realized that life is full of compromises, but it takes radicals and weirdos to reach happy mediums. Guys chaining themselves to trees, reading the Lord of the Rings and taking it seriously and so on. (Read it again and notice what concrete evil the bad guys actually do). "Back to nature" may never happen, but a lot of hippies made a lot of noise for a long time to make compromised but concrete advances in environmental conditions. So when it comes to squashing and autotuning and all that, I pull no punches. "What- you like to lick the asses of bully cops?" Because that's really what it's all about- brutal conformity. My aunt described working in the factory under Stalin- "loud repetitive music on loudspeakers all day long". Every time I go to the shopping mall I think of her.   Then I get "Whoa you're actually right, but..." and there's a compromise. But it can take radical stances against the machine to effect even happy mediums. Go ahead and laugh.     -Bobro

????????????????Did this make sense to anyone??????????????????

[joeaudio]

Will Russell wrote on Fri, 31 March 2006 21:41

Well, I did it. I mastered someone's CD today and made it so loud that I can't stand to listen to it. I was paid to take perfectly good mixes and ruin them.

No disrespect, but from the looks of your site you're not a mastering house.  
There are lots of good sounding records that are "loud".
Takes lots of experience and proper mastering gear
to achieve. (good mix doesn't hurt)
Maybe next time instead of beating yourself up send the client to a mastering studio.

Joe Yannece
Classic Sound Mastering

[Roadster]

Quote:

I was in Los Angeles more than 10 years ago, on the "cleanest day in 35 years". It was remarkable- still hazy, but radically better than when I was there in '70s, with burning eyes and an asthma attack. On that day I realized that life is full of compromises, but it takes radicals and weirdos to reach happy mediums. Guys chaining themselves to trees, reading the Lord of the Rings and taking it seriously and so on. (Read it again and notice what concrete evil the bad guys actually do). "Back to nature" may never happen, but a lot of hippies made a lot of noise for a long time to make compromised but concrete advances in environmental conditions. So when it comes to squashing and autotuning and all that, I pull no punches. "What- you like to lick the asses of bully cops?" Because that's really what it's all about- brutal conformity. My aunt described working in the factory under Stalin- "loud repetitive music on loudspeakers all day long". Every time I go to the shopping mall I think of her.   Then I get "Whoa you're actually right, but..." and there's a compromise. But it can take radical stances against the machine to effect even happy mediums. Go ahead and laugh.   -Bobro

I may drop some acid then come back in around 3 hours and see if this is making sense.  

[cerberus]

joeaudio wrote on Tue, 04 April 2006 13:33

from the looks of your site you're not a mastering house.

i don't think looks are important in mastering.

...although come to think of it, that "i love my avalons" ad from a few years back really made an impression on me too.

ok, now i'm ready for a hit of whatever bobro is smoking.


jeff dinces

[joeaudio]

cerberus wrote on Tue, 04 April 2006 20:31

joeaudio wrote on Tue, 04 April 2006 13:33 from the looks of your site you're not a mastering house. i don't think looks are important in mastering. ...although come to think of it, that "i love my avalons" ad from a few years back really made an impression on me too. ok, now i'm ready for a hit of whatever bobro is smoking. jeff dinces

I'm sure Mr. Russells studio is beautiful, lack of Emilies
lovely lips notwithstanding.
But recording and mixing are different skills
and require different tools than mastering.
I've been involved in audio(professionally) since 1980.
I haven't touched a mic in 15 years.

Joe
Classic

[Andy Krehm]

joeaudio wrote on Tue, 04 April 2006 16:03

cerberus wrote on Tue, 04 April 2006 20:31 joeaudio wrote on Tue, 04 April 2006 13:33 from the looks of your site you're not a mastering house. i don't think looks are important in mastering. ...although come to think of it, that "i love my avalons" ad from a few years back really made an impression on me too. ok, now i'm ready for a hit of whatever bobro is smoking. jeff dinces I'm sure Mr. Russells studio is beautiful, lack of Emilies lovely lips notwithstanding. But recording and mixing are different skills and require different tools than mastering. I've been involved in audio(professionally) since 1980. I haven't touched a mic in 15 years. Joe Classic

Well said and much more to the point than my multi-paragraph post!

Andy,

Silverbirch Productions

[Ronny]

Thomas W. Bethel wrote on Mon, 03 April 2006 08:08

Bobro wrote on Mon, 03 April 2006 04:11 I was in Los Angeles more than 10 years ago, on the "cleanest day in 35 years". It was remarkable- still hazy, but radically better than when I was there in '70s, with burning eyes and an asthma attack. On that day I realized that life is full of compromises, but it takes radicals and weirdos to reach happy mediums. Guys chaining themselves to trees, reading the Lord of the Rings and taking it seriously and so on. (Read it again and notice what concrete evil the bad guys actually do). "Back to nature" may never happen, but a lot of hippies made a lot of noise for a long time to make compromised but concrete advances in environmental conditions. So when it comes to squashing and autotuning and all that, I pull no punches. "What- you like to lick the asses of bully cops?" Because that's really what it's all about- brutal conformity. My aunt described working in the factory under Stalin- "loud repetitive music on loudspeakers all day long". Every time I go to the shopping mall I think of her.   Then I get "Whoa you're actually right, but..." and there's a compromise. But it can take radical stances against the machine to effect even happy mediums. Go ahead and laugh.     -Bobro ????????????????Did this make sense to anyone??????????????????

You had to be there to understand.

[Bobro]

Thomas W. Bethel wrote on Mon, 03 April 2006 13:08

????????????????Did this make sense to anyone??????????????????

Thought it was quite clear...

Here's the original post and question:

Quote:

The client was working with me, and despite my attempt to educate them, demonstrating the effects of compression and limiting on the transients of kick and snare, and despite the fact that they heard the difference and preferred the less compressed sound, they felt compelled to make their CD as loud as the (really bad sounding) competition out of fear. Fear of losing their first big shot at "making it" because their CD was not as loud as everyone else. "I can't afford to be the first one to break the trend" my client said. So, how do we stop this insanity? How do we convince a client to agree to more responsible levels? I am so depressed and angry right now I could scream...

And my answer is: I do scream. Somebody has to, that's what it takes to make changes for the better in this world.

You yourself refered to "dumbing down" of music- personally I think it's much worse than that, and should be be setting off howling alarms in the heads of anyone who has taken a look at the last century.

New ideas and ways of thinking tend to show up in the arts first, get a big pile of art and music history books and check it out. The dictators of the last century all knew this, and took it very seriously. Read what they wrote about music. They would have killed for MTV.  

The western world (don't know about Asia and Africa) is turning into a self-policing police state. Read the original post!  "I can't afford to be the first one to break the trend"

Man I have sung for some of the survivors of the last century's insanities (most humbling and uplifting audiences ever) and I refuse to take any kind of mass conformity as a joke, just can't do it no matter how hard I try to be "reasonable".

Maybe it's not as bad as I think, but some must believe that it is. At the very least call things as they are, it's "squashed", not "loud", for example.  

Anyway carry on, gotta pack my rig for a location recording.

-Bobro

PS. Real loudness comes from the volume knob and frequency balance, not from a few or even 12 dB of dynamic reduction. You can deafen an audience with sounds of a butterfly break-dancing on a tulip and turn a death metal band down to a faint and pleasant murmur.

[Will Russell]

Gosh Joe,

Thank you so much for taking the time to set me straight. It's clear to me now that my frustration with competing in the mastering volume wars is due to my physical contact with microphones and the fact that my studio does not look like yours. You would think that after  being involved in audio (professionally) since 1976 and doing mastering for 17 years that I would have figured this out sooner.

Thanks for blaming me for my situation. I'll be sure to send you my next mastering project.

[joeaudio]

Will Russell wrote on Wed, 05 April 2006 13:13

Gosh Joe, Thank you so much for taking the time to set me straight. It's clear to me now that my frustration with competing in the mastering volume wars is due to my physical contact with microphones and the fact that my studio does not look like yours. You would think that after  being involved in audio (professionally) since 1976 and doing mastering for 17 years that I would have figured this out sooner. Thanks for blaming me for my situation. I'll be sure to send you my next mastering project.

No problem. Glad I could help.

[Edited by moderator. Even in sarcasm, pimping yourself for work isn't allowed here...]

[joeaudio]

Will Russell wrote on Wed, 05 April 2006 13:13

Gosh Joe, Thank you so much for taking the time to set me straight. It's clear to me now that my frustration with competing in the mastering volume wars is due to my physical contact with microphones and the fact that my studio does not look like yours. You would think that after  being involved in audio (professionally) since 1976 and doing mastering for 17 years that I would have figured this out sooner. Thanks for blaming me for my situation. I'll be sure to send you my next mastering project.

Hey, wait a minute, you were being sarcastic weren't you ?
You know Will, for someone that's been "mastering"
for 17 years you come up a little light on the credits.
Look, I'm no Bob Ludwig but I have focused on nothing
but mastering (audiowise that is) since the early 90's.
Let's not beat around the bush. Your facility is not
was not and will never be a dedicated mastering studio.
That's my point. You're the one who posted that you
ruined someones work. I was stating that a dedicated
mastering house may have been able to achieve the levels
your clients were looking for without "ruining" the music.

Why do I always get in fights when I post to this board ?

Serenity Now !

Joe
Classic

[MoreSpaceEcho]

joeaudio wrote on Wed, 05 April 2006 17:20

Hey, wait a minute, you were being sarcastic weren't you ?

it took you 55 minutes to figure that out? impressive.

[Will Russell]

Quote:

<snip> Why do I always get in fights when I post to this board ? Joe Classic

(No Will! Don't reply! Don't try to answer him! Stop! Let it go.....)

deep breath...ahhhh.....

Thanks to those who actually read my original post and empathized. That's all I wanted.

I am most certainly done with this thread now.

[joeaudio]

MoreSpaceEcho wrote on Wed, 05 April 2006 17:48

joeaudio wrote on Wed, 05 April 2006 17:20 Hey, wait a minute, you were being sarcastic weren't you ? it took you 55 minutes to figure that out? impressive.

Countering sarcasm with sarcasm.
Sorry it went over your head.

Joe
Classic

[bblackwood]

Guys, can we take the pointless steak-swinging to PM?

Consider that less of a question and more of a suggestion.

[joeaudio]

Will Russell wrote on Wed, 05 April 2006 18:23

Quote: <snip> Why do I always get in fights when I post to this board ? Joe Classic (No Will! Don't reply! Don't try to answer him! Stop! Let it go.....) deep breath...ahhhh..... Thanks to those who actually read my original post and empathized. That's all I wanted. I am most certainly done with this thread now.

And done playing mastering engineer too, I hope.

[joeaudio]

bblackwood wrote on Wed, 05 April 2006 19:01

Guys, can we take the pointless steak-swinging to PM? Consider that less of a question and more of a suggestion.

Sorry Brad.
Love your forum. I didn't start with the nasties.

Peace,

Joe

[TotalSonic]

Last week I worked on a hip-hop EP that I cut with the highest average level that I've ever done - literally the meters pegged nearly the whole time.  It was a return client - on the previous CD I had done for him I had left some nice dynamics with some good amount of snap and thump to it on the first ref I provided - but he asked for a revision saying it wasn't as "grimy and gritty" as he wanted it   So I slammed everything despite the marked increase in the amount of distortion on it and he turned out really being happy with the results.

So anyway - I knew this time that the client wanted me to go for "all out."
For these mixes (which were pretty variable in quality) I had to throw everything at it - a little digital multiband comp on a couple of bands (and for this I've found the Sonoris multiband really completely outclasses the Waves stuff in not veiling the material), some heavy handed eq (gotta love the Filtek's for gigantic hard edged bottom end boosts), a good amount of glue from the API 2500, then clipping the inputs of Myteks, a little digital de-essing, then a little multiband limiting (Waves L3), and then further wide band limiting (RML Labs Levelizer).  

As you can imagine - the end results weren't all that pretty.  Still - I was pretty amazed at how clean I was still able to keep it considering that some of the mixes were pretty distorted already when I got them.  

But the client LOVED the ref!  He was actually into the fact that it made his small walkman headphones kind of sound like they were blowing up and that in his car stereo it just made the entire car rattle with the low end.  

SO - the conclusion of this tale is that in other words "hyperlimiting" has become a desired process for some hip-hop clients as it makes things sound more "underground"!

Luckily I also have found numerous clients that want things to still retain much more natural dynamics and have cut a couple relatively quiet masters recently  - so in some ways I see there are some genres where people are becoming aware of the downsides of hyperlimiting.  

But I do think that the average level that I am requested to cut has without a question gone higher even in the past 3 years.  Honestly - I thought there wasn't anywhere to go higher then - and I truly hope no one goes beyond the ridiculousness that so many masters are cut at this point - as it seems the only place to go would be 100% square waves!

Best regards,
Steve Berson

[Will Russell]

Interesting post. I know that some folks do like a compressed and limited sound, and that's cool. On some material heavy compression and limiting can sound great. Nothing wrong with loud, compressed and limited if that is actually the sound that the clients want. My frustration in my original post was that the client and I did not like the compressed and limited sound, but felt compelled to do it to "be competitive in the marketplace"

So I guess the question remains, If there is consensus that current mastering levels are out of hand, how do we as professionals take the first step to remedy this? Who takes the first hit?

[Ronny]

Will Russell wrote on Wed, 05 April 2006 15:34

Interesting post. I know that some folks do like a compressed and limited sound, and that's cool. On some material heavy compression and limiting can sound great. Nothing wrong with loud, compressed and limited if that is actually the sound that the clients want. My frustration in my original post was that the client and I did not like the compressed and limited sound, but felt compelled to do it to "be competitive in the marketplace" So I guess the question remains, If there is consensus that current mastering levels are out of hand, how do we as professionals take the first step to remedy this? Who takes the first hit?

Well besides myself for about 10 years now, there are many ME's that have been trying to educate the public about the detriments of over limiting, BK, Brad, Tom B., Steve B., etc. most of the fellows that you see post on this forum. So far other than talking about it, nothing has been done to really quantify a change and no real mechanical means of reversing it has been implemented. However, don't think that some one has to take the first hit, perceived levels can come back gradually, just like they went up gradually. The key is getting everyone to realize that out lowering everyone else will do more for the music than out louding everyone else.

[bblackwood]

Will Russell wrote on Wed, 05 April 2006 14:34

So I guess the question remains, If there is consensus that current mastering levels are out of hand, how do we as professionals take the first step to remedy this? Who takes the first hit?

Mastering engineers started the loudness war but they won't be the ones / can't end it - it's the client's decision.

Besides, it's kind of hypocritical to say "yah, I've been doing this to people's records for years and have made good money in the process, but now I think it's 'anti-art' and should be stopped...".

[Ed Littman]

Will Russell wrote on Wed, 05 April 2006 15:34

My frustration in my original post was that the client and I did not like the compressed and limited sound, but felt compelled to do it to "be competitive in the marketplace"

Maybe I'm out in left field, but as an active composer/musician myself I would never knowingly degrade my art in what I feel is a false hope that it will sell better. Making good music & getting off my ass & selling will do that. I'm not very good at the later..
I guess that's why I'm behind a bunch of gear getting it loud  for other people.

It must be even more frustrating to know that your clients knows too.
Ed

[joeaudio]

The fact that the artist chose the processsing
that he himself said didn't sound good is mind boggling.
There had to be another choice.
Different sequence of processing, different gear, something.
Unless the mixes were so poor and the CD used to A/B
so loud that it was just impossible to match.
In my entire career I've yet to have someone say
"that sounds like crap, print it!"

Joe Yannece
Classic Sound Mastering

[Arf! Mastering]

Check the hugely successful Fallout Boy release and tell me it doesn't sound like crap.  NOT a comment on the songs, musicians, or singer.  The extruded pounded-flat sound does not relate to the music in any conceivable way.

[Adam Dempsey]

I was trying to dig up Bob L's comments I read years ago on the relatively lightly maxxed Tool album 'Aenima' (1996) and how the band went with the less comp'ed version - compression for its sound, not for loudness. I'm sure many here will attest to it's use as a reference for that genre.

Remember, dynamic impact is a huge contributor to "loudness". There is no sense of "loud" unless compared with something less loud, so keep 'em both in the music! Often, a slight pumping compression can add to that sense of power, without need for over reliance on limiting, let alone clipping.

Related:
Masters on Mastering

By JJ Jenkins

Sep 1, 2003

"It's a losing battle for musicality,” Ludwig laments. “To me, it's a fact that highly compressed music is tiring to the ear and doesn't make you want to listen to something over and over again." - BL

So what's the trick to keeping the natural dynamics? “That's the creative part of mastering” says Marcussen.

[joeaudio]

Adam Dempsey wrote on Thu, 06 April 2006 02:44

I was trying to dig up Bob L's comments I read years ago on the relatively lightly maxxed Tool album 'Aenima' (1996) and how the band went with the less comp'ed version - compression for its sound, not for loudness. I'm sure many here will attest to it's use as a reference for that genre. Remember, dynamic impact is a huge contributor to "loudness". There is no sense of "loud" unless compared with something less loud, so keep 'em both in the music! Often, a slight pumping compression can add to that sense of power, without need for over reliance on limiting, let alone clipping. Related: Masters on Mastering By JJ Jenkins Sep 1, 2003 "It's a losing battle for musicality,” Ludwig laments. “To me, it's a fact that highly compressed music is tiring to the ear and doesn't make you want to listen to something over and over again." - BL So what's the trick to keeping the natural dynamics? “That's the creative part of mastering” says Marcussen.

That all sounds great. But in my experience niether one
of these gentlemen pratice what they preach.


Joe
Classic

[Mark Dann]

There's more to loud than just turning it up.  Flat-lining the transients with excessive limiting will often reduce the impression of a track's loudness no matter how loud you make it.  Unless you like the sound of 0ms attack time on your drum buss, you will need to find another way.  

That said, one can only master what the mixes are, much as genetics will have more effect on your longevity than a vegeburger.  (And this from a vegetarian, btw.)  Part of my work sometimes is getting people to fix their mixes. No joke.

If a client wants me to crank it further, I do it.  I defer to them.  I let them take it home and road test it.  They decide.  To be honest, the only time I have a problem with the sound is when the mixes aren't right.  Cranking that can get real ugly real fast.  The problem is "built-in".  Better mixes can be cranked higher.  They may well sound better a few dB down, but that is not my call.  Yes, I give them all the rap about level, but they decide in the end.  I'm a service industry, and thus have no guilt.  That's my MO.

Will does excellent work, btw, and is as obsessed as anyone here.  His rep is far and wide here in NY.  He might sleep better if he wasn't such an audiophile.  I know I would.

[MDz]

i agree, you are paid to do as the client asks.  You should never be upset.  Me myself i have dealt with customers who think they know whats better (i tell them my opinion and what i have learned through experience).  However, remember overall they make the final decision, not you (well that is if you want to get paid).  

[MT Groove]

AlanS wrote on Wed, 05 April 2006 20:35

Check the hugely successful Fallout Boy release and tell me it doesn't sound like crap.  NOT a comment on the songs, musicians, or singer.  The extruded pounded-flat sound does not relate to the music in any conceivable way.

I have to agree about the Fallout Boy CD.  Someone brought it in, I  scanned throught it and could not believe what I was hearing.  People bash the Green Day CD, but to me it sounded 10 times better.  The Fallout Boy CD is pretty much unlistenable in my books and I think I can tolerate a crushed sound more than most of you here.  That's just how bad it is.  But I think the mix came in to mastering destroyed already.