I am guessing Harry is trying to point out that local economies vary.......
Correct but not well defined. For example in my area a union electrician who just got his card and finished his internship might make about $38 per, while an experienced senior might make $45 plus. And a professional contracting company might estimate a job at $125 per.
So I would add that prices vary with location and
kenrob2037 wrote: I guess what is confusing me more is, I don't know what good and bad mixing and mastering are.
Its your art, your vision. And its subjective.
What sounds good to you and best matches your vision is good.
But I would add that having someone else mix your music adds their vision and artistry into the equation too.
I would say most serious artists would probably have to go through the experience of working with a number of people before finding both the results they envision, and a working relationship they are comfortable with. Often this develops into a matter of several people working as a team.
kenrob2037 wrote:How would I really know that they aren't just sticking it through some presets like I do. What I do sounds good to me, but it does not sound as good as most commercial releases.
Well, I've found that the vast majority of program presets for mixing are poor choices. Mastering? Far worse.
Take for example the basics. EQ and Compression.
Both require very intimate knowledge of the incoming signal to apply in a useful manner IMO, 99% of the time. Using presets is literally like having someone who has never heard the audio decide how to set the processes.
At best, there are some rare presets that come far closer than others for a good starting point for mixing.
Mastering presets are just a disaster in my experience. Far too much compression/limiting in nearly every case for example.
kenrob2037 wrote:So it's pretty much impossible for me to know if I'm getting my money's worth.
If you don't have the time and/or skill and you get competent results, that would be a value I guess.
But yeah, I would have to REALLY believe in my music to spend the going rate, I hear you there!
kenrob2037 wrote:I did try that online one from Landr, I feel they are a bit of a joke. Their sound was worse than mine.
I tried their freebie offer for reference. Meh.
I think that maybe if you supply a VERY good mix, rendered at the right level you can perhaps get OK or fair results.
but for that service, what are they doing if not simple analysis/preset mastering?
The real problem is probably that people are often submitting pretty poor quality mixes, and even Landr notes the prominence of submissions that are sent in uselessly hot......
I have to admit that most of the mixes I have had access to have consistently shown the same weaknesses.
The first big one is that the mix was started before the arrangement and editing was even finished, and I have to interpret the vision of the piece from a rough mix that is cobbled together from inferior recordings, with excessive processing and isn't even finished being edited yet from people who think its ready for final touches.
I guarantee Landr is getting the same kind of mess for "mastering"
Most people would benefit from forgetting mastering for a while and learning to mix better IMO.
But on the other hand, mixing seems to have kind of evolved to incorporate a sort of "mastering"
Anyway, backing up to ask my own question.
Should that mixing price quote include finishing post production editing and arranging? Or should the artist have that sorted out?
My mixing quote would NOT include cleaning up and editing tracks for 2 plus hours. That's extra.
If the supplied material is typical, $450 is a steal assuming competent results unless the material is coming from someone who is creating above average projects that need only final mixing.
So Rob? Whatcha got?