R/E/P Community

R/E/P => R/E/P Archives => Reason In Audio => Topic started by: RMoore on January 16, 2005, 07:52:13 pm

Title: Brian WIlson had one working ear
Post by: RMoore on January 16, 2005, 07:52:13 pm
Yet produced 'Pet Sounds' & quite successfully I would say
Title: Re: Brian WIlson had one working ear
Post by: ted nightshade on January 16, 2005, 08:50:15 pm
After having a friend's not-so-cute 10 year old scream directly into my right ear, at Thanksgiving dinner, I may be down to one good ear myself.

Basically, I'm quite grateful to have even one ear that works exceptionally well. I've come to the understanding that strangling the kid won't bring my hearing back.
Title: Re: Brian WIlson had one working ear
Post by: RMoore on January 16, 2005, 09:46:50 pm
Jeez - sorry to hear that,
You'd think at 10 they'd know better..
Title: Re: Brian WIlson had one working ear
Post by: Eric Rudd on January 19, 2005, 10:36:20 am
So did Al Schmitt for a while.

Eric
Title: Re: Brian WIlson had one working ear
Post by: Eric Rudd on January 19, 2005, 10:37:52 am
Oh...and David Pack from Ambrosia.

Still one of my favorite pop vocalists.

Eric
Title: Re: Brian WIlson had one working ear
Post by: Glenn Bucci on January 19, 2005, 11:26:48 am
I assume if Brian's hearing problms is one reason why he did not like stereo recordings?
Title: Re: Brian WIlson had one working ear
Post by: Your Ad Here! on January 19, 2005, 12:10:24 pm
Yeah, but Pet Sounds was mono.
Title: Re: Brian WIlson had one working ear
Post by: Bob Olhsson on January 19, 2005, 12:15:13 pm
Keef wrote on Wed, 19 January 2005 10:26

I assume if Brian's hearing problms is one reason why he did not like stereo recordings?

Not at all. Brian was into the same style of production and the same musicians as Phil Spector. It is very dependent on using huge amounts of chamber reverb that just plain doesn't work in stereo. Our mid '60s Motown recordings had the same problem. Most people are shocked by how much more exciting the mono mixes sound. Brian and Spector tried to block the release of stereo versions and it got picked up by the press.
Title: Re: Brian WIlson had one working ear
Post by: Glenn Bucci on January 19, 2005, 01:21:26 pm
Bob Olhsson wrote on Wed, 19 January 2005 12:15

Keef wrote on Wed, 19 January 2005 10:26

I assume if Brian's hearing problms is one reason why he did not like stereo recordings?

Not at all. Brian was into the same style of production and the same musicians as Phil Spector. It is very dependent on using huge amounts of chamber reverb that just plain doesn't work in stereo. Our mid '60s Motown recordings had the same problem. Most people are shocked by how much more exciting the mono mixes sound. Brian and Spector tried to block the release of stereo versions and it got picked up by the press.



Dont' tell people who want surround sound that mono is exciting, they will laugh in your face. Mono homogonizes the music. It sounds all together in your face. That's not how it is when you go to concerts, classical or rock. Having some separation so you can distinguish parts at least for me sounds better. I have yet to get excited about a mono recording.

It is true though that the reverb they used back then did not work in stereo which I think was a key factor.
Title: Re: Brian WIlson had one working ear
Post by: Bob Olhsson on January 19, 2005, 01:46:43 pm
I remain 100% convinced that almost all entertainment is by far most effective in whatever format it was originally produced for.

Surround music won't go anywhere until several people have actually PRODUCED recordings SPECIFICALLY for the format that are big hits. The question is if Wall Street and the consumer electronics industry will have enough patience. I wouldn't hold my breath.
Title: Re: Brian WIlson had one working ear
Post by: Eric Rudd on January 19, 2005, 02:03:57 pm
Keef wrote on Wed, 19 January 2005 18:21


Dont' tell people who want surround sound that mono is exciting, they will laugh in your face. Mono homogonizes the music. It sounds all together in your face. That's not how it is when you go to concerts, classical or rock.


Step out of the room.....and all music is mono.
It still comes down to whether or not the song/artist are good, ultimately.

BTW, as far as rock concerts go, there's an environment that generally sounds mono. I'll generalize to say most are mixed to provide coverage of the stage instruments to all areas of the audience. Not to provide a stereo image. (which would be lost on all but the most select seats)

Eric
Title: Re: Brian WIlson had one working ear
Post by: Ozzy on January 19, 2005, 02:29:12 pm
What about old Beethoven, his stuff has got to have been covered more that Brian Wilson's.

The Scottish classical percussionist Evelyn Glennie is profoundly deaf also.

http://www.evelyn.co.uk/
Title: Re: Brian WIlson had one working ear
Post by: Bobro on January 19, 2005, 02:49:47 pm
Keef wrote on Wed, 19 January 2005 18:21




Dont' tell people who want surround sound that mono is exciting, they will laugh in your face. Mono homogonizes the music. It sounds all together in your face. That's not how it is when you go to concerts, classical or rock. Having some separation so you can distinguish parts at least for me sounds better. I have yet to get excited about a mono recording.




Well I want surround, what a groovy thing, and I find mono very exciting too. Mono doesn't necessarily equal all-together-in-your-face, usually there's a very clear hierarchy to the sounds in a mono mix, front to back, and there can be a really nice feally of heighth/depth. That being said, I agree that mono
can easily be made to be aggressively up front- I'm surprised there isn't more mono around these days with the "loudness wars" and all.

By coincidence I've just been asked to do a mono recording, very enjoyable.

-Bobro




 

Title: Re: Brian WIlson had one working ear
Post by: seriousfun on January 19, 2005, 06:03:59 pm
Even with one ear, you can tell whether a sound is coming from behind you, or whether it is to your right or left.

The shape of your ear directs sound into the ear cavity differently depending on its relative location.

One-ear musicians can't perceive a stereo (def: from the greek for solid - no mention of "two") image the way most of us can, so we can't blame Brian for not thinking in terms of creating a stereo image with his productions. Multiple ears and transducers are definately better at experiencing acoustic spaces, and unless you regularly work in an anechoic chamber, we rarely hear anything that is not influenced by the room around it.
Title: Re: Brian WIlson had one working ear
Post by: ted nightshade on January 19, 2005, 10:42:31 pm
Man, I love mono. One mic mono, especially (although I tend to sneak in a little room mic). It can certainly be deeply thrilling! Mostly has to do with the performance.

Oh, and anyone who wants to laugh in my face can go right ahead! I can't imagine what my life would be like if I lived it trying to avoid that sort of thing...
Title: Re: Brian WIlson had one working ear
Post by: J.J. Blair on January 19, 2005, 11:25:17 pm
I wonder if Brian Wilson has done any ear candles.   Rolling Eyes  
Title: Re: Brian WIlson had one working ear
Post by: Jon Autry on January 20, 2005, 01:49:02 am
Keef wrote on Wed, 19 January 2005 13:21

Bob Olhsson wrote on Wed, 19 January 2005 12:15

Keef wrote on Wed, 19 January 2005 10:26

I assume if Brian's hearing problms is one reason why he did not like stereo recordings?

Not at all. Brian was into the same style of production and the same musicians as Phil Spector. It is very dependent on using huge amounts of chamber reverb that just plain doesn't work in stereo. Our mid '60s Motown recordings had the same problem. Most people are shocked by how much more exciting the mono mixes sound. Brian and Spector tried to block the release of stereo versions and it got picked up by the press.



Dont' tell people who want surround sound that mono is exciting, they will laugh in your face. Mono homogonizes the music. It sounds all together in your face. That's not how it is when you go to concerts, classical or rock. Having some separation so you can distinguish parts at least for me sounds better. I have yet to get excited about a mono recording.

It is true though that the reverb they used back then did not work in stereo which I think was a key factor.


Well, I have yet to get excited about a surround mix and I am often tempted to cynically laugh at the failure so far (at least in my opinion) for anyone to create music/surround mixes that justify the ridiculous format(s).

Take care,
Jon Autry
Title: Re: Brian WIlson had one working ear
Post by: Jon Autry on January 20, 2005, 01:50:05 am
Austin Ince wrote on Wed, 19 January 2005 14:29

What about old Beethoven, his stuff has got to have been covered more that Brian Wilson's.



yeah, but he has a few years on Brian...

Smile

Title: Re: Brian WIlson had one working ear
Post by: sirfun on May 08, 2009, 04:20:58 pm
I saw Brian Wilson with an 11 piece band at a 2000 seat theater about 2 months ago--Perfect!!!
Title: Re: Brian WIlson had one working ear
Post by: Steve Hudson on May 08, 2009, 04:52:06 pm
Jon Autry wrote on Thu, 20 January 2005 00:49


Well, I have yet to get excited about a surround mix and I am often tempted to cynically laugh at the failure so far (at least in my opinion) for anyone to create music/surround mixes that justify the ridiculous format(s).


I heard the surround mix of Dark Side of the Moon in George Massenburg's massively diffuse room at Blackbird and that made me a believer in surround mixing. It was an order of magnitude more compelling than the stereo mix, which I love.
Title: Re: Brian WIlson had one working ear
Post by: Ashermusic on May 09, 2009, 03:56:36 pm
Although I have a problem with the artistic choices in The Beatles "Love" surround sound mixes, the way you can hear all the elements is stunning.
Title: Re: Brian WIlson had one working ear
Post by: Edvaard on June 04, 2009, 09:54:56 pm

With both ears put together, I think that my brother has about 20 or 30 % of the hearing capability that Brian Wilson has.

And just one of my ears is probably at least 110 % of whatever Brian Wilson has, in a purely technical sense.


Either of us wish that we could do anything half close to what he does musically.