David@FrankHarvey said:
The usual way.
You listen to the customer (read the OP in this case), use your years of experience to work out what you think the person actually wants and suggest accordingly.
How do you do it?
bigalxyz said:
If you have read some of the previous posts on this topic (as I have) you would understand why I find it so tedious.
It's no reflection on you or anyone else - my opinion is that if you have an unbalanced system you might want tone controls. inmho tone controls intefere with the overall quality of sound.
tonky
tonky said:
But this isn't the same old 'tone control thread' where the pros and cons of the judicious use of such controls are debated ad nausiem.
This is about the OP, and many others too, assembling a perfectly decent hi-fi system and then finding out that it gets nowhere near giving them the sound that they want.
This isn't really about tone controls or eq, it is about the expectation and understanding of what a hi-fi system is, what it can and can not do and why, on occasions, it completely fails to deliver.
MeanandGreen
Well-known member
- Dec 26, 2012
- 149
- 69
- 18,670
The way I see it is like this...
There is no such thing as absoloute high fidelity, not in the home with domestic equipment. You'd have to sit in the studio and listen on the equipment the record was produced on to hear it as it actually is. Room acoustics and equipment matching are so variable it is not possible to playback every single recording and hear it as it was recorded.
As mentioned record producers don't always make the best job of it and who says they are right and should be telling us how to listen to it?
Tone controls can be effective for making subtle adjustments if you listen to a large selection of music across various genres.
However if they are needed all of the time to bring some life to the sound, then I'd say somehting probably isn't right with the room layout/speaker positioning and/or the gear is mismatched.
There is no such thing as absoloute high fidelity, not in the home with domestic equipment. You'd have to sit in the studio and listen on the equipment the record was produced on to hear it as it actually is. Room acoustics and equipment matching are so variable it is not possible to playback every single recording and hear it as it was recorded.
As mentioned record producers don't always make the best job of it and who says they are right and should be telling us how to listen to it?
Tone controls can be effective for making subtle adjustments if you listen to a large selection of music across various genres.
However if they are needed all of the time to bring some life to the sound, then I'd say somehting probably isn't right with the room layout/speaker positioning and/or the gear is mismatched.
steve_1979
Well-known member
- Jul 14, 2010
- 231
- 10
- 18,795
chebby said:
An interesting quote from Alan Shaw:
"Let's make a generalised statement which I believe to be incontestable, perhaps with the rarest of exceptions: record producers are not audiophiles. They probably have never even heard the word, although they may be vaguely aware that a commercially insignificant, micro-proportion of the subsequent home audience (say, 0.1% of buyers for classical recordings, 0.00001% for pop recordings, both commercially irrelevant) may have a 'good' home audio system. It is very unlikely that they themselves have what we might consider a 'good' home audio system, so it is vital to appreciate that your/our outright fascination with the minutia of recorded sound is not something that they themselves are into. For them, a recording and the heaps of post production (no recordings go straight from mixer to CD... they're all processed) that follows is a job of work. Like house painting. Or landscape gardening. Or designing car parts. Interesting; sometimes. Boring and frustrating; most of the time. Anxious; often when dealing with musicians, technology, lawyers, agents and accountants. What audience does he have in mind for the final product? Average Joe with his midi system on which it should sound good enough so that Joe doesn't dare return the disc to the dealer. That's the producer's remit from on high: 'make it good enough to sell, to stay sold and that's all. Not a cent more cost than need be.'
--------
And what about the needs of the audiophile?
"The who?"
The audiophile.
"Sorry, I don't understand the question. I guess you mean the bloke who's spent a fortune on his audio equipment and all that goes with it ...."
Yes. How conscious are you as a producer of the scrutiny that he'll put your recording under?
(Laughs). "He never enters my mind."
Never?
"Never. His economic impact on the record company is so negligible that it doesn't matter a jot whether he lives or dies, buys or rejects .... we're not pandering to the one buyer in a thousand who goes mad and spends $500 on a fancy audio system."
Don't you mean $5000 on an audio system?
(Pause). "What? Are you kidding me? $5000? No! Would someone actually do that? I'd like to meet him! Wish he'd spend a bit more on music to pay my wages. We might then be interested in pandering to him. I'm a business executive not a nurse maid."
steve_1979
Well-known member
- Jul 14, 2010
- 231
- 10
- 18,795
chebby said:
An interesting quote from Alan Shaw:
"So, now the question of whether or not the home user "should" ever apply some tonal adjustment, either from tilt controls, bass/treble controls, graphic EQ, loudness buttons, DSP room correction or even, taken to its logical extreme, changing the furnishings in the room which are themselves physical tone controls and filters. To answer this we need to get into the mind of the producer: not the engineer who is merely the producer's paid and replaceable servant. Let's make a generalised statement which I believe to be incontestable, perhaps with the rarest of exceptions: record producers are not audiophiles. They probably have never even heard the word, although they may be vaguely aware that a commercially insignificant, micro-proportion of the subsequent home audience (say, 0.1% of buyers for classical recordings, 0.00001% for pop recordings, both commercially irrelevant) may have a 'good' home audio system. It is very unlikely that they themselves have what we might consider a 'good' home audio system, so it is vital to appreciate that your/our outright fascination with the minutia of recorded sound is not something that they themselves are into. For them, a recording and the heaps of post production (no recordings go straight from mixer to CD... they're all processed) that follows is a job of work. Like house painting. Or landscape gardening. Or designing car parts. Interesting; sometimes. Boring and frustrating; most of the time. Anxious; often when dealing with musicians, technology, lawyers, agents and accountants. What audience does he have in mind for the final product? Average Joe with his midi system on which it should sound good enough so that Joe doesn't dare return the disc to the dealer. That's the producer's remit from on high: 'make it good enough to sell, to stay sold and that's all. Not a cent more cost than need be.'
--------
And what about the needs of the audiophile?
"The who?"
The audiophile.
"Sorry, I don't understand the question. I guess you mean the bloke who's spent a fortune on his audio equipment and all that goes with it ...."
Yes. How conscious are you as a producer of the scrutiny that he'll put your recording under?
(Laughs). "He never enters my mind."
Never?
"Never. His economic impact on the record company is so negligible that it doesn't matter a jot whether he lives or dies, buys or rejects .... we're not pandering to the one buyer in a thousand who goes mad and spends $500 on a fancy audio system."
Don't you mean $5000 on an audio system?
(Pause). "What? Are you kidding me? $5000? No! Would someone actually do that? I'd like to meet him! Wish he'd spend a bit more on music to pay my wages. We might then be interested in pandering to him. I'm a business executive not a nurse maid."
---------------
And you think that it's somehow morally wrong to add a bit of tone adjustment at home to suit your tastes as if it is a betrayal of the record producer? Ho ho!! "
MeanandGreen
Well-known member
- Dec 26, 2012
- 149
- 69
- 18,670
BigH said:
Not every release is pop pap that is compressed to death by the record companies. There is plenty of well recorded decent music out there that deserves to be heard as intended.
BigH said:
At the mixing stage yes.
To be honest, please go and read up on how an album is made as comments like this just show a complete lack of understanding as to what goes on, and backs up what I said earlier.
not meant offensively btw, just matter of factly.
Frank Harvey
Well-known member
- Jun 27, 2008
- 567
- 1
- 18,890
Frank Harvey
Well-known member
- Jun 27, 2008
- 567
- 1
- 18,890
davedotco said:
I was making the point that albums aren't necessarily made in the same way with regards to artist input.
David@FrankHarvey said:
So? I'm still not getting your point. Pre digested pop pap has been produced for 50 years, it was cr@p then and it is cr@p now and is of no consequence to anyone not making money out of it. We all know this, I just find it odd that anyone over the age of 12 would pay it any attention.
Excersise some discretion, there is plenty of good music, well recorded and far more deserving of your attention than most modern pop music. If you care enough to buy/sell decent equipment, play and promote some decent music, not the same old drivel we see on these pages time and time again.
chebby said:
You can read, I know you can.
So just how does "Pre digested pop pap" become "popular music"?
Frank Harvey
Well-known member
- Jun 27, 2008
- 567
- 1
- 18,890
davedotco said:
You're right, you're obviously not getting my point, otherwise you wouldn't have posted that useless post.
David@FrankHarvey said:
So explain, I'm genuinely interested.
My view is this, I feel that there is a huge devide in popular music.
On one side the music matters, I may not like it but that is not the point, others do and it means something to the artist.
On the other side it is simply a device to manipulate popular 'culture' and make money. As in the example you brought up.
I find the distinction clear and unambiguous, I choose not to waste my time on the later and find it odd that some people seem to have a problem with that.
In this context, One Direction isn't just a spade, it's a bl**dy shovel.
Someone obviously likes/liked it and is buying/bought the music in the past so it has some worth to somebody (mainly kids - but that is their choice isn't it ? ) .
That horse you are riding ddc is extremeley high - most of your posts are usually well thought out etc but sometimes you just have a tendency to be just plain rude and arrogant - it's a shame -
tonky
That horse you are riding ddc is extremeley high - most of your posts are usually well thought out etc but sometimes you just have a tendency to be just plain rude and arrogant - it's a shame -
tonky
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram