Members catphish Posted August 24, 2007 Members Share Posted August 24, 2007 I suppose it could if you wanted it to, but it doesn't normally right? If anything I'd think the overall compression would squash boominess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members fretless Posted August 24, 2007 Members Share Posted August 24, 2007 I suppose it could if you wanted it to, but it doesn't normally right? If anything I'd think the overall compression would squash boominess. eq'ing is a part of mastering so it could if that is the goal . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Fireball_73 Posted August 24, 2007 Members Share Posted August 24, 2007 You would be suprised. The guys who did our demo took the natural mid-range dominance of my bass, then made it sound even better. My band is like Motorhead crossed with the Artic Monkeys in some songs! You would be suprised about how adding high end in mixing makes the lower fundamentals of your bass sound better... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Kindness Posted August 24, 2007 Moderators Share Posted August 24, 2007 It doesn't if the engineer doesn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members T. Alan Smith Posted August 24, 2007 Members Share Posted August 24, 2007 It doesn't if the engineer doesn't. +1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Kindness Posted August 24, 2007 Moderators Share Posted August 24, 2007 +1. I think it's a rare occurrence that both of us would have to respond in a thread. We usually say the same thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators ThudMaker Posted August 24, 2007 Moderators Share Posted August 24, 2007 . . . ...It can if you want, or it doesn't have to, if you don't. All of these answers are very good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Smokinfiddler Posted August 24, 2007 Members Share Posted August 24, 2007 +1 to all:thu: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members catphish Posted August 24, 2007 Author Members Share Posted August 24, 2007 . . . ... yeah, I understand that, but the idea of mastering doesn't go hand in hand with adding boominess, correct? FYI, IMO Boominess=do not want. Here's the thing the bass on our album sounds titties, if I do say so myself, right now. It's exactly how we all want it to sound on the album. However, my guitarist thinks that mastering ALWAYS adds boominess. He thinks it's just part of what happens during mastering, and due to that concern he thinks we might want to drop the bass a bit. I don't think that's the case and have told him he's wrong but he's still worried. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators ThudMaker Posted August 24, 2007 Moderators Share Posted August 24, 2007 "Mastering" involves taking all your songs that will be on the CD and making them the same loudness (db) and making sure the tracks are similarly eq'd spectrally across the entire album. A quality mastering house/engineer has high end multi-band compressors/brick wall limiters at their disposal. If you've provided the mastering engineer with mixes that aren't boomy now, and have already been mixed down to somewhat similar eq settings on your songs, the mastered final product isn't going to be boomy unless the mastering engineer is a novice/idiot. And if they give you a product that you are completely dissatisfied with, can't you make them redo it? The other thing I would do is ask the mastering house for samples of their work. If you like their work, and it's similar to your music style, you will probably like the end result, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members fretless Posted August 24, 2007 Members Share Posted August 24, 2007 yeah, I understand that, but the idea of mastering doesn't go hand in hand with adding boominess, correct? FYI, IMO Boominess=do not want. Here's the thing the bass on our album sounds titties, if I do say so myself, right now. It's exactly how we all want it to sound on the album. However, my guitarist thinks that mastering ALWAYS adds boominess. He thinks it's just part of what happens during mastering, and due to that concern he thinks we might want to drop the bass a bit. I don't think that's the case and have told him he's wrong but he's still worried. nope tell him to relax Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members BEAD Posted August 24, 2007 Members Share Posted August 24, 2007 "Mastering" involves taking all your songs that will be on the CD and making them the same loudness (db) and making sure the tracks are similarly eq'd spectrally across the entire album. A quality mastering house/engineer has high end multi-band compressors/brick wall limiters at their disposal. If you've provided the mastering engineer with mixes that aren't boomy now, and have already been mixed down to somewhat similar eq settings on your songs, the mastered final product isn't going to be boomy unless the mastering engineer is a novice/idiot. And if they give you a product that you are completely dissatisfied with, can't you make them redo it? The other thing I would do is ask the mastering house for samples of their work. If you like their work, and it's similar to your music style, you will probably like the end result, too. +1 The guy who mastered our CD gave us a burned copy on a cheap CD to listen too first, in case we wanted him to change it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members BEAD Posted August 24, 2007 Members Share Posted August 24, 2007 nope tell him to relax He's playing you to try to get more guitar dominance in te mix. Next he'll want to cut drums and vocals back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators ThudMaker Posted August 24, 2007 Moderators Share Posted August 24, 2007 He's playing you to try to get more guitar dominance in te mix. Next he'll want to cut drums and vocals back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members T. Alan Smith Posted August 24, 2007 Members Share Posted August 24, 2007 yeah, I understand that, but the idea of mastering doesn't go hand in hand with adding boominess, correct? FYI, IMO Boominess=do not want. Here's the thing the bass on our album sounds titties, if I do say so myself, right now. It's exactly how we all want it to sound on the album. However, my guitarist thinks that mastering ALWAYS adds boominess. He thinks it's just part of what happens during mastering, and due to that concern he thinks we might want to drop the bass a bit. I don't think that's the case and have told him he's wrong but he's still worried. Hmmm...maybe his perception of boominess is different from yours. I would think that a boomy sounding album = a poor mastering job...IF the project didn't sound boomy beforehand. If your that satisfied with how you sound at this point, I'd be somewhat picky about where and who does my mastering. You and your guitarist should be a part of the process as well, to ensure your getting exactly what your paying for. Make SURE to set aside at least 1/3rd of your production budget for the mastering process. Yes, it's THAT important if you are going commercial. Mastering is the LAST place to cut corners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DevilRaysFan Posted August 24, 2007 Members Share Posted August 24, 2007 It doesn't if the engineer doesn't. Yup. Normalizing for digital mastering and compression will simulate "peak pulling"(for lack of better terms) to get as close to 0db as possible. This (seems to) add to dynamic range but shouldn't effect the audio spectrum of your bass tone at all........... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members catphish Posted August 24, 2007 Author Members Share Posted August 24, 2007 He's playing you to try to get more guitar dominance in te mix. Next he'll want to cut drums and vocals back. To some degree, I'm sure that is accurate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members BEAD Posted August 24, 2007 Members Share Posted August 24, 2007 To some degree, I'm sure that is accurate. It's funny how about 90% of all guitarists are the same asshole deep, deep down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Kindness Posted August 24, 2007 Moderators Share Posted August 24, 2007 yeah, I understand that, but the idea of mastering doesn't go hand in hand with adding boominess, correct? FYI, IMO Boominess=do not want. Here's the thing the bass on our album sounds titties, if I do say so myself, right now. It's exactly how we all want it to sound on the album. However, my guitarist thinks that mastering ALWAYS adds boominess. He thinks it's just part of what happens during mastering, and due to that concern he thinks we might want to drop the bass a bit. I don't think that's the case and have told him he's wrong but he's still worried. Who is doing your mastering? Will you be involved in the process? Simply telling the engineer that you love the bass sound as it is and want to avoid anything that might cause boominess should be sufficient. There is nothing about the process that inherently does anything. It is simply tweaking the final mix. Same as you would with any other track in the mix. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members catphish Posted August 24, 2007 Author Members Share Posted August 24, 2007 It's funny how about 90% of all guitarists are the same asshole deep, deep down. He's not even the slightest bit of an asshole. He has very minimal ego. As hard headed as we both are, we get along pretty damn well. I understand your point though. People who play guitar typically want to be the spotlit star. He is that way sometimes, but not all that often, and he's gotten better in the time we've played together. He used to try things like "well, the guitar player sang this one...so I should sing it." But that flew about as far as you can throw the lady in Mike F.s Avatar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members catphish Posted August 24, 2007 Author Members Share Posted August 24, 2007 Simply telling the engineer that you love the bass sound as it is and want to avoid anything that might cause boominess should be sufficient. Exactly what I plan on doing. Well...I should say, what we plan on doing. i won't actually be there. *cringe* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Kindness Posted August 24, 2007 Moderators Share Posted August 24, 2007 It is a boring process and you're glad you won't be sitting there. The most successful sessions I've had are where I come in with my final mixes and one or two cds that have the same overall sound/vibe that I am going for. It gives the engineer a great reference to use. In fact, many times the engineer will spend a good deal of time A/Bing the cd vs my album to make sure the process is headed the right direction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Cortfan Posted August 24, 2007 Members Share Posted August 24, 2007 How did you record the bass track? Direct into the board, mic a cab, both?? Most bass tracks end up sounding like '68 P bass 99% of the time. Our band recorded all day Sunday and Monday, and my short scale Musicmaster going thru my POD 2.0 (compression on, black panel model)-then direct to the board sounded exactly like a P, which is what we wanted. Most of the time a mic'ed bass cab will give a better chance of "boominess" than going direct. We record for other bands and when we do 2 bass tracks, 99 times out of 100 they drop the mic'ed cab track. Brand new roundwounds sometimes twang like a Telecaster. We usually use old flats for best results. ymmv Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members catphish Posted August 24, 2007 Author Members Share Posted August 24, 2007 It is a boring process and you're glad you won't be sitting there. The most successful sessions I've had are where I come in with my final mixes and one or two cds that have the same overall sound/vibe that I am going for. Yup, doing that too. We've been doing that throughout the mixing process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members catphish Posted August 24, 2007 Author Members Share Posted August 24, 2007 How did you record the bass track? Direct into the board, mic a cab, both?? Most bass tracks end up sounding like '68 P bass 99% of the time. Our band recorded all day Sunday and Monday, and my short scale Musicmaster going thru my POD 2.0-then direct to the board sounded exactly like a P, which is what we wanted. Most of the time a mic'ed bass cab will give a better chance of "boominess" than going direct. We record for other bands and when we do 2 bass tracks, 99 times out of 100 they drop the mic'ed cab track. Brand new roundwounds sometimes twang like a Telecaster. We usually use old flats for best results. ymmv did both. Kept the mic'd track in the mix for about half of the stuff. Your exactly right, on the stuff we wanted more big fat bottom we kept it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.