shadowfax wrote:at the end of the day it's about the song..not the production..production needs to good enough to hear the song ok of course..I think foolomons example is very interesting from this point of view.
best to all , Kevin
Perhaps you misread or misunderstood what I wrote. I DON'T think mastering is just about getting levels right, what I'm saying is in a practical real world that probably all you need to concern yourself with. So, no I don't need to go back anywhere and read anything. I am well aware of the original intent behind mastering, much of which is really not all that applicable to single tracks anyway - tracks that for most people invariably end up as MP3's on some website not being listened to.foolomon wrote:Doug: both versions were printed to the K-14 spec, so the levels shouldn't be too low.
Ian: I understand what you're saying, but I'll counter that if you think mastering is simply about getting levels correct then I think you need to go back and read up on what mastering intends to accomplish.
polgara wrote:hi Larry ,where do yo roll off your top end when you are finishing or mastering ,you have a nice cut off point and so does Ian (sherz) it has a nice soft kind of feel to the high frequencies . my finished stuff still sounds quite harsh in the highs ,and i don`t know where to cut off before it starts getting too dull.
shadowfax wrote:Well..I know you don't wanna hear this but the "before" is much better than the "after" before sounds more natural, the vox on the after is thin and sharp amongst other things..you've got a perfectly good song in the "before"
just my opinion though..Kevin
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests