Mastering

Mastering, it’s noted on most CDs somewhere as “Mastered by so-and-so at such-a-place”.  Recording, engineering and even mixing are somewhat obvious as to what they are but mastering has remained more mysterious until fairly recently.

Mastering grew out of the necessity to prepare finished audio tracks so that they could be cut to vinyl.  Too much low-frequency information for example could pop the needle out of the grove so mastering made certain that wouldn’t happen by using eq and other tools when they transferred the recordings to vinyl.  Eventually the process involved making small eq and compression optimizations to finished mixes and perhaps editing the completed mixes as well before they were sent to CD replication houses.  At one point it was a fairly transparent process and therefore somewhat steeped in mystery.  One thing was clear however – a good mastering engineer had an objective view of the material and a room designed for critical listening.  The goal of a mastering facility was to make sure that an album would translate on the vast majority of playback systems and ensure that the collection of songs on the album sounded like they belonged together.  That’s still the case today in large part but there is also a growing trend for some mastering engineers or facilities to put their own stamp or ego into the finished product.  Mastering can now be a major part of the final sound of a product.  So the question is, should you master your projects or not?

Recording engineers, mixers and producers are divided on this topic.  Some would say that they’ve put all this time into getting a project to sound a certain way and the client is happy so why make yet another change to the finished mix?  Others might say that it’s an integral part of the process and absolutely necessary to make sure that the audio will translate in the real world.  There are also many tools now that can be used in small studios that give virtually anyone the ability to “master” a project.  However, the key ingredient is still a well-trained set of ears with a room and gear designed for critical listening.  Most studios are designed for recording and it’s rare to find a control room that can match the listening environment of a modest mastering facility. 

The bottom line (sort of):  I believe that mastering via a facility or engineer that approaches projects with the intention of making them translate well on a variety of systems can take a good-sounding project and make it great by adding that final sheen or polish not possible without the proper tools or expertise.  I’m not a fan of mastering to make a CD louder at the expense of dynamic range.  If you’re happy with a mix and the client is happy, then mastering should make everyone even happier by maintaining the integrity of the mix and sound without adding someone else’s style or stamp to the project.  If you want that stamp you can hire a mixing engineer with a particular style but I don’t believe that the mastering engineer should add anything more.  Ultimately the decision is up to you.  Sometimes the best mastering engineer might even say “I’m not going to do anything to this song” and that’ll be the right approach.  I urge you to research and listen to find a mastering facility that matches your own goals because at the end of the day, your clients (or you as the artist) are the ones you need to take care of first and the listening populace generally still views mastering as a mysterious part of the recording process anyway.