Choosing the right mastering engineer for your project

Hey Twiddlers,

So I'm finally finished with the mixing process of the latest album for my main project, and my partner and I really want to invest in a proper mastering job for the album. We've already posted on Gearslutz with a song to be mastered as a sample for various ME's to download and take a shot at it, and we've gotten in like 18 different submissions. It was quite an honor to say the least. Unfortunately, nothing has GRABBED us, or completely satisfied us off the bat. There have only been a handful of them that are up there in terms of what we're looking for. Most were either too quiet, limited to hell, flat and dull or just not gelling. There are two we're considering, and then I received another this week from a well known mastering facility from an ME that has some very major creds... Strangely, this one seemed on the too quiet scale, and also a bit murky (not as bright as we'd like).

There are a few issues that we're trying to figure out at this point:

A. Should we just keep searching endlessly through almost every mastering engineer we find to seek out the "perfect" master sample for our music, or rather go with the best even if it's not ideal and try to work with the ME to drive a bit more gain, sculpt it, brighten it, tighten it, etc?

B. Where are we in music today in terms of loudness wars? I know the whole loudness thing is dying out and even the top ME's are competing less with each other in terms of one upping each other. Fyi, the project is essentially a synthpop album with hip hop and indie dance-rock elements, tinged in an 80's pop style. It's modern, and has indie-mainstream crossover potential but it's still weird and dark. Our aspirations in terms of market/style/impact lie somewhere in between the Gorillaz/Die Antwoord/N.E.R.D. realm and the Penguin Prison/Neon Neon side of things. So, really, we don't 100% know where our market is yet, but the album is so eclectic that we're planning on using CMJ and Jango Radio, etc. campaigns to find out where our music resonates the best. But for the sake of simplicity, we figure we should go competitively loud while still maintaining as much dynamics as possible. With that all in mind, should we be fierce and seek out mastering that's as loud as your typical EDM banger of today? (We've been A/Bing received submissions of the master with SHM's Don't You Worry Child. Yes, I know, wait to be obvious.) Or should we ignore the whole level stuff and settle for a really good dynamic master with a volume level that's equivalent to early 90's tracks, which is kind of what we've been getting in in terms of submissions?

I know this is all pretty much subjective, but if we are investing so much time and money into this and aspire toward it, we want to make sure that our song fits in, as far as levels, with potential DJ sets, podcasts, film/tv/commercial licensing, etc etc.

Any thoughts, ideas, etc are much appreciated. Anyone been in or currently facing a similar situation?

Thanks!

LV

P.S. one of the songs on the album is called Lane Visitor.... and yes, the title of the song was created before my watmm name was coined lol

have you tried mastering it yourself? Worth a shot to just compare to other people's work. Even though it takes professional skill to make a good master, ultimately what matters is do you like it or not, does it compliment the track or hurt it, things like that.

Also the only other recommendation I can offer is to seek out mastering engineers like Thomas Dimuzio, Taylor Dupree who are sound artists/electronic musicians in their own right. I've found much more satisfying results when using people like this. And even in some of the masters Taylor sent us we had to go through 2-3 iterations before I Was satisfied with it.

and lastly, and this is just a question since I haven't heard the track. Do you think the mix is top notch? Did you leave enough dynamic range in it so that a mastering engineer can have as much to work with as possible? If you're compressing or limiting your master bus before handing it off to a mastering engineer, make sure the transients in it are still very powerful and not rounded off too much. The less dynamic range you hand off to an engineer the less they'll have to work with. If you asked the gearslutz msg board to do this, did anybody tell you the mix was good/bad/average/couldbeimproved anything like that? Mastering can only improv a track so much, but the mix plays a much bigger role in if its going to sound good in the end

i think the only reason to play into the loudness wars is to sound 'similar' to people in whatever genre you're working in.
More importantly i think is can your track be played very loudly on a massive system and still sound as good as it does at a normal listening volume.

Another key thing to consider is that while you don't think it sounds perfect, they might be mastering your mix to sound optimal on many different systems.

  On 11/8/2013 at 3:27 PM, chim said:

Another key thing to consider is that while you don't think it sounds perfect, they might be mastering your mix to sound optimal on many different systems.

this is a pretty good assumption.

dont have much knowledge in the field but figured id give my two cents:

are you comparing your mastered track to the others that you've done? cause then of course it wont sound exactlly what you're looking for. i bet when they master the whole album it would sound better (though there is the possibility itd be shit). you need something to compare too. but like you said, you can work with whomever you choose and tell them exactly what you want then.

personally id much rather go for dynamics over "loudness," especially if you are making something like synthpop but that me.

I can personally recommend Christopher Leary (aka Ochre). He's mastered worked by the likes of Christ., Jasper TX (and cubus!). Check his stuff out here - http://melograf.com/faq/

It's a two way process to, he'll master the tracks based on your request of how you'd like it to sound - he'll send it back and either you give the go ahead or request further tweaks.

Guys, thanks so much for the ideas and insight so far. I think you guys are right about not worrying too much regarding loudness. As far as the mixes, yes, we've gotten them to a point where we feel they are pretty much as good as we can get them. We could keep adjusting and fine tuning, but we've been doing that for so long already, that we may have reached a point where it's become a bit trite to keep changing. All of our friends and some music colleagues have thought they sounded great and pro, so I guess that's a good sign. I think it's easy to overthink the mastering process especially when considering the money you're putting in and most importantly, the fact that it's permanent and once you release it, that's it. Having OCD and being a perfectionist can sometimes be aggravating (other times it can be your best friend) (:

  On 11/8/2013 at 3:27 PM, chim said:

Another key thing to consider is that while you don't think it sounds perfect, they might be mastering your mix to sound optimal on many different systems.

Agreed.. We haven't really tested the masters anywhere except my monitors and my car (and my headphones). That could be a changer.

I also feel like the record sounds nice warm, even if it's not sparkly and sheen in the ideal way i may have wanted it. considering the darker-edged synthpop vibe we're going for, i should probably consider that it doesnt need to be driven hard and super bright and loud to be effective. dynamics and power are probably what matters at the end of the day for what we're trying to do. It's just tempting to want my stuff to sound super bright and top 40 pop sounding, but in reality, it may not do the songs justice. We heard some submissions where they were like that, but they lost a lotta dynamics and were a bit abrasive and cold sounding- glad we didn't go with that. (:

mastering is really a personal taste thing. and you cant judge it on one mix at a time, since the whole album is supposed to work together, and sort of sound like it is a cohesive thing. its a big, big, big, difficult job.

even that is an opinion.

mastering isn't really going to push the project over the edge of meh to amehzing of course. and 99% of the time, just a couple db's of loudness is what 99% of folks think sounds better, whether they are 'wrong' or not.

mastering, from one frame of mind is cold methodical and underplayed.

from another mindset, its massively creative and causes lots of differences to a project.

some engineers use tons of reverb, some slam it with compression, others just make sure it doesnt break the vinyl cutter, etc.

ps: "translation" only exists in the mind of the artist, since the mastering engineer doesn't always know exactly what you had in mind when you wrote recorded and mixed the recording/music.

^ Most definitely... Thank you guys for your input and ideas.

After long listening and contemplating, we decided to go with Dominique Brethes, of Flow Mastering out of London. We like what he did to our sample track in terms of warmth and presence, and getting it decently loud while maintaining the dynamics. He's also a great personality and has very reasonable rates.

You guys may know his work, as he's mastered Ultramarine's latest LP, as well as The Kills, and re-masters of Siouxsie and The Banshees, and Durutti Column. He's also done work with Depeche Mode, The Beloved, and some other great synthpop icons. We're really psyched to have him lay his final touches.

It's a major relief when you finally find a cozy sonic home for your release (: