Tweakers' Asylum Tweaks for systems, rooms and Do It Yourself (DIY) help. FAQ. |
|
In Reply to: RE: Recording studio posted by Tre' on January 11, 2015 at 12:05:18:
amount of subjectivity in your statements.
Do you use a scope to compare pre and post EQ? Wouldn't the direct mike feed be the most accurate and everything else subjective and depending on the taste of the producer nad artist and engineer?
If that is the case ( and indeed the recording techs I have met and done work for all agree)that it is very subjective. Is a piano recorded more accurately when the mikes are hung in the soundboard?In real life, you listen to a piano at least ten feet away, you know...
What would the difference be between the engineers taste and my taste. Personally, the engineer is not listening to my system and my tastes my differs substantially from his. It's like foods, maybe I prefer mine a bit spicier than his.
To say that the only way to listen is per the producers wanted is, well, hubris. I know of some recording engineers who mix to make their stuff sound good on a boom bx, because that is the marker they are aiming for. Do I want a boom box mix in my listening room: not really.
Still I believe my system is probably better balanced than yours. I collect many recordings, and particularly those with known microphones and placement techniques. I set up my system so that such patterns are rather obvious. When different microphone techniques can be readily heard I believe I have achieved a sense of neutrality.
I can hear the multi mike set up of RCA's as compared to the three earliest minimally miked ones. I can hear the three mike set of Mercury recordings. I can hear the Decca tree. Going to other recordings I can hear the single stereo mike set up of Kavi Alexander in his AQ recordings which incidentally have excellent photos of the actual recording sessions.
You have criticized me but without hearing my system and simply assume that you are correct and I am wrong. I find that interesting and indicative of more than a hint of hubris.
YMMV obviously
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- There's a tremendous - unclestu 14:48:39 01/11/15 (10)
- RE: There's a tremendous - ahendler 19:36:40 01/11/15 (3)
- Tre' is Absolutely Correct - Dryginger2 23:29:23 01/11/15 (2)
- interesting - unclestu 10:31:50 01/12/15 (1)
- RE: interesting - Dryginger2 15:40:15 01/12/15 (0)
- RE: There's a tremendous - Tre' 15:43:53 01/11/15 (5)
- You have a bad habit of - unclestu 16:56:12 01/11/15 (4)
- RE: You have a bad habit of - Tre' 17:09:12 01/11/15 (3)
- RE: You have a bad habit of - ahendler 19:45:05 01/11/15 (2)
- Actually some weren't so bad - Mechans 09:11:33 01/13/15 (1)
- RE: Actually some weren't so bad - Tre' 09:36:34 01/13/15 (0)
The moderators feel that allowing this thread to continue, even though it may hold useful information, will wind up creating more trouble than it solves, and thereby detract from the purpose of this forum.This is not the appropriate venue for discussion of this matter, and we ask that those with an interest in the subject, take it elsewhere (e.g. private e-mail).
No further follow-ups will be considered.
Thank you for your support of the Asylum.