Danny Danzi

Rain

MakeShift
I think you hire a Mastering Engineer depending on the quality of the end product you are expecting to obtain.  If you are a professional musician wanting to put out polished professional work, you hire people like Danny and Jeff that have REAL skins on the wall.  You would probably do best to track in a true studio environment as well.....with real instruments.  If your a home studio artist posting 256 mp3 files, you can do fine small mastering your own. 
 
I feel very confident that if either Danny or Jeff were to Master a project that I did, it would turn out far better than what I could do myself, even though I have been doing this for 10 years as well.  It's called experience, quality equipment and tested environment.  There is a reason that clientele still go to the proven, for the professional end product.     

Ever since I've started working on this project a few years ago, it was clear in my mind that if we were to release anything, I'd at least consult Danny, possibly have him work some of his magic. But at least hire him for a bit of input.
 
But that depends on what happens with the project. Me, I'm all for the home made, independent  album, but I can see how my wife could wish to bring it up a few levels, go to bigger studios, and all.
 
But considering that you don't make records to make music anymore, you might as well do things your way, take the time, and make it more of a personal, artistic statement. 

I think you guys are both spot on here and are thinking the right way. I also think Ben went a bit over-board on what he thinks about this and has lost the significance. Let's totally remove the term "mastering engineer" for a second. Though I still think it's a necessity in certain situations, what you guys said above nails it perfectly. That said...there are important things to consider that I'd like to reiterate.
 
1. The extra set of ears from someone you trust is immensely important. More so than any mastering engineer, that person that can hear two gnats getting it on in the other room is worth his/her weight in gold if you are serious about your music. Even if you're just doing digital downloads.
 
2. I can't stress this enough. You recorded the music, you mixed it and listened to it far too many times and have lived with it too much to be subjective the right way. If you are using one set of monitors, you have the possibility to cloud your judgment further. Your judgement will never be where it should be...and I didn't have to go to school and get a degree to tell you that.
 
If this is for your head, it's fine to do whatever you want. If it's for sale, don't do what everyone else is doing to degrade music. Send it to someone. Heck try me first, I won't even take your money if I can't help you and I'll give you advice on how to mix the thing better if needed before we even master it as part of the package. That's not meant to be a shameless plug...it's meant to be truthful and tell it like it is.
 
3. Mastering is still needed. Whether you are going to vinyl or not, it's nice to level things and work up an eq curve that works for your mix as well as your entire album. It's really nice when you have someone doing this that knows what they are doing. Not all songs need extensive mastering. Most times when the mix is right, a little polish is all that needs to be done. The question is, can you really make the right call to do that without over-doing it? Most can't.
 
4. Relying on analyzers: You already lost if you watch these things too closely. I totally disagree with anyone living by this way of thinking. Don't fall into this trap and don't listen to anyone that tells you to....regardless of what degree they have.
 
I've mixed and mastered so many albums, I'd be curious as to how many I've actually done. Does that make me an expert? No...it makes me a dude that mixed and mastered a lot of albums. LOL! What I HAVE found out in doing so many is that there are times when your analyzers give you incredible stats where the song does not sound good....and there are times when you have a crappy looking analyzer yet the song sounds good. Don't EVER take a look at something and assume that little bump you see is a problem.
 
That little bump may happen one time in the song. Resetting your meters and watching them closely REALLY tells the story. This is one of the greatest things in Sonar's wave form preview. You can see a peak being created in real time so you know where it is. Ben was quick to jump on that bump he saw, Rain...without even hearing it. A HUGE mistake if you just cut it.
 
You listen to the music and believe what your ears and monitors are telling you. If you hear a problem, this is when you turn to your analyzer for a bit of help. Even there, they are not the be all end all of sorting out your problems. One little "whoomf" from a high gain guitar chug that may not be high passed enough and it will throw 120 Hz through the roof....you see this on the analyzer and curb 120 Hz. That's not only the wrong move, it's absolutely ludicrous.
 
We have another thread going on about controlling peaks. This right here counts as a frequency peak, which is different than a transient peak. Having an analyzer jump high one time showing you an off-set curve is nothing to be alarmed about. How does it sound? Is the bump you get making the material sound bad in that spot? These are the things to question.
 
I can go on and on here and then argue with Ben, pistol pete and anyone else that feels the need to take a shot at me. I really don't care to do that and am perfectly happy with who I am, what I do, as well as how my material sounds at the end of the day. My clients are happy too and I thank God every night for the business that comes my way.
 
At the end of the day, you guys should do whatever makes sense to you...but always look into the sources that you listen to. If a person can't lead by example in this field, 7 times out of 10 they just become a windbag of useless jargon while polluting the minds of those who are really in search of knowledge. This field is difficult enough as is without those types ruining it for the rest of us. Choose wisely. :)
 
-Danny

Hi Danny, I've taken my time to refrain a response.  Firstly I made it clear that I was musing about another way but still answering the question in my own way.
Second, I made it clear that you and Jeff were the boffins, maybe a backhanded compliment :) but still a compliment.  I still believe that you two are firmly in the past, in regards to your skill set.  But they are relevant still if you want that sound...i.e. a band in a studio.
Third, I gave a quick analysis to the pic Rain posted and if you had noticed, which I think you did...good scholars always know how to filter information; I actually said because you were mixing and mastering at the same time I would go back and hunt for the anomaly in the mix i.e. fix it at the source.  Handy because you are mixing and mastering at the same time.  I now know I fell into a trap...ha ha ha great.
Finally, I can say with some authority that my system works, not just because of my silly bits of toilet paper but because I took the last lot of mixes into the uni studio a couple of months ago...a professional studio with treatment and a sound meter and guess what?? They were in range, not perfect but they were there.  The levels were correct, the EQ was correct, everything was correct.  And I mixed and mastered the tracks at the same time.  A couple of the tracks took a little longer to pull together but essentially I applied the technique I am talking about.
 
Now they aren't band tracks, I don't believe in that paradigm, and nor does the music listening public either.  I have said for many years now I was talking about a for of sonic painting, I'm only just staring to understand enough to create the language to explain what it is I am talking about.
 
In conclusion, I was respectful to you and jeff, perhaps with a backhander but still respectful, I mentioned the very best boffins...ever and put both your names in the same context.
 

"A new language requires a new technique. If what you're saying doesn't require a new language, then what you're saying probably isn't new." ~Philip Glass
 
Ben
    

I think Ben uses some funny words.  Actually words I have not heard in a long time.  I like the choice of the word boffin in this context.  I hope that Ben thinks that people like myself and Danny are people who can survive and have clients and create an income from what we do and enjoy it too at the same time!  I know I certainly enjoy my work.  I certainly respect those who can do that consistently.  You can be boffin about it too and that is a good thing, it is why people come back or come to you because you might go that extra mile. Being a boffin can help you towards being a perfectionist to some extent.
 
Perfectionism can be helpful in mixing and mastering to which I think they can co exist but I like treating and doing those jobs separately.  Of course you can do it at the same time and we all do for various reasons.  But overall I feel when they are treated as very separate things you can get maximum results from both processes.
 
One thing to take into account is if you tend to only produce one genre of music or sound design say then doing combined mixing and mastering may work.  And work very well.  But not when you have mixed and mastered many different projects covering many genres.  You soon learn that one approach won't cut it for other things. If old school mastering later after a mix and with someone different does the job then that should be the way it goes.  And it often is in real life.
 
I am happy being a boffin  (In all the right areas only!)  But you can get all caught up too much in the technical stuff too and trust your ears.  You can be too much of a boffin on the technical jarb. When really all it takes is a cool guitar lick or drum fill to make you smile.  The music is always the number one for me.
 

Ha, Ha Jeff...yep words are my skill, or one of my skills.  I'm very verbose, in fact I revel in my verbosity and large lexicon.  I've been called a poet and that's what I am, it's just I use digital technology as my words.  I'm glad you did not take umbrage at the inference of being called a boffin lol.
 
I did not take umbrage and was cognisant of the line about sound design.  Thanks but remember, cutting a slither of strings out of a stereo track recorded with a ixy IPhone microphone and preparing it for granular synthesis is tricky, same when cutting a kick drum too, especially if it's recorded with a crowd walking past in quadrant.  And creating string sounds from orchestral instruments, adding transient shapers, two different types of reverbs, tape and console emulation, now that's an entirely different skill set too.  I may not be a studio boffin, but these days I am a DAW, sound designer, madman extraordinaire boffin. 
 
My last piece, which is the sonata, and has an accompanying video, took over 50 hours...just the construction alone.  This does not take into consideration, the improvisation practice on guitar, to come up with all the interlocking riffs and chord parts, which includes some roman numeral analysis...composition.  The gathering of the found sounds and found video and finally the assembly of the video itself another whole day.  Ah boffins, I'm more like a boffin than I thought...just not a studio or mastering engineer boffin, but I can do both if necessary.  But as you can imagine, I would find it quite boring.
 
Ben    

 Rain....can you put up the mix? 
 
Even the best engineers will sometimes disagree on how a mix should sound. I think there are multiple ways to work. Good engineers have found a way that works for them. Obvious things like ear fatigue can affect us all. Two sets of ears are always better than one unless the second set doesn't tell you the truth. In this case I think a firm and honest individual is best. I have attempted to mix and master by going back and forth between mix examples...listening with master plug-ins off, then master plug-in  on etc..... I don't always get the best results that way but I think if done taking everything into consideration it can work. If my cpu will handle it I'll even mix the whole thing in one swipe. As long as the numbers crunch I don't really see the need to make it more complicated. I do a kind of A/B thing between tracks, busses and master while mixing sometimes. In my thinking resting between mixes is probably the best advice, that and having a second opinion.
 
But that's how I work sometimes and I'm not telling anyone else that this is the only way and it probably isn't the best way. When you get to the mastering stage things are supposed to be panned and eq'd...all automation is done.Pretty much all that's left are the end details without getting back into the mix. If you did a good job up to that point I sometimes question why it's so important to get help for that last part. I mean...you made the rest sound ok...how much more difficult can it be to try the mix over different systems and several sets of monitors or ARC or what ever you're using?
 
The difference seems to be approaching the mix from a more left brain direction...looking at levels compared to all tracks and compared to good music master  made in those millions of dollars studios. 12 songs aren't all probably going to need the same treatment, so I can see where it would get more complicated than simply mixing one song. From what I see a lot of comparison and evaluation is in order along with the right know how and the right tools to get that  final sheen on it...sometimes it can be difficult to let your baby go. I'm sure Jeff and Danny can probably tell you stories where not every client loved the end result although I'll bet 95% of the time they do like it. Mastering engineers didn't get to be mastering engineers without mixing masters...so if you feel like giving it a shot I say jump in and get your feet wet...what's the worst thing that can happen? Your mixes might suck. If they do you can always go back to the drawing board. I think it's a different approach entirely. We can get the tools to do it pretty easily now, it's all more a matter of using those tools and knowing how.
 
I hear mixes from people who can barely afford an inexpensive interface and sometimes what they do blows me away...even the ones who are obviously a work in progress still got the art out there and I have heard appreciative comments on songs made on a beer budget. No it wasn't a very good recording, but it stands as art. Maybe one day they can take it to someone to master or get some insight into mastering....still I think it's an accomplishment.
 
 
 

i've always considered the line between mixing and mastering, to be a big fat line, once crossed over, requires a completely different mindset and using different tools.
 

Starise - since that's music for my wife, it wouldn't feel right to put it online. Plus, this one is a cover, and I have yet to get the legal details taken care of. 
 
I've kept on re-working that mix in my downtimes. It's close, closer than I've ever been.
 
I think it's got a lot to do with the fact that I've discarded EZ/SD - I just can't make my music work with those. I hear other peoples' music and it works terrific, their stuff sounds great, but I can't make mine work. Using one of Logic's own new kits, everything fell into place. Not so sure about the cymbals but the drums are alright. Someday I'll buy BFD...
 
As for the rest, you know what it is... You think you're close, but you need to take care of one detail that's annoying you - and then, with that out of the way, you notice something else which needs fixing that you weren't hearing before. 
 
At least for rock music.
 
For my own weird, electro-acoustic things, I'm doing alright now. Things sound as I hear them in my head.
 

I see a similarity in that I sometimes spend a really long time finding a drum program I like. It seems like no one program will fit. For awhile it was BFD and then for a long time nothing in BFD sounded right, so I went to Studio Drummer which I had given up on and it worked better in a few instances...go figure. This is after hours of trying different kits, kit combinations and loops both factory and hand made. I thought the new AD2 was going to be my end all solution...wrong....I seem to use some of all of them here and there at different times.  I think it's a form if insanity . On my latest mix.....which I can post at some point, I ended up scrapping all of the drums and playing acoustic percussion in live. I could get away with that because it is an acoustic guitar lead.
I wish I was a good drummer. Seriously considered hiring one for upcoming songs. There's a few locals around here that are inexpensive....or maybe one of the good drummers here on the CW site.
 
As you well know I can be long winded on the computer keyboard and I might talk about anything....this is also a form of insanity I think :)  I promise I won't bend your ear too much if you ever want to send me a track for "another set of ears". I'm no wizard...just a guy with ears, but I'd be willing to help give an OP on it and I won't bombard your PM box lol. As these things are sometimes mistaken for a person who thinks he knows it all....that's not me. Just trying to help, that's all. I know you already know what you're doing pretty well:)

Thanks, Starise! :) If I ever feel stuck w/ the mix and unsure where I'm heading, I'll certainly take your offer. 
 
One very obvious tip I've started putting to good use is to move back from the project at intervals and listen to a few bars of something else. I've realize that I tended to lose perspective very easily. As you work, everything seems to sound nice and good, but then you make a reality check and realize that you've simply gotten used to it.
 
Keeping that in mind at all time seems to help me.
 
As for drums... I tried SD again last night because I wanted to compare it w/ Logic's. Sonically, I really don't like it. But even worst is the way it handles velocity - or at least I suspect that's the culprit.
 
The track I'm working on has actually been written w/ EZ, using MIDI grooves from it, customizing them. But I never could get things to work - it's a shuffling, rockabilly sort of thing, which the snare rolling all through the verse, and no matter what I tried in EZ and SD the groove completely fell apart.
 
Quantizing, un-quantizing, nothing worked.
 
AD was no better. And NI Abbey Road drums, which I like, just don't play nicely with Toontrack grooves.
 
That's when I got Logic X and figured that, just for the sake of it, I'd try the new drum plug-in. Insert, press play. Close. Find a quantize setting that's loose enough but still works to give all those bits a sense of unity. Bam! Drums work both sonically and groove-wise.
 
I'd been messing with that track for months, on and off, trying to nail the groove. Took a minute to do w/ Logic's drummer.

Glad you found something that works! 

Rain
 
As for drums... I tried SD again last night because I wanted to compare it w/ Logic's. Sonically, I really don't like it. But even worst is the way it handles velocity - or at least I suspect that's the culprit.
 
The track I'm working on has actually been written w/ EZ, using MIDI grooves from it, customizing them. But I never could get things to work - it's a shuffling, rockabilly sort of thing, which the snare rolling all through the verse, and no matter what I tried in EZ and SD the groove completely fell apart.
 
Quantizing, un-quantizing, nothing worked.
 
AD was no better. And NI Abbey Road drums, which I like, just don't play nicely with Toontrack grooves.
 
That's when I got Logic X and figured that, just for the sake of it, I'd try the new drum plug-in. Insert, press play. Close. Find a quantize setting that's loose enough but still works to give all those bits a sense of unity. Bam! Drums work both sonically and groove-wise.
 
I'd been messing with that track for months, on and off, trying to nail the groove. Took a minute to do w/ Logic's drummer.

RAIN,
you might want to investigate Sony Acid.
 
i used to have it,
and created some killer drum grooves very quickly with it.