Fantastic tracks ruined by mastering/mixing.

[radi6404]

Without having read all the other posts I wanted to say that there are many tracks that I love that are ruined by the mixing and mastering. Sometimes the mastering is not even bad, but it just sounds strange and the tracks are strange to listen. One album i love is Boris Blenn - Berlin Future Lounge, a really impressive album with melancholic music in my opniion which is ruined by the mastering. The mixing is loud and the mastering sounds strange. I would love it with oldschool mastering but unfortunately it is mastered in a very specific way I don´t like.

 

There are other impressive albums that have awful mastering, like the one album that sounds similar to Astral Projection by the russian artist. It ireally a beautiful album and the Ambient Galaxy remake sounds impressive, but the mastering and mixing sound strange and are too loud. They also have too much bass and in my opinion it is really a shame that those tracks aren´t mastered like real Astral Projection

 

The new shpongle album doesn´t have the best mastering either. It sounds allright but is not like on Innefable mysteries. It somehow sounds overloaded and a bit busy.

[Balance]

Gotta say that Colin Oood's remastering work has done wonders on class tracks compared to the work Tim Schuldt has done for reissues on Suntrip. All the Dimension 5 reissues sadly just sound flat & boring when I compare them to the original releases.

 

I don't understand it either as Schuldt remastered some DAT stuff as well as Anjuna Records and it sounds amazin.

 

I really love & respect what Suntrip do but the work Schuldt does is not up to standard IMO compared to his work elsewhere.

 

Another album that falls flat for me & I think it's mastering is X-Dream's We Interface. It has some amazing tracks to use in crossover sets for techno/tech-electro but I find I spend way to much time having to adjus them to get good sound.

 

I've spent some time mastering at one of the top studios here in Australia as part of my studies & realize that so often what the artist or labels wants clashes with what the engineer thinks should happen, and more and more one finding it's better to let the engineer doing the mastering/remastering to have his way.

[johnb820]

Something I find amazing about Tim Schuldt's work with suntrip is how he is able to balance all the higher end stuff. It all sounds like this sonic hurricane, blending so effortlessly together to create this wall of harmonics. Sometimes I wish he would let the uniqueness of certain tracks speak for themselves, like he tries to force things that do not necessarily need done, but then of course in the end it's his job to get everything sounding even and he does an amazing job at that. It's so obvious when you hear a suntrip album because they all sound relatively the same. Not the ideas of course, just the final presentation due to Tim Shuldt.

 

Like take MFG for instance. Every single one of their albums have a completely different production style, especially the last one. But you could theoretically force them to sound much more similar. Would we still get to hear the unique concepts they were trying to express with Project Genesis or The Message? I'm not so sure.

 

It's probably more appropriate though to have everything from suntrip sound relatively the same because it makes it easier to DJ. It's probably more important to have a consistency throughout the label's catalog, to better define the direction of goa trance.

[Balance]

I do think a big problem with this scene and elecetronic music in general now is that labels market it for DJs more than listening, so you lose the unique sound of the artist because it's aimed more for the big sound system.

 

I was at a mate's warehouse last night and played some old Goa vs newer Goa on his outdoor PA system. The older stuff didn't sound great on the system but of course the newer stuff sounded amazing. Yet when I listen to older Goa on my headphones or car stereo it sounds great, where as I find a lot of the newer stuff intolerable on headphones. Interesting how the sound design has changed to fit with the market.

[BraneFreeze]

I don't know if it's the mastering or the original material, but I find most of the Crossing Mind tracks incredibly shrill. I can hear the talent, but I just can't stand the sound.

[johnb820]

I don't know if it's the mastering or the original material, but I find most of the Crossing Mind tracks incredibly shrill. I can hear the talent, but I just can't stand the sound.

Crossing Mind is a perfect example. I couldn't stand the way his album sounded to me at home or with headphones, but it probably sounds amazing at the festivals.

[HappyHorse]

Unfortunately we are 2014, and our tracks need to sound good on festivals like Boom, SUn, etc as well, which means modern mastering is somehow a must.

 

 

 

What you mean by "modern mastering"?

[Robbelaar]

The mastering discussion... Boring... Can you repeat what you said on psychedelic.be Agneton? It was something in the range of: I have no clue what it is about, I can only hear when the mastering is terribly messed up.

[Oopie]

Now when I gave it a go have to admit the new EU is horrible. It's very loud, compact and plastic - it's a shame as some of the tracks are really good ones. A prime example of "festival mastering for the large crowds" that holds zero value for home listening.

[Robbelaar]

Some people are complaining that the music is mastered for festival crowds and not for home listening... Dudes... If I could choose I would go for festival mastering any day! It is DANCE music after all... Getting Off Topic...

[Agneton]

I have no clue what it is about, I can only hear when the mastering is terribly messed up.

+1

 

As long as it doesn't sound like Mindsphere CD in Metapsychic Records age, I'm totally fine with everything and - appearently - totally deaf or unsensitive to make any kind of distinction between good and bad mastering. This whole discussion is mostly irrelevant to me, and the same goes for most of the people that I know.

[Anoebis]

What you mean by "modern mastering"?

Powerful, more maximal mastering. This doesn't mean there is no dynamics of course but less then before... But it doesn't infect the music in any (negative) way imo

 

And I think Agenton is right that many people indeed don't focus on mastering so hard, it's more something for music geeks and freaks

[Ormion]

+1

 

As long as it doesn't sound like Mindsphere CD in Metapsychic Records age, I'm totally fine with everything and - appearently - totally deaf or unsensitive to make any kind of distinction between good and bad mastering. This whole discussion is mostly irrelevant to me, and the same goes for most of the people that I know.

Well that's true for me as well. The examples I gave are very extreme. Most of the times it doesn't bother me that much.

[HappyHorse]

Powerful, more maximal mastering. This doesn't mean there is no dynamics of course but less then before... But it doesn't infect the music in any (negative) way imo

 

And I think Agenton is right that many people indeed don't focus on mastering so hard, it's more something for music geeks and freaks

 

 

 

1) About people want to hear good mastereing:

Hmm, first of all if Agneton says that, I do not agree. Nothing personal Elias

This forum is full of Goa Collectors and they demand good stuff - tough crowd

And well, I like that, cause it makes you reset your boundaries to more perfection: we have the know-how to do it.

Becomes a sport

More and more collectors are interested in this topic. Even on the Belgian Goa forum there was a huge topic on it. Our sound systems become better every year, even the cheep: so I think people do mind, I think they hear the difference.

 

 

2) Maximal mastering = Meaning?

a ) That you increase the volume + keep the full dynamics?

b ) Maximize volume and try to keep as much dynamics as possible (so compromise more on dynamics than volume, but keep as much dynamics as you can)?

c ) ... other option?

 

 

3) Besides:

I'm also wondering:

 

Hallucinogen was mastered with 10 dB dynamics (or in that range), and so mastered "classical way". Plus this guys music plays very well at festivals. At parties too, never had a problem.

So why need newer way of mastering than? Or maximalize it?

 

 

Interesting discussion, cause we are also every CD trying to find the right balance within the mastering at Cronomi.

Very nice and challenging exercise

I like this topic: gives me new insights….

[Agneton]

 

 

 

1) About people want to hear good mastereing:

Hmm, first of all if Agneton says that, I do not agree. Nothing personal Elias

That's okay

I just have to be honest here...I can't distinguish between good and bad (to a certain degree), so it would be stupid of me to enter into a discussion about it!

[radi6404]

Altough not goa trance, the album Michael Cassette ‎– Temporarity is one of the best albums when it comes to great melodies and charmonics. It is psychedelic and very alive in my opinion and the melodies and synthsounds are definatly unusual and very good. Unfortunately the mastering is not the best and sounds a bit harsh. With a little better mastering this album would be one of my absolute favourite albums, because the music itself is one of the best I have listened to. I can find myself in those tracks.

[Djuna]

Unfortunately we are 2014, and our tracks need to sound good on festivals like Boom, SUn, etc as well, which means modern mastering is somehow a must.

 

How does that even make sense? There's really no relevant correlation between keeping music dynamic in the mastering process (which you apparently don't see as 'modern', which is a wrong point of view altogether) and how the music is played on PA systems. You think those big speakers can't cope with other than heavily compressed music?

[mars]

 

1) About people want to hear good mastereing:

Hmm, first of all if Agneton says that, I do not agree. Nothing personal Elias

This forum is full of Goa Collectors and they demand good stuff - tough crowd

And well, I like that, cause it makes you reset your boundaries to more perfection: we have the know-how to do it.

Becomes a sport

More and more collectors are interested in this topic. Even on the Belgian Goa forum there was a huge topic on it. Our sound systems become better every year, even the cheep: so I think people do mind, I think they hear the difference.

 

 

2) Maximal mastering = Meaning?

a ) That you increase the volume + keep the full dynamics?

b ) Maximize volume and try to keep as much dynamics as possible (so compromise more on dynamics than volume, but keep as much dynamics as you can)?

c ) ... other option?

 

 

3) Besides:

I'm also wondering:

 

Hallucinogen was mastered with 10 dB dynamics (or in that range), and so mastered "classical way". Plus this guys music plays very well at festivals. At parties too, never had a problem.

So why need newer way of mastering than? Or maximalize it?

 

 

Interesting discussion, cause we are also every CD trying to find the right balance within the mastering at Cronomi.

Very nice and challenging exercise

I like this topic: gives me new insights….

 

 

How does that even make sense? There's really no relevant correlation between keeping music dynamic in the mastering process (which you apparently don't see as 'modern', which is a wrong point of view altogether) and how the music is played on PA systems. You think those big speakers can't cope with other than heavily compressed music?

 

Here we go again... you guys are a piece of work when it comes to mastering that almost holy word that's been so badly used on your forums: "dynamics". There's no point in answering these questions. I prefer to release music rather than pretend to be an expert at anything and "discuss" endlessly about it in a void attempt at filling empty spaces.

 

In short: we work with a reliable sound engineer that, for the last ten years has succeeded in pleasing our artists, the audience and ourselves, that is not "coloring" the tracks after his own "paw", that has never failed us, never delayed us, never bullshitted us. Good work and peace of mind, which allows us to focus and spend more time on other aspects and other releases that are appealing us.

 

Be sure that when we have more than 5-6 people not liking Suntrip's mastering, of course, we'll use another studio!

[radi6404]

How does that even make sense? There's really no relevant correlation between keeping music dynamic in the mastering process (which you apparently don't see as 'modern', which is a wrong point of view altogether) and how the music is played on PA systems. You think those big speakers can't cope with other than heavily compressed music?

Absolutely, the music doesn´t have to have maximal dynamics and be overcompressed to sound good. I don´t like music with loudness chrakater at all and the mastering of hallucinogen sounds good. If the PA-systems can´t play tracks with balanced mastering, than the soundsystem is wrong. Mastering should be balanced in volume so it doesn´t sound awful. Loud mastering is typically a sign of low quality music, when you look at Pop music and RAp music, you will find loud mastering. Quality music doesn´t have that mastering and sounds much better than RAp and Pop songs with loudness charakter.

[HappyHorse]

@ Mars: I just asked what he means by it. I never heard that term "modern mastering" before.

 

Plus: I'm very eager to learn about everyone here, every label, every sound engineer and not argue nor pretend I know everything

And that is the point: learning by asking questions.

 

 

 

Plus I think it's very interesting all label owner here talk openly about how they feel about mastering styles,...etc.

So we can get an insight in eachothers approaches, feelings about sound colors,... and that's a really cool trend imo: so we start understanding the diffrences between the labels.

 

So instead of starting to go in defent modus, we can better write and and explain eachother what we do, so we gain knowlegde so we can improve all steps of production

 

If I would know everything about sound engineering I'd never come here and start asking questions

It looks clear to my language use here I'm not saying "I don't like what you do" or "I know everything about sound".

Not gonna put energy in a "label vs label" thingy: no one learns anything in this type of discussion

 

Opinions differ, and I like that! That's democracy, that's what can makes us grow: "Goa Lives" <3

[Anoebis]

@Happyhhorse: Well, what we do is quiet simple... We use Tim Schuldt That was known before We and 99% of our public are happy, and will keep using him

 

@ Djuna: modern, maximal mastering does not mean there is no dymanics at all. Less compared to before, of course. But not, non. And that was my point, you can't master music like in 1996 anymore if our tracks are played on all big festivals... I saw it many times before. The modern goa tracks that take the crowd into oblivion, while the old school ones have less effect (on HUGE soundsystems) simply because of their mastering.

Honestly... 30% of the tracks I would like to play in my sets, I can't mix with modern goa tracks because the difference is too much. Who wants to go back anyway?

 

For the people that know nothing about mastering, you can have spectral views pretty easily in many programs. There

[Oopie]

I think we ought to remind ourselves the best artists of the 90s have quite a decent mastering, something you can still play at festivals (like someone here pointed out - Hallucinogen for example). Having good dynamics is the key thing in my books. Loudness & overcompression are ridiculous "pop tricks" in mastering that quite often turn the music texture into plastic sounding result. I do think thou, that as of recent all the major goa labels have been quite successful with their final products - the situation is better than 5 years ago.

[HappyHorse]

@Happyhhorse: Well, what we do is quiet simple... We use Tim Schuldt That was known before We and 99% of our public are happy, and will keep using him

 

 

 

 

I never said not use Tim - lol! I actually don't care who uses who.

I care about how they do it and what makes the sound diffrent.

It's all about learning or getting to understand the others point of view.

 

I just asked you: "What do you mean with modern mastereing?"

That's all

So please feel free to explain.

 

Off course 99% likes it, otherwise Suntrip wouldn't sell that much CD's.

Again: it was just a question, cause I'd like to learn from eachother.

So please do not feel offended, I don't wanna put anyone in defend mode

Let's just talk...

 

 

 

 

ON topic: I think the "Brainman - Brain food" album has terrible mastereing.

http://www.discogs.com/Brainman-Brain-Food/release/139485

[Anoebis]

I never said not use Tim - lol! I actually don't care who uses who.

I care about how they do it and what makes the sound diffrent.

It's all about learning or getting to understand the others point of view.

 

I just asked you: "What do you mean with modern mastereing?"

That's all

So please feel free to explain.

I did already on page 2 here, but here is my copy/paste:

 

"Powerful, more maximal mastering. This doesn't mean there is no dynamics of course but less then before... But it doesn't infect the music in any (negative) way imo :)"

[Anoebis]

I think we ought to remind ourselves the best artists of the 90s have quite a decent mastering, something you can still play at festivals (like someone here pointed out - Hallucinogen for example)

True!

The big names managed to stand out, not only musically, but also music quality/mastering-wise Because of that they are still playable on serious soundsystems... many others didn't manage from 1995-1999, and still you have the people that praise that kind of mastering into the sky. Unfair imo...