Walt wrote
"One of the problems with the digital age is this concept that everything
will be perfectly reproduced and always must be. In analog no such thing
bothered people. Yet analog processing produced excellent recordings.
What counts is the sound of the recordings you produce, not test results."
I quite agree.
He also wrote
"That's because most of us don't have a mixing board or other such
specialist studio hardware. A plugin is far cheaper and far less mumbo
jumbo than hardware. The usual description of a hardware based solution
is purely academic, more historical than real."
It is a pity that more recordists do not have analogue mixing desks to work=
with but rely on software to produce changes in audio quality. Anything yo=
u do not understand is mumbo jumbo.
Doing it manually and listening to what you are doing in real time puts you=
in control.
Software, however clever, is often left to do its thing from top to tail of=
a programme and you get what it is designed to give. It lacks judgement. T=
he beauty of manual operation is that you can constantly mix and adjust, ma=
king lighter or heaver touches as required. For example, playing with a fad=
er to 'ride the gain levels' requires skill and practice.
Relying on compressors and limiters whether analogue or digital plug-ins is=
usually set & forget.
Not what I want from my hard won recordings.
I own a high quality digital camera with full automation and it takes great=
snaps. It also has manual aperture, shutter speed, focus and a manual zoom=
. I use a combination of manual focus and zoom to reduce battery drain and =
constant refocusing. I set aperture priority automation and I take better s=
naps. I am not a photographer.
BigRog
---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-----
I am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users.
It has removed 11 spam emails to date.
Paying users do not have this message in their emails.
Try SPAMfighter for free now!
|