Mastering & Extreme Compression:Business Decision

[James Dawson]

Hi Guys,

Here's the situation for which I would greatly appreciate your learned views....

An album has been created that fits in the general funk/soul genre. Not exactly top 40, but mainstream because of vocals and elements such as the occasional rapping. It has been mixed and is ready to be sent off for mastering.

1. Do you request mild compression in order to maintain dynamics and prevent listener fatigue?

2. Or do you tell them to "brick wall it and put a smile on it" (compress the hell out of it and eq the bottom and top so it rattles windows and sounds like an ice pick in the ear.)? Afterall, its an mp3 world and this is a business venture...

Thanks,

James

[Jahn]

mild compression only, especially since it's funk. the last thing you need is something screwing with your clean chops. one of my fave tracks is "What is Hip" by Tower of Power - great recorded sound, dynamics that just pop out at you when those horns kick in, that rumble in the beginning from the bass...you get the idea. listeners can just turn it up and enjoy. if it's not going to fight in the Top 40 pop/rap loudness wars, why kill your tracks for posterity?

[James Dawson]

mild compression only, especially since it's funk. the last thing you need is something screwing with your clean chops. one of my fave tracks is "What is Hip" by Tower of Power - great recorded sound, dynamics that just pop out at you when those horns kick in, that rumble in the beginning from the bass...you get the idea. listeners can just turn it up and enjoy. if it's not going to fight in the Top 40 pop/rap loudness wars, why kill your tracks for posterity?

Thanks Jahn! I was leaning towards keeping it something to hear, too! I hate the loudness wars. It really bothers me to listen to some modern (style) mixing but I just thought it may be function of turning into an old fart! LOL

[Sunbreak Music]

Hi Guys,

Here's the situation for which I would greatly appreciate your learned views....

An album has been created that fits in the general funk/soul genre. Not exactly top 40, but mainstream because of vocals and elements such as the occasional rapping. It has been mixed and is ready to be sent off for mastering.

1. Do you request mild compression in order to maintain dynamics and prevent listener fatigue?

2. Or do you tell them to "brick wall it and put a smile on it" (compress the hell out of it and eq the bottom and top so it rattles windows and sounds like an ice pick in the ear.)? Afterall, its an mp3 world and this is a business venture...

Thanks,

James
A competant ME can get it both "good and loud", but I never recommend squashing it.

It just doesn't sound good once it gets to that point.

[rockinrob]

Master it so it's sounds good. No use competing unless it's going straight to top 40 radio. I have 3 songs from 3 different bands in rotation on the college and indie stations here, and none of them were brick walled, and they all sound as good (if not better) then what comes on before or after when I hear them, and just as loud. Top 40 stations add additional compression/limiting anyway, so don't worry about it, it will still sound like sh!t anyway (I'm mean bumpin' :rolleyes: ) if they play it.

You do want to make sure your low end is in order though, otherwise it will sound bad when it's bumped. Just take it to a mastering engineer whose work you're familiar with and it should be fine.

[Greggy]

Hi Guys,

Here's the situation for which I would greatly appreciate your learned views....

An album has been created that fits in the general funk/soul genre. Not exactly top 40, but mainstream because of vocals and elements such as the occasional rapping. It has been mixed and is ready to be sent off for mastering.

1. Do you request mild compression in order to maintain dynamics and prevent listener fatigue?

2. Or do you tell them to "brick wall it and put a smile on it" (compress the hell out of it and eq the bottom and top so it rattles windows and sounds like an ice pick in the ear.)? Afterall, its an mp3 world and this is a business venture...

Thanks,

James

What does the client want?

[James Dawson]

What does the client want?

The client, the artist just wants to sell records AND have it sound good. The concern would be in the battle between fidelity and loudness, sales would be the looser if we sounded much different than others in the field.

Thanks for everyone's comments!

[James Dawson]

Master it so it's sounds good. No use competing unless it's going straight to top 40 radio. I have 3 songs from 3 different bands in rotation on the college and indie stations here, and none of them were brick walled, and they all sound as good (if not better) then what comes on before or after when I hear them, and just as loud. Top 40 stations add additional compression/limiting anyway, so don't worry about it, it will still sound like sh!t anyway (I'm mean bumpin' :rolleyes: ) if they play it.

You do want to make sure your low end is in order though, otherwise it will sound bad when it's bumped. Just take it to a mastering engineer whose work you're familiar with and it should be fine.

Thanks Rob. I have heard what optimod's can do to tune, especially those that are over compressed or have no compression at all.

A local educational station played a live cut from a Mapleshade records artist whose label will not compress at all and only goes live to two track analog. The optimod was pumping all over the place and the deejay even made a comment on what a "rough" recording it was.

It was a great recording hosed by this obsession we have with compression and loundness!

[rob2001]

I was a studio cat on an Indy/top 40 project (female singer) and there has been discussion on this. The engineer/producer/ME, a very well regarded one at that, also mastered a few songs so they could get the songs out to a few A&R people. He's an old school guy and doesn't believe in using compression in this way. First off, i'll say the recordings sound fantastic and when I compare the recordings side by side with some of my favorite stuff, I detect no difference in volume.

Well, they get a few songs over to some people at VH-1. First they say "good stuff" and talk about genre and placement. The next thing they said was "it's not loud enough, the guitars are too loud and the singing is not loud enough".

Now i'm not a pro engineer but i've listened to music for 40 some years and my ears tell me it's a fantastic mix. Everything is audible and nothing is squishing anything else. I think it sounds great. But apparently the people selling the music don't agree and you now have a case of the salesman dictating how somthing should be "built". I haven't heard much lately about how it's gonna work out but I can see the "catch 22" that exists between the music makers and the marketing people.

At least in your case you aren't dealing with top 40 or pop music. I have heard lots about massive compression becoming the norm in new Jazz stuff but if I were you guys i'd tell them to master it, not kill it. Figure you might run into people either way saying either you squashed it or it's not squashed enough. Better to air on the side of good sound quality if you were to ask me.

[LSchefman]

I don't even squash my ad tracks. Honest. I use a pretty light hand with the compressor, And no one complains.

As someone else said, err on the side of good audio if you can!

[James Dawson]

I don't even squash my ad tracks. Honest. I use a pretty light hand with the compressor, And no one complains.

As someone else said, err on the side of good audio if you can!

Thanks Les. That is interesting. My question is sort of based upon generational preferences and second guessing my own decisions.

From my own listening I tend to notice songs with less compression and a bigger stereo spread (commercial, pop stuff). I also have learned a great deal from listening to movie trailers as those guys/gals seem to be able to develop these incredibly detailed sound stages with little reverb, a little delay and judicious use of eq'ing and panning.

I just stared using Logic and it is really a great deal of fun!

[loudboy]

Every young rock music fan I know LOVES the sound of those squashed records. The louder and more distorted, the better.

Even older fans, as shown by the great sales of the Plant/Krauss record that was, IMHO, ruined by the mastering. Flatlined, w/audible clipping, even on the ballads. You'd think people w/the cred of Burnett, Plant and Krauss could've done something, but they obviously signed off...

Not sure about R&B, but if you can find some major label releases in the genre, take a look at them and tell the mastering guy to do that...

[franksguitar]

I prefer recording analog for the warmth so you can saturate the tape and not get the digital white noise or need tube emulation or need to compress to death or be very careful in the recording process then dump the tape to digital domain to edit and add plug ins where very little compression is needed w/tape except kick & bass depending what db input is used (-10 or up to +4)

[MichaelK]

If it's my own recording of my own music, I'm the record label. So I ask the mastering engineer to compress less or more depending only on what I like.

What's the point of all that work, if I end up with something I don't like??

[Ulysses]

Sorry if off topic but curious. Is this the same guitarist James Dawson that lived in south Louisiana in the 1970's?

[enharmonic]

I say preserve as much dynamic range as possible. It will all get crushed enough once converted to MP3 anyhow (itunes etc).

With compression, less is often more...unless going for a particular effect. On a master, i say only a much as needed...and then maybe a little less than that.

Good luck with your release!:dude

[James Dawson]

Sorry if off topic but curious. Is this the same guitarist James Dawson that lived in south Louisiana in the 1970's?

Sorry, but no.