 |
 |
----- Original Message ----- From: "Karl Miller" <[log in to unmask]> > On Wed, 23 Feb 2005, Scott Phillips wrote: > > The overuse or inappropriate use of technology is a problem. Just > > because you have a tool doesn't mean it should be used, or tell you when > > it should be. Protools is software that easily allows that to happen > > because of its power, but the fault is the engineer/producer, not the > > hardware. 'Plugin' reverb, compression, and effects software do breed > > sameness, and the ability to 'fix' poor performances just allows > > mediocre recordings. Not really the equipments fault though.... just the > > humans'. > And those "humans" just aren't the engineers... > I believe that consumers "expect" a certain sound quality...much in the same > way as the recording has developed a certain expectation (standardization > and in my mind sterility) in live performance and performance on recordings. > Does a producer try to determine what the consumer wants or... > I let the musician determine the "sound," of their recording...and when > opening the door to the virtually limitless range of possibilities, they > sometimes find it overwhelming...while others know exactly what they want. > And, as I have experienced, what the musician wants is not always what the > critics want! However, for most major-label releases, the question becomes not "What do the customers want" (keep in mand they are the final judges) but "What do the people in the front office, who issue my paycheque, THINK the customer wants?!" I suspect this has a lot to do with why most folks from the LP (and 78) generation complain about "lousy CD sound!" Those who tweak the knobs have an idea "what CD's should sound like"...and this idea is based on what sold best over the past few years. Never mind that 21st-century pop hits have little in common with reissue CD's... Steven C. Barr