Print

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

[Trillium Sound]

Ged Leitch wrote on Sun, 13 August 2006 12:48

this is perpetuated a lot too>>> "...Mastering engineers are quite secretive about their EQ settings as they dont want the competition to find out!..."

Not true but I am not telling you why or getting into details.

[Ged Leitch]

trilliumsound wrote on Mon, 14 August 2006 02:27

Ged Leitch wrote on Sun, 13 August 2006 12:48 this is perpetuated a lot too>>> "...Mastering engineers are quite secretive about their EQ settings as they dont want the competition to find out!..." Not true but I am not telling you why or getting into details.

Will have to disagree Trillium i'm afraid,

because of my own online conversations with some of the Pro's here.

I dont think any of them are "Scared" of telling someone they cut 1db @ 250hz or whatever.

[Trillium Sound]

Ged Leitch wrote on Sun, 13 August 2006 22:07

trilliumsound wrote on Mon, 14 August 2006 02:27 Ged Leitch wrote on Sun, 13 August 2006 12:48 this is perpetuated a lot too>>> "...Mastering engineers are quite secretive about their EQ settings as they dont want the competition to find out!..." Not true but I am not telling you why or getting into details. Will have to disagree Trillium i'm afraid, because of my own online conversations with some of the Pro's here. I dont think any of them are "Scared" of telling someone they cut 1db @ 250hz or whatever.

It was a joke Ged  

[Ged Leitch]

trilliumsound wrote on Mon, 14 August 2006 03:20

Ged Leitch wrote on Sun, 13 August 2006 22:07 trilliumsound wrote on Mon, 14 August 2006 02:27 Ged Leitch wrote on Sun, 13 August 2006 12:48 this is perpetuated a lot too>>> "...Mastering engineers are quite secretive about their EQ settings as they dont want the competition to find out!..." Not true but I am not telling you why or getting into details. Will have to disagree Trillium i'm afraid, because of my own online conversations with some of the Pro's here. I dont think any of them are "Scared" of telling someone they cut 1db @ 250hz or whatever. It was a joke Ged

AArrrgh!!! sorry mate!
I should go to take my nightcap and go to bed!

[cerberus]

my problem with discussing settings is that they don't repeat on different gear;  mine are are tailored to each song or album, and to the goal of the project.  i don't tend to volunteer the information. not to be secretive, but because i don't think think it's very useful to know.  

when a client asks, i think i am in real trouble: because what happens if they try to paint it by the numbers and the results don't repeat in their studio?

jeff dinces

[Andy Krehm]

Ged Leitch wrote on Sun, 13 August 2006 19:36

Andy Krehm wrote on Mon, 14 August 2006 00:33 Ged Leitch wrote on Sun, 13 August 2006 12:48 this is perpetuated a lot too>>> "...Mastering engineers are quite secretive about their EQ settings as they dont want the competition to find out!..." This is perpetuated by studios like Sterling who say that their mastering setting are proprietary and can not be given out. (my paraphrase). Andy, Silverbirch Productions www.silverbirchprod.com Really? Chris Athens is usually very very open about stuff when he posts.

I saw it on their website a few years ago under "terms and conditions". I haven't looked lately but at the time I was researching other mastering studio's "terms and conditions" so I could make up one for us.

I'm sure some the individual engineers don't care b/c we all know that  that one would have to have EXACTLY the same gear and setup to repeat.

.Andy,

Silverbirch Productions

www.silverbirchprod.com

[Bob Boyd]

Andy Krehm wrote on Sun, 13 August 2006 18:33

Ged Leitch wrote on Sun, 13 August 2006 12:48 this is perpetuated a lot too>>> "...Mastering engineers are quite secretive about their EQ settings as they dont want the competition to find out!..." This is perpetuated by studios like Sterling who say that their mastering setting are proprietary and can not be given out. (my paraphrase). Andy, Silverbirch Productions www.silverbirchprod.com

I think this one can be a little overcooked.  I think Ged mentions a common myth but that one that can be dispelled simply on the fact that different songs need different treatment.

Forget trying to be secretive, I think the better question is why should you discuss settings with clients?  I'm not talking about generalities or approach, I'm talking actual settings.

I think focusing in on this clause is kind of like believing they also might have 'secret black box' voodoo.

[Ben F]

I think it's very educational for the client to discuss your techniques and settings, if it helps them to achieve better mixes. Generally they wouldn't have the same mastering grade equipment so it wouldn't sound the same anyway!

In martial arts, you can watch an instructer explain a technique a 1000 times, but without their understanding you will never be as effective. After years you may then aquire the technique, but it will always be slightly different, meaning the technique is then yours.

[Bob Boyd]

True.  I'm not opposed to talking about settings but I think approach is the greater thing to talk about.  I think this subject makes me feel like Brad and the threads about processing and plugins.  If you focus on settings, you've missed the forest for the trees.

I've had mix engineers want to talk to me about exactly what settings I used on the master.  If I discuss settings, that's what they tend to think about.  If I discuss approach, it's amazing how much more they just enjoy the music.  If the music sounds right, what difference does it make if I made an adjustment at 12k?  I would rather focus on the bigger picture.

[bigaudioblowhard]

I think mastering engineers do kind of guard their techniques.

I do.

And I feel that I've noticed various "known" engineers to be absent from these types of discussions. I sat in recently with Brian Gardner and Bernie Grundman and watched them work. Brian hardly discussed his work but Bernie went on and on like a fugitive getting something off his chest. It was weird, he discussed his favorite coffee, told me about his early experiences and how he bacame popular.

BECAUSE HE WAS AN INNOVATOR!

Because, more or less, ME's untill then, cut records flat. If a producer wanted a brighter or fuller sound, they remixed. Bernie compressed, made moves, all the stuff we take for granted today.

Yeah, he showed me his UREI Passive EQ's with the custom attenuators, but what I learned was...GO INNOVATE, seperate from the herd.

Look around his room and see little in common with other facilities. Same with The Mastering Lab. They just went their own way and the world caught on.

Who cares about other peoples settings, beat their work with YOUR SETTINGS. No, its not the '50's anymore. Not the dawn of the golden age of record making. But I do believe innovation is still possible. It hasn't all been done yet.

bab

[Tomas Danko]

Ben F wrote on Mon, 14 August 2006 05:02

I think it's very educational for the client to discuss your techniques and settings, if it helps them to achieve better mixes. Generally they wouldn't have the same mastering grade equipment so it wouldn't sound the same anyway! In martial arts, you can watch an instructer explain a technique a 1000 times, but without their understanding you will never be as effective. After years you may then aquire the technique, but it will always be slightly different, meaning the technique is then yours.

That's why we refer to particular techniques as Ninja-tricks and mention other engineers as Jedi's.

"The force is strong with this one."

[chrisj]

Bob Boyd wrote on Sun, 13 August 2006 23:10

I think focusing in on this clause is kind of like believing they also might have 'secret black box' voodoo.

The closest thing I've seen to 'voodoo' out of Sterling is a tendency, especially with heavy music, to do pre-emphasis and de-emphasis before and after compression.

I jumped on that and immediately enjoyed the results, even with my own chain. The neat part is, you would think any EQ settings would be obvious as hell and totally unsecret. But if you're putting in heavy (like more than 6 db) pre-and-de-emphasis you're basically tailoring how the compressor acts, and as the compressor is probably a broadband device the output has _no_ EQ peculiarities to betray what you did.

I think the most common use is probably bass- like putting a HPF on the sidechain of a compressor. But the sky's the limit, really. Anything that needs to squish more, boost and unboost. Anything that needs to kick, like bass, cut and restore...

The great thing is that it still falls under the category of 'EQ and simple compression', and it's totally down to what you do with it- not like an invariant 'black box', more like a set of 'unlabeled knobs'

[cerberus]

chrisj; it's like sidechain compression?  i think sidechain compression was invented to avoid having to do pre-emphasis and de-emphasis around the compressor! i mean... the riaa curve works basically like that... pre-emphasis/de-emphasis has always been in front of our eyes and easy enough to tap.

deviating the pre-emphasis from the standard was always a possibilty for m.e.s. adding one extra eq to the chain to perform de(on the compressor)/pre(to the playback system) emphasis seems obvious.  the theory may have been examined already a million times in history.  of course we are cutting it louder than ever in history too, which is fine as long as the extra process doesn't introduce distortion, noise and artifacts that we don't control...which is what i'm wary of.

jeff dinces

[Masterer]

Andy Krehm wrote on Sun, 13 August 2006 19:33

Ged Leitch wrote on Sun, 13 August 2006 12:48 this is perpetuated a lot too>>> "...Mastering engineers are quite secretive about their EQ settings as they dont want the competition to find out!..." This is perpetuated by studios like Sterling who say that their mastering setting are proprietary and can not be given out. (my paraphrase). Andy, Silverbirch Productions www.silverbirchprod.com

Oh for crap sake!

Some folks can't go five minutes without mentioning Sterling.

I don't know any professional mastering engineer that would make public ANYTHING that was done to a clients record. That is between the ME and the client.
Anyone who wants to know what settings were used on a particular project [unless it's their own] is completely missing the bus.

Any engineer secretive about his/her settings has much more than that to worrry about.

[bblackwood]

Masterer wrote on Mon, 14 August 2006 17:41

Some folks can't go five minutes without mentioning Sterling.

Now Chris, (sterling) I have no (sterling) idea what (sterling) you're talking (sterling) about. Perhaps you're just (sterling) being defensive (sterling)?

hehe

Good to see you here again, Chris.