Tony Maserati’s Analog/Digital Hybrid Studio
Engineer/Mixer Tony Maserati is one of the prime creators of the New York Hip Hop/R&B Sound. His mixes have the low end that rocks the dance floor and the clear top end that speaks on the radio. Tony’s been nominated for 5 Grammy’s and won for Beyonce’s "Crazy In Love".
When we spoke to Tony, he was just back from mixing assignments in London and LA, and was getting re-settled in his home base mix room. We asked him about his current setup.
SC: What were the first consoles you worked on?
Well, I started out working on live sound consoles, so it was everything from Biamp to Soundcraft, to Allen and Heath. Then I went to Berklee. I don’t remember what they had, but I never saw them in the real world - I think they were Sound Workshop. That was my first real in-line console. Then from Berklee I went to New York to work at Sigma Sound and they had MCIs, SSLs , and a Neve. So that was what I worked on. Those consoles used the old tape-based automation systems, but when I got to Sigma, none of the old-school dudes used that automation. They didn’t even know how. I had to teach everybody, cause at Berklee we used to use it.
In those days technology was moving fast, in some ways as fast as it is now. And the dudes who came through Sigma and all the big studios then, they used to mix live, in pieces, to quarter inch tape. If they got the verse, they got the verse, and they would stop and go back a get the chorus. Then they would go back for the next bit,
and cut that in and then listen to it. And that’s the way I learned to work at Sigma. When I showed everyone how to use the tape-based automation, they hated it. After that, I pretty much worked on SSLs and Neves – and then SSL took over.
SC: Did working on the SSL change how you mixed?
T: I wasn’t old enough to have a habitual way of working when the SSL came out, so it wasn’t even a transition issue for me. Look, I learned to mix at Berklee, and I use the term “learn” loosely, cause I didn’t know shit. I was the same as every other kid at Berklee . . . you know mixing is part technique, part feeling, part instinct, part going for it, part boredom, part being stoned. It’s all those things, and when you’re just starting out, the technology itself becomes an obstacle because you have no technique. I didn’t have any set ways of doing anything cause basically I was an idiot. I was a typical two-year intern who thought that he knew everything.
SC: When did you realize, yes – I can do this stuff?
T: You know, I think it’s hit or miss until something clicks. And I think something clicked for me in my 6th or 7th year where I realized that I had a methodology, a certain set group of methods that I would use on every mix. There’s a certain amount of things that come from the song itself, obviously. The song brings a lot to your approach. And the equipment. I had watched a lot of different engineers work back in the Sigma days, and I remember seeing some old-time engineers who used one reverb, and a couple of EQ’s, and their mixes sounded better than most people. I tried to take as much as I could. I used to write books of notes daily, on every technique that I saw.
I think there comes a point where you can just let go – whether you’re a guitar player, singer, whatever. You spend so many years shedding and getting your technique down then there comes a point where it just clicks and you let go, and all that technique happens naturally. You begin to hear it, see it, feel it, think it, and that’s it. So when people come into my mix room, like sometimes. a guest of my clients will come in and go, like, “why did you do that?”. . . I don’t really have a process of “why” anymore. As soon as I hear it, I hear the sound in my head, and I go for that sound - and my clients either respond positively, or I respond positively, and I continue on that path. I think that happens naturally for most musicians because music is a language, and it has to be innate for it to be good.
SC: What gear are you mixing with now?
It varies, but at my spot, the spot that Sonic Circus helped me to put together, I have a Pro Tools controller that does all my automation, a Chandler 16 channel mixer, and a Dangerous 2-Bus, so I have 30 channels of analog summing. Then I have an Allen Smart compressor, a Neve 33609, 20 channels of Neve 33114, a GML 8200, an SSL X-Logic rack, one 1176, and two LA-3A’s. A couple of Distressors, the Thermionic Culture Vulture - which I love, and the Princeton digital 2016 . . . awesome, I love that thing too. And I still use PCM70’s, DBX160’s, DBX de-essers, plus I have 24 channels of hardware inserts through my 192’s.
SC: That’s a great way to do it.
That way my patch bay is pretty much permanent. I’ve got insert one going to Neve one, insert 2 going to Neve 2, and so on. I don’t mess around with moving patches unless I come up with something I want to change. It’s great, and I can do a recall in 10 minutes even though I’ve got a room full of analog gear. The patches automatically come up in Pro Tools and I still get tons of analog sound. Cause plug-in compression does absolutely nothing for me. So I use a lot of analog compression, and a lot of analog EQ. And I get a better sound. And I don’t like to sum in the box. I’ve heard a lot of guys do it really well, but I haven’t been able to do it really well – and that’s all that counts for me.
SC: Yes, some mixers think it’s a completely different
animal.
It is a different technique. I made a conscious decision about three years ago to start working the way that I’m working now. I’d call it a hybrid. Analog/digital. And in all honesty, I’m just now hitting
my stride and my mixes are coming out great. I’m using a lot of analog compression, but I’m doing all the mixing with a controller. And even now when I go to a big studio – I just spent 3 weeks in London, where I worked on an API console – and I did the same thing. I used it as a summing bus. I set up 24 channels
at unity gain, and I ran my Pro Tools outputs into those 24. I had 16 channels of hardware inserts, and I had a small controller that I put right on top of the console, and that was it. And I essentially did the same kind of mixing I do in my spot, only with an API console as my summing mixer.
In LA, I went one step further, working on an SSL J. I did the same thing. I set up 32 channels at zero, and I did use quite a bit of SSL EQ and compression, and occasionally I would put an insert on the SSL channel. Doing it like this allows me to back-and-forth between songs relatively quickly. As opposed to working the old way, where the SSL was my automation system, and the SSL was everything to me. It’s just so much better now. New technology allowed me to build a room in my barn that, on a small level, can compete with a full-blown studio.
SC: What are your go-to plug ins?
The plug ins I use everyday are the McDSP, Waves,
and SoundToys FilterFreak. Those are my staples. Then I pull from others.
Instead of Waves L2 or L3, I use the bus setting on the Sonnox Oxford Dynamics
for maximizing, because it doesn’t crunch the signal as much.
SC: How do you feel about mixing projects that are tracked in
home studios?
I get records that are tracked by everything from that idiot I was 20 years ago, to consummate professionals, to the artist in his bedroom. Obviously I would prefer the professional, but that is probably less than 1% of the projects I get.
I don’t feel bad about the loss of the commercial facility. But I do feel bad about the loss of the knowledge that I got that was passed down to me, that somebody else got from another senior engineer. All of that stuff that we learned from senior guys is gone. Nobody’s giving it away, and there’s nowhere to get it. I’ve been thinking about doing a camp where young engineers can come and learn some of that technique. Because
you don’t get that technique and you don’t get that knowledge in school. I teach at NYU every other week. Every other week I do go in and do a thing. But the kids don’t get it because they are not it the environment every day.
