LawrenceF Posted April 30, 2005 Share Posted April 30, 2005 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Flier Posted April 30, 2005 Share Posted April 30, 2005 Arggh. I don't think the experiment you suggest would really yield any kind of useful information in terms of what we see vs. hear, nor would it really be relevant to actual mixing. That's partly because, yes, the ergonomic experience (not only what we see but what we touch) does have a bearing on the end result, and with a lot of great recordings that is actually a positive factor. Conversely if you are fighting the ergonomics (that is, having to relay to someone else verbally what to do rather than "just doing it" in an intuitive way) that will also affect the result. Also, I would say that as regards individual things like using different plugins, in some cases you'd be able to tell the difference between them and others not. And no, I don't think that really matters one way or the other. The engineer is an artist and most artistic decisions involve selection of tools and materials. The important thing is not so much whether somebody uses a Waves EQ or a Focusrite as whether THEY thought it would make a difference. I think the whole "could you tell the difference in a blind test" question is a red herring because it takes the focus off some of the real reasons different gear makes a difference. That is, there is no way to really determine what decisions would have been made by the artist if they had been allowed to use whatever tools they chose and used them in the ways they chose, instead of having been forced to do it under the conditions of the test. It's like when people post MP3's of a guitarist and say "One song was done with a tube amp and the other was with an amp modeller. Can you tell the difference?" Well, it doesn't matter (at least not much) even if you can't tell. The real question is, how does the performance differ for the guitarist when playing through an amp vs. modeller? Are they more inspired by one than the other? Do they finger things differently because of the particular latency or tube sag or whatever is going on while they're recording? And if they play what THEY think is the right tool for the job is that going to get across to the listener better? I think so. If the sound becomes divorced from the performance because the engineer later "re-amps" the guitarist's part, does that diminish the performance even if the sound might arguably be better or nearly the same? I think so. People have relationships with gear and if you disrupt the relationship the result will be different... and there's no real scientific way to know how it would be different. So I think we have to accept all these relationships at face value and quit trying to find some way to "prove" to anybody that their choice of gear doesn't matter, or is influenced by other factors than the sound, or whatever. There's no real way to separate the two and no real reason to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LawrenceF Posted April 30, 2005 Author Share Posted April 30, 2005 ...quit trying to find some way to "prove" to anybody that their choice of gear doesn't matter...I'm not trying to prove anything of the sort. I don't care what people use or what they choose to use. Use what you want. That's not the point. Never mind... Lawrence Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wireline Posted April 30, 2005 Share Posted April 30, 2005 Lee said: "Arggh. I don't think the experiment you suggest would really yield any kind of useful information in terms of what we see vs. hear, nor would it really be relevant to actual mixing" I;m not sure I agree with this, Lee...there are as many different responses to "apply compression" as there are compressors...and even though 2db is an exact measurement based on a set of standards, 2db on hardware compressor "A" may be much different sounding than 2db compression on software compressor "B"... Also considering that people's hearing thresholds change during the course of a day, and vary from person to person, I may hear a minor tweak in EQ where Lawrence didn't...or vice versa. There are so many variables NOT gear or platform related that the hypothetical seems impossible to fully conduct. Mostly, we are leaving out the ultimate (I think) circusmstance: could a set of "golden ears" tell the difference between software and hardware based platforms, processing equipment choices, and mixdown? At the track level, no way could anyone but the MOST critical ears detect the differences...but at the overall mix level, perhaps the cumulative effects of software vs hardware could be noticed... Lawrence, my friend...your question has given me a headache already thinking about it...and its not even 8:30 AM yet... So What ARE We Gonna Do With 8 Tracks...Fire the Arranger? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miroslav Posted April 30, 2005 Share Posted April 30, 2005 Originally posted by LawrenceF: I don't care what people use or what they choose to use. Use what you want. That's not the point.Well...then what exactly is the point of all these questions...??? Why set up this hypothetical situation if you are not trying to prove anything or gain any specific information....??? I think subconsciouslysome people toss these types of questions around in an effort to quell their own concern how close their rigtheir approachmeasures up to some theoretical holy grail. Not sure if thats your reason or not. miroslav - miroslavmusic.com "Just because it happened to you, it doesn't mean it's important." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Flier Posted April 30, 2005 Share Posted April 30, 2005 Originally posted by LawrenceF: I'm not trying to prove anything of the sort. I don't care what people use or what they choose to use. Use what you want. That's not the point. Lawrence, it wasn't my point either. I wasn't implying that you were trying to tell me not to use what I want or that you're trying to dictate anybody's choice of gear. I'm just pointing out that the information you would glean from such a test would likely tell you something different from what you think it would tell you, and that the conclusions we might draw from a test like that would probably be false. One of your questions WAS "Would it matter?" and why or why not and that is my answer. I might have worded that one sentence poorly as it wasn't meant to be an attack on you! I only meant that it was a ripe situation for people in general to draw false conclusions. If someone couldn't tell the difference (or the difference was very subtle) between the end results of listening to two different plugins or other gear, they might conclude that it therefore didn't matter which one they used, and for the reasons I pointed out in my post, I think it still matters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Flier Posted April 30, 2005 Share Posted April 30, 2005 And FWIW I do think you'd be able to tell the difference in a lot of cases anyway, some more than others. It would depend how familiar you were with the plugs in the first place, but there are definite differences in the way plugins do their thing. I could probably tell the difference between a Waves and GML or Sonalksis EQ for example, but not between a Waves and a Focusrite. Another question about the quality of plugins is how they sound cumulatively. Some plugs seem to add up across lots of tracks in a way that leaves nasty artifacts, and you wouldn't necessarily be able to tell that from listening back to one track. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LawrenceF Posted April 30, 2005 Author Share Posted April 30, 2005 Originally posted by miroslav: I think subconsciouslysome people toss these types of questions around in an effort to quell their own concern how close their rigtheir approachmeasures up to some theoretical holy grail. Not sure if thats your reason or not. Uh... no. Miro I didn't say I wasn't trying to get information. I said I wasn't trying to prove anything. Those are two different things. You can get information without necesarily proving anything. Most A/B tests don't actually "prove" anything they just add more information to the discussion. To really "prove" anything you'd have to be able to repeat the results many, many times over and over. I was just wondering how much influence what we see has on what we hear or think we hear. That's all. I'm deleting the original post. Obviously you have to be of a certain industry stature to ask a question like that without some people assuming the worst. I should have sent a PM to Bruce or Craig and asked to one of them to post the identical thing. We'd be knee deep into the "theory" of it by now with nobody questioning their motives. But this is still the Internet. Lawrence Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Flier Posted April 30, 2005 Share Posted April 30, 2005 Originally posted by LawrenceF: I was just wondering how much influence what we see has on what we hear or think we hear. That's all.I thought I gave a good answer to that. Namely that it does have an effect but that is part and parcel of why people choose their tools. I'm deleting the original post. Obviously you have to be of a certain industry stature to ask a question like that without some people assuming the worst. I should have sent a PM to Bruce or Craig and asked to one of them to post the identical thing. We'd be knee deep into the "theory" of it by now with nobody questioning their motives. Whoa! I think you're getting a bit defensive there and I'm sorry you deleted the post. Anybody can post something and have it be taken wrong. What that has to do with somebody's stature in the industry is beyond me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WFTurner Posted April 30, 2005 Share Posted April 30, 2005 hehe.... guess you had to get in on this one quick if you wanted to know what the hell it's all about. It certainly died a quick death. William F. Turner Songwriter turnersongs Sometimes the truth is rude... tough shit... get used to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bbach1 Posted April 30, 2005 Share Posted April 30, 2005 Well I want in on this discussion too. bbach Beauty is in the eye of the beer holder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miroslav Posted April 30, 2005 Share Posted April 30, 2005 Originally posted by LawrenceF: I was just wondering how much influence what we see has on what we hear or think we hear. That's all.You could have just made this statement in your original post (that you now deleted for some reason...???)...and it might have been easier to follow your intent. It's just that the way you posed the scenario....and questions...it seemed a bit "loaded". Also, it was a very odd scenario...something that would probably never be actually be tried...so, to answer the questions...it required a LOT of "going out on a limb" kind of response. Basically, just a lot of guesstimating without any real fact. Sorta' like... If I played two identical guitars for you...but each one painted a different color... ...which would you like better, and why? Come on...try and answer that. miroslav - miroslavmusic.com "Just because it happened to you, it doesn't mean it's important." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Strat Posted April 30, 2005 Share Posted April 30, 2005 If I played two identical guitars for you...but each one painted a different color... ...which would you like better, and why? If they're different in color, then they aren't indentical anymore, are they? BlueStrat a.k.a. "El Guapo" ...Better fuzz through science... http://geocities.com/teleman28056/index.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLAblablah Posted April 30, 2005 Share Posted April 30, 2005 I've always thought that black Strats sound best on darker Gothish songs, but a brighter color will always sound better on something like, say... Beach Boys, etc. But my Pink Paisley Tele seems to sound great on anything. Go figure... Barry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Franknputer Posted April 30, 2005 Share Posted April 30, 2005 Personally, I think Macs are better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miroslav Posted April 30, 2005 Share Posted April 30, 2005 Hey LawrenceF...sorry man, if I came off offensive in any way. I was just trying to get a handle on your premise and questions. It was too early and no coffee yet. Oh...Blue Strat...you are now dodging the question. If they are identical in all ways except the color...which one would sound better, and why? miroslav - miroslavmusic.com "Just because it happened to you, it doesn't mean it's important." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Strat Posted April 30, 2005 Share Posted April 30, 2005 Oh...Blue Strat...you are now dodging the question. If they are identical in all ways except the color...which one would sound better, and why? The blue one would sound better, of course. It absorbs more light radiation, therefore it's got more energy inside it. BlueStrat a.k.a. "El Guapo" ...Better fuzz through science... http://geocities.com/teleman28056/index.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bbach1 Posted April 30, 2005 Share Posted April 30, 2005 Originally posted by Blue Strat: Oh...Blue Strat...you are now dodging the question. If they are identical in all ways except the color...which one would sound better, and why? The blue one would sound better, of course. It absorbs more light radiation, therefore it's got more energy inside it. Oh, but the darkside is powerful Luke. Gotta go black. bbach Beauty is in the eye of the beer holder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LawrenceF Posted April 30, 2005 Author Share Posted April 30, 2005 Hack... wheeze... cough, cough... the sound of this thread dying... Lawrence Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ernest Buckley Posted May 1, 2005 Share Posted May 1, 2005 I read the original thread when it first went up and I believe that a professional engineer could tell you certain things are not where they need to be specifically on the EQ end and reverbs, delays, etc... My producer/engineer can point things out to me that I do not hear as clearly but then he`ll show me on the EQ and then I am amazed at how good his ears are for that sort of thing. Now as far as hearing the difference between plugs...I don`t think that is as easy. For one the engineer would have to have had lots of experience with that specific plug. From what I have observed most professional engineers have access to lots of outboard gear which has its own personality. That doesn`t mean that you can`t mix in the box because we already know that happens all the time but most have access to external hardware and use it quite frequently. My point is people like Bruce Swedien are using a lot more hardware than software so I would venture to guess that yes someone like him could hear the difference. I`m not sure what the point of your original post was though. I almost feel that you were trying to say that professional or the elite ones would not be able to pin point what it was about the mix that they did not like. I don`t know if thats what you meant but it did come across that way to me. www.ErnestBuckley.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Franknputer Posted May 1, 2005 Share Posted May 1, 2005 The Governor called - he wants this thread kept alive for a few more months... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.