On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 21:08:05 -0700, Ryan wrote:

Okay guys, first, thanks for all the reponses, second, I guess I
should have gave a little more detail. I'm not paying this guy.
We're both doing this pro-bono as a side project. However, we do plan
on "releasing" it. If it sells, than we get paid. I'm friends with
this guy, it's not really a strictly professional relationship. He
isn't even a mastering engineer either. We probably won't even have
it mastered (again pro-bono). He's just the guy that will be laying
down bass and mixing it.

Could anybody tell me why clipped to hell is bad? I know that it is
but I have problems trying to figure out how I can explain this to
him. Are there really artifacts that happen from this? Someone
suggested I'm too far down the path, but I would say I'm not far
enough down it. I'd really like to learn what this stuff sounds like
and how to identify it. If it really ruins audio, it seems to me the
problems should be rather easy to point out. If someone can't
identify an exact problem, than it must be hypochondria, right?

It's bad because it makes the record sound cloudy and tiring to listen to.

Also, you have to consider why clipping is done.

If you want a really loud master like a lot of commercial CDs, you have to
do most of it in the mix.

I find I have to use a lot of automation to bring things forward when they
are required, and back when they are not, and really think about where all
the energy in the mix is. Then when it's mastered, the geezer doing the
mastering does not have to slam it to get it loud.

If you try and get all the gain by ultramaximising the master, it ends up
really clipped, tiring to listen to, and still won't sound that loud when
it's played on the radio for some reason.

This is probably all just plain old good mixing techniques, but it took me
ages to work out that you don't get loud mixes just though the mastering.