A good read on the art of mastering

Jeff Evans
Perhaps instead of reading articles trying to not explain how to master and to perpetuate the myth that it is a real dark art that only a few understand try reading an article that explains it instead.  I found this:
 
http://www.emusician.com/how-to/1334/master-class--the-art-of-mastering/45065
 
Also the Bob Katz book on mastering is also an excellent read.
 
It is not hard nor impossible to do.  I have mastered many CD's very successfully.  Yes there are some tricks involved for sure like any other part of the process but they can be learned and practiced.
 
Mastering a track is different to mastering a whole album that is for sure.  The good news is that if the mix is excellent very little mastering is actually required.  Very slight EQ, compression and limiting will do the trick.  It becomes much harder when the mix is bad though.
 
I find working with reference CD's is also important.  It can save a lot of time and stop you from going down the wrong path.  The client will have a very definite sound in mind that they are wanting you to achieve so it pays to find out what it is.
 
Also many great mastering engineers have also said that digital processing now is so good you do not have to come out into the analog world to do it either.  That is a myth.  With all the wonderful analog emulations we have around now it is very possible.  I have mastered all my CD's for my clients digitally and they sound excellent.  It is what you do with those processes that is far more important.  The only caveat here though is it pays to spend some serious money on quality plugins.  In some cases as much as what a DAW would cost but if you do it regularly and get paid for it then it is well worth it.
 
You do need a nice room with some nice speakers in it though.  You can master your own music too but you just have to leave plenty of time between the mix and the mastering.  I do like mastering other peoples mixes as well.

Hi Jeff,
 
Been a while....hope all is well, miss you brother....and I'm glad to see you still posting and helping people on here. :) I just wanted to share a few things which you'll probably have a laugh about.
 
Though you and I usually see eye to eye and you know my respect for you and your experience is second to none, I have to peacefully disagree with some of the stuff you mentioned above. I'll tell you why.
 
First, I think Katz book is over-rated and can lose a common person in 0.2 ms. LOL! I think you have to have a college degree to understand it, which I do not. However, though I am not a total idiot, I see his book as a smoke-screen that didn't teach me anything other than how eccentric Bob is as well as how he has the ability to sort of intimidate through intelligence while pushing his specialty gear. It's HE who has sort of made mastering more of a dark art than it needs to be.
 
I love the guy, have talked to him and even had him master one of my albums. I just don't think he is as good of a teacher as you or me when it comes to explaining things. I'm sure others will disagree with me since I'm a nobody and he is a Grammy winner. I give credit where it's due....he's a great mastering engineer. I just didn't get much out of his book or his teaching ability.  Anytime you have to read and re-read something over and over only to come away with "huh? I don't quite get it?" it's not delivered correctly. I'll be the first to admit I'm not the sharpest knife in the drawer.....but I don't see the need for wisdom and know-how to be masked behind big words and technical jargon that doesn't actually show cause, effect, or outcome. That's just me though.
 
You mentioned mastering not being hard to do/not impossible. Though this may be true in your realm and in mine, I do not think this is true for most of the home recording people of today. I've mentioned this several times, but when someone mixes a song and presses that export button, in their mind, they are done. Where do they even start if they don't know where to listen? How do you begin to master something that is already "done" in the ears of that particular beholder?
 
Most don't have the rooms or even the know-how to do this properly. Heck, if you get a chance to visit the songs forum, there are songs that are totally obliterated by people trying to master that over-master everything. That's not a bash, just an observation. Should people pay to have it done? Nah, only if they are releasing for sale. However, I just about always like hearing mixes that people DON'T attempt to master because they ALWAYS sound better. After a while, I get sick of loud mixes loaded with sub low end that just sound ruined.
 
And lastly, you mentioned reference CD's. I've never been more unhappy with reference material than I am today. I can't compare 70's classic rock to what I record in 2016 as much as I'd like to because I enjoy those mixes. I can't even compare mixes of today with the ones I create today because I simply don't like them, no matter WHO the grammy engineer is.
 
Today, we live in a world of no rules. I believe that mixes and masters are being done based on earbuds as quite a few do not sound good on real systems or in cars without extensive post mastering. I've stopped comparing and referencing mixes with what I do today simply because, if you listen to music today, everyone is doing their own thing. I hear hissy cymbals being acceptable, I hear loads of sub low bass, I still hear clipping and excessive loudness and a "who cares" type attitude from some music.
 
Also, referencing is difficult because we aren't using the same instrumentation. I know YOU know this, but others may not take it into consideration. I find it hard to even get a happy medium based on someone else's mix UNLESS you are working with similar material and instrumentation.
 
I'll never forget a client I had one time that insisted I master using a curve from another band. I told him that there was no way to reference that band let alone cop their curve with positive results. They made me do it using HAR-BAL. The results were beyond disappointing resulting in a new re-master. Even using the original band as a reference would have failed this band simply because their instrumentation was WAY different and so was their mix.
 
I sincerely believe this to be true with everything. I have gravitated towards "being me" and doing things until they sound right to my ears. I think I am a pretty good judge of mixing, mastering and making good decisions. Using reference material that has nothing to do with the instrumentation I am working with has done nothing but deter my performance past and present.
 
However, all of this is moot if someone doesn't know what a good mix is to begin with. But even there, a mastered work of a pro band has never really helped me. What HAS helped me is proper sound identification, flat monitors, and years of experience which includes loads of trial and error.
 
So in closing, I really don't think any of this is easy for people that aren't where guys like you and I are at this time. There are so many variables that contribute to this, it can make your head spin. Though in a sense, I DO agree with everything you have said being ME, (other than Katz) in the shoes of someone else not knowing what I know, I'd have to disagree. Hope you don't take any of this the wrong way as I have nothing but love and respect for you.
 
Speaking of mastering, I have quite a few things I have posted regarding it that I could share if anyone is interested. ;) You may not get any better at mastering, but I can assure you, you won't get lost with anything I say. LOL!
 
-Danny

Voda La Void
Danny hit the nail on the head - we amateurs hit export, and in our minds, we are done.  
 
But I would like to know what my tracks would sound like mastered.  Sounds expensive.  Suggestions?  I don't have the engineering skills, nor the interest, in learning that part myself.  I don't mind paying someone, but I have no idea what kind of expense I'm inviting....

It's really not even an amateur thing, Voda. If I can be honest with you...I myself sometimes have a problem mastering my own material simply because I'd never hit that export button if I wasn't happy. I usually leave limiting and final eq curves for mastering, which in my case is usually a slight high pass, maybe a little low pass or a mid bump or cut. I do such little mastering on my own stuff because I've done it all in the mix.
 
Realistically speaking, you guys have too. You don't need all the mastering that I hear in some songs. The other thing to consider is how far we go with the term "mastering".
 
It's more work for me to "master" an entire album making it sound coherent and leveled while choosing the right song to create the actual mastering curve than it is to literally master a song.
 
See, the other part of the mastering stage that gets missed is how we literally prepare an album for production. PQ sheets, ISRC codes, UPC/EAN codes, fade ins, fade outs, final limiting, dither, sample rate conversion, segues, and all the stuff that DOESN'T get talked about. Most music today does NOT need extensive mastering. Mastering is what ruins it.
 
The other stuff is what gets overdone. We get so close to our own material, we can't always make the right calls. It's really true. Then again, if you go through stages when you do this stuff and change hats while staying focused, you can usually do fairly well. But like I said before, even I sort of shake my head when mastering my own stuff...and I sort of know what I'm doing. :)
 
As for "what your stuff would sound like" I'd say "different" than if you did it yourself. I had a client once that did his own mastering for years and decided to try me. I thought I gave him an awesome master, and I mastered the song 3 times. He sent me his mastered version and wound up using his own.
 
In my opinion, his master was loaded with bass and excessive compression. BUT...that was what HE wanted and what HE felt he needed. So he will never use my services again and in his eyes, I failed him. In my eyes, he was too close to his own material to understand his track sounded over-processed and ruined.
 
Some people just don't know what to listen for. Louder isn't always better. More bass isn't always better. A mix that is not as loud that is mastered correctly, will go up and up and up without distortion. A mix that is mastered loud, stops at a certain point and will turn into distorted, jumbled audio if you keep turning it up.
 
A mix that is mastered with too much bass, will distort. A track mastered with the right bass can always have a little brought in via car eq to enhance if needed, and it should not distort. Doesn't everyone post master via car eq on everything anyway? LOL! I personally don't....all eq's in my vehicles and gear are set to flat and never move. If I have to move them, the mix/master needs to be improved. ;)
 
The other thing to consider is, most mastering facilities that offer free stuff or deals on things, are bogus. No matter who they are. They are using a general curve and boosting the volume making you think you got a good master. You can do what they do with a high pass, low pass and Sonar's Concrete Limiter. These free guys that give you 30 seconds or whatever for free crack me up.
 
For what it's worth, it would take me the same amount of time to master a 30 second clip as it would a 4 minute songs. The reason being....it's not the length (ugh, sounds sexual lol) that determines anything. The same eq curve I'd create using the same array of mastering plugins would take the same amount of time, roughly.
 
I still have to create the curve and choose the effects....and before I do that, I have to pre-master the song. This takes about 40 minutes to an hour or more depending on the song if I am REALLY doing my job. No mastering engineer that takes pride in his or her work can really do things the right way in under 30 minutes...and that's pushing it.
 
I'm probably too meticulous in what I do and could probably make more money if I cared less and used tools that auto removed artifacts and auto-leveled the audio. When I have, though some of those methods work for some things, something always seems to suffer because of using stuff like that. With my method, nothing suffers and no stone is un-turned.
 
But, by the time I scan the song(s) while keeping a log and the times where I've edited for pops, clicks, artifacts, hums, other oscillations and then manually level the audio so that I don't have to over compress, I've probably put in at the least, 20 minutes. And that's if things are super minimal. I've never done a pre master that was 10 minutes. It's always 20-40 at the least due to removing EVERY bad peak by hand.
 
Could I do it using a limiter? Sure...that's what all the others do....and your audio CAN suffer from this.I could use an auto hiss remover on things....but then we wonder why a piece in the middle where there is an acoustic guitar or something that can benefit from a nice high end frequency, now sounds more dull.
 
Nothing should ever be treated automatically. This is where you lose your dynamics if you are not careful and can pick up other artifacts. I'm always aware of every little snare hit, rim shot, stick hit on a drum mic, guitar pick against a body, singer's teeth hitting the mic and all the other things the engineer failed to address. That's what a mastering engineer is supposed to listen for. Do it right, or don't do it at all. I can sleep sound every night knowing I've never ripped off a soul and have poured my all into their material.
 
As for it being expensive? For the most part, the good mastering guys charge about $100+ per song depending on what needs to be done. I don't think that's expensive when you consider how in depth one has to be to do this stuff. We are the last guys to touch the audio before it gets sent to duplication. We are chosen because we are trusted to make a difference for the better and anything less will not be acceptable.
 
I get paid for my ears alone due to the things I can hear that others may not. I can't tell you how many times I've saved people just because I heard things that were crucial that they either couldn't hear, or didn't realize at the time. You most likely will NOT get that type of service from guys that are offering discounted mastering. Then again, guys like that are fine if you are not releasing a product for sale. However, you have to ask yourself "how important is my music?" ;)
 
-Danny