sending demo's to labels

[Thomas D and Jack Thomas]

spend more time and effort on the music than how the CD looks. Like Pheek said, make sure you send your music to a label that actually caters to the style. Nothing is more annoying than receiving a demo of irrelevant music. It proves the artist put little effort into sending demos out aside from compiling a list of record label names. TAKE PRIDE IN YOUR MUSIC AND WHO YOU SEND IT TO.

As a producer, I can say...don't limit yourself to just the small labels either. Don't be afraid to send your tracks to bigger labels. It's surprising sometimes to see what is picked up. They may not even pick your tracks, but the support and feedback can mean a lot. Don't underestimate yourself.

Also, just because somebody has worked hard in ableton for a year doesn't mean they're truly ready for their debut release. Get some honest feedback from friends and other producers first if possible. And, if your music isn't at least slightly different than the rest...why release it? I was in a rush to release my first record and I did. Do I regret it? No, I think the material represented me well at the time, but I probably could have held off. Most big producers will tell you they rushed their first record out too soon.


Does anybody agree that a seperate thread or section should be started with a list of contacts that producers can send demos to? A lot of labels frequent the site, and I'm sure they're always looking for new music. I don't think its a bad idea and it wouldn't require much work.

[dsat]

i like to receive 6-7 tracks
even more, it gives me a good view on who the artist musically is
it takes longer, but it's more interesting if you want to work with artists on a longer term instead of just releasing 1 ep...

i also like to hear tracks that have nothing to do with the label, like experimental tracks
so i know the artist is versatile... always interesting to know for the future

[skept]

when sending a demo should one have the tracks professionally mastered first?

[patrick bateman]

when sending a demo should one have the tracks professionally mastered first?

Nope.

[skept]

when sending a demo should one have the tracks professionally mastered first?

Nope.

this prompts some more questions then:

should it not be mastered at all (i.e. simply the main render if using a daw)?
should it be mastered using a mastering suite and one of it's presets?

[Thomas D and Jack Thomas]

this prompts some more questions then:

should it not be mastered at all (i.e. simply the main render if using a daw)?
should it be mastered using a mastering suite and one of it's presets?

That's a touchy subject. The best answer is, if you actually know what you're doing then go for it. If you don't, or just have an idea, then do too much mastering. A lot of people over compensate in mastering, over-compressing things, limiting the sh!t out of their music, normalizing, adding too much bass, etc.

This makes it really hard to cut and master. Truth is with all these new bandwagon minimal producers, the bright side is a lot of them are pretty creative. The dark side is its totally obvious how some of them have no clue about the sonics and dynamics behind the music and mastering.

[skept]

That's a touchy subject. The best answer is, if you actually know what you're doing then go for it. If you don't, or just have an idea, then do too much mastering. A lot of people over compensate in mastering, over-compressing things, limiting the sht out of their music, normalizing, adding too much bass, etc.

This makes it really hard to cut and master. Truth is with all these new bandwagon minimal producers, the bright side is a lot of them are pretty creative. The dark side is its totally obvious how some of them have no clue about the sonics and dynamics behind the music and mastering.

well i have no idea what i am doing so i guess that would be a no. but that is why i suggested using one of the presets that come with the mastering package. i assume that if it were to be pressed i would provide the render and it would be mastered from there by a professional. that is way in the future though. i am not even planning on sending a demo at the moment. just preparing for the day that i do.

when i have played my own tracks out i used a mastering suite and which ever preset sounded the best. i did no tweaking from there whatsoever.

thoughts about using the presets to temporarily master for presentation?

[patrick bateman]

when sending a demo should one have the tracks professionally mastered first?

Nope.

this prompts some more questions then:

should it not be mastered at all (i.e. simply the main render if using a daw)?
should it be mastered using a mastering suite and one of it's presets?

When you're just sending the demo, just send a MP3 file, or CD. There you should just make sure your track sounds good so here you can use some mastering chain or what ever to make it sound nice, but when you're actually sending the 24bit file to the label after signing, then don't use mastering/compressor/limiter on master output. That's a no-go if the label will have it mastered by a professional mastering studio before cut.
(of course if the label require you to deliver a mastered file, because they're just doing a 1:1 cut, then you should master it)