The mastered version is brighter, louder, has more depth and better dynamics; however, the highs are a bit harsh and less focused, and the bass is a bit thinner and flatter.
The differences among the files are very clear. The mastered version is more convincing as a whole, but at the cost of some detail and warmth.

It's not a good idea to use videos for such comparisons. The WebM format is lossy, and there are better players than YouTube's online player. Therefore, you should have posted separate WAVs packed into FLACs for download instead.
For blind A/B testing in an audio player, 8-second loops are ideal.

 

I charge $15-$30 a track and I'm broke. I work with what I have. You don't need to treat your room for headphones which is why I consider them a cheap and valuable option. Andrew Scheps can make stuff sound amazing on headphones and so can other people.

Now if you want to buy me some better speakers and room treatment materials I'll gladly send you my address for shipping

 

People buy the track or buy the mastering service? I charged $15 for this. Not $150. I also give detailed mix feedback to clients (they usually ignore it even if they're minor changes) and try to prep the mix for the best master. Mastering is only 3-5% of process. I've never heard someone dislike a track unmastered and then like that track mastered. Saying mastering is the difference between someone buying a track and not buying a track is kind of insane imo. That's placing way too much importance on mastering, which should just be the final touches.

 

All of that is 100% true.

However, I am going to ask you to get back to working on you live album project and stop wasting time on here.

I'm waiting to be enlightened, no sarcasm, though I don't believe in "secrets" I might be curious about techniques. I know cross polination in language happens between marketing and work in these lines of work, it is what it is. I've seen quite a few guys as themselves, with a long list of credits get laughed out the door here and elsewhere, it happens but as we are all anonymous at the moment... lets let the method do the talking.

 

Thank you. This is some of the best feedback on the thread.

I completely agree that I sacrificed some things in the master. That's what I even wrote at the end of the video.

I tried to tonally shift the mix as it was very bottom heavy and had a muffled top end. By bringing out the top end it also brought out the harshness of the Sax and a bit of high hat. I tried a bit of dynamic eq to take the sax harshness but it started to duck surrounding frequencies when I eqd out more than 2dB. The bass is also a bit thinner but I believe I made the kick and bass sound a bit more separated which was my goal. A bit more emphasis on the upper range of the kick.

 

There is still the issue of translation and the breath of devices that something will translate on properly of with in acceptable limits. These treads are aways a little self deafting especially when the are based off the 10 second A/B on youtube or even worse shit like soundcloud or other loss as fuck services.

The original question was: is there a difference - the answer was yes.

Is the difference worth anything - who the fuck knows, can't tell shit from a 10 second clip on youtube. on what seems to be some overly loud neosoul jazz loops.

I for one though acknowledging that I am doing so, without actually having the data to make an objective decision I. am going to declare that I believe it was worth the $15 that were paid into it, especially since none of us knows the targets and conditions that the client request prior to post.

 

Well you're not too busy to be here talking with the rest of us.

Usually when people want to be taken seriously they back their words up with something like their work. I'm more a fan of judging a product than ideology and speak. Talk is cheap.

Its pretty easy to just post stuff and have people listen to it. Then at least people can know you're not completely talking out your ass. I have no idea how good you are. Still haven't heard anything. So I can't form a true judgement.

Btw people who have a lot to offer DO spend their time sharing it with others. Have you ever been on YouTube? It's full of extremely skilled creators sharing their expertise to teach others. I learned Davinci Resolve, Ableton, building PCs, making Hackintosh computers, mixing and sound design, modding video game consoles, exercise and diet, biology and kinesiology. Those people are probably idiots tho.

Edit: BTW I own 5 studios in my local area and I'm a professional NASCAR driver in my spare time.

 

Thanks for that. It makes my work feel worthwhile and of decent value.

 

You don't know who I am. Know why? I'm here incognito. I make no claims about being a big shot- maybe I am... doesn't matter because I don't go there. You have. You've made big claims. So now it's on you. Right now you're just a keyboard warrior making noise. You bring nothing to the community and I'm not interested in you. So again: BACK UP YOUR MOUTH or go enlighten somewhere else.

 

I'll never really understand the whole talking without showing thing (all bark, no bite). It's always valuable to have someone with more skill educate you and help you attempt to improve. This community seems to be pretty supportive of showing, not just telling.

 

A bit late to the topic and the fight (lol, jk) but whatever, not interested. I watched (listened) to the video. I like the Mastered version. Apart from everything people already mentioned, the Mastered version should translate well IMO. Having hundreds of my work mastered by professional all these years, one small thing that I noticed is how a good ME will try to squeeze every important element of the song into the NS10 range, so nothing left behind while having both of the extended highs and lows nicely balanced in conjunction to the midrange. Meaning the song can still be listened even in the shittiest listening environment ever with all the important element that shaped the song intact and also capable of serving as background music when played at low volume, details maybe lost but you can still hear and sing along with it. That's how I grade good master. I don't really do detailed comparison unmastered vs mastered version (for my stuff) because it will cause more problems than it actually solves them. One being, it's hard to not get biased over something you worked for 10 hours or more and liking others final version of it.

I never sent out a mix for the Mastering hoping the mix will get more "depth", "denser", "wider" or "better" because... my mix is already perfect or at least that is what the client approved. I just want my mix to translate well everywhere at the commercial loudness and the song's integrity remains the same like I mixed it. Forgot when I stopped looking at mastering process as a "bettermaking" process although most of the time things do get relatively better in some areas. That's just how I see it and it works for me.

 

Don't listen to this lot! Total piss takers!!!

 

Thank you for the detailed response and insight! I haven't always looked at mastering the way you describe, but it makes perfect sense. If you always expect a master to be "wider", "denser", or "have more depth", you may be dissatisfied with the master if you think it's lacking one of those elements, even if it really didn't need those things to be added during mastering.

I've only had the chance to work on NS-10s a few times but I'm a fan of their role as translation checkers. I think you're right about the goal of a Master being to optimize translation across as many listening environments as possible.

 

I would never be sarcastic. That's just not my style.

 

Also, I read your post about "3 Mastering Tips" and really enjoyed it. Very informative and well explained. I use a couple techniques similar to what you've described but in a different order. I really want to try out the HF and LF limiting trick.