Ahoy everyone! I'm here with another mix today, just needs to master by your gifted hands.

this time i tested cheap headphones (Samson Sr850) with headphone eq correction (Sonarworks reference 4) and Crossfeed emulation (Goodhertz Can Opener). It was soooo bright to my headphones after i disabled corrective plugins but i exported how it was.

It's all yours.

https://vocaroo.com/1iEIXCRCGCfB - This is for listen (to worth your time or not)

https://mega.nz/file/K9FU0bzI#JNcYt-iHlrwl3vcmeJmBbopbT7naEAIVp9oSMHtaxpc - This is the .wav file (24 bit 44.1 khz)


This Track proivded by cambridge-mt library. All copyright ownership belongs to artist, or record company, or someone else i don't know.

you can support artist from his bandcamp site here below:

https://davidtyo.bandcamp.com/

 

Last edited: Jun 9, 2021

Once again, you need to set some targets and expectations. It's all fun and games the first and even the second time around, but by now you are seasoned and should know what you want. You might as well be walking into a restaurant and asking for 'something good to eat that I am going to love.'

A few good points, the clarity and openness of you mixing has improved considerably. Your vocal is very well bedded in and seated into the body of the instrumental very well. You music and singing are working together rather than your vocal sitting on top and everything else just being background. You've done a great job locking things in. I haven't looked at the hi-res file but on one listen it sounds detailed, with flat frequency spread, verging on a little bright but very clean and genre appropriate.

A few issues, the hard static panning is cool and very retro but it is going to a pain in the ass if you want this loud. You mix is nice and wide and sounds beautiful but depending on what you want you might have to balance things a bit better.

Hope you get some takers on the spin the post targets, if you are just looking for different takes on the same theme.

Geat job, and good luck.

 

Not sure i have the best monitoring system, but i'm very used to my headphones and yes, can confirm this is a bit too bright. Gonna give it a try later on just so ya'll can bask on the greatness of my mastering skills.

 

enjoy. /tc finalizer/

 

Last edited: Jun 9, 2021

Sure! Where should I send you the Master to? Will you give credits?

 

I liked the song so did this mastering for kicks. I'm not a mastering expert so any critiques are welcome

 

This was mixed, mastered and published in 2017.

It's So Easy To Love You
by David Tyo
released October 29, 2017
Drums, percussion, cello, acoustic and electric guitars, banjo, piano, lead and backup vocals, recording, production, and mixing by David Tyo from October 27-29, 2017.

Who is David Tyo:
http://www.davidtyo.com/

 

If i had seen your reply before i started working i probably woudn't have mastered this,

but the song is cool so here we go

 

I agree with you, pratyahara has the best so far but "need access" to hear your mix? That's just insecure...

 

Apologies, an honest mistake, forgot to make it public, hold your horses friend

 

At first I thought "oh cool for once someone isn't looking for someone elses stems"
but then I was like "wait so, he uploaded a song by another artist to be mastered that has long existed?"

 

I think the man is just trying to up his game with some practice, he probably got the multi-tracks from the Cambridge Music Technology library as he had with his previous mixes that required mastering. Nothing wrong with having a target to shoot at and he is going to get a lot more feedback and participation (though not always of the best quality) if he asks for a master than if he just asks for feed back.

Nothing wrong with any of that, he is motivating people to participate to get what he wants. Smart man.

I actually prefer TheMoss's mix balance to D. Tyo's orginal which is a bit dull & dry but only by a small fraction. Where the original stands out is that it avoids the phase and wash that many of the louder volunteer masters are suffering from.

His balance is great and he to my ears he would have outdone the original if he had ducked the verb/eco a bit with some gating on his vocal reverb and had added some pan automation in certain spots. Anyways it's all preference at a certain point if the reverb and phase issues get worked. He's probably reached a point where proper monitoring and time are the only things holding him back.

 

Oh cool thanks for explaining. I always just used reference mixes by myself but never thought do make a thread about it this way to get advice before hand. So yeah that is smart!

I need to check out Cambridge Music Technology myself to see what it's all about then. I hope they have metal stems, I know sometimes masterclasses provide stems of the track they break down so you can attempt yourself.

 

Here it be. Behold my mighty master. Now excuse while i go cry in a corner

 

This is not his 'mix' at all.
He has 'remastered' an already perfectly mastered stereo track (so, it's the 2nd generation), and offers his remaster to be remastered (to become 3rd generation). He's hiding that fact, as also happened in the first two cases when asking for 'volunteers'.
This 'remaster' shows signs of crude transient shaping abuse, harmonic overdrive, and has terrible +6dB peaks on 5.8, 6.7, 8.9 and 15.5 kHz. DC offset is also very big. EQ-ing has a big -4dB dip in 6-12kHz range.
The basics:
With each re-mastering generation you can only degrade the technical quality of a final stereo track (especially THD and IR).
I already pointed out that this guy's files are suspicious, but no one took notice.
http://audiosex.pro/threads/anyone-volunteer-to-master-my-mix.59227/#post-559986

 

Last edited by a moderator: Jun 9, 2021

Sorry for response everyone!

First of all that is correct to trying get some attention to my mix and your master for educational purposes only. I am self taught audio engineer (mixing engineer) and besides all the resources lying on the internet, i do not hesitate to ask opinions about anyone who got better experience on the field than mine.

I do not gain any income or anything beside experience on the field of mixing and mastering at all. Almost all of the tracks are belong to cambridge-mt library for 'educational purposes' only. So there is nothing wrong with that to share to gain some knowledge on my workflow.

Thank you for all kind comments btw. I am working so hard on mixing stuff and trying to gain some income with dayjob already before stepping in to my professional career (i hope so).

If the tension of this topic getting a bit more lower, i am glad to announce i will listen all of master attempts and gonna make mine. Then i will compare all of them for analyzing differences, approaches etc.

AND...

I am sorry but this is my 'mix' with using only 'raw' , 'unprocessed' channels that artist recorded by himself. I can upload project file with all plugins so you can bypass and check if you gonna satisfy.

ps: i did not over mastered any track at all. it is just a mix. I will master it when i get home from work.

 

Maybe being honest upfront about the source of your material might help avoid topics like these that as you mention "Get tensed"?
Especially when it's not yours to begin with. I guess nobody will blame you for being honest.
But as you see they do thou afterwards when they find out you haven't been.

Just sayin'

 

To be clear: This multitracks granted from
"The 'Mixing Secrets' Free Multitrack Download Library"

Also from the site: "All downloads from this site are provided free of charge for educational purposes only, and the material contained in them should not be used for any commercial purpose without the express permission of the copyright holders."

I did exactly the same thing. I do not have to access any studio or source to improve my skills with totally 'educational' purpose. So i used open source to work. I did not request or claim any credit; or expected any currency. I did not add it to my portfolio, but i will try to reach copyright owner and it's totally appropriate.

I did not intend to bother anyone, or kept pressure for checking my project and share their knowledge with me. I just expect to share some knowledge and some guidence from volunteers.

No need to bullying. I will keep practising and trying to be better at my work. And hear different people's
perspective. Rest is none of my business.

 

I downloaded the stream from the site (it's in mp3@128, though), and I can confirm that all of the deficiencies mentioned by me above are present in the original stereo track. So I guess I was wrong about you having a part in it. From technical point of view that track is very bad.
Anyway you should give credit to author (author's name, the title of the song, recording date). That's a matter of honesty.

 

Last edited by a moderator: Jun 9, 2021

Dear friend, i got the original recorded stems as .wav file. artist donated it to the site for to improve their skills. Like i did. I mixed start to finish without any reference.

All i ask to get a mastered version so i hear the good and bad things about the mix. What can be improved at the master stage, weaknesses and strong parts. I don't have anyone to guide me so i'm trying to get opinions from internet. No fraud, just maximum effort to learn. Then I master by myself and compare with all of 'em in the daw with analyzing tools. That's all.