Dubstepforum.com

yong wrote:

taal mala wrote:i think you should let the mp3 DJ's continue to sound shitty so they will eventually realize that they should play records/dubs.

Support your local 15 year DJ with no money to buy vinyl

Support your local Live PA

yong wrote:
taal mala wrote:
i think you should let the mp3 DJ's continue to sound shitty so they will eventually realize that they should play records/dubs.




Support your local 15 year DJ with no money to buy vinyl


get a job, kid.

taal mala should get a clue and post his comment on dogs on acid , thats where all the haters post.

phobang wrote:

yong wrote:

taal mala wrote:i think you should let the mp3 DJ's continue to sound shitty so they will eventually realize that they should play records/dubs.

Support your local 15 year DJ with no money to buy vinyl

Support your local Live PA

damn straight! hold tight my live PA crew

Rusha wrote:

yong wrote:
taal mala wrote:
i think you should let the mp3 DJ's continue to sound shitty so they will eventually realize that they should play records/dubs.




Support your local 15 year DJ with no money to buy vinyl


get a job, kid.

taal mala should get a clue and post his comment on dogs on acid , thats where all the haters post.

oh no, theres haters here too. If you wanna find them, they're pretty much everywhere on the internet these days.

Im blind to haters lol

Anymore news about this?

If I was getting a tune released I'd pay for somehing like this just to give it a bit of a boost. Don't think I'd bother just for the hell of it though.

Jtransition:

So essentially no mastering or eq work is going to be done, it's just going to be played through some analogue compressors or ssl stuff?? what eaxactly?

I think a lot of people here might have the wrong idea about this, it won't really make a bad mix sound any better really, I think you should maybe post some examples. post a clip of a pre and post processed versions so we can hear what exactly is the change, also the kit you're going to do this with, but the pre/post audio clips are a MUST IMO before anyone with any sense can really consider this, as I say I think a lot of people may read this and think they can send you below average/shoddy mixdowns and you wave your magic wand and make them sparkle like magic... which obviously isn't the case, people need to address their mixes first. So lets here some pre/post examples of this process!

what is it people don't understand??

This ISN'T mastering - it's a quick 'spitshine' of the track in terms of overall EQ/compression etc., in exactly the same way as if you were getting a dubplate cut by them. The only difference is that you don't get an acetate at the end of the process, you get a file instead.

Of course it isn't a quick fix for a bad mixdown, nor is it 'mastering' i.e. best possible version suitable for release - but it may make the difference between your track sounding alright, or sounding great and moving a lot of air on a big system.


The kit list, if you're interested, is on Transition's web site:

www.transition-studios.com/kit-list.html

konrad wrote:Jtransition:

So essentially no mastering or eq work is going to be done, it's just going to be played through some analogue compressors or ssl stuff?? what eaxactly?

I think a lot of people here might have the wrong idea about this, it won't really make a bad mix sound any better really, I think you should maybe post some examples. post a clip of a pre and post processed versions so we can hear what exactly is the change, also the kit you're going to do this with, but the pre/post audio clips are a MUST IMO before anyone with any sense can really consider this, as I say I think a lot of people may read this and think they can send you below average/shoddy mixdowns and you wave your magic wand and make them sparkle like magic... which obviously isn't the case, people need to address their mixes first. So lets here some pre/post examples of this process!

Thinking nailed it with his comment,Also please don't take the kitlist as gospel because it is a few years old now and need's updating.
Jason

How much is this going to cost, And when can we start using this service?

taal mala wrote:i think you should let the mp3 DJ's continue to sound shitty so they will eventually realize that they should play records/dubs.

I vote for this man. I can't follow the thoughts of Jason on this one. What differences does it make to the tune a producer sends in? If the source material is already clipping and phase distorted straight out of the DAW, then no 'mastering' in any shape or form are going to make it sound better, even with the Transition logo 'stamped' on it.

I do think that it's wise to offer a service to cut dubplates from lossless digital formats online though.

But digital to digital mastering? No thanks, I can do that myself.

brklss wrote:If the source material is already clipping and phase distorted straight out of the DAW, then no 'mastering' in any shape or form are going to make it sound better, even with the Transition logo 'stamped' on it.

This is pretty much true afaict.

But digital to digital mastering? No thanks, I can do that myself.

This I'm not so sure about. Mastering your own stuff seems a bit like fixing your own car - sure, you could do it and some people find it interesting, but it takes quite a lot of expensive kit that you probably don't own and skills that you probably don't have and can go badly wrong if you aren't good at it, so unless you're really interested in it for its own sake it's probably better to just pay someone else to do it and get on with something more interesting.

Slothrop wrote:

brklss wrote:If the source material is already clipping and phase distorted straight out of the DAW, then no 'mastering' in any shape or form are going to make it sound better, even with the Transition logo 'stamped' on it.

This is pretty much true afaict.

But digital to digital mastering? No thanks, I can do that myself.

This I'm not so sure about. Mastering your own stuff seems a bit like fixing your own car - sure, you could do it and some people find it interesting, but it takes quite a lot of expensive kit that you probably don't own and skills that you probably don't have and can go badly wrong if you aren't good at it, so unless you're really interested in it for its own sake it's probably better to just pay someone else to do it and get on with something more interesting.

I also look at it as having an un-biased ear working on your tune. But this is not what you would be getting from this service. I agree with the other poster, I can get my tunes to sound good enough to play out. I don't however trust myself to properly master a tune for release. I would have to pay the full price for that and they are a bit out of my price range at the moment.

brklss wrote:

taal mala wrote:i think you should let the mp3 DJ's continue to sound shitty so they will eventually realize that they should play records/dubs.

I vote for this man. I can't follow the thoughts of Jason on this one. What differences does it make to the tune a producer sends in? If the source material is already clipping and phase distorted straight out of the DAW, then no 'mastering' in any shape or form are going to make it sound better, even with the Transition logo 'stamped' on it.

I do think that it's wise to offer a service to cut dubplates from lossless digital formats online though.

But digital to digital mastering? No thanks, I can do that myself.

I do not think you have read the whole thread,
But you are correct in suggesting that if something is heavilly clipped that it cannot be fixed,I regularly request new mixes of tracks that are unworkable.

I do think that it's wise to offer a service to cut dubplates from lossless digital formats online though.

Erm,
I was not suggesting that,I was suggesting that we would deliver the end product as a mp3 so as not to be confused as a master,And please can you explain what you mean by "digital to digital mastering''

Jason

Pretty neat how this thread got turned in to a debate about analog versus digital, very fresh topic. Joking of course.

In response to Jason's original question, I've been wanting to inquire about something similar to what he seems to be proposing.

Jason, could I send .wav files to Transition to be mastered, if so ,how much would this cost per file, and how much for the slightly cheaper "polishing up" that you are talking about ? I'd rather just send .wavs and get .wavs back. I can compress to .mp3 on my pc for ppl that don't want the larger .wav files. I hope I'm not missing the point of the thread too !

Also, I guess I am also a little confused too... I always thought that when you got dubplates cut that they got mastered first .

no, i personally wouldnt b interested... i dont see the point: imo if a tune is worth mastering its worth really mastering, if not then it aint worth bothering with at all. not even a polish, not even at a low price.

I would definitely be interested in this if the price were right and you could deliver an uncompressed file.

Id be well interested in buying mp3 dubs!!

How much is this, how much is a full mastering job?

What is the difference, what will the overall difference be to any untrained ears... for instance, I'm playing on a Funktion ONE sound system... will this digital dubplate sound about the same as my DMZ records, or as roughly as good as any released and fully mastered tune?