| lagerfeldt wrote on Thu, 15 June 2006 17:46 |
| Andy Krehm wrote on Thu, 15 June 2006 17:35 |
Firstly, a mastering engineer who is working on a compilation has to have the right to change volume levels of various tracks. Otherwise, how can you have an album that is listenable in one pass?
|
Very true, of course.
However, it's also his right - nay, his obligation - to do this in the best way possible, and for the right reasons.
|
Given your agreement with Andy, your caveat seems a bit odd - Nothing stated so far would indicate that the ME is shirking this obligation. Indeed, from the sound of it, I would suggest it sounds more like the guy's bending over backwards to accomodate this particular artist! I rarely have the budget or inclination for this sort of back-and-forth with a comp. Typically the label secures permission to do what needs doing, and limits interaction with individual artists. If I talked to every artist on every comp I've done, I'd still be on the phone, and broke, without clients, as labels dropped me like a lead balloon! Who pays for the ME's time? The revisions/conversations? Forget the larger issues, like fairness to ALL bands on the compilation, this entire topic assumes an endless budget for the whole project, and a lack of vision/direction by the producers.
As to the .1 dB thing, I'll admit to having done this in the past, although I tend to go with .5, as that might actually provide some benefit (reducing intersample peaks, and new distortions generated by pushing cheap dacs). In the case of major labels using their own plants, it's not unheard of at all: the plant will sometimes spot the FS samples and squeal to the exec in charge of the title in a way that might suggest the ME is a hack or a moron. On a single bands title, the A&R in charge can (and often DO) sign off on a disc with 0 dBFS peaks or even clipping based on the artists or managements preferences, but that kind of leeway isn't typical on compilations. It's just a cheap trick to make the "over" light go out, while keeping the meters reading as hot as possible.
Now, assuming the ME in question has decent gear (Sonic, Sadie, Sequioa, etc), I see no problem with the change. If he's doing it in Jam or Nero, I wouldn't be surprised if there were an audible difference. But any premastering engineer who cannot execute a gain change without audible degradation is unlikely to be "top talent". Based on Martin's report about past results, and the fact that so many hands are allowed all over the project, there are some real questions about professionalism and project management.
Finally proportionality and perspective seems lacking. How much does ANY comp really matter to any individual artist on it? While there are some terrific ones out there, like the Nuggets series, most are little more than "samplers", shoving dozens of bands through a single lens. As a result the song and performance matter much, much, much, much, much more than the sound quality or mastering on most compilation. No individual artists work is fully optimized on comps, its a balancing of trade offs. Expecting perfection on a compilation, regardless of how much blood, sweat and dollars you pour into your song's mix, is unrealistic. The goal is to get the song out there, and not screw it up or make it worse. In that context, I can't imagine a .1 dB change really being that big a deal.
-d-
