His engineering credits include "Billie Eilish's" “When We Fall Asleep, Where Do We Go?, ”Lady Gaga's“ Dawn of Chromatica, ”Joe Jonas's“ Music for People Who Believe in Love, ”The Marias" “Hold It Together,” "Billy  Idol’s" “The Cage EP,” and even Mexican norteño band “Los Tigres del Norte”, among  others.  

This wasn’t a typical conversation but a very insightful one for understanding John’s  mindset. He discussed the artistic and technical nuances of mastering, the importance  of balance in the industry, how to handle criticism as a creative professional, and his  perspective on the future of mastering in today’s evolving music scene. We also talked  about education, longevity, and the link between technical precision and emotional  impact in music. It was a thoughtful conversation with one of the most respected voices  in contemporary mastering.

Why Mastering Became the Right Fit: 

Having worked in recording, mixing, and mastering, John explained that one of the main  reasons he ultimately gravitated toward mastering was the amount of time and energy  required by recording and mixing sessions. In recording, for example, artists naturally  want to get the most out of the money they invest into their art, which often leads to  sessions that can last indefinitely. While those environments are usually enjoyable and  collaborative, spending long periods around people can also make the work feel deeply  personal.  

As John put it: "It's hard to have any kind of a life if you're in sessions all the time. Other aspects of your life tend to suffer. Time with family, friends and so forth."

“IN THE MASTERTING STAGE, EVERYONE IS HAPPY BECAUSE THE PROJECT IS AT AN  END AND THEY'RE EXCITED TO MOVE ON TO THE NEXT PHASE OF TOURING,  PROMOTION AND SO FORTH, SO IT'S GENERALLY A HAPPY OCCASION AND YOU GET  TO SEE THE POSITIVE SIDE OF PEOPLE'S PERSONALITIES." 

He also spoke about how the process of cutting records has changed over time.  According to him, much of the magic and intensity that once existed in the actual recording sessions has diminished with modern technology. Working with tape required  total concentration and precision — mistakes had real consequences, and the pressure  itself made the craft exciting and rewarding. With the evolution of DAWs and modern  digital workflows, many of those processes have become easier and more automated.  While technology improved efficiency, John feels that some of the excitement and  satisfaction of the work disappeared along the way. As he says:  

“IN GENERAL, TECHNOLOGY TENDS TO TAKE THE FUN OUT OF THE PROCESS.” 

Experience in teaching

John has also spent time on the educational side of the industry through masterclasses  and online content, which eventually led the conversation toward his experience with  teaching and explaining a craft.  

John: So I learned a lot from having to explain what I actually did during a session.  Basically, I learned what I did through talking about it. Unless you try to explain the  process to someone else, you tend to think there's nothing to it and it's actually very  simple. When you start to explain, you realize that there are so many decisions so many  thought processes regarding each project and it's much more complicated than you  thought! In other words you learn what it is that you do by teaching others and this is  very helpful.

Managing Time and having perspective  

As a professional in such a demanding industry, it's often challenging to find the right  balance between work and the other important aspects of life. While being a recording  engineer can feel like driving over the speed limit, mastering requires a different  methodology. I wanted to know John’s approach to this conflict. For him, a five to six hour run is about as much as he can do in one day.  

The reasoning is fairly straightforward: it’s about maximizing both time and critical listening. According to him, after five or six hours, the ear can begin to lose perspective, making it more difficult to objectively hear what is truly happening in the music. On a  given day, the work can consist of five or six singles from different artists, an album  project, and EP and some other songs, and so on. Some songs you get right away and  can finish them relatively quickly, while others can take several hours of  experimentation. It's actually pretty tiring making all those decisions!  

“THE MOST IMPORTANT SKILL TO BE LEARNED IN MASTERING IS LISTENING”  

He first listens to the material, then tests different processing options. He might go fully  analog, work entirely digitally, use saturation or not, clip converters, or keep things clean —it depends on the project. Serve the client and make the right moves As John  explains, there are some kinds of clients out there, for example, the ones that are  starting out, and depending on what is brought to the speakers, he might use a multi band compressor and completely change the mix. At other times, if the mix is from one  of the top mixing engineers, he's just making very small changes, or perhaps even no  changes at all!  

John: It’s basically the case that you spend all day listening to finished, so you know  what “finished” sounds like, and you spend the time trying to figure out how to get there.  

“THE AIM IS TO ALLOW PEOPLE TO FEEL THAT WHAT THEY'VE GOT IS AS GOOD AS IT  

CAN BE AND THEY CAN FEEL GOOD ABOUT IT AND MOVE ON TO THE NEXT STAGE  WITH CONFIDENCE.”  

Client’s vision and personal taste  

Many times, mixers will send the mix and a limited version of the mix reflecting current  market loudness. The loud version will be what the client has approved so you will need  to take that into consideration and not not stray too far from the artist's intention. He  referenced a quote from Tony Maserati regarding the mastering process: "When I send  something to mastering, it has to come back better, whether it's just a little bit better or  whether it's a lot better, I don’t care, but it has to be better." With that in mind, John  keeps the process clean and simple—matching loudness to the reference while  improving sonics based on his judgment. When he gets a quiet mix, he feels freer to push the loudness and shape the sound to his taste and experience. When receiving mixes from top engineers such as Spike Stent, he often experiments with different  approaches to see if there’s anything he can improve or elevate beyond what has  already been done. Sometimes it's possible that the mix really can't be improved on in  which case then don't do anything!  

That reminded me of something he had mentioned in another interview regarding  dithering. At one point, John spoke about going through what he described as his  "Dither Expert" era, in which, with certain mixes, he would simply apply dither rather than further process the material. That made me curious about whether his approach  had changed over time. According to him, that phase ended after he realized that any  kind of dithering altered the sound he had worked hard to create more than he wanted.  Nowadays, he prefers to preserve not to dither at all. 

Recognize self-growth and improvement of tools  

The discussion shifted to self-awareness and the challenge of measuring progress in a  craft where improvement is hard to quantify. He said it was an interesting question  because, in his view, improving also requires access to better, and often more  expensive, equipment. For example, he recently purchased a six-channel word clock  built in Japan with a $30,000 list price. It is, without exaggeration, an extremely  expensive piece of gear. John first learned about it through a producer friend who  brought it over to his studio for testing. After integrating it into his system through, he  immediately noticed an improvement in the sound of his rig. He described the result as  warm, detailed, and reminiscent of tape. And of course if you find something that  improves the sound, you have to get it!  

“EXCEPTIONAL SOUND STARTS WITH ACCURATE LISTENING.”  

For many, investing $30,000 in a word clock is unrealistic. Yet small changes can make  a big difference. John noted that electricity and power quality can significantly affect system performance. Ultimately, he believes it comes down to listening carefully and  recognizing the subtle nuances every change introduces. Although he owns an  extensive collection of analog gear, his chain has continued to evolve. Rather than  viewing these changes as strictly better or worse, he sees them as variations that offer  new sonic perspectives and greater flexibility in his approach to sound.  Today, he relies both on plugins and analog devices. His analog signal chain is relatively  simple and consists of an Imersiv D-1 DAC, Knif Eksa EQ, Elysia Museq, Elysia Alpha  Compressor, HUM Audio Devices LAAL, and finally the Lavry Savitr ADC. One of the aspects he cares about most is gain staging, making consistency throughout every  stage of the process extremely important. The EQ section is not used for dramatic tonal  shifts; instead, much of the sound shaping happens within the dynamics processing.  John placed particular emphasis on the interaction between the Elysia Alpha  Compressor and the HUM Audio LAAL. According to John, nearly 50% of the time he relies on the Alpha Compressor not to  aggressively compress the music but to enhance sonic clarity and definition within the  program material. In this context, the Alpha Compressor acts more as a gain shaper and dynamic control tool. Things become especially delicate once the soft clipping  stage is introduced. At that point, the processor helps prepare the signal before it  reaches the LAAL by carefully adjusting the threshold and gently clipping transients, so  the limiter can respond in a more controlled, musical way. After the LAAL performs the  final limiting stage, the signal is sent to the Lavry A/D converter, where John may  choose to apply saturation within the converter, depending on the material and the  character he wants to achieve. Once he arrives at the sound he is looking for on a  particular record, the material is recorded back into the DAW generally with a little  headroom so that there's no digital clipping at this stage.  

John also keeps in mind that most modern music is consumed primarily on portable  devices such as smartphones. For that reason, he often incorporates specific saturation  stages to help the music translate more effectively on smaller playback systems.  According to him, this approach can also help work around the perceived effects of  streaming platform normalization.

“YOU CAN MAKE THINGS LOUDER AND FUNCTIONAL.”  

Demystifying Loudness on streaming platforms  

Even today, loudness normalization on streaming platforms remains a heavily debated  topic. We are living in a kind of battleground where more and more tools are available to  make records louder, while at the same time trying to operate within a supposedly fair  playing field in which every platform has its own standardized playback level. Despite  these normalization targets, songs continue getting louder. In many cases, those  playback standards are simply ignored, and mastering engineers like John continue delivering aggressive yet polished masters without compromising musicality. At the  same time, for every engineer pushing loudness further, there is an opposing  perspective: engineers who believe streaming normalization targets should be  respected to preserve the material's dynamic range and integrity during playback.  

The subject became particularly relevant after John recently gave a series of  masterclasses at SAE Mexico City, where discussions around loudness normalization  and streaming standards sparked broader conversations about the realities of modern  mastering. One of the students presented research about how loudness penalties affect  music differently across streaming platforms. That eventually led John to share his own  perspective on the subject, including a conversation he once had with one of these  “loudness purists,” as I like to call them. 

John: There’s this one kid who has done this special report on the Spotify normalization  thing and how things should be, you know, -14 LUFS, then you shouldn’t go over the  true peak, and you should send stuff at -1 dB and so on. And he was kind of shocked  because I told him that we just don’t do that, you know, that’s not the assignment. In an ideal world we would perhaps do that but if you work in the actual music industry most  A&Rs, for example, particularly with new artists, don't care about streaming  normalization, they just want it to be as loud as anything else out there. If you look at  the top songs in charts at any given time, they're mostly pretty loud and over 0 true  peak. So at the top of the industry it's pretty clear that no one is paying much attention  to the LUFS debate. In fact of course mastering most material at a more reasonable  level would be a good idea but who in their right mind is going to call Ron Perry (CEO  and the president of Columbia Records) and say “I think this song will sound better if it’s 2 dB’s quieter can you get the mixer to fix it?. It’s not going to happen, and you’ll never  work with them again! The dynamic range enthusiasts basically hate those of us who work on pop music. I actually went on a podcast run by one of them just to say: "Maybe you are right, maybe  if the song was 5dB quieter, it would sound better, but at a certain level of the industry  that’s just not how it works." However because the dynamic range crowd don’t really  work in the industry, so they don’t know that so they just don't accept it. In reality you  just have to stay in your lane and do your job. You are just part of the process. 

Dealing with criticism and rejection  

This topic is an interesting one because when working on a creative endeavor you may  be exposed to a lot of different opinions and as engineers our work is to provide the  best we can but there are times where our work is rejected in favor of somene else's  this raises a larger question about how engineers emotionally navigate rejection in such  a competitive and deeply personal industry.  

John: It is a really hard and difficult thing because you put your heart into it, and then  somebody doesn’t like it and they send it to somebody else. That’s a situation that  everybody has to deal with, even the very top level people. It's a very competitive  business." He also points out that there are different reasons why work gets rejected, and it’s not always about the quality of the job. Here, it gets political, and there might be   rimes when relationships act as catalysts in this process.  

For example, the producer on the project has got their guy, you know, and they  want to send it to them and then the artist is friends with this other mastering engineer,  so they want to send it to them. In that scenario, the producer’s not gonna like it just  because they didn’t get their way and they didn’t get to use their guy, so that’s liable to  end up somewhere else. Or a lot of times the label, most labels, if it’s a bigger artist,  they will just send it to Sterling because they have mastered the hits for them in the past, so there's a comfort level there. It’s not always because your master wasn’t  actually better.  

These are some of the reasons why some things get’s rejected but how can we get through this loophole of self doubting and not feeling harmed because we lose the  job or the opportunity, because let’s be honest we are in a very competitive industry and  you might be the best engineer today and feel like in the top of the mountain but maybe  the next time when things get ugly you might sink into the deepest part of the  desperation ocean.  

Well, it seems meditation can become the best tool for your brain and emotional  stability. It’s not the first time I hear from an engineer that this is a powerful process to  keep in mind. I was introduced to meditation by Michael Brauer. A couple of years ago, I  attended a masterclass with him, and he talked about how meditation helps him balance  life and work. At first, I was very skeptical because I have a very different mindset on life and work. I thought you needed to really grind very hard to get things done, no matter what, and that you had to find a solution to every problem because, at the end of the  day, we are right? Problem solvers, and we need to provide solutions to our clients.  

That being said, Michael and John's take on meditation is making me doubt my way of  thinking about my process and lifestyle. Here’s what John shared with me about  meditation.  

John: Early on in my career, if someone didn't use my master I would be bummed out  about it for like weeks, you know, but over the years of practicing meditation it's gotten  much easier. I think that now, maybe I’ll be a little upset for about a minute, then I'll be  ok. It’s like "Best of luck to you". For me, the meditation thing is very important because  it creates some space between you and your problems, not just mastering problems but  life problems in general, and so over the years I’ve gotten better at it. Basically, when  you’re in the zone with meditation, all that stuff is like nothing. Sometimes, I’ll start the  meditation session, usually every morning, and I’ll be like “yeah yeah, what am I going  to do about this and that,” and at a certain point during the meditation, I’ll go “What was that thing I was worried about?” Then I bring it back, look at it, and be like, "That thing is  not important at all!” So it’s been an interesting process." 

Having said that though the bottom line with that is that you kinda have to get it right  most of the time, because otherwise, what are you doing? You're not going to be in  business for long.  

"THIS HAPPENS TO EVERYBODY, NO MATTER HOW GOOD YOU ARE, IT’S PART OF THE  JOB."  

The Future of the mastering engineer  

As technology continues to evolve, the audio industry enters a space filled with  uncertainty where creative crafts seem increasingly affected by AI and other tools  designed to simplify, or even reduce, the need for human intervention. Nowadays,  society often demands faster production and easier access to content in order to  constantly satisfy the need for instant gratification. However, within the music industry,  every stage of the creative process is deeply valued, understanding that truly great  productions require time, attention, and care.  

Since mastering engineers stand at the final stage of a musical piece in terms of  optimization and quality control, an increasing number of tools are emerging, claiming to  make the mastering process accessible and effortless for the average user. This raises  important questions about the future of the craft and the role engineers will continue to  play within an increasingly automated industry. I asked John how to survive in the  industry amid AI and what he thinks about the future of this craft. 

John: I don't think AI is going to be taking my job anytime soon. Basically, it’s art that we  are making and it's a collaborative process between humans that is the fun part. I mean  where's the fun in just writing a prompt and having everything done for you? Certain  tasks at a lower level perhaps will be taken over but for this job we like to work with our  friends and support each other. 

John emphasizes building a community, the importance of communication, and the  need to be aware of the people you’ve worked with.  

Really, if you want to survive, you need to get involved in common business practices  such as branding and so forth. Another thing that helps is creating a client database,  keeping track of all the people you work with, and ranking them by importance. The  people you get the most work from, take them out to dinner once in a while and keep a  note of the last time you talked to them and make sure you follow up from time to time.  If you like someone's work, write to them and tell them. On this part of the conversation, he threw a sadly hard truth:  

John: " Recently I went through this process and spent some time looking at what artists  I've worked with in the past were up to now and what I found was that there were many  who had just given up. It’s so hard these days that I think a lot of people will do it for  maybe 4 years, and if you don’t get at least low million streams, it just becomes too  much work for too little reward.  

Oh yeah, I almost forgot something extremely important that John said, and it is a very  simple but important life philosophy.  

“DON’T BE A DICK.”  

That’s the main advice here…  

Life and work philosophy  

John explained that, ultimately, it all comes down to pursuing the work as far as it needs  to go and being fully committed to the process. For him, the goal is to create something  that truly satisfies the client without compromising the quality of the work or the effort  behind it.  

“DON’T HALF-ASS IT.” 

Consistency and attention to detail are part of that philosophy. John mentioned that  even small actions — looking through an artist’s Instagram, listening to their previous  material, or simply having a conversation with them — can help engineers better  understand the person behind the music and connect more deeply with the project.  When asked if there was a phrase he carried as a personal mantra, John recalled his  experience working with Omar Sosa around 10 years ago, while mixing several of his  albums. During their time together in the studio, Omar would often repeat a phrase that  stayed with him:  

“FIND THE BEAUTY IN IT.”  

John: Beauty does not necessarily mean something polished or  traditionally pleasant. Sometimes the beauty can exist in distortion, imperfection, or  even ugliness — because those qualities can also carry emotion, character, and  meaning.