Mastering, finalising the track
In his book "Here, There and Everywhere", Geoff Emerick recalls being told that the purpose of mastering was to make sure that “it sounds better after mastering than it did before”.
The idea is still fairly accurate. But thinking of mastering as a simple “boost” stage that will automatically improve a mix would be reductive. It is a final stage of listening, analysis, correction and adaptation before release.
I aim to improve what can be improved without altering what has been built during the mix: overall balance, dynamics, impact, coherence, stereo image, level and the way the track translates across different listening systems.
WHAT IS MASTERING FOR?
A track does not sound exactly the same when played through studio monitors, headphones, small speakers, a phone or other audio systems.
The purpose of mastering is not to make the result identical everywhere, which would be impossible, but to make sure that the essential choices remain coherent and that the track retains its balance under different listening conditions.
To achieve this, I combine several approaches: critical listening, reference tracks, checks on different playback systems and objective measurements. Together, these different sources of information help me understand how the mix behaves and determine which interventions are genuinely useful.
BEFORE MASTERING
Before applying any processing, I listen to and analyse the mix while also comparing it with at least one reference track chosen with the artist. This reference can serve as a guide for the track or project as a whole, but also for one specific aspect: tonal balance, dynamics, vocal presence, transient impact, width, level or overall character.
This stage helps identify the strengths of the mix, any potential imbalances and issues that could be corrected more effectively directly in the mix. The better balanced the mix is, the more the mastering can focus on finalisation rather than compensation.
When the mix can still be modified, I therefore prefer to address the issue at source: I explain what I am hearing to the artist, suggest the adjustments I think would be useful, and we can go through a few rounds of revisions before continuing with the mastering.
Mastering then becomes the final stage of a process rather than a treatment automatically applied to a file.
CORRECTIVE MASTERING
However, going back to the mix is not always possible.
Some productions reach the mastering stage with missing tracks, an old project that can no longer be accessed, a previous engineer who is no longer available, or simply a stereo file that is now the only usable source.
In these situations, I do not necessarily consider that the project should be rejected. I also accept corrective mastering projects and use the tools available to improve the result as much as possible from the existing file.
This can involve targeted frequency or dynamic processing, work on transients, the stereo image or specific areas of the frequency spectrum. When it genuinely contributes to the result, I can also use tools that partially isolate certain elements of the mix so that they can be processed more precisely.
These interventions have their limits and cannot always replace a correction made directly in the mix. But when returning to the original tracks is not possible, I prefer to explore what can genuinely be improved rather than assume on principle that mastering should never correct anything.
WHAT MASTERING CAN CHANGE
Mastering primarily works on the track as a whole, but its effects can be heard very clearly on individual elements.
Working on dynamics or transients can change the impact of a kick or snare. A frequency adjustment can alter the presence of a vocal or the balance between different areas of the mix. Work on density, stereo image and overall level can also change the overall perception of the track.
So mastering is not simply about making a track louder. Depending on the mix and what it needs, the mastering can remain very subtle or result in a much more noticeable evolution.
A TREATMENT ADAPTED TO THE TRACK
Not every track requires the same interventions at the mastering stage.
A dense, energetic production does not call for the same choices as an acoustic track built around a voice, guitar and cello. In some cases, the work is mainly about preserving nuance, naturalness and the relationships between the instruments while improving overall coherence and translation across different listening systems.
The processing, its intensity and the final level are determined by the track, its aesthetic and what is already there.
Depending on the needs of the track, the processing may remain entirely digital or make use of analogue processors. I use them when they genuinely contribute something to the result, through their behaviour, dynamics or sonic character, rather than as a matter of course.
WHAT MASTERING INCLUDES
Mix diagnosis
Critical listening and recommendations when changes made upstream could improve the final result.
Reference-based mastering
The work is systematically guided by at least one reference track, used either as an overall guide or as a point of comparison for a specific aspect of the master.
Cross-checking on different systems
Checks on different headphones and playback systems, in both mono and stereo, to make sure the result remains stable under different listening conditions.
Objective measurements
Analysis of the frequency spectrum, dynamics, level, peaks, phase and mono compatibility, alongside critical listening.
Balance and dynamics
Work on tonal balance, density, transients and overall dynamics when the track requires it, using digital or analogue processing according to what best suits the project.
Stereo image
Checking and, when appropriate, adjusting the width and coherence of the stereo image.
Final level
Finding a level that is consistent with the track, its style and its intended distribution, without unnecessarily sacrificing dynamics to reach a theoretical target.
Delivery files
Preparation of the final files according to their intended use: WAV files for digital distribution, archiving and, when necessary, formats intended for other methods of distribution or duplication.
A COLLABORATIVE APPROACH TO MASTERING
I see mastering as the final stage of quality control for a project rather than as an isolated operation.
A first version makes it possible to assess the result in practical terms. We can then discuss any changes, return to the mix when that remains possible, or adjust the master directly when another solution is preferable.
The process can therefore involve several rounds of revisions until we reach a version that works both technically and artistically.
This way of working avoids creating an artificial divide between mixing and mastering: when an issue can be solved more effectively in the mix, we return to the mix; when it can be dealt with effectively at the mastering stage, I can address it directly.
To go further:
Mastering: a Collaborative Process
AFTER MASTERING
Once the master has been approved, I prepare the final files according to their destination.
For a digital release, they can then be used directly for distribution to streaming platforms. When the project is also distributed by TQIDr, the mastering can therefore form part of a continuous process through to the release going live.
A PROJECT TO MASTER?
You can send me your mix along with some information about the project and its direction. I will also ask you for at least one reference track, which can serve as an overall guide or simply illustrate a particular aspect of the result you are looking for.
I can first listen to and analyse the file, identify any areas that may need further work, and determine with you the best way to approach the mastering, whether it involves straightforward finalisation or a master requiring more corrective intervention.