referring to that the issues in certain respects when it comes to 'sound ar=
t' have various sources: going right back to when 'music' became separated =
from the other 'arts' in the public consciousness.
--- In Peter Shute <> wrote:
>
> "This is a problem with all kinds of roots ..."
>
> What do you mean by "roots", Jez?
>
> Peter Shute
>
>
> From: =
ps.com] On Behalf Of Jez
> Sent: Tuesday, 29 May 2012 6:48 AM
> To:
> Subject: Re: [Nature Recordists] Mixing using Headphones
>
>
>
> yes - that is part of my point indeed.
>
> sadly, there is a lot of 'sound art' that falls short of having been crea=
ted through listening in a meaningful way. This is a problem with all kinds=
of roots, not least being that curators by & large have had no interest in=
creative music / sound exploration in their own listening habits & therefo=
re often program work that is of poor quality or simply repeats work done f=
or many years by others. I could (but will refrain) name quite a few fairly=
well established 'sound artists' who, in private, admit they don't care mu=
ch about sound & just view the art form as an easy way to get funding or ex=
hibition opportunities. The problem is that there are still not enough peop=
le involved at a certain level who can spot the players or know enough abou=
t the history of explorative sound to be able to recognise original approac=
hes.
>
> --- In <naturerecordists%40yahoogr=
oups.com>, "hartogj" <hartogj_1999@> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Jez,
> > Your point of view is clearer to me now. When it comes to creative proc=
esses there are infinite possibilities. I would say any sound art requires =
careful listening - it is not sound art after all until someone takes care =
to listen to it. Regarding nature sound recording as sound art, there is no=
reason to limit the form to any specific medium. I might consider wax cray=
on on cardboard a nature sound recording where it is evocative of natural s=
ound.
> >
> > John Hartog
> > rockscallop.org
> >
> >
> > --- In <naturerecordists%40yahoo=
groups.com>, "Jez" <tempjez@> wrote:
> > >
> > > what about the opinions of 'experts' that differ from that ? For me t=
his is the point - that it is the material that matters & like it or not th=
e music / sound that we respond to is made, mixed & edited in all kinds of =
different spaces - with or without headphones & with a wide range of speake=
rs.
> > >
> > > I'm all for quality of course, but this is an individual choice. I ha=
ve good speakers (a few different pairs in different rooms) & a pair of goo=
d headphones - the same pair I use in the field.
> > >
> > > As i've said before, I don't have any issues with anyone who chooses =
to build a studio space or an acoustically treated space - each to their ow=
n of course, but in 35 years of involvement & interest in field recording i=
n its many different forms & on all levels, it has been proved to me over &=
over again that material can communicate even if its been mixed in less th=
an what some folks would describe as 'ideal' circumstances. I think my conc=
erns when any aspects of a craft or art form gets herded towards some 'idea=
l' is that what happens is, whilst precision becomes more achievable to mor=
e people, things tend to edge towards a mainstream, middle of the road appr=
oach & less personal.
> > >
> > > Perhaps one of the difficulties with this conversation on this partic=
ular group is that a large number of members are mainly interested in the, =
technically, 'best' recording of a certain species or environment. For many=
people however, whilst getting good & powerfully eloquent recordings is a =
focus, what they are aiming for is an emotive or creative impression of the=
location.
> > >
> > > We are talking about something that isn't set in stone here & I think=
for me I find it both interesting & I confess a bit puzzling that anyone w=
ould take pleasure in listening to bird song (for example) in the 'real' wo=
rld & then take a recording of the same back to a studio setting & try to '=
perfect' the sound of the recording. Its a personal view point of course bu=
t to me we already know that we can't capture a 'neutral' recording - they =
are always coloured by mic, recorder choice etc & therefore, if one lets go=
of that to some degree, what becomes more interesting is capturing somethi=
ng of the experience of being in that location at that time.
> > >
> > > When it comes to editing (& I should declare here that it has been my=
approach for some time to do not processing - I top & tail & on rare occas=
ions might eq out some hiss if the mic used has not performed as i'd have l=
iked, but thats it) I do this on headphones simply because i'm listening fo=
r any 'problems' - ie. not natural or man made sounds in the location but m=
ic pops or other such issues. I tend to live with recordings for some time =
before I do anything public with them & therefore I would guess that the wa=
y I 'listen' to them critically for the most part involves playing them bac=
k on the same system I listen to every day.
> > >
> > > so, back to the advice of experts bit & with the understanding that t=
his is another can of worms, what's an expert ? & what happens when some sa=
y one thing & others say another ? I know were discussing fine hairs here b=
ut, for example, I sometimes get referred to as an expert in field recordin=
g & I always say i'm not because we are all engaged with listening to a wor=
ld we don't control. We can gather knowledge of course but the moment we as=
sume we know exactly what we're doing is the moment we've lost the most imp=
ortant point - to let go of our human need to dominate, control & make assu=
mptions of what is / will happen & instead engage more closely with the lis=
tening & the simple act of being in a place for a period of time. Expert - =
urghh. We're not plumbing in a sink here :)
> > >
> > > --- In <naturerecordists%40yah=
oogroups.com>, "hartogj" <hartogj_1999@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > The definition of "mixing" was confusing from the beginning of this=
muddy thread.
> > > > Is mixing limited to only the combining of separate sounds or track=
s, or is the meaning extended to include other post production processing t=
echniques that may be applied to an original recording?
> > > >
> > > > For critical analysis and fine adjustments of any recording, I will=
go along with the experts on this group who have in the past many times re=
commended good monitors and good headphones, and an acoustically treated sp=
ace. Listening with two more different pairs of good headphones is better t=
han using only one pair. I liked Bernie's description of his studio made wi=
thout parallel walls or ceiling.
> > > >
> > > > John Hartog
> > > > rockscallop.org
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
>
|