User talk:Stizz

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Stizz, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!  Btw thanks for undoing the vandalism to my userpage committed by User:NaturalNeil, who has since been blocked. Walton monarchist89 17:42, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you

Thank you for watching my user page! --NMChico24 07:01, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Football

The first of your reversions was the correct one. It's an article about all types of football and not just US football. Cheers. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 23:27, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Loudspeaker peer review request

I've requested the article Loudspeaker to have peer review. I noticed it was pretty good and might deserve a GA status. If you can take a look at it too and help evaluate and improve it's quality, that would be great. The peer review tag can be found on the article's talk page. --Davidkazuhiro 10:26, 19 February 2007 (UTC)


== Music mastering peer review request == Thanks for that request. However, the most popular industry term used for the optimization of signal frequencies to meet industry standards, is not audio mastering but music mastering. The reason maybe that most record mastering engineers like to sign their credits (Or. be credited as) music mastering engineers.

Audio mastering it's not incorrect. But, show me just one single CD that on the credits it says; "Audio Mastering by"

There are many CD productions that leave out the word "music" and mastering engineers are simply given credit as "Mastering by" or "Mastering engineer:". The length of the title (Music Mastering By) maybe the main reason why it's not implemented. Evinatea 04:08, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Stizz, its Edward Vinatea I have made the revision with an impartial definition. However, without the participation of the other members of this project, the burden is on us. I'd like you to collaborate with me on keeping an eye out of the spammers on the new mastering page.

I would also like to point out to you that maybe the term "mastering" should be the title with a short note that "it is part of the audio or music mastering process". Or something to that effect. (Don't forget, some people even call this CD mastering, which is a more popular word/term on Google). Best. Evinatea 20:50, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Uh... clarification should be made as to pre-mastering and actually mastering (throw back to the days of using lathes to cut masters for vinyl...). Pre-masteing is the art of taking mixes (whether 2 or multi-channel) and preparing the mixes for use in actual medi release. one of the premier books on this is Bob Katz's Mastering Audio.

tho I do agree it's usually listed as "Mastered by bob Ludwig..." or similar...

Also it'd be great to have some dialog on the recent trends in mastering and the effect it has on RMS-to-Peak levels, crest factor, without getting too opinion-oriented as to right/wrong. My views are similar to Katz's views; that a shift in modern environmental noise has led to lower peak/rms ratios but I digress, it appears to me to be directly related to trends in smaller speaker driver surface area, as well as the practice of bands/A&R/producers comparing how "loud" their mix is to the current musical offerings of other genre-similar music.

I'd love to be able to show the online the differences between some of the reference recordings I have in my mastering software. It's amazing how something as recent as the 10 or Blood Sugar look/sound in reference to average vs peak levels as compared to Nickelback or more recent releases. Katz goes into some detail on this subject in his book.

One of the best visual indicators of this trend toward lower pk/RMS ratios is in the software Wavelab where there's a peak/rms meter (you can adjust the integration times). Early stuff ('bout pre-95) shows a typical crest factor of about 12 db, hell the newer stuff is lucky to see 4-6db diff in pk vs rms.

Sorry for the long rant but it's been a topic of recent music lists such as lefsetz.com and the like. Wamnet 22:43, 7 April 2007 (UTC)