R/E/P Community

R/E/P => R/E/P Archives => Brad Blackwood => Topic started by: breathe on June 21, 2010, 12:30:02 PM

Title: Mastering for digital downloads? (i.e. no CD is being released)
Post by: breathe on June 21, 2010, 12:30:02 PM
Dear mastering people: I have a question.  I now run a record label that I have mandated will be exclusively audiophile vinyl and digital downloads.  I have this theory that the CD is going the way of the dinosaur.  I want to have the digital download files properly mastered and I was wondering if there is any way to do this other than to make a mastered CDR (I do my digital download stuff through Tune Core).  Please let me know if you have encountered any clients/labels with a similar situation to mine, and how this issue was dealt with.

Best,
Nicholas


Title: Re: Mastering for digital downloads? (i.e. no CD is being released)
Post by: MASSIVE Mastering on June 21, 2010, 12:34:22 PM
Happens all the time.  Usually they'll still request physical delivery along with PCM and/or high-res MP3 files, but nothing really changes.  
Title: Re: Mastering for digital downloads? (i.e. no CD is being released)
Post by: jdg on June 21, 2010, 12:38:14 PM
2/3s of all mastering i do is "digital delivery" these days.

no CDR needed. put the digital masters on the net, zipped or rar'd up.
or on a thumb drive, etc etc.

im sure most ppl do the same.
Title: Re: Mastering for digital downloads? (i.e. no CD is being released)
Post by: urm eric on June 21, 2010, 12:38:22 PM
breathe wrote on Mon, 21 June 2010 11:30

Dear mastering people: I have a question.  I now run a record label that I have mandated will be exclusively audiophile vinyl and digital downloads.  I have this theory that the CD is going the way of the dinosaur.  I want to have the digital download files properly mastered and I was wondering if there is any way to do this other than to make a mastered CDR (I do my digital download stuff through Tune Core).  Please let me know if you have encountered any clients/labels with a similar situation to mine, and how this issue was dealt with.

Best,
Nicholas





Sure (if I've read you correctly). I do work for a couple of classical and jazz labels which is entirely media-free: they send me raw files over the net, I master them and send them the material back the same way in downloadable format (mp3 and FLAC at 24/96). I'm sure a lot of other ME's do the same kind of thing.

Cheers,


Eric

Edit: looks like three of us had the same thought at the same time. Great minds, and all that ...
Title: Re: Mastering for digital downloads? (i.e. no CD is being released)
Post by: TotalSonic on June 21, 2010, 12:45:05 PM
I work on digital only orders all the time where no CD masters are ordered.  It's extremely easy to provide these back in whatever format(s) is desired: 24 or 16bit wav or aiff file, FLAC, mp3 in whatever desired bit rate, ogg, wma, etc.

I'm a big supporter of the FLAC format as it is open source, license free, full taggable  and since it is a completely lossless codec enables around a 2:1 data compression ratio while still giving 100% of the fidelity of the uncompressed PCM source when it is played back - http://flac.sourceforge.net

Best regards,
Steve Berson
Title: Re: Mastering for digital downloads? (i.e. no CD is being released)
Post by: breathe on June 21, 2010, 01:21:26 PM
So since the ME doesn't have to sequence the songs like putting together a CD, is it cheaper to master for digital download?  How do you charge for this?  I'm asking because the ME's I've worked with in the past charged for CD mastering per-project, not per hour.

Nicholas



Title: Re: Mastering for digital downloads? (i.e. no CD is being released)
Post by: breathe on June 21, 2010, 01:29:25 PM
And if you're using a service like Tune Core to distribute the files, how do you sequence the record, in iTunes?

Thanks,
Nicholas



Title: Re: Mastering for digital downloads? (i.e. no CD is being released)
Post by: jdg on June 21, 2010, 02:00:38 PM
i charge separately for "parts" (aka CDRs)
i believe alot of ppl do.

so, in my case, it is "cheeper"
Title: Re: Mastering for digital downloads? (i.e. no CD is being released)
Post by: CWHumphrey on June 21, 2010, 02:03:30 PM
breathe wrote on Mon, 21 June 2010 10:21

So since the ME doesn't have to sequence the songs like putting together a CD, is it cheaper to master for digital download?  How do you charge for this?  I'm asking because the ME's I've worked with in the past charged for CD mastering per-project, not per hour.




The gapping of the songs is hardly "genius" work--or time consuming.  You're paying the ME for his/her ears and judgement.

Pay accordingly.

Cheers,
Title: Re: Mastering for digital downloads? (i.e. no CD is being released)
Post by: cass anawaty on June 21, 2010, 02:04:31 PM
jdg wrote on Mon, 21 June 2010 19:00

i charge separately for "parts" (aka CDRs)
i believe alot of ppl do.

so, in my case, it is "cheeper"

Same here.  I'll waive the assembly fee.
Title: Re: Mastering for digital downloads? (i.e. no CD is being released)
Post by: TotalSonic on June 21, 2010, 02:20:22 PM
jdg wrote on Mon, 21 June 2010 14:00

i charge separately for "parts" (aka CDRs)
i believe alot of ppl do.

so, in my case, it is "cheeper"


Yup - same here with per unit charges for parts - so digital download only orders end up slightly cheaper here as well.  

As far as things like Tunecore distribution - you still create a track order with gaps set as you wish the album in its entirety to be heard.  It's then up to the playback software to be capable of gapless playback of a playlist in order for your album's track transitions to be heard correctly.

Generally digital distributors like Tunecore and CD Baby have online upload forms where you upload a wav file per track and manually enter the metadata (i.e. titles, artist names, ISRC, artwork bitmaps) and then they handle the actual encoding to the particular delivery format (i.e. tagged mp3, m4a, etc.) for you.

Best regards,
Steve Berson
Title: Re: Mastering for digital downloads? (i.e. no CD is being released)
Post by: Waltz Mastering on June 21, 2010, 03:19:16 PM
breathe wrote on Mon, 21 June 2010 12:30

Dear mastering people: I have a question.  I now run a record label that I have mandated will be exclusively audiophile vinyl and digital downloads.  I have this theory that the CD is going the way of the dinosaur.  I want to have the digital download files properly mastered and I was wondering if there is any way to do this other than to make a mastered CDR (I do my digital download stuff through Tune Core).  Please let me know if you have encountered any clients/labels with a similar situation to mine, and how this issue was dealt with.

If your masters for your digital download releases are done at somewhat conservative levels you could conceivably supply these same masters, only assembled, to the vinyl cutter as well.
Title: Re: Mastering for digital downloads? (i.e. no CD is being released)
Post by: dave-G on June 21, 2010, 04:40:21 PM
Definitely seeing this equation more and more. .  Download/vinyl only, or download only.  And though it cuts down on parts-cutting fees, it also minimizes the parts-cutting busywork, labeling, packing and shipping.

I do find it odd sending T-shirts to clients without it being wrapped around a production master CD, but ... <shrug>

Title: Re: Mastering for digital downloads? (i.e. no CD is being released)
Post by: Macc on June 22, 2010, 07:58:09 AM
I burn three CDs a year, tops.
Title: Re: Mastering for digital downloads? (i.e. no CD is being released)
Post by: Andrew Hamilton on June 22, 2010, 10:04:17 PM
Hi Nicholas,
    One of my regular clients sells only downloads.   I send them 16 bit/44.1 .wav files and also 192k vbr mp3 (encoded from the same masters).   For lacquer mastering studios, I have supplied a clone of the master, on CD-R, with 0:30 silences between intended sides.   So far, so good.  CD is what it is.  If you record onto it well, it can sound pretty great - and not fade away... at least not for five years.





Andrew
Title: Re: Mastering for digital downloads? (i.e. no CD is being released)
Post by: Table Of Tone on June 24, 2010, 03:52:41 PM
I've been making 320 MP3's straight from the 32 float, pulled down a half db, in a bit to stop em getting any extra crunch from the codec.

Seems to actually sound OK!

Anyone else doing this?
Title: Re: Mastering for digital downloads? (i.e. no CD is being released)
Post by: Gold on June 24, 2010, 04:08:48 PM
dave-G wrote on Mon, 21 June 2010 16:40


I do find it odd sending T-shirts to clients without it being wrapped around a production master CD, but ... <shrug>




The only solution I see is to get a lathe.
Title: Re: Mastering for digital downloads? (i.e. no CD is being released)
Post by: dave-G on June 25, 2010, 06:46:48 AM
Gold wrote on Thu, 24 June 2010 16:08

dave-G wrote on Mon, 21 June 2010 16:40


I do find it odd sending T-shirts to clients without it being wrapped around a production master CD, but ... <shrug>




The only solution I see is to get a lathe.


*sigh*

Title: Re: Mastering for digital downloads? (i.e. no CD is being released)
Post by: Patrik T on June 25, 2010, 09:19:51 AM
Table Of Tone wrote on Thu, 24 June 2010 21:52

I've been making 320 MP3's straight from the 32 float, pulled down a half db, in a bit to stop em getting any extra crunch from the codec.

Anyone else doing this?


No, mp3's will always be made from the final 16/44.1 wav master here.

Same level, no drops and no tricks. And no questions are ever being asked later on regarding blah-analyze-blah-red-peaks-blah-blah-distortion-blah.


Best Regards
Patrik

Title: Re: Mastering for digital downloads? (i.e. no CD is being released)
Post by: Gregg Janman on June 25, 2010, 09:36:11 AM
I always encode from the CD quality .wav. I've never tried encoding from 24 or 32 bit files. Is there an audible difference in quality, or file size?

If you run mp3gain (set to "max level before clipping for each track/album") on the file, it will ensure that if the encoding process introduced any inter-sample peaks, it will decrease the level slightly to get rid of them.

http://mp3gain.sourceforge.net/
Title: Re: Mastering for digital downloads? (i.e. no CD is being released)
Post by: Table Of Tone on June 26, 2010, 09:36:31 AM
Gregg Janman wrote on Fri, 25 June 2010 14:36

I always encode from the CD quality .wav. I've never tried encoding from 24 or 32 bit files. Is there an audible difference in quality, or file size?
http://mp3gain.sourceforge.net/


The file size of the MP3 comes out the same but it seems to sound better when made from either 24 fixed or 32 float (containing 24), than it does made from the 16's.
Title: Re: Mastering for digital downloads? (i.e. no CD is being released)
Post by: Greg Youngman on June 26, 2010, 12:18:48 PM
Gold wrote on Thu, 24 June 2010 13:08

The only solution I see is to get a lathe.


Really.  Once you take the sequencing out of the equation, you just have a bunch of parts.  I can't imagine listening to Sgt Peppers a cut at a time in random order.  The experience back then was listening to the whole record.  I can't imagine reading a book a chapter at a time in random order. Yet, some movies are successful with type of out of sequence editing (Pulp Fiction).  I think mastering single tracks can be done by my next door neighbor's son (practicing 12 year old ME).  Putting together a cohesive piece of art is where it's at for me.
Title: Re: Mastering for digital downloads? (i.e. no CD is being released)
Post by: Adam Dempsey on June 26, 2010, 10:30:14 PM
There's also no reason to sample rate convert, say, a 48k source to 44.1k to mp3, other than for very low bitrate mp3's (<96kbs to my knowledge). So the avoidance of SRC could reasonably be taken to at least sometimes make a difference. Not to mention any HPF ripple depending on the encoder/settings, in which case knocking it back a bit would minimise clipping.
I do wish that 16/44.1k was more often seen as being the required specs for compact disc only.
Title: Re: Mastering for digital downloads? (i.e. no CD is being released)
Post by: Table Of Tone on June 27, 2010, 06:42:54 AM
Adam Dempsey wrote on Sun, 27 June 2010 03:30

There's also no reason to sample rate convert, say, a 48k source to 44.1k to mp3, other than for very low bitrate mp3's (<96kbs to my knowledge). So the avoidance of SRC could reasonably be taken to at least sometimes make a difference. Not to mention any HPF ripple depending on the encoder/settings, in which case knocking it back a bit would minimise clipping.
I do wish that 16/44.1k was more often seen as being the required specs for compact disc only.

The resulting MP3 does distort less after pulling the audio down a half db, while still working in the 32 bit floating point domain.

There is also no need to dither for an MP3, when making it form 32 float audio.
As you quite rightly pointed out, 44.1/16 is for CD only!

I've never tried making one from audio of a higher SR though.
Interesting.
Every day's a school day!
Title: Re: Mastering for digital downloads? (i.e. no CD is being released)
Post by: aleatoric on June 27, 2010, 02:12:52 PM
If you remove singles from the equation I'd say about 50% of the work I do requires a red-book production master CD and the other 50% is for digital downloads only and either requires a data disc or the files are simply uploaded back.  I charge for parts as well so digital download releases that do not require a PMCD are slightly cheaper.  I suspect that as time goes by I'll be seeing a decrease in the need for a PMCD as more and more artists opt for digital download only releases.