See any parallels?

[Gentleman Jim]

This could have been in Recording Techniques, or Gear Talk, or even in Computer World. But I stuck it here because the discussion is a little more free form around these parts.

http://vimeo.com/18104656

[JGriffin]

That may well be the only Vimeo/YouTube vid I've ever seen where I could reasonably accept that it may be deliberate that the sync sound is just in the left channel.

[fuzz]

You'd also probably enjoy Walter Sear's Do Brain Surgery at Home for Fun and Profit

http://www.searsound.com/pdf/surgery.pdf

[fossiltooth]

I absolutely love Walter Sear and his legacy, but equating recording music to brain surgery is a silly idea that'd I'd take with a grain of salt.

I'm not sure if I get this video, or Walter's article. Yes, experienced professionals are often better at doing things than inexperienced amateurs. But would we tell people not to learn piano because they may not be Rachmaninoff or Bill Evans? Or that they shouldn't learn guitar because they won't be Jimi Hendrix or Chet Atkins?

Psshhh. I know "us" (meaning all human beings, including me): We'd just turn around and complain that no one gets our music because they don't understand music well enough. Then we'd go on railing about how we need more music education. Bleh. Why are we always complaining?

People who are educated about music make better, more inspired, more active, and more tasteful music fans. Same goes for film, painting, anything. As a species, art is in our blood. (Unfortunately, so is complaining about what other people are doing.)

Don't listen to the people who tell you not to try and learn a new art form. If you wanna play tuba, go for it. If you wanna record, godbless ya. If you wanna write screenplays, I'll get you a pen. I might not care to listen/watch/read what you do. And I might recommend you get professional assistance if you're going about it seriously. But you as a person have the right to create and amuse, simply by being born.

So did Walter. He expressed an articulate idea in writing, rest his soul. I won't fault him for "not being a writer". More power to him.

[Gentleman Jim]

Justin, I wasn't posting this as some kind of elitist thing. Nothing could be further from my position.

I enjoyed the point that the guy in the video made: We learn that a certain master uses a certain tool, and we equate buying that tool with buying that mastery. I think we've all done it at some time in our lives; it's why companies hire spokespeople in the fields where their products are used. Athletes wear sneakers, and we think we'll be able to dunk if we get the same style. Guitarists use certain amps and we think we might be better if we just get that model. Engineers and producers endorse microphones, DAW's, etc.

Then we get the box home and we're still ourselves. Yes, we can all improve, but when we spent the money we tricked ourselves into thinking we were buying creativity, not just a tool. I've been guilty more than once in my life, and that's all I want to admit right now.

[JGriffin]

Yeah, that's what I got out of it as well--that a cool new piece of gear doesn't turn you into George Martin or John Lennon or Ansel Adams or Federico Fellini automatically, though they are often marketed as though they would.

Remember those ads for 4-track cassette machines in the 1980s showing the cover of Sgt. Pepper's, implying very strongly that since Pepper was done on 4-track, buying a 4-track cassette machine put Pepper-quality results right in your very hands. Which is just so much BS.

And the marketing --and street buzz-- about DSLRs is very similar. I've seen it in my own workplace; everyone gets all excited that they shot episodes of "House" on a D5, and decides we have to have one. Whether we can do something as cool with it as the "House" DP with his twenty-five years of experience and megadollar sets and lighting budget, well, that's a whole other thing, isn't it?

[chris harris]

Yep, the point of this video is not to discourage people from learning about filmmaking. It's to highlight the reality that it takes more than a camera to make a great movie.

The real parallel to these HDSLR cameras is the PTLE systems. Sure, there are a handful of great records that have been made in some bedroom somewhere on these systems. But, for every great record, there are probably thousands of people who bang their heads against the wall wondering why their recordings don't sound "Pro". Or, more accurately, there are thousands of PTLE system users wondering what else they have to BUY to get good results.

Just because Epiphone has a Les Paul for less than $500 doesn't mean everyone is gonna play like Slash.

[fossiltooth]

Justin, I wasn't posting this as some kind of elitist thing. Nothing could be further from my position.

I enjoyed the point that the guy in the video made: We learn that a certain master uses a certain tool, and we equate buying that tool with buying that mastery. I think we've all done it at some time in our lives; it's why companies hire spokespeople in the fields where their products are used. Athletes wear sneakers, and we think we'll be able to dunk if we get the same style. Guitarists use certain amps and we think we might be better if we just get that model. Engineers and producers endorse microphones, DAW's, etc.

Then we get the box home and we're still ourselves. Yes, we can all improve, but when we spent the money we tricked ourselves into thinking we were buying creativity, not just a tool. I've been guilty more than once in my life, and that's all I want to admit right now.

I totally get it, and I think it's a good point to make, Jim. I just want to make sure we don't go reeling too far in the other direction and discourage people from pursuing their passions. It's a tough balance to strike.

The reason I love the messageboard format so much (despite its many flaws) is that no one post or perspective matters that much. It's when you take them all together that you start to get some idea for where the truth lies.

If I see the scales tipped too heavily in one direction, I like to take the other side. What can I say? It's my nature. I just hope I'm doing it without being too much of a jerk. That's also a tricky balance

[drumsound]

That video is a good reminder that the hierarchy really is:
Who's being recorded
Who's doing the recording
what stuff is used to make said recording.

[Gregg Juke]

>>>>I absolutely love Walter Sear and his legacy, but equating recording music to brain surgery is a silly idea that'd I'd take with a grain of salt.<<<<

I know what you're saying, Justin, but surely that's a funny-fun, considering your avatar and the name of your on-line publication!

GJ

[fossiltooth]

>>>>I absolutely love Walter Sear and his legacy, but equating recording music to brain surgery is a silly idea that'd I'd take with a grain of salt.<<<<

I know what you're saying, Justin, but surely that's a funny-fun, considering your avatar and the name of your on-line publication!

GJ

I guess it is. The words "facetious title" are literally scrawled over the title of the magazine in my own handwriting.

Sure, we do some things fairly scientifically. For instance: next week we're coming out with a complete audio history of the AKG 414. We gathered all the essential versions of the mic ever made together in one studio, placed their capsules as close together as possible, level-matched the signals, and captured all of them recording the same takes of instruments they're most often used on.

But, at their best, studies like these just help us inform, test, and clarify opinions that we form intuitively. What I like most about science is the power it has in helping us overcome our most deep-seated and counter-productive biases. We do ourselves a disservice when we let a narrow interpretation of facts cement new biases instead.

The truth is, you don't need a license to make art. And for good reason! Sorry if I'm being too hard on these guys, If the point of this video (and Walter's essay) is to encourage beginners to practice instead of speculating, act then great! But I've gotta say: based on their tone, I don't think these dudes were encouraging people to do sh*t. In the end, maybe this is just a bias of my own. I guess I just prefer complaint-based humor when it makes fun of the complainer instead. Like in Curb Your Enthusiasm or It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia. Now that' funny.

[Gregg Juke]

>>>>For instance: next week we're coming out with a complete audio history of the AKG 414. We gathered all the essential versions of the mic ever made together in one studio, placed their capsules as close together as possible, level-matched the signals, and captured all of them recording the same takes of instruments they're most often used on.<<<<

Now that sounds fascinating, scientific or not!

Not a fan of the shows you mentioned, but I have always been a fan of self-deprecating humor...

As to Sears and the others (and the very quaint little video), I don't think the point (at least my biased reading) is "Don't ever try, because you can't do it!" I think it's more about how the equipment fools people into thinking that that's all you need. Not understanding the equipment, or what it's used for, or, for Heaven's sake, understanding music! (or film or brain-surgery, in those particular cases). And I tend to agree. There are LOTs of DIY ways around things, and I'm a great believer in them, when used properly. And I'm a great believer in using great equipment, if you have some or can afford it, I guess. But I've been saying for years that there's just a lot of gear out there, without people behind it that are the least bit interested in taking the time to learn what to do with it. If they can't get good drum sounds, they must need new mikes and preamps. If they can't get good vocal sounds, they must need new mikes, and that great new multi-verb (program, or hardware box, or whatever). Not "oh, wait, maybe I need to move the mike. Maybe I need to move the singer. Maybe I need to get a singer! Maybe I need to learn how to produce the singer, not just put up a microphone and plug it in..."

"Why can't I get a good guitar sound? Why is my mix messed-up?" When the guitar sounds are fine, there's just 256 tracks of them.

Another example: Years ago I was playing with a union band. I wasn't going to be able to make the gig, so they hired a sub. Then, I could make the gig, but not wanting to put the sub out of work, I asked if the bandleader had the budget to hire both of us, so I could sing and play percussion, but this guy could have the drum-chair for that gig. He did have enough money, so that's what we did.

This guy had a _huge_ drumset, an unbelievable amount of immaculate cymbals and all manner of percussion/traps attachments, and all he wanted to talk about when we met was equipment; it was _all_ about the gear. Comes downbeat time, the first tune is a straight 2 & 4 backbeat, and this guy can't play it to save his life. The next tune is a shuffle, and he's got no clue. And so on, throughout the rest of the painful night's activities. But man, that guy knew the size of every one of his drums, the ply of his shells, all about his bearing edges, his heads; and he knew just about every cymbal in the Zildjian and Paiste catalogues... He just couldn't play. At all.

I'm not an elitist, in that I think anyone willing to put the time in, that has a little natural ability, or is willing to work hard to develop it, can be a great recordist. I think the infamous Steve Albini rant from years ago was much more elitist than the Walter Sears article... (the stuff about the music business in general was pretty right on; but the stuff slamming other producers that don't happen to be electrical engineers as well...)

Anyway, rant over; I thought the Sears thing was funny (and I think I've read it before somewhere).

GJ