Okay folks I received the Recording sessions a while ago and decided to Master or as some would say Process them.... What I have done is eq,compress,stereo expand, Balanced and limited the tracks .... there is no brickwall limiting ala Zimmer scores.... I like to keep the dynamics in tact for a better listening experience.....

https://mega.co.nz/#!bthT2KqB!9R6SwAnOH9qY3UXE5_MvmhDuL9zmoZNeIoWAVBj q9Qw

Password: spider-man


I have done others so if ye like what I�ve done I can upload them

Thank you, I'll give it a listen :)

Very quick analysis, this is rather gross.

1:14-1:20 of track 1. That's all I need to say. Won't listen to any more. It's just not good.

Very quick analysis, this is rather gross.

1:14-1:20 of track 1. That's all I need to say. Won't listen to any more. It's just not good.

Could you elaborate more .... are you referring to my Mastering or James Horner�s Score

I'm sure Rocklegend2000 has offered something good here, but can anyone else assess the quality of the entire score presented here. I would just like to be clear that if I proceed to download this version, I have used the space wisely. I have the other version that was offered here (labelled "Complete Score") and that sounds good enough. Does this version offer more material, or...


(I am aware no one is forcing me to download this, but I don't have the space and am curious as to what this edition actually is)

Rocklegend2000, Thank you very much for your mastering of the recording sessions. In the meantime, I've been listening to your version and it sounds very good t me, a notch above the 128kbp recording sessions posted earlier as far as I'm concerned. Kudos to you and everyone else, help yourselves to a great Horner score!

a notch above the 128kbp recording sessions posted earlier !
When were the sessions posted, the only editions I know were posted were "Complete Scores", they had slate numbers and titles, but not referred to as "sessions" :/

So, did you master with the FLAC sessions or 128k..? I hope you had the lossless files.

FYI, it is 192k, not 128k.

So, did you master with the FLAC sessions or 128k..? I hope you had the lossless files.

Lossless.... opppps sorry I should have mentioned it in my Post..... Sorry

When were the sessions posted, the only editions I know were posted were "Complete Scores", they had slate numbers and titles, but not referred to as "sessions" :/

Annnnnnd this is why I have such a gripe against people labeling a complete score as the recording sessions. Now there's confusion.

It was the complete score that was posted, never the sessions.

Mastered? Are you an engineer? Why would you 'process' the audio. Ala ala there never was 'brickwall limiting' on Hans Zimmer scores. 'eq,compress,stereo expand, Balanced and limited' Eek. You unprofessionally touched the width of the - most likely lossy - audio? I understand if you're doing it for fun and practice, but don't pollute man :)

Annnnnnd this is why I have such a gripe against people labeling a complete score as the recording sessions. Now there's confusion.

It was the complete score that was posted, never the sessions.

Okay. Let's make it so clear. It was the complete score "aka. A partial sessions" that was taken "directly" from the complete sessions, which we do not have.

Mastered? Are you an engineer? Why would you 'process' the audio. Ala ala there never was 'brickwall limiting' on Hans Zimmer scores. 'eq,compress,stereo expand, Balanced and limited' Eek. You unprofessionally touched the width of the - most likely lossy - audio? I understand if you're doing it for fun and practice, but don't pollute man :)

Did you even bother to listen to his work before calling it "pollution?" Better yet, did you even read the whole thread before posting? He mastered LOSSLESS .flac files.

^ And did a bad job of it.

Well as you noticed before, there is a pretty weird volume jump in the first track.

And I'm sure the frequencies jump in more songs. But I just can't be bothered to listen to more.

Interesting.

Well as you noticed before, there is a pretty weird volume jump in the first track.

There's nothing weird about it..... it's called dynamics...... as I said before.... I refuse to Brickwall anything

---------- Post added at 10:41 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:40 PM ----------


And I'm sure the frequencies jump in more songs. But I just can't be bothered to listen to more.


Frequency jumps ; huh what the fuck are you talkin about .....

---------- Post added at 10:45 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:41 PM ----------


^ And did a bad job of it.

Go on smart arse I'll give you the recording sessions unprocessed Lossless files for you to do..... go on have a go.... I dare ya

---------- Post added at 10:46 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:45 PM ----------


Well as you noticed before, there is a pretty weird volume jump in the first track.

you do know it was recorded like that......

---------- Post added at 10:48 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:46 PM ----------


Mastered? Are you an engineer? Why would you 'process' the audio. Ala ala there never was 'brickwall limiting' on Hans Zimmer scores. 'eq,compress,stereo expand, Balanced and limited' Eek. You unprofessionally touched the width of the - most likely lossy - audio? I understand if you're doing it for fun and practice, but don't pollute man :)


you do know what Mastering entails...............No?

you do know it was recorded like that......

Ah, so it was. Just checked the non-mastered files and you are right of course. That simply is the way the Main Title sounds. Doesn't change the fact that the "dynamics" of the track at about 1:14 sound really weird, but that's on James Horner or some other bootlegger somewhere. My only excuse for not remembering that was there is that the tracklist I copied for my own set (http://chrono-score.blogspot.com/2013/03/amazing-spider-man.html) doesn't include that particular piece of that cue at all.

Anyhoo, I'm sorry if I am among those who have offended you today and I have no reason to doubt your ability to master music. Quite the opposite. I have and enjoy your edit of Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. I certainly don't know how to master stuff!

Go on smart arse I'll give you the recording sessions unprocessed Lossless files for you to do..... go on have a go.... I dare ya
Considering they have not been posted in lossless, I would appreciate that more than your edit. If that makes me a smartass, then I suppose I'm guilty.

Considering they have not been posted in lossless, I would appreciate that more than your edit. If that makes me a smartass, then I suppose I'm guilty.

The 'complete score' / 'sessions' / whatever one wants to call them were indeed posted in lossless a long time ago. I got them in lossless long before they were posted here. They weren't given their own thread, just added to the existing scorepranos thread if I remember correctly. I know it was mgm5215 who made the post with the lossless link.

Thank you!!!!

Thank you!!!!


You're welcome.... I hope you enjoy it

---------- Post added at 09:09 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:33 AM ----------


Ah, so it was. Just checked the non-mastered files and you are right of course. That simply is the way the Main Title sounds. Doesn't change the fact that the "dynamics" of the track at about 1:14 sound really weird, but that's on James Horner or some other bootlegger somewhere. My only excuse for not remembering that was there is that the tracklist I copied for my own set (http://chrono-score.blogspot.com/2013/03/amazing-spider-man.html) doesn't include that particular piece of that cue at all.

Anyhoo, I'm sorry if I am among those who have offended you today and I have no reason to doubt your ability to master music. Quite the opposite. I have and enjoy your edit of Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. I certainly don't know how to master stuff!

No Offence taken..... all constructive criticism is Welcome .....

Thanks! Great score, too bad Zimmer's doing the sequel!

Did you even bother to listen to his work before calling it "pollution?"

Indeed I did. It's amateur. Would you like the sonic qualities of the scores and franchises that define your musical tastes being crapped on?


did you even read the whole thread before posting? He mastered LOSSLESS .flac files.

Indeed I did. Check timestamps. Twelve minutes between the mention of 'lossless' and my post... I was reading, listening and writing.

Lastly, it's not 'dynamics' when there are 'weird' jumps in velocity. Neither do you require to 'brickwall limiting' to correct it. There are experienced, talented mastering engineers who bring these scores to light... please don't sabotage their work.

This is awful beyond words and scarring to a fan.

I suppose that's your way of saying that you have no advice for the OP on how to get better at mastering. Even if you're 100% correct in your assessment of his work, the lack of anything constructive in the posts by you and Tyrion is off putting.

Indeed I did. It's amateur. Would you like the sonic qualities of the scores and franchises that define your musical tastes being crapped on?



Indeed I did. Check timestamps. Twelve minutes between the mention of 'lossless' and my post... I was reading, listening and writing.

Lastly, it's not 'dynamics' when there are 'weird' jumps in velocity. Neither do you require to 'brickwall limiting' to correct it. There are experienced, talented mastering engineers who bring these scores to light... please don't sabotage their work.

This is awful beyond words and scarring to a fan.

I would like to humbly point out to you, sir, that no one actually did any professional mastering of the "complete" score set. They are culled from a boot of the sessions and are therefore raw and unmixed/mastered. I am interested in any comments on how to better achieve decent sound with amateur equipment myself, for use in the tv samples I put up. I have no real idea how to accomplish this and so would love input.

To the op, if you post, people will comment. One would hope in the vein of constructive criticism, but you've been around long enough to grasp the types of comments will be posted. Sooo...while I understand the frustration, you should not be surprised nor let it bother you. Btw, can we provide Tyrion with the lossless set, so he can hear it himself?

Indeed I did. It's amateur. Would you like the sonic qualities of the scores and franchises that define your musical tastes being crapped on?



Indeed I did. Check timestamps. Twelve minutes between the mention of 'lossless' and my post... I was reading, listening and writing.

Lastly, it's not 'dynamics' when there are 'weird' jumps in velocity. Neither do you require to 'brickwall limiting' to correct it. There are experienced, talented mastering engineers who bring these scores to light... please don't sabotage their work.

This is awful beyond words and scarring to a fan.


I have read your posts and I�m going to tell you don�t know what you are talking about....in fact you know Jackshit.... proof here�s Horners TASM OST

The Amazing Spider Man (2012) Main Title Theme (Young Peter) (Soundtrack OST) - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVDrTLHZEVQ)

As you can hear the cresendo is identical..... identical so this sudden jump in Frequency lol ha ha ha as you called it and then this weird fuckin phrase I�ve never came across "jumps in velocity" ..... really care to explain that one to me because my PuigChild 670 compressor controlled all the Velocity and also glued the tracks together to make em tighter and to give em abit of ooomph and to give constant volume and dynamics across the other tracks.... it�s part of the Mastering process...... The only difference between my version and Horners version is regards to Volume.... my version is approx 4db louder with approx 3db of headroom.... anymore than that and it�s clipping and distorting.....
Now I�m gonna make this as simple as I can.... you have no clue not one fuckin iota what you are talking about.... just a bad fuckin troll so I would respect you get the fuck out of the thread and let others enjoy it.... well from the thanks I got at least they are enjoyin it.... I�ll say to you what I said to that other Gobshite .... if ya don�t like what I did I could really give two fucks because I know you ain�t got a fuckin clue and even when people point out that you�re wrong you�ll still and come up with more bullshit ......

Oh and on the Han Zimmer scores are not brickwalled..... well go and open up one of his files in a wav editor.... his music is compressed to shit where there�s 0 dynamic range..you do know what Dynamic range is.... don�t you... 0 .... so before you reply which we both know you will , go and educate yourself and if you want I will give you the unprocessed Recording session and you can have a go and upload them for me and others to critic or you can write the process in which I should do in the future and how I should do it....what plugins and gear should I use... what frequency should I cut etc....etc.....
So unless you have something technical to say on how to improve these sessions well then Fuck Off and troll somewhere else :)

---------- Post added at 07:13 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:07 PM ----------


I would like to humbly point out to you, sir, that no one actually did any professional mastering of the "complete" score set. They are culled from a boot of the sessions and are therefore raw and unmixed/mastered. I am interested in any comments on how to better achieve decent sound with amateur equipment myself, for use in the tv samples I put up. I have no real idea how to accomplish this and so would love input.

To the op, if you post, people will comment. One would hope in the vein of constructive criticism, but you've been around long enough to grasp the types of comments will be posted. Sooo...while I understand the frustration, you should not be surprised nor let it bother you. Btw, can we provide Tyrion with the lossless set, so he can hear it himself?

Do you want me to upload The raw Files...... Yeah sure......
yeah you are right Amanda .... I am around here long enough and these comments don�t bother me in the slightest but these people post this stuff without having any knowledge is unfair especially to those whom might want to download the tracks but are put off buy idiotic things said in a thread.....
Oh and The Spiderman Sessions were mixed but not Mastered or edited ..... I think the Volume of the tracks ranged from -15db to -8db ........ so there was 7db of dynamic range to play with

As soon as I got the lossless version I made my own "Listener-Friendly" version of this, along with "Karate Kid" and any other score that features very low overall volume and long bookending gaps of silence.

I don't change the range unless it's more to my comfort levels throughout a track but never considered uploading anything unless it's one of my "custom complete score" presentations.

I supposed I must have completely FUCKED with "Avatar" ruining that score, ruining "Glory", ruining "The Perfect Storm", ruining a lot of scores. I altered the volume levels of all of them where needed.

I have not downloaded this simply because I'm quite happy with my custom of this score, but I doubt anyone is deserving of the kind of shitfests that have gone on here, unless it's one of those "DVDrip-passed-off-as-complete-scores" that pantaloons guy made a bunch of.

...you can find the flac here:

http://forums.ffshrine.org/f92/amazing-spider-man-complete-score-james-horner-118335/7.html

Post #165

As soon as I got the lossless version I made my own "Listener-Friendly" version of this, along with "Karate Kid" and any other score that features very low overall volume and long bookending gaps of silence.

I don't change the range unless it's more to my comfort levels throughout a track but never considered uploading anything unless it's one of my "custom complete score" presentations.

I supposed I must have completely FUCKED with "Avatar" ruining that score, ruining "Glory", ruining "The Perfect Storm", ruining a lot of scores. I altered the volume levels of all of them where needed.

I have not downloaded this simply because I'm quite happy with my custom of this score, but I doubt anyone is deserving of the kind of shitfests that have gone on here, unless it's one of those "DVDrip-passed-off-as-complete-scores" that pantaloons guy made a bunch of.


You have a version of James Horner�s Glory.... Oh man I would love a copy of it , if you wouldn�t mind sending me a link

You have a version of James Horner�s Glory.... Oh man I would love a copy of it , if you wouldn�t mind sending me a link

My thread for it is here:

Thread 126607

My thread for it is here:

Thread 126607


Thanks.... I really enjoyed your Perfect Storm...... well done

Firstly, I was not trolling. I was quoting and replying with my opinion. I don't see the necessity to begin harassing me with profanity and typical banter.

You used 'PuigChild 670' plugin? That plugin has been known to add aliasing and inharmonic content to an audio source when processed at anything below 88/96k. Even at high sample rates, it's hazy and dull, making it the worst of the 670 emulations. Nobody would use it on a master bus.

Indeed, some of Hans Zimmer's soundtrack CD releases have 'brickwall limiting'. Some are truly 'brickwalled', others are done well pushing it to '0 db' while retaining dynamics. They go through this process using 24-bit 192k tracked into Pro Tools then processed using the very best analog limiters.

I still don't see why anybody would touch the stereo width? It just doesn't make sense.

If you want to stay true to the source while 'only bringing up the volume' you can use a transparent compressor such as Cytomic The Glue to catch the peaks then 'normalize' the audio.

Finally, to clarify, nowadays most composers/mixing engineers mix and master as they go a long, so most everything bounced is mixed and mastered to an extent. Particularly if the elements of the score are produced in-the-box. As with the old term, if it were just sessions, we would be hearing nothing but orchestral sessions of the composer mock-ups. The source is mixed... and mastered :)

I'm sorry if it came across as offensive, but if you were in the industry I'm in... this is the norm. I do however apologize that my posts weren't constructive.

Firstly, I was not trolling. I was quoting and replying with my opinion. I don't see the necessity to begin harassing me with profanity and typical banter.

You used 'PuigChild 670' plugin? That plugin has been known to add aliasing and inharmonic content to an audio source when processed at anything below 88/96k. Even at high sample rates, it's hazy and dull, making it the worst of the 670 emulations. Nobody would use it on a master bus.

Indeed, some of Hans Zimmer's soundtrack CD releases have 'brickwall limiting'. Some are truly 'brickwalled', others are done well pushing it to '0 db' while retaining dynamics. They go through this process using 24-bit 192k tracked into Pro Tools then processed using the very best analog limiters.

I still don't see why anybody would touch the stereo width? It just doesn't make sense.

If you want to stay true to the source while 'only bringing up the volume' you can use a transparent compressor such as Cytomic The Glue to catch the peaks then 'normalize' the audio.

Finally, to clarify, nowadays most composers/mixing engineers mix and master as they go a long, so most everything bounced is mixed and mastered to an extent. Particularly if the elements of the score are produced in-the-box. As with the old term, if it were just sessions, we would be hearing nothing but orchestral sessions of the composer mock-ups. The source is mixed... and mastered :)

I'm sorry if it came across as offensive, but if you were in the industry I'm in... this is the norm. I do however apologize that my posts weren't constructive.



Well firstly let me opologise for the use of Profanity .... It�s not really becoming of me and it�s something I rarely do....

Actually I was wrong stating that I used the Puigchild 670.... I used that on my Avatar recording session..... On these sessions I used my SSL Buss compressor .....
You ask Why mess with the stereo field..... well I�ve never worked with someone on a project where someone didn�t enhance the stereo field .... it�s part of the process..... christ I worked with CLA and you should see what he does to the stereo field...my word ......
I�m gonna give you a tip.... never ever normalize Audio.... ever .... always use make up gain to boost sonic levels.....
Also Mastering engineers are not mixing and mastering on the go.... esp when they are dealing with 20-40 tracks .... engineers mix first and then when said project is finished and then master.... well that�s my experience

Apology accepted.... lets move on before this becomes a bitch fest of who�s has the bigger man or girl size.... you didn�t like what I did well that�s fair enough but I ain�t charging no-one for the files

and here I am just using my eyes and ears with nothing special with regards to hardware or software.

Thank you so much! Literally cannot wait to hear it!!!

and here I am just using my eyes and ears with nothing special with regards to hardware or software.



you indeed have a very special talent lol ;)

Yes. I have always felt JH was a bit..."special". :awsm:

Errrr...wait....

I swear I never once ate paste in school.

It did smell tasty though...

If people will allow, I�d like to offer my opinion too.

But first let�s talk about the OST. A few weeks ago I did my own Deluxe Edition of this score (it�ll be shared when the sequel hits theaters). The lossless, complete score I had (the one everyone has) seemed to be derived from the recording sessions. To my surprise, the OST did not differ in terms of stereo width or equalization, the bootleg and the OST sounded completely alike. BUT: on the OST some tracks had different gains (two or three cases included adjusted dynamics). These gains depended on the track coming before, meaning that when a loud track came before a soft one, the soft ones' gain was raised accordingly and vice versa. But if the loud track had a soft beginning (featuring a single piano for example), this wasn�t adjusted which led to an interesting yet uneven impression of gain. Of course, tracks or pieces were out of chronological order... but that�s fairly common, I�d have done the same.

In terms of general sound quality, the OST was close to perfection, a very clean recording with only slight amounts of unobtrusive peak limiting. Staging was almost perfect, the overall balancing of frequencies was tastefully done. However, just as the OP I�ve always felt that the score might profit from a bit more 'oomph'. Not much, just a bit. Furthermore, the sound was what might be called too 'warm'. The staging was problematic too (at least to my ears): placement of instruments and stage width was wide; yet it lacked depth (with the exception of synthesized elements).

I got rid of everything I regarded as a problem (too strong a word really... 'slight flaws in an otherwise perfectly decent recording' is better... but very long) on my Deluxe Edition. The most important thing for something like this is IMO to work with care and to be extremely subtle. An almost perfect recording doesn�t need to be changed in order to be superior, simply because it can only be worse if the amount of processing is exaggerated. Keep what�s excellent and perfect what can be perfected. That�s all. And when we�re doing things like this we have the luxury of taking any time we want, we don�t have a deadline to deliver a finished product, meaning we don�t have to hurry.

Which brings me to the version here. Rocklegend, in my opinion you went into the right direction but you exaggerated which wasn�t needed.

1. to counter the aforementioned 'warmth' you effectively diminished frequencies below 300 Hz or so by roughly 4 dB which leads to a brittle sound missing punch and snap
2. I assume that somewhere in your processing chain was an exciter (a tool I rarely use; for people not knowing what I�m talking about: an exciter adds controlled distortions to 'amplify' certain frequency bands); the effects of the exciter you�re used are actually audible -> there�s too much 'grain' which leads to harshness that could have been avoided
3. how did you change the stage? In your OP you said you widened it - IMO you should have widened it even more because your result has not enough stereo separation (probably caused by the DSPs you used). Secondly, placement and size of instruments now feels off; everything in the center of the stage sounds constricted, it can�t 'breathe'. Instead of giving instruments more room to breathe, you diminished the virtual size of the stage (and the distance between instrument groups) by quite a huge amount
4. this curious stage also causes the sound to lack reverb; that�s probably what you were looking for since the recording might have sounded too 'wet' to you. But let me tell you that this impression is misleading; only some parts sound wet (voices, piano or synths for example), other parts (the orchestra itself) sounds much less wet - and organic - in comparison. Most likely this wasn�t a mixing choice but an artistic one, that�s perhaps the sound James Horner wanted
5. your dynamic compression... I�m sorry, but to me that�s the most problematic aspect of your set. Audiophiles call this 'microdynamics' (stupid word really), on this set they�re absent while the OST and the original pieces were bursting with them. You effectively leveled them out and while I didn�t notice any 'pumping' artifacts that might have given away the automated dynamic compression, it still is the kind of compression I wouldn�t want to use for a finished mix (automated faders would have given you superior results)
6. you also limited dynamic peaks... and it pains me to write this... but you�ve introduced some fairly audible 0 dBfs artifacts (digital clipping), as an example I�d like to point out track 38. Tower.

All in all, this is much too aggressive for my taste, it sounds like something supposed to play well on the radio or on bad hardware. IMO, mastering should always be done in a way that the result sounds (within limits) enjoyable everywhere, be it crappy hardware or some audiophile system. It actually sounds like your avatar suggests, like some rock album from the 70s. This sound might work during the first 5 minutes of listening to it... but afterwards it gets tiresome, leaving an exhausted listener.

Listen, I don�t want to attack you, far from it. But I think that you can do better than this; judging from this release you�re able to spot problems of a recording. And this is one of the most important ability of a mastering engineer. But IMO you lack - as of now - the ability to stop yourself from too much processing. Don�t be mad at me, I just wanted to point out that you�re a diamond in the rough in need of cutting and polish.

If people will allow, I�d like to offer my opinion too.

But first let�s talk about the OST. A few weeks ago I did my own Deluxe Edition of this score (it�ll be shared when the sequel hits theaters). The lossless, complete score I had (the one everyone has) seemed to be derived from the recording sessions. To my surprise, the OST did not differ in terms of stereo width or equalization, the bootleg and the OST sounded completely alike. BUT: on the OST some tracks had different gains (two or three cases included adjusted dynamics). These gains depended on the track coming before, meaning that when a loud track came before a soft one, the soft ones' gain was raised accordingly and vice versa. But if the loud track had a soft beginning (featuring a single piano for example), this wasn�t adjusted which led to an interesting yet uneven impression of gain. Of course, tracks or pieces were out of chronological order... but that�s fairly common, I�d have done the same.

In terms of general sound quality, the OST was close to perfection, a very clean recording with only slight amounts of unobtrusive peak limiting. Staging was almost perfect, the overall balancing of frequencies was tastefully done. However, just as the OP I�ve always felt that the score might profit from a bit more 'oomph'. Not much, just a bit. Furthermore, the sound was what might be called too 'warm'. The staging was problematic too (at least to my ears): placement of instruments and stage width was wide; yet it lacked depth (with the exception of synthesized elements).

I got rid of everything I regarded as a problem (too strong a word really... 'slight flaws in an otherwise perfectly decent recording' is better... but very long) on my Deluxe Edition. The most important thing for something like this is IMO to work with care and to be extremely subtle. An almost perfect recording doesn�t need to be changed in order to be superior, simply because it can only be worse if the amount of processing is exaggerated. Keep what�s excellent and perfect what can be perfected. That�s all. And when we�re doing things like this we have the luxury of taking any time we want, we don�t have a deadline to deliver a finished product, meaning we don�t have to hurry.

Which brings me to the version here. Rocklegend, in my opinion you went into the right direction but you exaggerated which wasn�t needed.

1. to counter the aforementioned 'warmth' you effectively diminished frequencies below 300 Hz or so by roughly 4 dB which leads to a brittle sound missing punch and snap
2. I assume that somewhere in your processing chain was an exciter (a tool I rarely use; for people not knowing what I�m talking about: an exciter adds controlled distortions to 'amplify' certain frequency bands); the effects of the exciter you�re used are actually audible -> there�s too much 'grain' which leads to harshness that could have been avoided
3. how did you change the stage? In your OP you said you widened it - IMO you should have widened it even more because your result has not enough stereo separation (probably caused by the DSPs you used). Secondly, placement and size of instruments now feels off; everything in the center of the stage sounds constricted, it can�t 'breathe'. Instead of giving instruments more room to breathe, you diminished the virtual size of the stage (and the distance between instrument groups) by quite a huge amount
4. this curious stage also causes the sound to lack reverb; that�s probably what you were looking for since the recording might have sounded too 'wet' to you. But let me tell you that this impression is misleading; only some parts sound wet (voices, piano or synths for example), other parts (the orchestra itself) sounds much less wet - and organic - in comparison. Most likely this wasn�t a mixing choice but an artistic one, that�s perhaps the sound James Horner wanted
5. your dynamic compression... I�m sorry, but to me that�s the most problematic aspect of your set. Audiophiles call this 'microdynamics' (stupid word really), on this set they�re absent while the OST and the original pieces were bursting with them. You effectively leveled them out and while I didn�t notice any 'pumping' artifacts that might have given away the automated dynamic compression, it still is the kind of compression I wouldn�t want to use for a finished mix (automated faders would have given you superior results)
6. you also limited dynamic peaks... and it pains me to write this... but you�ve introduced some fairly audible 0 dBfs artifacts (digital clipping), as an example I�d like to point out track 38. Tower.

All in all, this is much too aggressive for my taste, it sounds like something supposed to play well on the radio or on bad hardware. IMO, mastering should always be done in a way that the result sounds (within limits) enjoyable everywhere, be it crappy hardware or some audiophile system. It actually sounds like your avatar suggests, like some rock album from the 70s. This sound might work during the first 5 minutes of listening to it... but afterwards it gets tiresome, leaving an exhausted listener.

Listen, I don�t want to attack you, far from it. But I think that you can do better than this; judging from this release you�re able to spot problems of a recording. And this is one of the most important ability of a mastering engineer. But IMO you lack - as of now - the ability to stop yourself from too much processing. Don�t be mad at me, I just wanted to point out that you�re a diamond in the rough in need of cutting and polish.


Thanks for the reply.... I really appreciate it especially as I've enjoyed your releases..... and I ain't angry......

my chain was EQ, SSL buss Compressor,L3 Multi Band Compressor used to control EQ AND Waves L2 limiter ..... I also used a surround sound plugin to expand the stereo field....

After reading your reply I'm gonna have another go ;)

thanks

See... all it takes is one lengthy post from someone who knows what he's talking about (Sonic)... Don't understand some people here. FFS... download the score, and if you don't like it, delete it. Don't come spewing your gall here because it doesn't help. If you can't be constructive then go out and punch a wall or something. Maybe that will help you vent.

Can I get a link for the 128 kB/s version please