****Mastering Challenge Vote Thread****

[Dean Aka Nekro]

[mauseoleum]

nevermind -what- it was - it sounds ugly

[Geoff242]

nevermind -what- it was - it sounds ugly

I went back and checked it, it's all in time with no artifacts. Are you referring to the fill at the very end? If so, it's kind of a strange fill, but I like it.

[Dean Aka Nekro]

nevermind -what- it was - it sounds ugly

I went back and checked it, it's all in time with no artifacts. Are you referring to the fill at the very end? If so, it's kind of a strange fill, but I like it.

I think that is the place: all that happens is the kick sounds like it is behind the bass guitar hence the bass guitar sounds a little eager at that one note but its not 'ugly' and mauseoleum i used to play bass guitar and did so for many a year. So i 'know' what im on about and am miles away from the engineer's you may have experienced. Frankly i did not even bother to listen to your three attempts because it would of been a waste of my time and disk space - the way you rattle on is like an old women

[mauseoleum]

Ouch. Please accept my sincerest apologies if I stepped on someones' precious.


But now with digital it's so easy to align things and it shouldn't bother anyone if something was mentioned that could improve the end result. In my time, hd rec. and adat era it was much more involving for both us players and button operators.. Surely benefitted vendors of coffe and tobacco (at least).

I may sound like an old woman (I was born in 60's) but you do sound like a young girl who was told something but she acts like she's the only one whos got pussy (iow vagina) in the whole universe. Your talent isn't that scarse, is it?


Btw. nothing personal, I didn't know you was the player, I merely pointed out an observation that could only benefit the end result of the recorded song.

[Dean Aka Nekro]

Ouch. Please accept my sincerest apologies if I stepped on someones' precious.

Right, not my precious

But now with digital it's so easy to align things and it shouldn't bother anyone if something was mentioned that could improve the end result. In my time, hd rec. and adat era it was much more involving for both us players and button operators.. Surely benefitted vendors of coffe and tobacco (at least).

Your Point? Geoff would of done that himself if that is what he wanted and it is not out in the first place

I may sound like an old woman (I was born in 60's) but you do sound like a young girl who was told something but she acts like she's the only one whos got pussy (iow vagina) in the whole universe. Your talent isn't that scarse, is it?

Again your point? Where do i mention talent? Maybe your old ears have gone which would explain posting three crap attempts which are boomy and bass-heavy.

Btw. nothing personal, I didn't know you was the player, I merely pointed out an observation that could only benefit the end result of the recorded song.

Again nonsense, the only time i ever heard the track was when Geoff offered it out as a stereo file. neither did i realise i was the player. Nothing personal between this track and me old timer

[JCM]

1. Russet
2. Indigo
3. Nacarat
4. Aeneous
5. Vermilion
6. Nigrine
7. Ultramarine
8. Zinnober
9. Perse
10. Mazarine
11. Morel

[JCM]

Very true. Too bad I stumbled upon this thread much too late. I'll definitely join, time permitting, the next challenge if one such is ever arranged. In case it is not, I can report that there are similar mastering challenges, like this one, being organized at Brad Blackwood's Mastering Demystified forum. The difference is that most who attend and write at the forum are mastering for a living. It's a great place to learn and I highly recommend reading those forums.

I just participated on WUMP 15 over there. It was very fun and educational. There is also one going on at http://www.recordingwebsite.com/forum/i ... &board=2.0

I would like to know how you all are listening to the entries. Are you comparing the mastered versions to the mix? Are you matching levels between the entries? In what oreder did you listen to the entries? How much time , if any , did you take between listening to each entry?

[eduardo_b]

I would like to know how you all are listening to the entries. Are you comparing the mastered versions to the mix? Are you matching levels between the entries? In what oreder did you listen to the entries? How much time , if any , did you take between listening to each entry?

The comparison was the mastered versions (320 bps MP3) to the original file (wav). The levels were very close -- most were -0dBfs or so close it was good enough. Take time between entries to acquire a favorite beverage before hearing another entry in the loudness category? No, but now that I think about it, that would have been helpful.

[eduardo_b]

I just participated on WUMP 15 over there. It was very fun and educational.

What is most interesting is how many ways there are to approach mastering -- both in terms of hardware, software and what one decides the issues might be and how to fix them. All of which says that mastering is still the black art it's always been. The rightness or wrongness of one's choices is in the ear of the critical listener.

You don't hear normal people complaining about what could the ME have been thinking.

[Dean Aka Nekro]

I voted blind, with random playback using foobar2000 and the monitor screen switched off and with a pen and paper, no spectrum analzyer because it would not tell me what my ears favoured. Then wrote down the results, listened again a edited my vote and did the same for Kilroy's, Kim's, bd's, ed's And bManic's versions. So really i had no visual feedback whatsoever

Dean

[Geoff242]

You don't hear normal people complaining about what could the ME have been thinking.

Ya, most people have no idea what we all go through to get a track from post recording to release. I think it's funny that the industry sells these "remastered" versions of music, and most people have no idea what that actually means. They just assume it's better.

[Dean Aka Nekro]

You don't hear normal people complaining about what could the ME have been thinking.

Ya, most people have no idea what we all go through to get a track from post recording to release. I think it's funny that the industry sells these "remastered" versions of music, and most people have no idea what that actually means. They just assume it's better.

You get unreleased 'bonus' tracks of demo's, alternate takes or live tracks!
Oh and its usually alot louder than the first original version

Well that is what i have from all my 'digitally remastered edition' CD's in my collection

[eduardo_b]

You don't hear normal people complaining about what could the ME have been thinking.

Ya, most people have no idea what we all go through to get a track from post recording to release. I think it's funny that the industry sells these "remastered" versions of music, and most people have no idea what that actually means. They just assume it's better.

You get unreleased 'bonus' tracks of demo's, alternate takes or live tracks!
Oh and its usually alot louder than the first original version

Well that is what i have from all my 'digitally remastered edition' CD's in my collection

Agreed. The remastering is often louder in ways that make the originals far more appealing. I'll use the volume control and keep the dynamic range, thank you very much.

I found it interesting and pleasantly surprising that the Beatles 1 albums were not louder and had the same quality sound of the original albums.

[eduardo_b]

You don't hear normal people complaining about what could the ME have been thinking.

Ya, most people have no idea what we all go through to get a track from post recording to release. I think it's funny that the industry sells these "remastered" versions of music, and most people have no idea what that actually means. They just assume it's better.

That's how they get people to rebuy the CDs they bought when they replaced their vinyl versions. Although, frankly, I don't think remastering is a factor for those who simply buy the music they like. My wife has no clue about any technical aspect of audio. Yeah, she knows there are studios because she's seen them on the telly, but that's truly the end of it. Mixing, mastering and anything else is not just a compete mystery but not even a concept. She plays piano and understands music, so she does like seeing the spectrum on the receiver or EQ when music is playing. But, loudness to her is simply the volume knob or control on her Shuffle. She loves music, so it's only about listening to it from an emotional perspective.

I think this is often invisible to those who are immersed in the technology of audio. They don't realize how insignificant it is to 98 percent of the people who listen to music. The only exception is when music is played on a setup that's simply inadequate. When I gave her a Shuffle, she noted that the music didn't have much quality or bass (she's used to the systems in the cars and at home), but I remedied that with $50 earphones. She was quite happy after that, despite the questionable dynamic range of some of the music I loaded onto it for her. It's refreshing, actually. She enjoys the music for what it is, not what it isn't.