“Can you do stem mastering if I send you the tracks?”
This is a sentence I still hear surprisingly often when people talk to mastering engineers. Not only from beginners, but sometimes from people who have been producing and mixing music for years. And every time I hear it, I’m reminded that the confusion between tracks and stems is still very much alive.
To be clear, this isn’t about being pedantic or correcting people just for the sake of terminology. In audio production, words matter. Using the wrong term can lead to misunderstandings, wrong expectations, and workflow problems, especially when you’re working with mixing or mastering engineers, or using online mastering services.
What makes this even more interesting is that this isn’t a new issue. Back in 2021, legendary mixing engineer Bob Clearmountain publicly pointed out that the terms track and stem were being used incorrectly. If someone at that level feels the need to raise a flag, it’s a pretty good sign that this isn’t just a beginner problem.
So, let’s clear this up, once again, and properly. What exactly is a track? What is a stem? And why does the difference still matter today, especially in the age of AI-powered tools like Soundboost, which offers stem splitting as part of its workflow?
Let’s start at the beginning.
Bob Clearmountain and the Stem Conversation
In 2021, Bob Clearmountain took to social media to point out something that had clearly been bothering him for a while: people were using the term “stem” when they actually meant “track.” Coming from one of the most respected mixing engineers in the history of recorded music, this wasn’t a casual remark. It was a correction!
For context, Bob Clearmountain has mixed records by artists like Bruce Springsteen, David Bowie, The Rolling Stones, and countless others. When someone with that level of experience says, “we’re using this term wrong,” it’s worth paying attention.
What struck me at the time wasn’t just what he said, but why he felt the need to say it. By 2021, DAWs were more powerful than ever, remote collaboration was the norm, and workflows were becoming increasingly fluid. Yet, despite all this technological progress, a basic piece of audio terminology was still being misunderstood.
And here we are, years later, still talking about it.
That tells us something important: this confusion isn’t about trends, platforms, or tools. It’s about how we communicate in audio production and why using the right words still matters.
What Is a Track?
In the simplest and most practical sense, a track is an individual audio element inside a session.
– A kick drum is a track.
– A snare drum is a track.
– A bass guitar is a track.
– A lead vocal is a track.
Each of these elements typically lives on its own channel in a DAW, with its own processing: EQ, compression, automation, effects, and so on. Tracks are the building blocks of a mix. You balance them, shape them, mute them, solo them, and make creative decisions at a very detailed level.
Tracks are usually:
– Raw or semi-processed
– Meant to be mixed
– Flexible and editable
This is why sending “tracks” usually implies that the mix is not finished yet, or at least that there’s still room (and intention) for mix-level decisions.
From a workflow perspective, tracks belong to the mixing stage. They are not designed to be delivered as a final, intentional grouping. They are the ingredients, not the dish.
And this is where the confusion often starts: when multiple tracks are exported individually and labeled loosely, it’s tempting to call them “stems.” But terminology-wise and workflow-wise that’s simply not correct.
Which brings us to the next question: If tracks are individual elements, then what exactly is a stem?
What Is a Stem?
A stem is not an individual element. A stem is a submix.
In other words, a stem is created by grouping multiple related tracks together and exporting them as a single audio file. That file represents an intentional balance between those tracks.
Common examples of stems include:
– Drum stem (kick, snare, hi-hats, toms, overheads, room mics)
– Music stem (guitars, keyboards, synths)
– Vocal stem (lead vocals, backing vocals, harmonies)
– FX stem (reverbs, delays, special effects)
The key word here is intentional.
Stems are exported after mixing decisions have been made. Levels, processing, automation, and internal balances are already set. When you solo a stem, you’re not hearing raw material, you’re hearing a finished part of the mix.
This is a crucial distinction:
– Tracks are meant to be mixed
– Stems are meant to be handled as groups
If someone can open your files and still rebalance the kick against the snare, or the lead vocal against a backing vocal, they’re not working with stems, they’re working with tracks.
Stems live in the space between mixing and mastering. They offer more flexibility than a stereo mix, but far less than a full multitrack session. And when used correctly, they can be incredibly powerful.
Which leads us to the most important question of all: Why does this distinction actually matter?
Why Terminology Matters (More Than You Think)
At first glance, confusing tracks and stems might seem harmless. After all, audio gets delivered, work gets done, music gets released… right?
Not quite!
Using the wrong terminology can create very real problems, especially when you’re collaborating remotely or working with mixing and mastering services.
Here’s what typically happens:
Someone says they will send stems.
What actually arrives is a folder with 40-60 individual tracks.
At that point, expectations are already misaligned.
A mastering engineer expects:
– A small number of grouped files
– A mix that is essentially finished
– Minor, controlled adjustments at a group level
What they receive instead:
– Full mix responsibility
– Decisions that belong to the mixing stage
– A session that was never meant to be reconstructed
This isn’t just a workflow issue… It’s a communication issue!
Clear terminology sets clear boundaries:
– Tracks -> mixing decisions
– Stems -> controlled flexibility
– Stereo mix -> final balance
When these terms are used correctly, everyone involved knows what stage the project is in, what kind of changes are appropriate, and what the outcome should be.
And this becomes even more important today, with online and AI-powered tools entering the picture. Technology can do amazing things, but it still relies on humans using the right words to describe what they want.
Which brings us to an important modern question: How do stems fit into online mastering and tools like Soundboost?
Stems, Online Mastering, and Modern Workflows
As music production workflows have moved increasingly online, the role of stems has evolved as well. Today, artists and producers expect more flexibility, faster turnaround, and better translation across platforms, all without endless back-and-forth.
This is exactly where stem-based workflows make sense.
Used correctly, stems allow mastering engineers (or mastering services) to make targeted, controlled adjustments without stepping into full remix territory. For example:
– Slightly adjusting the vocal level relative to the music
– Tightening the low end by working on a drum or bass stem
– Making small tonal corrections without affecting the entire mix
But again, this only works if we’re actually talking about stems, not tracks.
This distinction becomes even more relevant with modern tools like Soundboost, which offers stem splitting as part of its workflow. Stem splitting can be incredibly useful, especially when a stereo mix needs a bit more flexibility at the mastering stage. However, it’s important to understand what this does and what it doesn’t do.
Stem splitting does not magically turn a finished mix into a multitrack session. It doesn’t replace proper mixing, and it shouldn’t be treated as an excuse to skip mix decisions. What it does offer is practical control at the group level, helping masters translate better across listening environments and platforms.
And once again, terminology matters here.
If we call everything a “stem,” expectations get blurry. But when we use the term correctly, stem-based tools (whether traditional or AI-assisted) become powerful allies rather than sources of confusion.
Which brings us to the final point: Let’s wrap this up and put a clear stake in the ground.
Let’s Call Things by Their Real Names
None of this is about being overly strict or academic. Language in audio production exists to make collaboration smoother, not harder. But when words lose their meaning, workflows suffer.
So let’s keep it simple:
– Tracks are individual elements meant to be mixed.
– Stems are intentional submixes created after mixing decisions.
– They are not interchangeable terms.
Calling tracks “stems” doesn’t make a project more professional. It just creates confusion. And in a world where collaboration often happens across emails, uploads, and platforms, clarity is everything!
This matters even more today, with modern tools like Soundboost, where features such as stem splitting add real flexibility to the mastering stage. These tools are powerful, but they work best when users understand what they’re actually working with. Technology can assist, enhance, and accelerate workflows, but it can’t fix unclear communication.
Using the correct terminology sets expectations, respects each stage of the production process, and ultimately leads to better-sounding results.
So the next time you prepare files, send a brief, or choose a workflow, take a moment to ask yourself a simple question:
Am I sending tracks… or am I sending stems?
Getting that answer right makes a bigger difference than most people realize.