Subject: Re: Mastering EA was French Touch
From: Richard Wentk (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sat Oct 29 2005 - 11:06:03 EDT
At 15:51 29/10/2005, Dominique Bassal wrote:
>Le 05-10-29, à 09:38, Richard Wentk a écrit :
>>At 13:37 29/10/2005, you wrote:
>>>- that a good proportion of them are unbearably loud (clipping is all
>>>over the place);
>>>- that treble and high mids are highly exagerated, causing actual ear
>>>- that dynamics are brutal and resonant. They are received as
>>>agressions, not impressive surges of energy;
>>>- that booming generally comes along with any bass manifestation;
>>>The whole experience is considered as highly unpleasant.
>>This sounds like a textbook list of the results of monitoring on the kind
>>of poor equipment where you can't hear the low end or the high end properly.
>The studio was built from the ground up, including the dimensions of the
>rooms themselves, isolation and acoustic treatment, by the most
>experienced and respected acoustician and studio builder in Quebec
>(references available), who also sits as consultant in major comitees in
>the audio industry, cinema and broadcasting. Most of the equipment was
>either rebuilt or performance optimized by that same engineer, who also
>performs regular calibration of the whole set-up, with Neutrik latest
>measuring equipment. The general frequency response of the whole system is
>considered as reasonably flat, by professional mastering standards, both
>on the stereo and the 5.1 playback systems.
I didn't mean *your* studio.
I'm occasionally paid to do mastering work, and it's guaranteed that if
someone is mixing on budget monitors there will be plenty of bass slopping
and rumbling below 100Hz.
Why professional composers, who presumably have access to professional
facilities, would be making similar basic mixing errors, I have no idea.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b27 : Sat Dec 22 2007 - 01:46:13 EST