again, apologies if i'm misreading the intention but:
'No guarantee, but a carefully arranged and tuned monitoring environment wi=
ll give you the best chance at producing a product with legs--one that will=
sound good on many different systems'
if we stick to the main point about a 'studio' space situation then your co=
mment above has been proved totally wrong by so many examples of music & so=
und work made & mixed / edited outside of such an environment. I have no id=
ea (& this could be a very difficult conversation to have online without of=
fending everyone :) ) what your own musical history is but its been such a=
very long time that such a view held anything like the weight it perhaps o=
nce did. rooms set aside as studios (home or professional) & tuned remain a=
vital part of music making - for some but not all & the same goes for othe=
r takes on sound / sound art / natural acoustics etc. but there has been a =
dramatic shift in what people now want from such work with more & more peop=
le wanting it to be personal & not compressed or treated so that it sounds =
that same on an mp3 player, in the car or on their home sound system. The d=
ays of wanting our music / sound to be flat lined across all possible syste=
ms is on the wain - thankfully. Its ok for conventional music (whatever you=
r tastes) but not for other areas - the field is much wider than that now.=
If the statement were true then the 'legs' of all the music & sound that ha=
s reached, touched, moved & captivated people all over the world that was r=
ecorded / mixed outside of such spaces would be what ? a fluke ? a mirage ?
'I think this is a debate between solipsism and professionalism'
if i'm reading this right I have to confess that I find it somewhat offensi=
ve. To assume people who don't hold to the conventional idea of studio mixi=
ng aren't professional is way, way off the mark & I do hope that isn't what=
you're saying. As i've implied in earlier responses to this thread, I can =
absolutely guarantee that every single person in this group will have, in t=
heir collections, music & sound recorded / made / mixed by extremely profes=
sional musician / artists / recordists that has not been anywhere near a 't=
uned studio space'.
I'd go further: i'd view anyone who thinks good sound with legs can only be=
produced in a tuned studio space is far less of a professional than someon=
e who has a more open & varied view of what the possibilities of sound are =
& how the science of acoustics does not answer all the questions. For a sta=
rt they would be someone who perhaps knows a bit more about how listening i=
s developing in creative terms & a have a more varied understanding of musi=
c production in its many forms. How awful & unprofessional would it be to h=
ave sound or music measured by an acoustician who then tells us whether its=
good or not or for the world of sound & music to be only seen as 'professi=
onal' when its produced in tuned studios. Ridiculous.
Sorry Dan, I know your some aspects of your work & have a lot of respect fo=
r you but on these points I have to take issue.
--- In Dan Dugan <> wrote:
>
> > I stick to my point that attempting to build a neutral, acoustically tu=
ned space might assist you in your process but it doesn't & can't guarantee=
that the end result will be 'better' or will communicate in some certain w=
ay to listeners.
>
> No guarantee, but a carefully arranged and tuned monitoring environment w=
ill give you the best chance at producing a product with legs--one that wil=
l sound good on many different systems.
>
> I think this is a debate between solipsism and professionalism.
>
> > Sound might be able to be explained by science but our response & conne=
ction to it isn't.
>
> As Scotty said, "I canna' change the laws of physics, captain."
>
> -Dan
>
|