View Single Post
Old 09-20-2011, 10:09 PM   #2040
flmason
Human being with feelings
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 642
Default

[Continuing...]


Quote:
Originally Posted by Gizzmo0815 View Post
And with an infinte number of possible sounds, and an infinite number of techniques to record those sounds, followed by an infinite number of ways to mix those sounds, with a relatively infinite number of pieces of equipment to use and most importantly...and infinite number of artistic choices to be made...there is NO WAY for anyone to tell you how to "make a good recording".

If you want specifics...upload a track...and ask for advice to make it sound good.
Well, see the above, I'm not even wanting recipies, because I long ago realized that there's all those permutations and there are more suck permutations that great permutations.

What's at issue is, "What's the real secret", as in the frequency graphs mentioned above.

At this point, I'm actually tearing things down, probably won't be recording for a while. Things really are going south. Wasn't joking there.

Given the crap of my latest results it's probably not even worth posting. What would I post. "Here listen to this A above middle C from sim X... it lacks the timbre, harmonic content and sustain of same note played on a Trainwreck amp?"

That's what my research attempts are getting down to at this point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gizzmo0815 View Post
Bull and shit. When I filter through the FM dial I hear thousands of different ways in which the tracks have been produced. None of which sound the same.
Well, sure, as I zero in on specific songs the diffences in individual tracks, genre's etc. are clear. But, if but for the stations processes, all come across as if put out by the same people, to the same overall standards etc.

Not surprising since many "textbooks" mention the technique of "reference recordings". That practice alone is going to enforce similarity in mixing.

Now go into specific genres, and the similarities are even greater, otherwise you'd be talking about two genres.

No sure of the entire contents of Red Book standard, but perhaps that plays in too?

In any event, sound like it all comes through the same "prism" for lack of a better word, which may just be the station processes and my speakers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gizzmo0815 View Post
Then stop worrying about replicating and get on with the creating. That way you are entirely free to do whatever you want. And there is literally NOTHING that you can do incorrectly, if you do it with a vision.
Yeah, but suppose you want a pinstripe and your brush is a damned 2" drywall brush, LOL!

It's a fine artistic ideal to say, "It's art, it's wide open". But human audiences and tastes... and at this late date, comparison to the existing backlog... come into play.

At this point there are established, well, almost traditions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gizzmo0815 View Post
Math is a small subsection of the ART of music. In the same way that paint is made of specific chemical compounds that create specific colors. But using the paint to create the Sistine Chapel is someone only Michelangelo could do.
Nah, it's the other way around. Math is the language of all. Although some do debate where math exists as a separate something... or just luckily describes everything.

Essentially it's a descriptive language. So it's not really a subset of anything. Much like Logic (and Rhetoric if you want to believe Aristotle) Math is a science that applies to other sciences (and art of course, as art is just an application).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gizzmo0815 View Post
Absolutely. Unless the artist wants to involve the recording engineer into the process. At which point the recording engineer would become an artist himself.
Well now this is the point. Someone like me, an admitted no talent hobbyist with a passion is both "artist" and "engineer" and using plugins as part of the tone generation process connects "recording" and "artist-ing" at the hips.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Gizzmo0815 View Post
Then you should probably stop spending money on a venture that has clearly, after 10 years, gotten you nowhere.
And golf gets a lot of folks nowhere to, as do any number of cash burning hobbies. But sure, would be sensible to quit. Did stop for 10-12 years at one time. Can remember waking up in the middle of the night debating with myself... "Dimarzio Super Distortion or Duncan JB.... ah shit, I don't want to debate this crap anymore."

So's...been lets see, turned 49 today... 49-12... been 37 years since that first date stamp in the Mel Bay book I started in, LOL!

Were I to hit the lottery, this damn pursuit would be one of the first I'd set about to nail down. Once I do, chances are I'd quit. Serves little purpose at this age. Especially having no commercial goals for it.

Perhaps it's an instrumentalists defect, but seems to me most guys I know that are into it at all have several guitar, amps, other toys, Apparently this stuff can be an addiction, LOL!

But yes, undoubtedly there are many other things I could've put the time and money too that would've yielded more good in my life. Hindsight's 20/20.

If I'd have expected this end result, probably wouldn't have started, LOL!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gizzmo0815 View Post
Then stop worrying about it and choose one.
Ironically they all sound like the same Line 6 distortion with different EQ curves. None of them are the desired choice.

If none are the target, the desired choice isn't present.

Last edited by flmason; 09-21-2011 at 07:43 PM.
flmason is offline   Reply With Quote