Subject: Re: Mastering EA was French Touch
From: Kevin Austin (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sat Oct 29 2005 - 23:58:55 EDT
This is part of a discussion that has taken place in many arts.
If one writes a book, there will be an editor, but imagine an editor
for a composer ... "Dear Harry. Your Symphonic Dance Sketches is
good, but needs some work. The third dance is clearly too long and
the contra-bassoon part may be better put into the tuba and two soli
Color correction in printing is a standard technique and I have seen
articles where colors have been shifted far away from the originals,
as they look "better" that way.
I think there are also a couple of discussions going on here, and the
topic under discussion may not apply to works which are digital in
synthesis, although Dominique may disagree.
What if there is a (say) DX-7 piece that used the sounds directly
from the DX-7 without any spectral processing or reverb, or an analog
piece devoid of processing, does the 'mastering' process improve the
signals that have come straight from the tone generators?
At 01:50 -0400 2005/10/29, Louis Dufort wrote:
>> Very different from my experience of EA mastering, where a majority of
>> the pieces still arrive to me in a very hectic state, and where I have
>> to make severe corrections before I can make them at least bearable...
>That's exactly why I'm very suspicious concerning mastering EA works...
>Mastering should always be about enhancing, not correcting. But in the real
>this is not the case. In Pop music mastering is very important due to the
>fact that the standard is very well known even by the public. But I really
>think that EA composers should have last hands on their works, this is what
>makes it poetic for better or for worse.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b27 : Sat Dec 22 2007 - 01:46:13 EST