Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Mixerman]

R.Nicklaus wrote on Fri, 18 November 2005 09:53

Mixerman, I agree with much of your post. If this has any trace of John's post re CLA, a quick check if his discography shows some pretty big country records cut in Nashville. I still believe when someone does the volume of business from so many varied projects, they would have a huge chance to see a cross section of formats.  It's a pretty wide scope.

From my understanding, CLA only accepts Alsihad files (these days). He wouldn't know WHAT it was cut on, nor would he care. This would seem to limit his scope, not widen it.

Mixerman

[malice]

Ron Steele wrote on Fri, 18 November 2005 18:47

"There is a world far beyond the scope of our own vision." Exactly, so why all this fuss? Can't we just leave it at that without all the BS debates over what one uses to do his work? Has anybody ever said your a hack for still using 2" or radar and dissed you for it? I doubt it.

That is not the point. The point is to know limitations of a given medium in order to be able to use it. Everyone that has made a transfer from analog to any digital medium should be interested by this test, and that's about all we can learn from it.

It won't change the recording industry and I have no doubt it would change anyone's habits as far as recording is concerned. But as I experienced problem of low end myself with PT, I'm more than happy to have this opportunity to understand better the phenomenon.

Two thinks can happen now from my own and insignificant point of view.

1) there is a lack of low end, and I will be please to know I'm not alone. And people that swear to their god they haven't heard nothing should wonder if their ears or monitoring system is not seriously flawed.

2) there is not a lack of low end, and I should wonder why I have heard it and why it seems to be a collective delusion  and what could be the reason.

I'm curious, that's all, and when you put aside the pissing contest, you will find it is just about time we make a test and verify.

I won't throw the stone at you Ron, you had the good idea to organised this. Mo power to ya

malice

[Mixerman]

Ron Steele wrote on Fri, 18 November 2005 09:47

"There is a world far beyond the scope of our own vision." Exactly, so why all this fuss? Can't we just leave it at that without all the BS debates over what one uses to do his work? Has anybody ever said your a hack for still using 2" or radar and dissed you for it? I doubt it.

I defy you, or anyone else, to show me anywhere in the thousands upon thousands of posts that I have made on the internet since 1999, where I have ever called anyone a "hack" for choosing one recording platform over another.

What you WILL find, is a record of my stating over and over again, that I CAN understand why someone would choose Alsihad. That one CAN certainly make a GREAT record on the platform. But that MOA seems more interested in planned obsolesence (which results in future sales) than on providing the best quality product they can for their loyal customers.

If you REALLY take a moment and READ what I've been saying these past three years (regarding HD), you will see that I am interested in prodding MOA to improve their product to sound better, and I'm interested in prodding the Record Industry into signing acts that have a chance of more than one hit song on one album. Signing acts that REQUIRE a computer, are generally not good bets as career acts.

I'm making legitimate critcisms of this product and this industry. Why anyone would take umbrage or try to tear me down for said criticisms is beyond me.

Mixerman

[Mixerman]

R.Nicklaus wrote on Fri, 18 November 2005 10:03

Mixerman wrote on Fri, 18 November 2005 09:57 R.Nicklaus wrote on Fri, 18 November 2005 09:53 Mixerman, I agree with much of your post. If this has any trace of John's post re CLA, a quick check if his discography shows some pretty big country records cut in Nashville. I still believe when someone does the volume of business from so many varied projects, they would have a huge chance to see a cross section of formats.  It's a pretty wide scope. From my understanding, CLA only accepts Alsihad files (these days). He wouldn't know WHAT it was cut on, nor would he care. This would seem to limit his scope, not widen it. Mixerman Right, the guy is an idiot.  Spare me.

Tell me precisely what words in my post imply that I think CLA is an idiot.

Mixerman

[rnicklaus]

Mixerman wrote on Fri, 18 November 2005 12:38

R.Nicklaus wrote on Fri, 18 November 2005 10:03 Mixerman wrote on Fri, 18 November 2005 09:57 R.Nicklaus wrote on Fri, 18 November 2005 09:53 Mixerman, I agree with much of your post. If this has any trace of John's post re CLA, a quick check if his discography shows some pretty big country records cut in Nashville. I still believe when someone does the volume of business from so many varied projects, they would have a huge chance to see a cross section of formats.  It's a pretty wide scope. From my understanding, CLA only accepts Alsihad files (these days). He wouldn't know WHAT it was cut on, nor would he care. This would seem to limit his scope, not widen it. Mixerman Right, the guy is an idiot.  Spare me. Tell me precisely what words in my post imply that I think CLA is an idiot. Mixerman

You didn't use those words, I did.  You said he wouldn't know WHAT the masters were cut on nor would he care.

Like there are no conversations or tracks sheets or interest on his part about the project.

[Ron Steele]

"I defy you, or anyone else, to show me anywhere in the thousands upon thousands of posts that I have made on the internet since 1999, where I have ever called anyone a "hack" for choosing one recording platform over another."

What you WILL find, is a record of my stating over and over again, that I CAN understand why someone would choose Alsihad. That one CAN certainly make a GREAT record on the platform. But that MOA seems more interested in planned obsolesence (which results in future sales) than on providing the best quality product they can for their loyal customers.

If you REALLY take a moment and READ what I've been saying these past three years (regarding HD), you will see that I am interested in prodding MOA to improve their product to sound better, and I'm interested in prodding the Record Industry into signing acts that have a chance of more than one hit song on one album. Signing acts that REQUIRE a computer, are generally not good bets as career acts.

I'm making legitimate critcisms of this product and this industry. Why anyone would take umbrage or try to tear me down for said criticisms is beyond me.

------------------------------------------------------------ -------------------------------------

I never said you called anybody a hack, and I apologize for the use of that word. It was not meant to be an accusation.


But to further clarify the point I didn't make very well,  I will do it with your point,

you said:

"I'm making legitimate criticisms of this product and this industry. Why anyone would take umbrage or try to tear me down for said criticisms is beyond me."


you also said:



"There is a world far beyond the scope of our own vision."


Yes, we all have our own legitimate thoughts and opinions that allow us to formulate our own individual choices and criticisms.

[Your Ad Here!]

I don't recall you calling anyone a "hack". However, one thing you did do MM was comment on pop/click in PTs, blaming it initially on a technical flaw in the software. In the post, I believe I was suffient in proving that it was user error and ignorance about the methods in which PTs handles fades that caused the problem.  

I only bring this up to reiterate that you've made assumptions publicly that flaws exist in the PT system before and you were wrong.

It will be interesting to see if you're wrong again. If so, perhaps an acknowledgement of your wrongness would be in order this time.

If you're right you can feel sufficently rightious!

Either way thanks for pushing the issue and going through all the trouble to do the test tonight.

[electrical]

Your Ad Here! wrote on Fri, 18 November 2005 16:24

I don't recall you calling anyone a "hack". However, one thing you did do MM was comment on pop/click in PTs, blaming it initially on a technical flaw in the software. In the post, I believe I was suffient in proving that it was user error and ignorance about the methods in which PTs handles fades that caused the problem.

To put this in perspective, I have very limited experience with ProTools, having been involved in sessions where it was used, but never using it myself. The one fade issue MM brought up, like the loss-of-low-end thing, are not uncommon complaints. He is not making one-off accusations here. He is an example of a working engineer who is encountering problems that other working engineers encounter.

I know this because I have heard other working engineers say precisely the same things about precisely the same problems.

One would do well to avoid personalizing these complaints. That's one of the reasons the Chicago test is being conducted. We want to see if there is a real problem there, removed from the personality of the complaining engineer.

[The Resonater]

Wow...a lot of print here since I last posted.

Fletcher, IMHO, those were low blows leveled at Chris and his work, but I'm not going to engage myself in what I feel is a rather unprofessional attack which is off topic anyway.  We're not even discussing Chris' "sound" here.  My reason for bringing Chris into the discussion was not to use him or his work to validate the sound of Pro Tools, but rather to respond to your earlier statement that "many, many people" in L.A. were using Radar, and simply to say that, as arguably the busiest guy in the business, Chris is not working on any appreciable ( far, far less than 1%) amount of stuff originally done on Radar.

Mixerman, your point about there being scope outside of our own vision is totally valid.  However, I think Randy Nicklaus said it best above, when he stated, "I still believe when someone does the volume of business from so many varied projects, they would have a huge chance to see a cross section of formats. It's a pretty wide scope."  To elaborate, in most cases, we do end up knowing what formats were used along the way.  This info comes to us either from dialog with the producer, notes on the track sheet, discussions with the engineer, etc etc.  It is true that we ask that all files come in on PT, but there is typically a lot of dialog along the way to get the files into their proper format, if they're not already.  So, I don't think that there's a lot going on that we're not seeing.  And again, to be fair, Chris is probably as busy as any other single engineer out there.  Between what I see on his projects and what I see when I work out at other studios or talk with other studio owners, etc., I just don't see any Radar work going on in the city.  Doesn't mean it's not, just means I'm not seeing any, and with all the projects coming and going through here, you'd think I'd be seeing some.

[Fletcher]

The Resonater wrote on Fri, 18 November 2005 20:14

Fletcher, IMHO, those were low blows leveled at Chris and his work, but I'm not going to engage myself in what I feel is a rather unprofessional attack which is off topic anyway.

Here we experience a cultural difference... see, I'm from the East Coast, you're obviously from the West Coast.

On the East Coast we have this age old tradition of "breaking balls"... on the West Coast y'all have this age old tradition of taking everything too fucking seriously.

I was breaking balls.

Take a Valium.

[danickstr]

more phucked-up mixes are done on PT than on any other system.  but that does not mean that someone who cannot necessarily tell on which format the tracks were recorded is a hack mixer.  

A lot of you gooroo mixers know too much for your own good.  IMO some of the best mixes on country or pop/rock have really "radio friendly" eq curves that eliminate debates about bottom end.  The mix engineer took it out or carved it up real good so as not to conflict with shitty bass response of the crap speakers upon which  90% of the human race listens to music.  250 Hz 3dB falloff seems to be a close approximation.  A low e is 44 hz. A kick is just a bunch of air and overtones.  what da phuck are yo trying to preserve down there? Club mix stuff to play on 18" woofers?

[rnicklaus]

danickstr wrote on Sat, 19 November 2005 08:27

more phucked-up mixes are done on PT than on any other system.  but that does not mean that someone who cannot necessarily tell on which format the tracks were recorded is a hack mixer.   A lot of you gooroo mixers know too much for your own good.  IMO some of the best mixes on country or pop/rock have really "radio friendly" eq curves that eliminate debates about bottom end.  The mix engineer took it out or carved it up real good so as not to conflict with shitty bass response of the crap speakers upon which  90% of the human race listens to music.  250 Hz 3dB falloff seems to be a close approximation.  A low e is 44 hz. A kick is just a bunch of air and overtones.  what da phuck are yo trying to preserve down there? Club mix stuff to play on 18" woofers?

I believe this test was about using Pro Tools as a multi track recorder only - no in the box mixing or the entire mixer portion considered.

[The Resonater]

Fletcher wrote on Sat, 19 November 2005 04:20

The Resonater wrote on Fri, 18 November 2005 20:14 Fletcher, IMHO, those were low blows leveled at Chris and his work, but I'm not going to engage myself in what I feel is a rather unprofessional attack which is off topic anyway. Here we experience a cultural difference... see, I'm from the East Coast, you're obviously from the West Coast. On the East Coast we have this age old tradition of "breaking balls"... on the West Coast y'all have this age old tradition of taking everything too fucking seriously. I was breaking balls. Take a Valium.

Fletcher,

You were right.  

It's been about an hour since I popped the Valium, and it's pretty clear that you were just breaking balls and I was just overreacting.  It's so weird, because when I was just normal ol' me (pre-Valium), your disparaging post about Chris seemed like a bean-town gear pimp talking smack about a multiple Grammy/Emmy/TEC winner.  But damn if you're not right!  Under the warm and fuzzy comforts of the Valium, it's so plain that it was just your east coast heritage allowing you to break the balls of an accomplished professional actually working in the music business.  Silly me!

Thanks for the Valium suggestion.  Once again, you were right!

John Van Nest
Resonate Music Studios

[danickstr]

that is some funny although acerbic stuff.  wrt the test itself, the thread has spread itself out like a weed in a country sidewalk.  so while I know what the test is referenceing, I am simply putting perspective into the thread itself.  we forget in the heat of testing shit that what we are testing is musical gear.  key word being music.