Re: Re[2]: (313) production and mastering
I absolutely agree, and that's one of the things I had in mind when writing. The problem isn't compression itself, merely it's use as a balm. Maybe the visual interface afforded by the likes of Pro-Tools encourages producers to normalize, compress, or otherwise louden their work? When you see a small waveform, you want to make it bigger!? (I suppose this would apply to all screen-based DAWs, not just Pro-Tools.) As for preferring digital to vinyl, with SACDs coming out soon (at 192KHz rather than 44.1KHz) you may have an airtight case! The only production technique that consistently annoys me is the over-use of compression. Many producers will say they do it to get their tracks noticed, or to give them presence . . . I would suggest, if you find that people only notice your tracks when you eliminate your dynamic range and make everything blaringly-loud, you've probably got bigger worries than poor production. An over-compressed track is like a black and white photograph that's 90% flat white and 10% flat black black, with no grey in between. But then I prefer digital to vinyl . . . *runs away* Andrew Hodgson Transmission Operator Central Playout LPC 1 Stephen St. London W1T 1AL Tel: (020) 7691 6225 / 5168 Fax: (020) 7691 6919 *** This email is confidential and may well also be legally privileged. If you have received this email in error, you are in notice of its status. Please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and then delete this message from your system. Please do not copy or use it for any purposes, or disclose its contents to any other person: to do so could be a breach of confidence. Thank you for your co-operation. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of The RTL Group or its associated companies. Please contact our IT Helpdesk on +44 (0)20 7691 6996 or e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] if you require further assistance. ***
RE: Re[2]: (313) production and mastering
2 weeks ago Buzz Goreewas spinning over here, some guy booked him with 2 other DJ's who where playing banging looptechno, Buzz was playing the middle of them. All the looptechno records where extremely compressed, it was just one solid wall of sound pushing out of the speakers while the records Buzz was playing used a way more subtile compression giving these records lots more dynamics. I prefer to use compression in a more subtile way to, just to keep the dynamics and to keep the track alive Personally i think that the biggest advantage of digital systems like protools are for producers. No way you can hear in a club if it is mixed on an analog desk or a digital one. For producers it works faster and easier, sure it gives a cleaner sound but to be honest, that is almost not hearable on a soundsystem. [EMAIL PROTECTED] The only production technique that consistently annoys me is the over-use of compression. Many producers will say they do it to get An over-compressed track is like a black and white photograph that's 90% flat white and 10% flat black black, with no grey in between. many people try to hide the fact that they cannot mix without compressors; mixing the sounds of tune is more important than compressing the sh*t out of it. mixing is art, it takes time to master it. i tend to use compressors a bit; i try not to overuse them; and yes, i know, my mixing skills suck. (no, i'm not referring to playing records) -- DISCLAIMER De gemeente Almelo aanvaardt voor haar medewerkers geen enkele aansprakelijkheid voor eventueel onjuist, onrechtmatig of ontoelaatbaar geacht gebruik van e-mail (inclusief bijlagen). Dit e-mail bericht is door de gemeente Almelo gecontroleerd op de aanwezigheid van eventuele virussen. Wij kunnen echter geen garantie afgeven dat al onze e-mail berichten volledig virus vrij zijn. Het is daarom verstandig uw binnenkomende e-mail berichten zelf op de mogelijke aanwezigheid van virussen te controleren. --
Re: Re[2]: (313) production and mastering
This discussion came into my head this morning and I recalled a thing that happened several years ago. A friend of mine and I (both of us about the same age) were working at a job (must have been mid to late 1990s) with a younger guy who was into stuff like Smashing Pumpkins, Radiohead, Nirvana, etc. Decent music but he was curious about where the music had come from so we started feeding him stuff like the Sex Pistols, the Stooges, Ramones, etc. Except for the Ramones he didn't like the earlier music that much because of the sound quality. He said something to the effect that it sounded thin and low budget compared to the newer productions. MEK Brian 'balistic' Prince To: 313@hyperreal.org [EMAIL PROTECTED]cc: .comSubject: Re[2]: (313) production and mastering 02/05/03 10:56 PM Please respond to Brian 'balistic' Prince The only production technique that consistently annoys me is the over-use of compression. Many producers will say they do it to get their tracks noticed, or to give them presence . . . I would suggest, if you find that people only notice your tracks when you eliminate your dynamic range and make everything blaringly-loud, you've probably got bigger worries than poor production. An over-compressed track is like a black and white photograph that's 90% flat white and 10% flat black black, with no grey in between. But then I prefer digital to vinyl . . . *runs away* -- Brian balistic Prince http://www.bprince.com - art and techno
RE: Re[2]: (313) production and mastering
He thought the Stooges sounded thin compared to Smashing Pumpkins!! :o Its strange, I suppose someone who's only used to listening to music on a digital format must be listening in a totally different way, but to me it seems that he was mixing up precision with depth... -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 06 February 2003 16:19 To: 313@hyperreal.org Subject: Re: Re[2]: (313) production and mastering This discussion came into my head this morning and I recalled a thing that happened several years ago. A friend of mine and I (both of us about the same age) were working at a job (must have been mid to late 1990s) with a younger guy who was into stuff like Smashing Pumpkins, Radiohead, Nirvana, etc. Decent music but he was curious about where the music had come from so we started feeding him stuff like the Sex Pistols, the Stooges, Ramones, etc. Except for the Ramones he didn't like the earlier music that much because of the sound quality. He said something to the effect that it sounded thin and low budget compared to the newer productions. MEK Brian 'balistic' Prince To: 313@hyperreal.org [EMAIL PROTECTED]cc: .comSubject: Re[2]: (313) production and mastering 02/05/03 10:56 PM Please respond to Brian 'balistic' Prince The only production technique that consistently annoys me is the over-use of compression. Many producers will say they do it to get their tracks noticed, or to give them presence . . . I would suggest, if you find that people only notice your tracks when you eliminate your dynamic range and make everything blaringly-loud, you've probably got bigger worries than poor production. An over-compressed track is like a black and white photograph that's 90% flat white and 10% flat black black, with no grey in between. But then I prefer digital to vinyl . . . *runs away* -- Brian balistic Prince http://www.bprince.com - art and techno
