Mastering Orchestral Music: What should I be looking to achieve?

[tpedraja]

Hi guys, I'm new to this forum so I hope this is being posted to the correct place.

I wanted to ask your thoughts on mastering orchestral music: I understand one of the primary goals of mastering is to increase the perceived loudness of a track. This makes sense to me in the context of pop and dance music, where the dynamics are more limited. But in the case of orchestral music, there are many loud and quiet moments in a single piece. It seems to me the seeking to make the entire track louder would kill the dynamics of the track.

If loudness is not the goal of mastering orchestral music, then what sorts of things should I be looking to achieve? Additionally, if anybody has some good resources for learning more about this specific topic, I would appreciate it.

Thanks!

[Hugh Robjohns]

I understand one of the primary goals of mastering is to increase the perceived loudness of a track.

It was a goal. Not so much now we're in the era of loudness normalised streaming.

...in the case of orchestral music, there are many loud and quiet moments in a single piece. It seems to me the seeking to make the entire track louder would kill the dynamics of the track.

Of course... just as it would with any other musical genre.

If loudness is not the goal of mastering orchestral music, then what sorts of things should I be looking to achieve?

The dynamic range of orchestral music can be very large. Music designed for a concert hall is often far too dynamic for comfortable listening at home in the kitchen, or the car.

So, it often is appropriate and necessary to gently — and thoughtfully — reduce the overall dynamic range of the source to some degree to make it more acceptable domestically.

There are many ways of doing this. Personally, I prefer to ride faders in anticipation of loud and quiet sections, ideally by reading the score.

Alternatively, you could use very gentle compression with a very low threshold (say 1.3:1 ,from -50dBFS.

Or use parallel compression ...

It doesn't normally need much, but it obviously depends on the material involved.

[RichardT]

I think an important goal with mixing / mastering classical music is to preserve an impression of full dynamics while making sure the actual dynamics are suitable for home replay.

Another option might be to get some music mastered by a professional and learn some of things they do. I can recommend Eric James - he’s an expert in this genre and very happy to explain what he’s doing and why.

[Philbo King]

If it is well recorded, the idea to do as little as possible has a lot of merit. Listen to it carefully looking for flaws, coughs from the audience, imaging and depth, frequency balance.

A good rule of thumb:
If you make an adjustment, back it off about 1/2 way from the setting where you start to hear a difference. Sounds ridiculous but works great.

[sonics]

I wanted to ask your thoughts on mastering orchestral music

Welcome. A nice easy topic for your first post then!

I don't think I can begin to give you any tips unless I know more about your project. For example, is it live orchestral recordings or sampled instruments. What is the style and intended use? What is the final format? Do you have any mastering skills already? Are you a musician? Do you read a score?

Tell us more.

[Arpangel]

This is an area where really good equipment, and a good engineer! are needed to record the music in the first place, this will make it easier for whoever is mastering it.
Firstly, noise, will determine dynamic range to a certain degree, you don’t want to have that presenting compromises.
Hugh is right, riding faders, making minimal adjustments according to the music is preferable.
Basically, think about as much as you can, while you’re recording, it’ll make mastering much easier.
It’s an art, this particular field, and it takes many years to learn it, and there are very few classical guys out there that can cut the mustard, and they aren’t getting any younger! it’s a field that’s wide open for young engineers, but it’s not glamorous is it? like pop.
You’ve only got to listen to Radio 3 a lot, to hear that dynamic range is difficult in classical music, it’s a compromise, sometimes I think the station has gone off-air! it’s so quiet, I turn it up, and then have my ears blown away by the volume of a loud movement!

[Nazard]

It’s an art, this particular field, and it takes many years to learn it, and there are very few classical guys out there that can cut the mustard, and they aren’t getting any younger! it’s a field that’s wide open for young engineers, but it’s not glamorous is it?

I had wondered whether Tony Faulkner, one of the finest classical recording engineers of all time, had written a book about this subject, but I don't think so.

[Hugh Robjohns]

He has written a few magazine articles over the years on specific techniques and technologies, but never a book.

But a book I can recommend on the topic is this:


https://www.soundonsound.com/reviews/cl ... -tradition

It has one chapter on mastering for classical music which may seem unhelpful... but actually the key to successful mastering in the classical world is very heavily shaped by the nature of the recording, as Tony mentioned above.

[RichardT]

Thinking some more about this, I would say that unless you have a fair bit of experience mastering already, do not attempt to master an orchestral recording.

It requires subtlety, a trained ear, an ability to judge the mix and give feedback to the mixing engineer and a very good monitoring chain and room. Unless you're confident you have these, I would say get someone else to do it.

Unless you know already that the original recording is not very good! In which case, none of the above applies.

[jimjazzdad]

I have recorded a fair bit of live classical music performance, both orchestral and ensembles. I don't pretend to be learned in the genre but I will say that listening to a lot of classical recordings helps. I have hundreds of recordings and I can often pull out a 'professional' example of the piece I have recorded and compare. The toughest thing is that the great recordings had great producers with clear artistic vision of what the recording would embody. Unlike the great producers, I don't have the education or experience so, in the end, I do my best to please my harshest critic (me). Sometimes I have a modest success.

Re: Tony Faulkner - he has several good YouTube interviews wherein he discusses techniques such as compression and mics. Well worth finding and watching them.

[OneWorld]

I confer with several other forumees, orchestral music is so enriched with dynamics, it's hard for me to imagine what purpose compression would serve. I was listening to First Night at the Proms and one piece of music, a newly commissioned piece and during some parts the sound was so quiet it was hardly discernable, then going right to the other extreme even death metal would pale into insignificance, it was like going from the flutter of a butterfly's wing to the full throated roar of a lion, and everything in-between. I often wonder when listening to a live orchestral piece "How do you go about mixing/producing that, where would one start?"

[OneWorld]

..............y good monitoring chain and room. Unless you're confident you have these, I would say get someone else to do it...................

Best advice there is sometimes

[Hugh Robjohns]

I often wonder when listening to a live orchestral piece "How do you go about mixing/producing that, where would one start?"

With the score... and a conversation with the conductor to understand his /her intentions.

[forumuser840717]

I often wonder when listening to a live orchestral piece "How do you go about mixing/producing that, where would one start?"

With the score... and a conversation with the conductor to understand his /her intentions.

And, if that's not possible, at the very least, by being rigged and ready to go before rehearsal starts and listening very carefully to what the conductor is saying to and doing with the orchestra so as not to be caught out by any unusual interpretative idiosyncracies. The more one works with a conductor, the more one gets to know their personal likes/dislikes and is less likely inadvertently to undo things that make their approach unique just because they don't sound as one expects. (E.g. knowing that woodwind being louder than one is used in a balance might not be something to do with how one is mic'ing or balancing it but how the conductor has got the woodwind playing it. That can often be picked up from rehearsal comments but if the band are familiar with the conductor they might just know and do it without anyone saying anything.) Listening to recordings they've made can be informative in that respect.

It also helps to know the piece(s) to be ready for any 'surprise' elements (e.g. pre-recorded inserts, pyrotechnics, specified balance oddities, directed off stage performers, etc., etc.) and so as not to be caught out by sudden changes. However, with unusual/unfamiliar repertoire, and/or premiere performances of new works of which recordings aren't yet available, getting hold of scores, preferably in advance so one can go through them to scope out (and mark) any awkward/odd/important corners is very advantageous. And if there's a rehearsal or two on new works before the day of the show, then getting along to those (with scores) is a good idea. And make notes!

With a new work, in the absence of scores (which isn't uncommon), talking to the composer can help - even just vague stuff about their intentions or what they're trying to do musically/emotionally can be useful info.

And it can help to have some familiarity with the orchestra and venue. All orchestras have unique characteristics in how they balance, their general tonalities and performance idiosyncracies with certain sections/players of which it's useful to be aware. Similarly, venues all do different things in how they interact with ensembles and repertoire. Sometimes these can be exploited, sometimes they need to be worked around and sometimes they can make it more or less impossible to achieve the intended result but the more one knows, or can work out, the better.

Definitely know the proposed stage plan in advance of rigging! There are 'common' layouts for orchestral performances but assumption is never a good idea as there are even more uncommon layouts. And then there are the little unexpected variations which can really scupper an otherwise good plan.

So in short - prepare, plan*, and practice. A lot!

And if you think that's hard, wait 'til you start mixing live opera. Especially going live to air on the first night of a performance in an unfmailiar venue where the band were held up so the balance check consists of roughly checking levels on a 20min seating check and warm up before the house opens!

(* And be ready for your plan to change completely at the drop of a hat!)

[tea for two]

A conductor that interprets the scores dynamics for radio, recordings, streaming, helps a tonne.
Would require some toing and froing between the recording engineer/s and the conductor to lift the quietest part from ppp to pp or even to p, lower the loudest parts from fff to ff or even to f: 1812 cannon fire excluded lol.
Doing this makes the mastering engineers work a whole lot easier : so that let's say volume dial on our stereo is at 1/4 of its full volume : we should then be able to clearly hear the quietest part (our ears age permitting), as well as the loudest part not requiring a panic rush to lower volume.
Knowing the score well is essential also for a mastering engineer.

::

I would say were those Classical composers writing nowadays, they would write the dynamics to be easily heard on streaming platforms, radio, recordings.
Dynamics is just one of the tools tricks as it were they employed to maintain audience interest in the music where motifs parts themes are repeated, also to heighten the hook of the piece, to champion the chorus as it were, alongside the sudden loud parts to jolt wake up those audience nodding orrff lol.

[OneWorld]

::

I would say were those Classical composers writing nowadays, they would write the dynamics to be easily heard on streaming platforms, radio, recordings.
Dynamics is just one of the tools tricks as it were they employed to maintain audience interest in the music where motifs parts themes are repeated, also to heighten the hook of the piece, to champion the chorus as it were, alongside the sudden loud parts to jolt wake up those audience nodding orrff lol.

Classical composers are writing today, the piece of music I was listening to was only recently commissioned. And classical composers follow classical techniques, they write ‘pianissimo……….forte’ into the manuscript, don’t they?

[sonics]

I would say were those Classical composers writing nowadays, they would write the dynamics to be easily heard on streaming platforms, radio, recordings.

I can see the score markings now. Something like
fff (LUFS = -6)

[Arpangel]

It’s an art, this particular field, and it takes many years to learn it, and there are very few classical guys out there that can cut the mustard, and they aren’t getting any younger! it’s a field that’s wide open for young engineers, but it’s not glamorous is it?

I had wondered whether Tony Faulkner, one of the finest classical recording engineers of all time, had written a book about this subject, but I don't think so.

We spent an evening with Tony Faulkner, my partner knows him, not once did we talk about music, they were too busy catching up, his wife too.
Great couple, and he’s extremely modest about what he does.
There was loads I’d like to have asked him, but it wasn’t appropriate.

[Hugh Robjohns]

Good to know...

[OneWorld]

I often wonder when listening to a live orchestral piece "How do you go about mixing/producing that, where would one start?"

With the score... and a conversation with the conductor to understand his /her intentions.

And if you think that's hard, wait 'til you start mixing live opera. Especially going live to air on the first night of a performance in an unfmailiar venue where the band were held up so the balance check consists of roughly checking levels on a 20min seating check and warm up before the house opens!

(* And be ready for your plan to change completely at the drop of a hat!)

I watched the Proms last night and again, everything was crystal clear, everything well balanced, each instrument definable and not a mush of noise - as opposed to some of the stuff I watched/listened to during the broadcasts from Glastonbury - I suppose mixing/engineering rock/pop performances is more difficult because of the vast array of different performers, so it's not a good analogy I make?

[Hugh Robjohns]

The Proms is held in a very well-known venue, using a very well-known rig, all entirely under control of the BBC (rather than beholden to the whims of the PA team), with no bass spill issues in the OB trucks, and — most importantly — all fully rehearsed. It's a very different kind of event.

[shazer]

If it is well recorded, the idea to do as little as possible has a lot of merit. Listen to it carefully looking for flaws, coughs from the audience, imaging and depth, frequency balance.

There's a piece I used to listen to once, but there was a distinct cough halfway through... so bloody annoying just constantly took you out of the moment

I think it was recorded a while back and the tech wasn't available to edit it out but glad they can get a handle on that!

[shazer]

I often wonder when listening to a live orchestral piece "How do you go about mixing/producing that, where would one start?"

With the score... and a conversation with the conductor to understand his /her intentions.

And if you think that's hard, wait 'til you start mixing live opera. Especially going live to air on the first night of a performance in an unfmailiar venue where the band were held up so the balance check consists of roughly checking levels on a 20min seating check and warm up before the house opens!

(* And be ready for your plan to change completely at the drop of a hat!)

I watched the Proms last night and again, everything was crystal clear, everything well balanced, each instrument definable and not a mush of noise - as opposed to some of the stuff I watched/listened to during the broadcasts from Glastonbury - I suppose mixing/engineering rock/pop performances is more difficult because of the vast array of different performers, so it's not a good analogy I make?

Everything is sound checked beforehand remember so there's really no issue for big festivals, plus they are largely working with well known quantities like guitars, bass, keys, drums, vocals etc

[Hugh Robjohns]

Ho hum....

[OneWorld]

The Proms is held in a very well-known venue, using a very well-known rig, all entirely under control of the BBC (rather than beholden to the whims of the PA team), with no bass spill issues in the OB trucks, and — most importantly — all fully rehearsed. It's a very different kind of event.

Yeah, that makes sense, I suppose festivals by definition are a moving feast