Re: [microsound] digital audio genius Bob Katz

[Velvetdoug@xxxxxxx]

In a message dated 1/10/2003 2:39:04 AM Eastern Standard Time, billjarboe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:

> It could be more difficult to determine such things when the listening
> space is shared with a "professional"; meaning some overfed jerk who sits on
> his ass in a swivel chair most of the day in his little mastering boudoir
> and makes a comfortable living by telling people "what 
> sounds good".

steady on old chap - we're not that bad!

mastering is firstly about a critical monitoring environment, mix engineers sometimes work in unfamiliar studios, whereas a mastering engineer works in one room always. also that room will have excellent monitoring which may reveal imbalances not noticed at mixing. in addition a mastering engineer comes to a project fresh, wheras the guy who mixed it has spent days and weeks obsessing over details of the mix, so the mastering engineer can hopefully be more objective. also mastering is about sequencing the recordings on an album together so that they work as an album, especially if they were mixed at different studios by different engineers.this involves judicious levelling, EQ etc 

to what extent other aspects of mastering such as compression/limiting applies to Microsound-type stuff depends on taste. i certainly think the above paragraph is valid. however that may mean that if you don't want the 'loudest CD in the world ever!' then the mastering guy might do next to nothing. what you pay for is the listening, we don't get paid by the dB of EQ. i'd also say it was better to attend mastering sessions and bring CDs for comparison - we do loads more rock, pop and dance musics than anything else, so your engineer may not know what you mean when  you ask for it to sound like 'the last Ryoji Ikeda joint'

i can't argue about the 'overfed' bit thoough ;-)

Doug Shearer
comfortable on his ass in a swivel chair
Townhouse Mastering
London

------------------------------