DAN DUGAN:
>I don't worry about
> > mono compatibility.
CURT OLSON:
>I do, mostly because I'm in the habit from 30 years in radio
>production. I always have in the back of my mind that somewhere down
>the line something I record could end up on the radio, and I worry
>about what mono listeners would hear.
A good policy. But there is a trade-off between the spatiality of the
recording and the mono compatibility. When headphone listening became
common (rather than something engineers did), and auto systems became
stereo from the factory, I decided that mono compatibility had become
less important.
But it's always good to check, you don't want to put out something
that's really awful in mono!
>... when I'm standing there taking the
>headphones on and off, comparing what I hear with "naked" ears to what
>I hear through the recording chain, I realize that the mics are often
>picking up and amplifying a whole lot more low end than my "naked" ears
>ever perceive. Maybe it's just me, but I'm not interested in recording
>an over-hyped low end any more than I want to record an over-hyped high
>end or midrange.
I suspect that perception has to do with listening at a
higher-than-natural level. Fletcher-Munson curve and all that. And
there lies good justification for judicious low end reduction in post
production, so the amplified natural sound still sounds natural.
They don't call mixing an art for nothing.
-Dan Dugan
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
|