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

[mauseoleum]

http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/3/25/ ... eoleum.mp3


That's it. I redid it with fresh ears (my original for-fun take is on previous page or so).

Just like my first version - done on my beat-up walkman headphones (yes walkman). There was a 'phones thread around here, no?


Clearly (to me), this is the "it" version, i.e. the "reference". To my criteria, it sounds the most like a "song", i.e., a cohesive unit versus other versions. (== on my 'phones that is)


To me it's pretty obvious that the majority didn't understand how the bass should sound. (As a bass player I had similar problems with smart engineers).


The cymbals/hats are absolute bitches here, though. Or at least on my thing. Otoh, this may be due the original encoding artifacts? Plus there's something weird @2.12... sounds like fkedup cassete tape.


How do the cymbals/hats sound to you?

[Shy]

Sorry but it sounds extremely wrong. The bass is unbalanced and very, very loud. Lower it properly and the entire track will sound much better. It may sound good with your walkman headphones, but that doesn't mean it's a reference of any kind, just like the headphones aren't. As for the high frequency artifacts, they're due to crappy mp3 quality. Use LAME 3.98 with at least -V 1 profile.

[mauseoleum]

Interesting. I used 3.97 and -q0 in cmdline.
Funny thing is that of all versions, my last version on my phones sounds cohesive, with properly focused, muscular bass. I'm sorry, I don't have the multitrack to lower it.

[eduardo_b]

Let's put all of this in perspective. Mastering is not a contest and it's not mixing. It's supposed to be a relatively transparent process that improves the mix both on its own and as part of a larger work -- such as an album. So, there are no winners or losers, just preferences.

Mastering is also, within narrow limits, subjective. It's not to fix the mix but make it better to the degree that's possible without doing damage or attempting to remix via mastering. That's it. To be really meaningful, all versions should have been done with the same monitoring and plug-ins. Because this is impossible, the results are hardly A-B comparisons.

All of which is to say, let's keep it nice and friendly, and let's just talk about why we made the choices we did, how we did it and what that might mean in the real world. Then it can be a learning experience, and a pleasant one at that.

[kilroy]

Kilroy, I really liked the punchy sound of yours; somehow the track felt more "together", warmer, but it seemed a little muddy to me overall. Maybe I've been listening too long.

Bduffy, your hearing is just fine...the only way I could ever get this so that it would not set my teeth on edge was to wipe the top end right off.

Really though, posting this twas only intended to be a wind up of sorts. In hind sight, it was a somewhat ill conceived play.


My apologies to bmanic and Geoff...

[Dean Aka Nekro]

The Original Eleven:

01: Nacarat
02: Aeneous
03: Ultramarine
04: Vermilion
05: Morel
06: Indigo
07: Perse
08: Russet
09: Nigrine
10: Zinnober
11: Mazarine

I will not add the whys and the whats i think of each one both positive and negative: i did a blind listening test and that is the what my ears told me

Edit: and bManic spotted 12! thanks mate
Re-Edit: Vote revision after further A/B listening to my top two although its so damned close to call: similar to the bduffy/Kim decision

The Additional Five:

01: bduffy
01: Kim
> Honestly you two i like both equally and can not put one above the other
otherwise i would be lying to you.
Kim your version: the Vocal sounds more intimate and the mix a touch
more spacious than bduffy's
Bduffy your version: is more instrumentally focused but the vocal is still
clear and a touch brighter than Kim's.
03: eduado_b
> For everything you preached on the thread you also practised and did so
well although for me it was a bit too dry and dull to my ear but i still
really like it and the criticism implied is meant in a very minor way
04: Kilroy
> Although bottom heavy the mix still cuts through most of the way through
but the drums are too overpowering however each element is still audible
05: bManic
> Too much bass and low-mid heavy which in turn leaves little top end and
non of the criticle mid/high-mid range is audible enough and does not cut
through at all which is important to me

Dean/Nekro

[Dean Aka Nekro]

Let's put all of this in perspective. Mastering is not a contest and it's not mixing. It's supposed to be a relatively transparent process that improves the mix both on its own and as part of a larger work -- such as an album. So, there are no winners or losers, just preferences.

Mastering is also, within narrow limits, subjective. It's not to fix the mix but make it better to the degree that's possible without doing damage or attempting to remix via mastering. That's it. To be really meaningful, all versions should have been done with the same monitoring and plug-ins. Because this is impossible, the results are hardly A-B comparisons.

All of which is to say, let's keep it nice and friendly, and let's just talk about why we made the choices we did, how we did it and what that might mean in the real world. Then it can be a learning experience, and a pleasant one at that.

Totally agree eduardo, but i really can not list what stuff i used and my thoughts in full until all votes are in as Geoff has all that information
and its part if not the most part of the whole thread and also really looking forward to what Geoff himself has to say which will come after the votes are closed, but when all is revealed then yes that would be good man. Also it looks like me and you are jumping aboard the kind offer made by Kim so hopefully what i have gained from taking part in this will carry on it to
that

Best regards friend and take care

Dean

*Me and Serious are two words that rarely go together but i certainly do not mean everything is one big joke to Me. I think all work and no play can be really bad for one's health so even when tracking i will try to get all musician's relaxed, some banter going on and it works for me and seems to get the most honest and great takes from musician's, in fact i would say social skills and diplomacy are one hell of an important aspect of recording unless you happen to be a one man show, i do not find one man shows very appealing as both a musician and as an engineer because i feel without that interaction and being able to bounce ideas around it would be extremely boring and very uninspiring*

[bmanic]

The Original Eleven:

01: Aeneous
02: Nacarat
02: Aeneous
03: Ultramarine
04: Vermilion
05: Morel
06: Indigo
07: Perse
08: Russet
09: Nigrine
10: Zinnober
11: Mazarine

Check your list.. You have one entry twice.

Cheers!
bManic

[bmanic]

1: Vermilion (very well controlled highs, perhaps too much? It's still the most "natural" of the bunch in my opinion. Perhaps it's a bit too controlled overall)
2: Indigo (quite natural but too much reverb still present, also a bit too "careful")
3: Russet (nice focus, you killed the reverb! Good work! It's too muddy though)
4: Nacarat (good focus but it sounds too "processed" and highs (2-4kHz) hurt a lot)
5: Perse (highs are well controlled but too much room/reverb comes through)
6: Aeneous (mids and highs hurt my ears.. too "tinny" sounding)
7: Mazarine (too squashed, commercial radio sounding weirdness)
8: Morel (too squashed, weird frequency response)
9: Ultramarine (highs hurt my ears, a lot)
10: Nigrine (lots of added reverb or widening that brings out the original crappy reverb)
11: Zinnober (very strange frequency response)


Interestingly what today seems to annoy me the most with the original mix are the highs. It varies from day to day I guess. Yesterday it was all about the rampant bass for me but today it's the highs. My own master has also way too much highs and they bug the hell out of me!

@kilroy: I like the "punch" you have on each kick. How the heck you get that? Your frequency response is a bit funky though which is weird as that is usually what I think you always nail 100% every time.

Cheers!
bManic

[Nokenoku]

I'm very surprised you hear hurting highs in Nacarat, Aeneous and Ultramarine but not in Perse. You even say "highs are well controlled". o.O

Now I'm interested in what your listening-equipment is. Mine are the Event TR8 and the AKG K-601.
To me the highs in perse are hurting and it's like only the very high highs are there, but under them there's a hole.

[Compyfox]

I didn't want to start a war regarding a "price" or something, I was just curious there. So thanks for the answer.

If there's another challenge, I might be interested to join. Just make it prominent enough on the boards, so that even I can find it.

[bmanic]

I'm very surprised you hear hurting highs in Nacarat, Aeneous and Ultramarine but not in Perse. You even say "highs are well controlled". o.O

Now I'm interested in what your listening-equipment is. Mine are the Event TR8 and the AKG K-601.
To me the highs in perse are hurting and it's like only the very high highs are there, but under them there's a hole.

There are a few possibilities to the why/what is going on:

1) We talk about different highs, for me high = 4-7kHz, I should perhaps call them high-mids. Anything above 10kHz needs to be completely funked to hurt, in my opinion. Usually too much energy in the very-highs (10kHz and up) means the track will feel thin or hypey (depending on the relation to the bass). Perhaps the "hole" you mention is what I perceive as "controlled".

2) You are more sensitive than me to other frequencies. My Achilles heel is around 2 to 5kHz where I cannot tolerate brittle sounds (aliasing distortion, too much energy or spikes).

3) I listened to the tracks at home on Akg K-701 headphones (and my panasonic boombox) which might present the frequencies differently.

4) I was sensitive to a particular frequency area today morning (when I did the listening), like I clearly said in the post, I was a bit surprised by this myself. Yesterday I thought Nacarat was the best but not today. Yesterday I thought I had the balance of the highs correct in my own master, but not today.

5) "Perse" had more bass and mids in relation to the highs compared to the others which makes the overall feel less fatiguing.

6) You might have much better hearing than me. Mine is not bad nor damaged but I'm certainly not one who can hear past 20kHz either.

Cheers!
bManic

[Dean Aka Nekro]

thanks for the spot bManic friend, late nite voting!

[mauseoleum]

Hi, ladies!


http://www.fileden.com/files/2008/3/25/ ... m_mstr.mp3


The last attempt. Obviously 'phones mastering isn't for me. This one I checked on speakers, too...

[Nokenoku]

1) We talk about different highs, for me high = 4-7kHz, I should perhaps call them high-mids. Anything above 10kHz needs to be completely funked to hurt, in my opinion. Usually too much energy in the very-highs (10kHz and up) means the track will feel thin or hypey (depending on the relation to the bass). Perhaps the "hole" you mention is what I perceive as "controlled".

...

3) I listened to the tracks at home on Akg K-701 headphones (and my panasonic boombox) which might present the frequencies differently.

...

6) You might have much better hearing than me. Mine is not bad nor damaged but I'm certainly not one who can hear past 20kHz either.

The AKG K-701 should be fine (the K-601 are actually quite similar, but if I remember correctly the K-701 even have a little bit more highs), but generally I can rather hear hurting highs on monitors/boxes.
I can also hear those highs through the AKG K-601, but they're (nearly) not hurting (but still fatiguing).

We really talk of different highs I guess. I just used an analyser to actually find out, what's bugging me with the perse version. And yes, it's something, which occurs at 20kHz.

As you can see, there's something at 20kHz, but at 5kHz to 18kHz it's rather dark (opposed to another version with more presence). That's the "hole" I was talking about.