I recently was mastering a project that consisted of upright bass, piano,
drums and vocal using a pair of Event TRS6 speakers. The bass track had a
lot of Maxx Bass applied to in the extreme low frequency range at the
studio. I didn't realize that it even existed until I heard the mix on a
home stereo with 12" speakers with the loudness contour engaged. At that
point the bass sounded REALLY bad. Removing the loudness button helped it a
little, but still WAY out of whack.

I originally checked the mix on my monitors, a boom box and cheap car
stereo, where it sounded perfect. Having avoided handing the client a
near-disaster, I've gone on a hunt for new speakers. I played the same
material on a pair of Tannoy PBM 6.5 speakers, and all the bass flaws were
audible and not "hyped"....which tells me that there a 6" speaker can pull
this off.

I have since played the material on a variety of 6" and 8" monitors. The
Event 20/20 (8-inch) did not reveal the problem unless I was hooked up to a
consumer amp with the loudness button. The M-Audio BX-8 might as well not
even have a woofer! My TRS6 speakers have better bass than that.

I also tried the new KRK ST6 passives. Believe it or not, the bass on this
6" is way over-hyped (more bass than any nearfield speaker I've heard, even
Mackie HR824s) and the top end of the speaker is very dark and
one-dimensional.

The Mackies are amazing, but I know that I don't need to spend $700 per
speaker just to hear the bass notes that I was able to clearly hear on a
pair of Tannoys that originally sold for for $150 each.

I only have space for a 6" speaker on my desktop.

Anybody got any brainstorms?

jonas aras wrote:


I originally checked the mix on my monitors, a boom box and cheap car
stereo, where it sounded perfect. Having avoided handing the client a
near-disaster, I've gone on a hunt for new speakers. I played the same
material on a pair of Tannoy PBM 6.5 speakers, and all the bass flaws were
audible and not "hyped"....which tells me that there a 6" speaker can pull
this off.

So why not use the Tannoys?

They're no longer made.


"Rob Adelman" wrote in message
...


jonas aras wrote:


I originally checked the mix on my monitors, a boom box and cheap car
stereo, where it sounded perfect. Having avoided handing the client a
near-disaster, I've gone on a hunt for new speakers. I played the same
material on a pair of Tannoy PBM 6.5 speakers, and all the bass flaws
were
audible and not "hyped"....which tells me that there a 6" speaker can
pull
this off.

So why not use the Tannoys?

Also, they're not my speakers. Sorry if that wasn't clear from my origianl
post.

"Rob Adelman" wrote in message
...


jonas aras wrote:


I originally checked the mix on my monitors, a boom box and cheap car
stereo, where it sounded perfect. Having avoided handing the client a
near-disaster, I've gone on a hunt for new speakers. I played the same
material on a pair of Tannoy PBM 6.5 speakers, and all the bass flaws
were
audible and not "hyped"....which tells me that there a 6" speaker can
pull
this off.

So why not use the Tannoys?

They are easy to find used. I had 2 pairs for quite a while, sold one
pair off a while back. Otherwise I think the new Tannoy Reveals are very
similar though I never used them myself.

Here is a pair of PBM 6.5's on eBay:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2574594304&category=47 093

jonas aras wrote:

They're no longer made.

So why not use the Tannoys?

The bass track had a
lot of Maxx Bass applied to in the extreme low frequency range at the
studio.

Yuk!



---------------------------------------
"I know enough to know I don't know enough"

jonas aras wrote:

I recently was mastering a project that consisted of upright bass, piano,
drums and vocal using a pair of Event TRS6 speakers. The bass track had a
lot of Maxx Bass applied to in the extreme low frequency range at the
studio. I didn't realize that it even existed until I heard the mix on a
home stereo with 12" speakers with the loudness contour engaged. At that
point the bass sounded REALLY bad. Removing the loudness button helped it a
little, but still WAY out of whack.

Here is some recycled ascii somewhat related to the topic:

QUOTE OF OWN POST FROM ALT.MUSIC.4-TRACK BEGIN

Andrew Kerr wrote:

I'm looking for prices on KEF and B&W products but they don't seem to be
listed anywhere easy to find.

http://www.kef.com/products/new_cresta/cresta10.htm comes to mind, I am
suggesting this model as it appears to be the closest thing to a direct
descendant of the LS 3/5 concept in KEF's product line.

These are "audiophile" stereo speakers right?

Yes, they tend to have good resolution, good powerhandling and good
linearity also in terms of frequency response.

Have you used them in a monitoring situation?

I use also, but not only, a pair of 1976 KEF Coda's supplemented with a
pair of ATC 9" studio bass units below 115 Hz. That installation is
reasonably linear from 30 Hz to 12 kHz without any eq.

I don't doubt that they sound great

I haven't heard them,

Http://www.kef.com/products/qseries/qseries1.html is the smallest one in
the coaxial line. Products and designs do change over time. I did hear a
pair of Q15.2 a couple of years ago and I still kinda regret that I
didn't get them, but I was out looking for a budget solution for an old
girlfriend and didn't then consider their relevance for my own use.

...do they come in powered versions or would I need to buy a good amp
to run them?

Yes, you would have to look for a poweramp in the 50 to 150
watt range, say a Rotel 6 x 60 watts. They did have a "dedicated monitor
line" a couple of years ago, but it was basically the Q-line with a
somewhat different look & I plain can not remember if it also came with
integral amps.

Andrew

For additional info, such as local distributor, please check KEF's
website. Again, I have not heard their current models, but based on my
experience with their past models I'd expect them to be OK and very cost
efficient. I'm not paid by them and it is not so that I think they are
the only usable stuff.


Kind regards

Peter Larsen

QUOTE OF OWN POST FROM ALT.MUSIC.4-TRACK END

You *must* have something with a reasonable response to 30 Hz. The ATC's
in question (the lower, decapitated, part of a friends three-way
speakers, fortunately built with a loose head) are tucked into a corner
where the lower shelves of a bookshelf would be covered by my desk
anyway and facing each other with some 2" between the fronts, cabinet
sides outward. That obviously tunes the bass reflex loading down in
frequency ... O;-)

The (smallest of the range) KEF Cresta suggested happens to be budget
friendly ... you could look into a sub-woofer solution later. I used a
fair bit of EQ to linearize the Coda's response for many years prior to
enhancing it with the ATC's. The B110 appears to be a tolerant
loudspeaker unit ... O;-)


Kind regards

Peter Larsen

--
************************************************** ***********
* My site is at: http://www.muyiovatki.dk *
************************************************** ***********

I only have space for a 6" speaker on my desktop.

Anybody got any brainstorms?

Maybe a powered sub-woofer on the floor?

DaveT

studio. I didn't realize that it even existed until I heard the mix on a
home stereo with 12" speakers with the loudness contour engaged.

Good job! before printing you should listen on a lot of systems to detect
such issues. Make sure you listen to a couple of other well known good mixes
(that are played in the same key/octave) before deciding your track has too
much bass based on this stereo. My car got me a couple of times till I
realized that I needed more cd references for the car.

You may just have a standing wave in that room that happens to fall on your
bass guitar notes.

The Mackies are amazing, but I know that I don't need to spend $700 per
speaker just to hear the bass notes that I was able to clearly hear on a
pair of Tannoys that originally sold for for $150 each.

You could always roll off your mastering EQ near same point as the monitors
low rolloff. This will at least keep you from getting more than you
bargained for. If the bass is rich, it is rich. No sense in taking chances.
Just watch you aren't biasing your mixes.

"jonas aras" wrote in message
. com...
I recently was mastering a project that consisted of upright bass, piano,
drums and vocal using a pair of Event TRS6 speakers. The bass track had a
lot of Maxx Bass applied to in the extreme low frequency range at the
studio. I didn't realize that it even existed until I heard the mix on a
home stereo with 12" speakers with the loudness contour engaged. At that
point the bass sounded REALLY bad. Removing the loudness button helped it
a
little, but still WAY out of whack.

I originally checked the mix on my monitors, a boom box and cheap car
stereo, where it sounded perfect. Having avoided handing the client a
near-disaster, I've gone on a hunt for new speakers. I played the same
material on a pair of Tannoy PBM 6.5 speakers, and all the bass flaws were
audible and not "hyped"....which tells me that there a 6" speaker can pull
this off.

I have since played the material on a variety of 6" and 8" monitors. The
Event 20/20 (8-inch) did not reveal the problem unless I was hooked up to
a
consumer amp with the loudness button. The M-Audio BX-8 might as well not
even have a woofer! My TRS6 speakers have better bass than that.

I also tried the new KRK ST6 passives. Believe it or not, the bass on
this
6" is way over-hyped (more bass than any nearfield speaker I've heard,
even
Mackie HR824s) and the top end of the speaker is very dark and
one-dimensional.

The Mackies are amazing, but I know that I don't need to spend $700 per
speaker just to hear the bass notes that I was able to clearly hear on a
pair of Tannoys that originally sold for for $150 each.

I only have space for a 6" speaker on my desktop.

Anybody got any brainstorms?

jonas aras wrote:

The Mackies are amazing, but I know that I don't need to spend $700 per
speaker just to hear the bass notes that I was able to clearly hear on a
pair of Tannoys that originally sold for for $150 each.

I only have space for a 6" speaker on my desktop.

Get a used pair of Tannoys? Check out the NHT stuff?
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

"jonas aras"
I recently was mastering a project that consisted of upright bass, piano,
drums and vocal using a pair of Event TRS6 speakers. The bass track had
a
lot of Maxx Bass applied to in the extreme low frequency range at the
studio. I didn't realize that it even existed until I heard the mix on
a
home stereo with 12" speakers with the loudness contour engaged. At that
point the bass sounded REALLY bad. Removing the loudness button helped
it a
little, but still WAY out of whack.

I originally checked the mix on my monitors, a boom box and cheap car
stereo, where it sounded perfect. Having avoided handing the client a
near-disaster, I've gone on a hunt for new speakers. I played the same
material on a pair of Tannoy PBM 6.5 speakers, and all the bass flaws were
audible and not "hyped"....which tells me that there a 6" speaker can pull
this off.

I have since played the material on a variety of 6" and 8" monitors. The
Event 20/20 (8-inch) did not reveal the problem unless I was hooked up to
a
consumer amp with the loudness button. The M-Audio BX-8 might as well not
even have a woofer! My TRS6 speakers have better bass than that.

I also tried the new KRK ST6 passives. Believe it or not, the bass on this
6" is way over-hyped (more bass than any nearfield speaker I've heard, even
Mackie HR824s) and the top end of the speaker is very dark and
one-dimensional.

The Mackies are amazing, but I know that I don't need to spend $700 per
speaker just to hear the bass notes that I was able to clearly hear on a
pair of Tannoys that originally sold for for $150 each.

I only have space for a 6" speaker on my desktop.

Anybody got any brainstorms?

Yeah.

1. Get a bigger desk.

2. Don't think you're a mastering studio when your facility can only
accomodate 6" speakers that cost $150 each.

3. Don't judge the final on a CD mix by what you hear with the "loudness
button" or any other eq on your consumer amp engaged.

4. You say you liked the Tannoy PBM 6.5's, well they don't sound nearly as
accurate as the Tannoy Reveals do, and the Reveals are about $300-$350 a pair.

5. Don't use your own tweaking of poorly done mixes as reference material to
judge the speakers you are auditioning, use well mixed and mastered CD's.

6. You're kidding, right?



Will Miho
NY Music & TV Audio Guy
Off the Morning Show! & sleepin' In... / Fox News
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits

3. Don't judge the final on a CD mix by what you hear with the "loudness
button" or any other eq on your consumer amp engaged.

Well, had I not checked it that way, I wouldn't have known that the bass was
pushed way too far, especially when played on "monsoon" car stereos and the
like. The upright bass sounded like something out of a hip-hop album.
Further, listening to this material on "accurate" speakers (Mackie HR824)
just barely revealed the problem. The PBM 6.5's did a better job. They
have a bit of a "bumped" bottom, but that would have been very helpful in
this case.

4. You say you liked the Tannoy PBM 6.5's, well they don't sound nearly
as
accurate as the Tannoy Reveals do, and the Reveals are about $300-$350 a
pair.

Everybody claims to have an "accurate" speaker that translates well. When
you walk into any monitor room, it's astounding to hear just how different
"accurate" sounds between the various speakers. Just compare a set of KRK
V8s to the Event 20/20...it's like two different planets!

5. Don't use your own tweaking of poorly done mixes as reference
material to
judge the speakers you are auditioning, use well mixed and mastered CD's.

I've gotta disagree strongly here. I used the 24 bit version that came
directly from a well respected studio in North Hollywood (@$350/hr!!) which
used pricey Genelecs to do the mixes. There were other problems in the
mixed material as well. The frequency balance in the mid to upper range was
so different from song to song that you'd swear it was at least three
different pianos and drum kits. Some of the tracks were compressed well
past the point of sounding appropriate for the genre. By using material
that I know has a problem, I'm better able to determine how "accurate" a
speaker is. Well mixed and mastered CDs, on the other hand, will sound
good an any speaker. It might be OK if you just want to gauge the tonal
balance, dispersion, etc.

I specialize in acoustic chamber music and jazz. I'd gladly stack up the
quality of my work against anybody. I may not have $10,000 speakers and a
$30,000 equalizer, but I have 30 years of experience as an accomplished
instumentalist and ears that haven't been destroyed by listening to Pantera
@130 dB for years on end! Yes, the gear can be a great help, but it's no
substitute for a good ear.

"jonas aras"

WillStG wrote
3. Don't judge the final on a CD mix by what you hear with the "loudness
button" or any other eq on your consumer amp engaged.

Well, had I not checked it that way, I wouldn't have known that the bass was
pushed way too far, especially when played on "monsoon" car stereos and the
like

Speakers that have some low end on them, or a decent sub, and a room that
has halfway decent sound treatment is arguably a much preferable method to
check the low end on a mix.

"Jonas"
Everybody claims to have an "accurate" speaker that translates well. When
you walk into any monitor room, it's astounding to hear just how different
"accurate" sounds between the various speakers. Just compare a set of KRK
V8s to the Event 20/20...it's like two different planets!

I have used both the PBM6.5 and the Reveals. A lot. The PBM 6.5 aren't
nearly as accurate as the Reveals. And different sized rooms with different
quality of treatments will sound way different, even if you use exactly the
same monitors. And although the reveals aren't at all mastering speakers you
can afford them at $325 a pair, since you indicated this pricepoint was an
issue.

WillStG wrote
5. Don't use your own tweaking of poorly done mixes as reference material to
judge the speakers you are auditioning, use well mixed and mastered CD's.

Jonas
I've gotta disagree strongly here. I used the 24 bit version that came
directly from a well respected studio in North Hollywood (@$350/hr!!) which
used pricey Genelecs to do the mixes ...

So what? You have no idea what the CD sounds like! You should know your
room at least, but apparently you are letting this admittedly crappy mix
convince you your room is even worse than that mix, because of what you hear
when you throw a loudness button on. Dude. You need a better methodology.

Jonas
By using material that I know has a problem, I'm better able to determine how
"accurate" a speaker is. Well mixed and mastered CDs, on the other hand, will
sound good an any speaker. It might be OK if you just want to gauge the tonal
balance, dispersion, etc.

How can you judge anything with an indeterminate reference point? If you
have a CD that you know what the stereo image is like, when you listen to it in
a room you can tell if the speakers and room have decent imaging or not. If
you have a CD where you know what the sub frequencies balance is referenced to
the rest of the mix, you will be able to tell if the room has a tight or a
loose low end, or if it has any low end at all in comparison to what you
already know about that CD. Hell, I've even had engineers take out a sweep
tones CD and blast a studio to find any rattles when they're intending to mix
R&B with a lot of bottom like 3 kick drums.

Hey look, I don't claim to be a mastering engineer, but I'll touch stuff
up and help my clients as best as I can (with disclaimers) if they need it and
the alternative is worse. But if you intend to do mastering you need to have a
known quality in your listening environment, and the only stable point you seem
to be judging things on at this point is the loudness button on your consumer
stereo. Yuck.

Yes, the gear can be a great help, but it's no
substitute for a good ear.

I'm not disparaging your ears, I am suggesting that you put them to work
more efficiently.

Regards,

Will Miho
NY Music & TV Audio Guy
Off the Morning Show! & sleepin' In... / Fox News
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits

"WillStG" wrote in message
...

How can you judge anything with an indeterminate reference point? If
you
have a CD that you know what the stereo image is like, when you listen to
it in
a room you can tell if the speakers and room have decent imaging or not.
If
you have a CD where you know what the sub frequencies balance is
referenced to
the rest of the mix, you will be able to tell if the room has a tight or a
loose low end, or if it has any low end at all in comparison to what you
already know about that CD. Hell, I've even had engineers take out a
sweep
tones CD and blast a studio to find any rattles when they're intending to
mix
R&B with a lot of bottom like 3 kick drums.

I also use some mixes that I've done and know what to expect, but when
you're listening to this stuff at the typical Guitar Center room, all the
intricate details of the acoustics of that room are neglible to figure out
whether or not a nearfield speaker is doing a decent job. I don't proclaim
to have a perfectly tuned room in my studio, but I've got some Auralex
placed judiciously. As far as mixing R&B with that much bass....well..... I
won't make any remarks about a genre I don't appreciate.

Hey look, I don't claim to be a mastering engineer, but I'll touch
stuff
up and help my clients as best as I can (with disclaimers) if they need it
and
the alternative is worse. But if you intend to do mastering you need to
have a
known quality in your listening environment, and the only stable point you
seem
to be judging things on at this point is the loudness button on your
consumer
stereo. Yuck.

It wasn't the loundness button on my stereo. It was the bass player on the
project who played it on his home stereo (loudness button and large
speakers) and his VW Passat with a "monsoon" sound system who complained
that the recording sounded like crap on all his systems and I couldn't
figure out the problem initially using the speakers that I normally use.
Hence, my quest for the truth.

Cheers,
Jonas

On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 7:43:02 -0800, jonas aras wrote
(in message ):

The bass track had a
lot of Maxx Bass applied to in the extreme low frequency range at the
studio.
--------------------------------snip----------------------------------

That's a very, very dangerous thing to do. In addition to all the other
comments in this discussion, I'd say you have to use this plug in (or the
hardware version) of MaxxBass very carefully.

Go back and read Waves' manual on MaxxBass, and you'll see that they
specifically caution you about the problem of hearing MaxxBass-treated mixes
on full-frame speakers vs. modest bookshelf (or boombox) speakers. This is
one of those things you have to check and re-check to make sure you're not
going overboard; subtlety is the key. Think of MaxxBass as a spice, not the
prime ingrediant of the mix.

The only exception would be if you were creating a specific mix ONLY to play
back in a specific venue, with predictable speakers. In that case, then
you'd simply add the MaxxBass effect to taste, and know it's always going to
sound right -- in that one place. Anywhere else, it's going to be
unpredictable, the more you crank it up.

--MFW

You're absolutely correct. Unfortunately, my task was to "undo" Maxx Bass
that was placed there by the recording engineer. The approach that I found
to work best was to downward expand everything below 59 hz. Initially, the
upright bass had way to much sustain (almost organ-like) and was muddy and
too loud, . By downward expanding, the initial ping of the tone, with a bit
of the boost remained, but the decay was closer to natural.


"Marc Wielage" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 7:43:02 -0800, jonas aras wrote
(in message ):

The bass track had a
lot of Maxx Bass applied to in the extreme low frequency range at the
studio.
--------------------------------snip----------------------------------

That's a very, very dangerous thing to do. In addition to all the other
comments in this discussion, I'd say you have to use this plug in (or the
hardware version) of MaxxBass very carefully.

Go back and read Waves' manual on MaxxBass, and you'll see that they
specifically caution you about the problem of hearing MaxxBass-treated
mixes
on full-frame speakers vs. modest bookshelf (or boombox) speakers. This
is
one of those things you have to check and re-check to make sure you're not
going overboard; subtlety is the key. Think of MaxxBass as a spice, not
the
prime ingrediant of the mix.

The only exception would be if you were creating a specific mix ONLY to
play
back in a specific venue, with predictable speakers. In that case, then
you'd simply add the MaxxBass effect to taste, and know it's always going
to
sound right -- in that one place. Anywhere else, it's going to be
unpredictable, the more you crank it up.

--MFW

"jonas aras"
It wasn't the loundness button on my stereo. It was the bass player on
the
project who played it on his home stereo (loudness button and large
speakers) and his VW Passat with a "monsoon" sound system who complained
that the recording sounded like crap on all his systems and I couldn't
figure out the problem initially using the speakers that I normally use.
Hence, my quest for the truth.

Jonas, You're the guy who says his speakers are so bad that the Tannoy
PBM6.5's are brilliant comparitively in their bass extension. Dude! If
that's the case those speakers really sound like _ass_. You have no business
"Mastering" on them, how can you call it "Mastering" when you cannot hear
anything below 100Hz or so? Sure with DAW's, good converters, decent plugins
you can do budget mastering more inexpensively than ever in the digital domain,
but you have to have decent speakers at least to hear what you're playing with!

Do a google search on RAP on Quested, Dynaudio, and suggested "Mastering"
speakers. Genelecs are onsidered by many a bit too flattering, so not the best
reference speakers. Be ready to spend north of $2k. With speakers that can at
least somewhat reproduce what is on a mix, perhaps your golden ears will be put
to better use.

( Do I sound cranky? I must be cranky, for some reason I find this kinda
irritating. )

Will Miho
NY Music & TV Audio Guy
Off the Morning Show! & sleepin' In... / Fox News
"The large print giveth and the small print taketh away..." Tom Waits

By downward expanding, the initial ping of the tone, with a bit
of the boost remained, but the decay was closer to natural.

What did you use for this?



---------------------------------------
"I know enough to know I don't know enough"

Waves LimMB.

"EggHd" wrote in message
...
By downward expanding, the initial ping of the tone, with a bit
of the boost remained, but the decay was closer to natural.

What did you use for this?



---------------------------------------
"I know enough to know I don't know enough"

Jonas, You're the guy who says his speakers are so bad that the Tannoy
PBM6.5's are brilliant comparitively in their bass extension.

All the monitors that you mentioned are certainly marvelous and would
probably reveal the same bass flaw that I'm able to hear with cheap PBM6.5s
that have some kind of artificial low end bump in their design. I know that
their bass repsonse is not linear.

I'm not negating the fact that there are much better speakers out there, all
of which I'd probably love to have, but I shouldn't have to spend over $2k
to hear the kind of crap that would be produced on a car stereo that has
some built-in loudness crap on it. Even listening to Mackie HR824s (yeah,
I know it's not a high-end mastering monitor) didn't reveal the problem as
well as it should have.

I guess the conclusion for this particular case is that an inaccurate
monitors (VW monsoon car stereo , the bass player's home stereo, and my
friends PBMs) were in fact more helpful than other "more accurate" speakers
in determining that MAXX Bass had gone too far on this recording.

I'm not into "name dropping" but Scott Frasier, a respected member of this
group, heard one of the chamber projects that I finished and congratulated
me on the fine job. And, believe it or not, that entire project was
mastered by listening to it on borrowed PBMs.

I do a LOT of other things that go against conventional wisdom, but they
work!

jonas aras wrote:

All the monitors that you mentioned are certainly marvelous and would
probably reveal the same bass flaw that I'm able to hear with cheap PBM6.5s
that have some kind of artificial low end bump in their design. I know that
their bass repsonse is not linear.

No speakers have linear bass response. No rooms are without bass problems.

I'm not negating the fact that there are much better speakers out there, all
of which I'd probably love to have, but I shouldn't have to spend over $2k
to hear the kind of crap that would be produced on a car stereo that has
some built-in loudness crap on it. Even listening to Mackie HR824s (yeah,
I know it's not a high-end mastering monitor) didn't reveal the problem as
well as it should have.

Then I would suspect a good part of your problem is the room rather than the
speakers.

I guess the conclusion for this particular case is that an inaccurate
monitors (VW monsoon car stereo , the bass player's home stereo, and my
friends PBMs) were in fact more helpful than other "more accurate" speakers
in determining that MAXX Bass had gone too far on this recording.

Depends. With accurate monitors, you are going to have to learn to listen to
the low end and where things are, rather than just listening for when the speakers
crap out. Subharmonic synthesizers will put stuff down there that cheap speakers
cannot reproduce, but good monitors can. You need to learn what this sounds
like on the good monitors. You already know what happens when you play it
on cheap speakers; they bottom out and distort.

I'm not into "name dropping" but Scott Frasier, a respected member of this
group, heard one of the chamber projects that I finished and congratulated
me on the fine job. And, believe it or not, that entire project was
mastered by listening to it on borrowed PBMs.

I do a LOT of other things that go against conventional wisdom, but they
work!

Maybe, but it's sure a lot easier to work with a good monitor chain, because
you can tell what you are doing. I figure probably half of your studio budget
should be invested in the monitor rig.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

(EggHd) wrote in message ...
The bass track had a
lot of Maxx Bass applied to in the extreme low frequency range at the
studio.

Yuk!


I'll second that...... Don't blame the messenger!

J_West

"jonas aras"
I recently was mastering a project that consisted of upright bass, piano,
drums and vocal using a pair of Event TRS6 speakers. The bass track had
a
lot of Maxx Bass applied to in the extreme low frequency range at the
studio. I didn't realize that it even existed until I heard the mix on
a
home stereo with 12" speakers with the loudness contour engaged. At that
point the bass sounded REALLY bad. Removing the loudness button helped
it a
little, but still WAY out of whack.

snippage

What a ****ed up way to do work. If the Maxx Bass was applied by the
original mixer, then the product needs to be remixed by that original mixer
sans Maxx Bass, or the client needs to get the tracks and have someone else
mix the product. You should never accept a challenge to be stupid, and
trying to "undo" a project's faults without the original project material is
an exercise in stupidity.

A) You'll never be able to undo it without leaving artifacts
B) Your client will never be wholely satisfied with it and most likely will
ultimately blame you, particularly if you are charging them (you ARE
charging, right?)
C) You should have better things to do with your time than waste it and
possibly your reputation by accepting a project you should know FROM THE GIT
GO that you can't accomplish satisfactorily.
D) Don't sit there using inexpensive rebadged bookshelf speakers and call
what you're doing mastering. You set yourself up for a fall every time.
How can you hope to represent the music properly if your speaker system
won't even represent the frequencies available in the standard home system
with sub, much less without having a reasonable picture of what your room
actually sounds like?

Don't get me wrong, Jonas, but just the thought makes my skin crawl, and the
"mastering" label just makes it that much harder for the rest of us when
some client comes in and want's some "more" mastering on the same product.
By all means, call it what you want, and do what you do, but use some common
sense on the project. If you can't get the original product to work from,
then you can't master it. In fact, it's far more likely that it will master
you. One of the services we are supposed to be offering is working WITH
someone to help them realize their musical dreams. It seems to me that your
efforts, however well intentioned, won't accomplish this at all. And again,
ANY client with a possible beef is a client who can destroy your reputation,
even if your intentions were good.

And no, this is not to suggest that one shouldn't accept jobs that might be
difficult. It's just to suggest that one has to have a set of procedures to
work by in order to garner some strength in their experience, a level of
consistency if you will. If you're taking all types of jobs where you can't
offer consistent quality and end up with happy clients, ultimately, besides
a ****ed client, you won't be happy yourself. Not being happy in your work
isn't a good way to get quality work.

I'd gladly stack up the
quality of my work against anybody.

OK, try RAP 3 Times or Fifth of RAP and go to Tonebarge's selection and
stack your work up against that. I mean, I'm not asking you to stack your
work up against George M. Tone does his work with a reasonable list of
equipment that shouldn't overshadow yours by much, except perhaps his mics
and pres, but at least he's a guy doing tremendously talented work in a
reasonably equipped environment. I'd really like to know what you think, if
you happen to have the RAP cds. After all, it is YOUR statement. Hell, I
might even go tit for tat with you because I might just learn something.
Particularly if you want to stack up piano, bass and drums, of which I do
plenty in the way of jazz. NOT a challenge. You made the challenge.

--


Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio
Purchase your copy of the Fifth of RAP CD set at www.recaudiopro.net.
See how far $20 really goes.

I'd love to send you an MP3 snippet of this project that I corrected. If
you think it sucks rocks, so be it.

BTW, I don't use home speakers to do the work. I have a set of Event TRS6s.
A friend of mine just gave me a set of Event 20/20 v1. Can't beat the price
there!

I agree that it should have been remixed. Unfortunately, the vocalistwho
finanaced the project is not as rich as God, spent 2 days @$350/hr to mix it
and had it come out a disaster. So much for the "audio professionals". I'd
love to get in on that joke.

BTW, the chamber music project that I spoke of came from even more humble
beginnings. Two songs were recorded on high-end Sony cassette recorder, the
rest on a Sony PCM. An old crummy Sony stereo condenser mic with hiss
problems was used. Ground hum appeared sporadically. Much of it was
recorded at night at a church with the air conditioner on, and there was
some sporadic traffic noise. Finally, the mic was way in the back of the
room! I spent about a year working with the artist/composer on this one (a
NUT who wouldn't accept anything less than absolute perfection) and I
guarantee that it will blow you away! I can shoot some MP3 snippets your
way if you like.

Cheers,
Jonas



"Roger W. Norman" wrote in message
...
"jonas aras"
I recently was mastering a project that consisted of upright bass,
piano,
drums and vocal using a pair of Event TRS6 speakers. The bass track
had
a
lot of Maxx Bass applied to in the extreme low frequency range at the
studio. I didn't realize that it even existed until I heard the mix on
a
home stereo with 12" speakers with the loudness contour engaged. At
that
point the bass sounded REALLY bad. Removing the loudness button helped
it a
little, but still WAY out of whack.

snippage

What a ****ed up way to do work. If the Maxx Bass was applied by the
original mixer, then the product needs to be remixed by that original
mixer
sans Maxx Bass, or the client needs to get the tracks and have someone
else
mix the product. You should never accept a challenge to be stupid, and
trying to "undo" a project's faults without the original project material
is
an exercise in stupidity.

A) You'll never be able to undo it without leaving artifacts
B) Your client will never be wholely satisfied with it and most likely
will
ultimately blame you, particularly if you are charging them (you ARE
charging, right?)
C) You should have better things to do with your time than waste it and
possibly your reputation by accepting a project you should know FROM THE
GIT
GO that you can't accomplish satisfactorily.
D) Don't sit there using inexpensive rebadged bookshelf speakers and call
what you're doing mastering. You set yourself up for a fall every time.
How can you hope to represent the music properly if your speaker system
won't even represent the frequencies available in the standard home system
with sub, much less without having a reasonable picture of what your room
actually sounds like?

Don't get me wrong, Jonas, but just the thought makes my skin crawl, and
the
"mastering" label just makes it that much harder for the rest of us when
some client comes in and want's some "more" mastering on the same product.
By all means, call it what you want, and do what you do, but use some
common
sense on the project. If you can't get the original product to work from,
then you can't master it. In fact, it's far more likely that it will
master
you. One of the services we are supposed to be offering is working WITH
someone to help them realize their musical dreams. It seems to me that
your
efforts, however well intentioned, won't accomplish this at all. And
again,
ANY client with a possible beef is a client who can destroy your
reputation,
even if your intentions were good.

And no, this is not to suggest that one shouldn't accept jobs that might
be
difficult. It's just to suggest that one has to have a set of procedures
to
work by in order to garner some strength in their experience, a level of
consistency if you will. If you're taking all types of jobs where you
can't
offer consistent quality and end up with happy clients, ultimately,
besides
a ****ed client, you won't be happy yourself. Not being happy in your
work
isn't a good way to get quality work.

I'd gladly stack up the
quality of my work against anybody.

OK, try RAP 3 Times or Fifth of RAP and go to Tonebarge's selection and
stack your work up against that. I mean, I'm not asking you to stack your
work up against George M. Tone does his work with a reasonable list of
equipment that shouldn't overshadow yours by much, except perhaps his mics
and pres, but at least he's a guy doing tremendously talented work in a
reasonably equipped environment. I'd really like to know what you think,
if
you happen to have the RAP cds. After all, it is YOUR statement. Hell, I
might even go tit for tat with you because I might just learn something.
Particularly if you want to stack up piano, bass and drums, of which I do
plenty in the way of jazz. NOT a challenge. You made the challenge.

--


Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio
Purchase your copy of the Fifth of RAP CD set at www.recaudiopro.net.
See how far $20 really goes.

I recently was mastering a project that consisted of upright bass, piano,
drums and vocal using a pair of Event TRS6 speakers. The bass track had a
lot of Maxx Bass applied to in the extreme low frequency range at the
studio.

I generally am taking extreme low frequencies out of the acoustic bass track
when mixing. Can't imagine ever thinking Maxx Bass is the right treatment if
the context is acoustic jazz.


Scott Fraser

BTW, I don't use home speakers to do the work. I have a set of Event TRS6s.
A friend of mine just gave me a set of Event 20/20 v1. Can't beat the price
there!

Just a reality check here, but in the spectrum of consumer-ish vs pro-ish
speakers used for accurately assessing audio quality, Events are closer to
consumer-ish than pro-ish.

BTW, the chamber music project that I spoke of came from even more humble
beginnings. Two songs were recorded on high-end Sony cassette recorder, the
rest on a Sony PCM. An old crummy Sony stereo condenser mic with hiss
problems was used. Ground hum appeared sporadically. Much of it was
recorded at night at a church with the air conditioner on, and there was
some sporadic traffic noise. Finally, the mic was way in the back of the
room! I spent about a year working with the artist/composer on this one (a
NUT who wouldn't accept anything less than absolute perfection) and I
guarantee that it will blow you away!

Did you get it to sum to mono properly after looking at it again?

Scott Fraser

ScotFraser repoied to somebody who wrote:

I spent about a year working with the artist/composer on this one (a
NUT who wouldn't accept anything less than absolute perfection)

He or she would have to be clinically insane to expect the possibility
of "perfection" from material recorded in the manner described. From
**** one gets a **** salad. Put all the dressing on it you want;
underneath the sauce it's what it is.

and I guarantee that it will blow you away!

Good thing you don't have to back up that guarantee, becuase I can
guarantee you have little concept of what it would take to blow away
Scott Fraser when it comes to recordings of chamber music.

--
ha

Yes! Somehow one of the channels got out of phase. It was very easy to
cure that problem.


"ScotFraser" wrote in message
...
BTW, I don't use home speakers to do the work. I have a set of Event
TRS6s.
A friend of mine just gave me a set of Event 20/20 v1. Can't beat the
price
there!

Just a reality check here, but in the spectrum of consumer-ish vs pro-ish
speakers used for accurately assessing audio quality, Events are closer to
consumer-ish than pro-ish.

BTW, the chamber music project that I spoke of came from even more
humble
beginnings. Two songs were recorded on high-end Sony cassette recorder,
the
rest on a Sony PCM. An old crummy Sony stereo condenser mic with hiss
problems was used. Ground hum appeared sporadically. Much of it was
recorded at night at a church with the air conditioner on, and there was
some sporadic traffic noise. Finally, the mic was way in the back of the
room! I spent about a year working with the artist/composer on this one
(a
NUT who wouldn't accept anything less than absolute perfection) and I
guarantee that it will blow you away!

Did you get it to sum to mono properly after looking at it again?

Scott Fraser

Agreed.

"ScotFraser" wrote in message
...
I recently was mastering a project that consisted of upright bass,
piano,
drums and vocal using a pair of Event TRS6 speakers. The bass track had a
lot of Maxx Bass applied to in the extreme low frequency range at the
studio.

I generally am taking extreme low frequencies out of the acoustic bass
track
when mixing. Can't imagine ever thinking Maxx Bass is the right treatment
if
the context is acoustic jazz.


Scott Fraser

Jonas,

I think it's worth looking at why your post sets so many of us on
edge. First of all, I would never claim to be a mastering engineer, so
my perspective comes as a "consumer" of mastering services. I have
been a professional musician for about 30 years, so that much we share
in common.

I track and mix at my studio, and almost always use the services of
"inexpensive" local mastering houses (as opposed to Gateway, etc.)
where I pay anywhere from $90-$150 per hour. The mastering studios
competing for my projects in this price range are, in some sense, the
low end of the scale. Yet, many have spent around six figures in
acoustically tuning their rooms, and at least half of that again in
their speaker/power amp listening chain. Then there is all the various
hardware and software, cabling, etc. Why is it important to me that
anyone who calls themselves a mastering engineer have this level of
facility? Because I want them to catch every little flaw that i was
unable to find on my system in my room, which, by the way, already far
exceeds the set-up you describe at your studio by an order of
magnitude.

The argument in your favor, of course, is that you are able to do what
apparently no one else can - professional quality mastering in an
acoustically inferior room on practically the most inexpensive and
innaccurate listening chain that one could imagine. Assuming this is
true, I suppose that makes you some sort of genius, or at least, an
idiot savant. (No insult intended by that term. Referring to someone
who can multiply 20 digit numbers in their head in seconds, for no
readily explainable reason.)

But I'm sure many of us are not quite willing to take your claim at
face value. It is hard to believe that many major recording studios
would be willing to take a chance on sending a high budget project to
your place, as opposed to, say, Gateway, where the budget for cabling
alone probably comfortably exceeds the value of your entire room/rig.
But you have certainly aroused my curiosity - can you give us a list
of some of the commercially released CD's that you have mastered?

I think that what is the most annoying, is not that you have
"succeeded" using inferior gear - that's actually admirable. But it's
more the cavalier manner in which you blithely dismiss seeing any need
for improving your room or your listening chain. From your point of
reference, accurate speakers in an accurate room are a nice frill, but
hardly necessary or important to get "pro" results. And I think that's
the attitude that makes others' hair stand on end... it flies in the
face of most of out collective experiences.

However, if I may make a suggestion that will help your current
situation: invest in a pair of Sennheiser 580 headphones and a decent
headphone preamp. If your low end is seriously out of whack, you'll
hear it on the 580's. They've saved a couple of mixes of mine. (No,
I'm not suggesting mixing or mastering on them - just for checking the
low end content.)

I will soon have two or three jazz discs available thru
http://www.jazzundiscovered.com/. The chamber music project I mentioned
will be available at www.nickariondo.com early next year. You can read
Nick's bio he http://www.concentric.net/~Accomuse/

One of jazz discs is a piano/trombone duo that was recorded at Mad Hatter
Studios about 10 years ago. The piano on this particular project was
spectactularly gorgeous, but the trombone was mixed way in the back with a
TON of reverb.

This CD was then brought to a "professional" mastering engineer who proceded
to make it worse. The written notes from this mastering engineer indicated
that he did a bunch of eq cuts in the 500hZ range, which made the trombone
sit even further back! The project sat on the shelf for years because the
trombonist hated it so much.

As there was no access to the original multitrack tapes, I had to make the
balances acceptable to the trombone player on the project. The first step
was to undo what the previous guy did, which immediately made it 20% better.
After that, it was tricky to bring out the trombone without ruining the
sound of the piano, but I was able to find a happy medium. It took a lot of
automation of the Waves LimMB as well as some creative volume and panning
automation, but about 12 hours later, we had an acceptable sounding project.
I can't imagine anybody else who have wanted to work on this one, because it
wasn't a matter of just dialing a setting on a $10,000 eq and compressor and
processing it. It was extremely labor intensive as I worked on it phrase by
phrase. Perhaps I should call that "stereo remixing" instead of mastering
if that makes everybody happier.

The experiences that I've had would seem to indicate that many recording
studios and engineers (and I'm not talking about "K-Mart Studios") are
baffled when it comes to acoustic music. I'm certainly not a genius, but I
work extremely hard to get the result that I hear in my head.

Cheers,
Jonas

In article ,
"Roger W. Norman" wrote:


What a ****ed up way to do work. If the Maxx Bass was applied by the
original mixer, then the product needs to be remixed by that original mixer
sans Maxx Bass, or the client needs to get the tracks and have someone else
mix the product.




Waves made a big mistake naming it Maxx Bass, because people use it to
put sub in where there wasn't (not always a horrible idea) but it wasn't
the purpose of the plug and it doesn't do it that well. For its
original purpose, putting low end enhancement where the environment
DOESN'T use speakers with much lows, by putting the artificial boost in
the lowest range a small speaker can reproduce it, not the low-low range
where it can't. You need to know the end speakers to apply the
solution. It can be lifesaving for TV or installations where you know
the speakers will be the size of boomboxes, like kiosks. It's not a
magic bass boost



For other music coming out of normal speakers it's not the best way to
add fake bottom. On the other hand, it's very likely it was just
abused. There's a chance that 1/3 of the amount at a different freq
could actually be beneficial. I've used it on a thinly recorded
acoustic bass and it helped. One trick is to send just the added low
freq through a gate and taper the attack and release more than what the
plug will let you do. If you can hear it, it's an effect, subject to
all that implies, including mondo scorn 5 years later.

--
remove 555 from address to reply

On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 15:43:02 GMT, "jonas aras"
wrote:

I recently was mastering a project that consisted of upright bass, piano,
drums and vocal using a pair of Event TRS6 speakers. The bass track had a
lot of Maxx Bass applied to in the extreme low frequency range at the
studio. I didn't realize that it even existed until I heard the mix on a
home stereo with 12" speakers with the loudness contour engaged. At that
point the bass sounded REALLY bad. Removing the loudness button helped it a
little, but still WAY out of whack.


First off, isn't the "Loudness" button on home and car stereos
only there to add extra bass frequencies which are lost when listening
at lower volumes? Most consumers don't read their stereo manuals to
find this out...they just LOVE to have stuff LOUDER. Explain this to
the bass player, have him leave the loudness button OFF. He can
always turn up the volume more.


I originally checked the mix on my monitors, a boom box and cheap car
stereo, where it sounded perfect.

Three versions of the same thing, isnt it? Best to check on some
quality monitors (with at least 8" woofers, goes down to at least 40
hz), some cheapo speakers (to approximate a boombox, car stereo, or
bookshelf stereo), and quality headphones. By the way, you'll never
hear those bass frequencies that are felt in the chest on even the
best headphones.


Having avoided handing the client a
near-disaster, I've gone on a hunt for new speakers. I played the same
material on a pair of Tannoy PBM 6.5 speakers, and all the bass flaws were
audible and not "hyped"....which tells me that there a 6" speaker can pull
this off.

I don't believe ANY 6 inch speaker can be used to monitor bass
properly.



I have since played the material on a variety of 6" and 8" monitors. The
Event 20/20 (8-inch) did not reveal the problem unless I was hooked up to a
consumer amp with the loudness button. The M-Audio BX-8 might as well not
even have a woofer! My TRS6 speakers have better bass than that.


Pretty obvious that the problem is that "Loudness" button. If
you plan to allow for your listeners using this button incorrectly,
you will have to remove the same amount of artificial bass frequency
that the button adds (in general, crippling a track for the sake of
poor listener habits?!?). My guess is it's similar in frequency to
what the Maxx Bass added artificially (twice as much garbage added
into an otherwise great track, hm?). And of course, you will need
monitors that reach down to about 40hz so you will be able to hear
what is going on down there.

First off, isn't the "Loudness" button on home and car stereos
only there to add extra bass frequencies which are lost when listening
at lower volumes?

Bass frequencies are not lost at low volume. The human hearing mechanism is
less sensitive to them. Highs also.


Scott Fraser

Bass frequencies are not lost at low volume. The human hearing mechanism is
less sensitive to them. Highs also.

Exactly. Go read about a couple guys named Fletcher and Munson (no, not
the R.A.P. Fletcher) and the research they did in the 1930s.


Obviously the Fletcher-Munson Effect, pardon my not naming it at
4am. But the loudness switch IS for boosting bass at low volume
levels, which the human ear has problems hearing ("lost", as far as
I'm concerned - does a tree falling in the forest make a noise if
there's no one there to hear it?).
This seems to be the fly in the ointment, besides the small
monitors which cannot reproduce these bass notes faithfully enough for
him to realize that they are there.

"ScotFraser" wrote in message


First off, isn't the "Loudness" button on home and car stereos
only there to add extra bass frequencies which are lost when listening
at lower volumes?

IME a system with really good low bass tends to be more satisfying at lower
levels, without any extra bass boost.

Bass frequencies are not lost at low volume. The human hearing
mechanism is less sensitive to them. Highs also.

More specifically, our ability to hear low frequencies decreases as their
level drops below 100 dB. In contrast, our ability to hear highs is always
far less than for midrange, but is more consistent with changes in level.