Talk:Mastering (audio)

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Audio mastering. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070524113354/http://mixonline.com:80/recording/mastering/audio_issues_modern_mastering/ to http://mixonline.com/recording/mastering/audio_issues_modern_mastering/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070827154625/http://www.digido.com:80/bob-katz/mixing-tips-and-tricks.html to http://www.digido.com/bob-katz/mixing-tips-and-tricks.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120906061506/http://cdmusicmastering.com:80/how-much-headroom-for-mastering.html to http://cdmusicmastering.com/how-much-headroom-for-mastering.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:02, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: https://web.archive.org/web/20120906061506/http://cdmusicmastering.com:80/how-much-headroom-for-mastering.html isn't working but http://cdmusicmastering.com/how-much-headroom-for-mastering.html is. I have removed the bad archive. ~Kvng (talk) 19:01, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: We have articles on Mastering engineers and the field of mastering, but the same page for Audio engineer and Audio engineering. The scopes of these articles are nigh identical, and there is little to gain by keeping them separate. This article is a lot better so most of the content will be from here, but to match audio engineer the title for a merged page should be mastering engineer Mach61 00:50, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Pinging @NicolausPrime@BrigaderG@Slatersteven from previous AfD discussion Mach61 00:58, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text:  Mach61 01:00, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

text: Sounds good. Slatersteven (talk) 08:44, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

text: Support merge. Popcornfud (talk) 10:13, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

text: Support merge. NicolausPrime (talk) 13:34, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

text: Oppose merge. I do think there is currently an unncessary contentfork, but I think we should look at separating out the profession (history, awards, rising role in music culture) from the activity (technology, transition from analogue). BrigadierG (talk) 22:52, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: @BrigadierG I disagree that everything worth including couldn't fit on to one article. There are some professions that definitely should have separate articles from their fields (e.g. Police/Police officer) but imo "mastering engineer" is too specialized to be one of them. The field is barely a century old, and it's more heavily linked to the available technology it rechquires than most. A combined article's "history" will have much more to say about advances in gear than advances in pay-scale. Mach61 17:25, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems like I am in the minority here so I am happy to bend to consensus if it remains, but I think the activity is a much more comprehensive article topic than the profession. To put it in a word, I think the action is prior to the profession. If discussing the history of mastering, there was a time when mastering was not a sufficiently developed or broad activity so as to be its own job. In that frame, mastering engineers are a subset of the big blob of mastering (the activity) in thingspace. I can't imagine a world where a job is notable but the activity you do in the job is not. BrigadierG (talk) 21:34, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

text: Support merge, too similar a scope to justify separate articles. InDimensional (talk) 20:22, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

text: Support merge, but into mastering, not mastering engineer. I don't see why we have to match audio engineer. Mastering is a specific process, unlike audio engineering, which is refers to a set of processes that only make sense together when in the context of the profession. I agree with BrigadierG that mastering is really the notable topic here, not mastering engineer.  BappleBusiness[talk] 04:16, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: @BappleBusiness I can live with this, as I care more that we don't have redundant articles than which article title is chosen. Perhaps, as a compromise, a merge can be preformed first, and then a WP:Requested move debate started over the best title? Mach61 16:53, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

text: I would be happy with this and would not contest it BrigadierG (talk) 16:58, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge