Print

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

[philip]

OK, so I've done my listening, still with crappy consumer gear, laptop and two different pair of cans.

Mastering is subjective, that said I try an objective approach so I have listened as I let my clients listen in the studio, with matched volume. My goal with mastering is to make the master sound better than the mix, not only loud and punchy.

The results are contradictory, I did not get the same results using my Koss porta pro as I did with a pair of Sennheiser eh350. That is a proof of how difficult it is to judge a subjective matter IMO. When the results were not correlated, the first comment is from using the porta pro and the other sennheiser. No proper listening can be done from my side until I come back to Sweden.

I really don't want to offend anyone and as said, mastering is subjective.

I also write the crest factor for you, someone might be interested.

(better - better sounding than the original mix level matched IMO, worse - the master sounds worse than the mix level matched IMO)

UnderTow - 12dB - better
Herbeck - 11.1dB - distorts heavily- worse
KAyo - 10dB - worse
LudwigM - 13.2dB - worse
MC - 11dB - worse/better
OTR - 11.9dB - better
Podgorny - 11.7  - better/worse
PeterBeckmann - 11.8 - thin and distorts - worse
MGMaster - 10.8 - better but with reservation, the overall sound is better but it a bit to limited for my taste.
patrikt - 13.5 - very wierd sounding IMO. -worse

My three favorites are acually in the other group:

Ator, Fuse and Gregg Janman. (Greggs Master is actually amazing considered the crappy Yamaha monitors he uses )


/Philip

[gertvanhoof]

Disclaimer: I'm not a native speaker by any measure, so any profanity should be considered unintentional. OK, let's see...

AivoryUK (-12.7/-0.3)
Nice and open sound. Could do with just a little more dynamic contrast.

AndreasN (-11.2/-0.3)
A little harsh in the high mids to my taste. The limiter clamps down too obviously.

Ator (-11.4/-0.3)
Big and deep, yet warm, open and detailed.

Biig Niick (-13.8/-0.1)
An all too dominant limiter provokes a certain harshness in the upper part of the spectrum, as well as in the low end.

Chris Adler (-12.6/-0.3)
Tight, smooth low end. Well-balanced and engaging overall sound.

Chris Doremus (-15.2/-0.3)
Natural dynamics, nice and easy on the ear. I've got the impression there's still room for extra loudness here without compromising the sound quality.

Dalton Brand (-14.6/-0.3)
Voice and rhythmic accents have an unnatural, husky quality. Lacks some overall depth in comparison.

Fuse (-13.6/-0.3)
Inviting, transparent timbral quality. Excellent trade-off between appropriate loudness and dynamic properties of the original mix.
I'm getting some crackles during playback, most notably in the vocals of the intro section. Anyone else here to confirm this?

GertVanHoof (-12.2/-0.2)
Erm... obviously I've trimmed the source file's fade-out tail way too short.

Graham Headley (-11.4/-0.3)
Rather heavy-handed on the loudness processing, at the expense of detail and dimension.

Gregg Janman (-15.3/-0.1)
Smooth, rich and detailed, with natural dynamics.

Best regards,
Gert

[philip]

Fuse (-13.6/-0.3)
Inviting, transparent timbral quality. Excellent trade-off between appropriate loudness and dynamic properties of the original mix.
I'm getting some crackles during playback, most notably in the vocals of the intro section. Anyone else here to confirm this?

Confirmed.

how did I missed that    (not in my group I blame it on   )

[philip]

I'm wondering what limiter Fuse and Herbeck uses? Sony Oxford?

@Gert - really liked the sound of your master as well  

[gertvanhoof]

Gregg Janman wrote on Thu, 22 July 2010 09:00

Well, mine was definitely on the quieter side compared to a lot of the others. I'd like feedback on whether people think I should be making it a little louder.

Ultimately, everything will depend on the way your signal chain behaves when you raise the levels. Regardless of this caveat, I think a slight increase in perceived level would not compromise the sonic quality of your master. Just make sure you go easy on compression and use as inobtrusive a limiter as possible to watch over the transient response.

Best regards,
Gert

[Herbeck]

philip wrote on Thu, 22 July 2010 16:44

I'm wondering what limiter Fuse and Herbeck uses? Sony Oxford?

Hej Philip,

I use my own clipper, and I've never pushed it this hard before.

Podgorney - But it almost feels farther back in the speakers than the others.
This also has to do with the clipper, a kind of width/depth enhancement I wanted to try on you folks.



All the best

Herbeck

[Gregg Janman]

philip

My three favorites are acually in the other group: Ator, Fuse and Gregg Janman. (Greggs Master is actually amazing considered the crappy Yamaha monitors he uses

Hey, you leave my little speakers alone!  

Thanks for the kind words Philip. In all seriousness I love my speakers. I think I may have mentioned it before elsewhere on here, but I have been using them in the same position in the same room for over eight years now. I actually have two pairs. The older pair are now in the living/tatami room, so I can hear how things sound on them in two different locations. I do intend to upgrade speakers to something larger at some stage, but I can't afford to do it right now.

I also missed the noises in the Fuse version, doh! When I listen back again now, it sounds like a slight high frequency distortion, mainly on the vocal in the opening section.

gertvanhoof

Gregg Janman (-15.3/-0.1) Smooth, rich and detailed, with natural dynamics. Ultimately, everything will depend on the way your signal chain behaves when you raise the levels. Regardless of this caveat, I think a slight increase in perceived level would not compromise the sonic quality of your master. Just make sure you go easy on compression and use as inobtrusive a limiter as possible to watch over the transient response.

Thanks Gert, I see mine has the lowest average RMS level in my group. Thanks for including those details. After running the file through the analogue outboard the highest peak was -1.4dBFS. I then applied the Voxengo Elephant limiter (ELUni algorithm) with 4.4dB limiting, so the loudest peak was squashed by about 3dB. I'll go back to the file and see how it sounds with 1-3dB more of limiting. I usually prefer to err on the side of caution and back things off as soon as I can hear any timbral changes, but clients do often seem to ask me for it "a bit louder".

Thanks for all the comments so far, keep them coming!

[chrisdoremus]

aivoryuk- I wanted to boost top end for this songs as well but felt like it separated the hi hats/shaker from the mix... I could be wrong, Inter-sample clips... not that it really matters.

andreasn- Boomin' nicely. There might be some distortion I'm hearing.

ATOR- Nice and loud but I feel like I hear some distortion. Could be a good thing. Gives it mojo. Inter-sample clips... not that it really matters.

BiigNiick- Nice clarity on the vocal but at the expense of the percussion sounding separated. Inter-sample clips... not that it really matters.

ChrisAdler- Awesome EQ work but I think I hear pumping.

DaltonBrand- The mid scoop is a little much for my personal taste but what the hell do I know. Inter-sample clips... not that it really matters.

fuse- Sound great dude! A nice present top.

GrahamHeadley- Loud and proud baby!

GreggJanman- Balanced and nice! Since everyone seems to like yours I'm gonna have to say it sounds similar to mine! HAHA

gertvanhoof- Nice! I feel like the balance of the mix changed a little bit. Maybe for the better.


From what I vaguely remember I started with a 20hz Hi Pass filter-->Weiss K-Stereo 1dB--> GML compressor @ 20:1, 2-3dB GR,-->Avalon EQ Up 1 @ 50hz, Up 1 @ 900hz, and up 2 @ 25Khz-->Prism Compressor @ 8:1 no GR--> Weiss A-D clipping.

-Chris

[Podgorny]

So, anyone else from Team H-Z?.. I was hoping for some criticism.
Seems a little quiet.

[gertvanhoof]

Gregg Janman wrote on Fri, 23 July 2010 03:19

Thanks Gert, I see mine has the lowest average RMS level in my group. Thanks for including those details.

You're welcome! Basically, there's nothing wrong with your RMS level at all, and there's no doubt I like the way your master reflects the original dynamics of the mix. (As Chris Doremus pointed out, both of your results do share similar sonic virtues). That said, and being all but a big fan of "loudness on purpose", in those boisterous times I try to spread the gradual gain buildup in relatively tiny steps over several - sometimes similar - devices in the mastering chain. As for loudness maximising and timbral shifting, I firmly steer clear of any multiband processing. Radio processing is bound to have its take on that later on...

Best regards,
Gert

[Matt_G]

KAyo wrote on Thu, 22 July 2010 12:55

Yup.. same master, wrong dither, which destroys the taste of the wine completely.. Dither can be so indulgent, that getting it wrong, can break the camels back, and it has here, well.., at least in my picky book, it has.

Hey Kayo, I've got to agree with Patrikt on this one, there are far greater concerns with the bottom end pumping & blowing out than the dither imho. Are you running subs or full range monitors?

I'm partial to dither tastes though too so I agree that it is important to find the right one. There is usually a trade off between high end brightness & detail though.

[Matt_G]

Podgorny wrote on Thu, 22 July 2010 16:11

About dither, KAyo made mention of what noise shaping he used.  Do you guys usually go through various shapes until you feel it complements the material, or just go with one?

Yes quite often, I usually have a preferred dither which I generally go with but if something seems to have changed slightly after converting to 16 bit I may re-evaluate & change the noise shaping style & amount while I'm A/B'ing agains the 24bit file & noticing less of a difference.

Quote:

What is it that you're looking for in dither? My understanding is that you choose a shape that is less noticeable in the context of the music, and that makes sense.  It just seems to me that something THAT low in level is unlikely to make a large impact on the material, but hey, what do I know?

I'm usually looking for the sound of the '24bit'source master in a 16bit converted file while listening for tonal balance changes (mostly HF) or how it's effecting the low level detail. There is often a trade off to be made usually. It's quite small the differences between dither but on great monitoring you can pick it out & discover your own preference for one over another.  

Quote:

Also, I noticed a number of entries in my group didn't set off my peak meter.  Is there some reason for NOT utilizing every last bit of peak headroom?  It seems to me that if you've achieved a level of sound and impact that you like, all you're doing is robbing yourself of 0.3dB of loudness.  Or is there some other reason?

There is a good reason for this, it's called ITP (inter-sample peaks) these are reconstruction errors that occur during the D/A conversion or sample rate conversion. If you peak to 0.0dBFS you run the risk of distorting cheaper consumer grade electronics or more specifically the DAC (cheap CD players). Even though -0.3dBFS doesn't seem like much wiggle room it's enough to make a difference in playing back cleaner with less overloads on the said players.

[Matt_G]

I'll post on my group soon.. just finishing up a tonne of work & will hopefully get to it over the weekend.

[Patrik T]

philip wrote on Thu, 22 July 2010 22:45

patrikt - 13.5 - very wierd sounding IMO. -worse

I found no need, in whatever way, to shimmer the top or richter the bottom, which seems pretty popular amongst the entries.

Will be back with some feedback soon.


Regards
Patrik

[Patrik T]

In order to open up for constructive thinking:


herbeck - 3 seconds in I hear obvious distortion, trigged by the vocal parts, in the sides that follows throughout the whole song. it sounds hard over all.

mattgray - it's nice. maybe a bit towards nervous dynamically, might have to do with feeling of low-end clip/saturation whatever it is.

philip - a bit too scooped sounding for my thoughts on translation. I hear the compression.

undertow - again, too scoped for me and the dynamics feels very nervous, especially in the slide-part, my ears are push-pulling too much.

podgorny - it's good but a bit too zingy (glass-smack).

otr - nice, I appreciate that the top end does not overshadow the rest.

MC - I think this one translates well to the outer world, maybe a touch less lows. The midrange just sounds right to me. And it should not piss the mixer off in any manner.

Ludwig - too much audible compression work (sounds nervous) and a touch too zingy.

Kayo - Low end for 20 years and the dynamic action is just silly.

Peter Beckmann - aiff?


Side note: RMS values says absolutely nothing to me when it comes to ongoing music. I don't understand why people even bother about RMS.


Regards
Patrik