2. misc-audio
  3. 153788-17159

Before the music emerges from your speakers....

I thought it might be instructive (perhaps interesting) to have an insight into one engineer's thoughts and methodology into assembling what we listen to.

This young lady details some of her thoughts before, during, and after she 'tracks' a session (or 'X' number of) with her 'rig' on site, followed by 'the real work' creating the master.

There's a lot of 'trade tricks' going on 'twixt the artist(s) and your ears.  It's good to be not only aware of this (which may already be the case for most), but to acknowledge that it's all going into the 'comp'.

It may be played analog...but it's all going direct to digital.

https://reverb.com/news/shani-gandhi-on-recording-bluegrass-and-metal?utm_source=MarketingCloud&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=20200112+Sunday+Content

Note her comments on the use of compression; done with a 'light touch' it seems a standard practice to 'sweeten'/'dial down' certain elements of a recording.

This is also one reason I have no qualms about using 'pro gear' within my equipment.  What's good for the goose...;)
128x128asvjerry
asvjerry's avatar
asvjerry OP
4,615 posts
 
...one should also note the $ spent on the equipment employed to allow her to do her job....
...and How she listens to the 'product' in her car...

You might hate and squirm at the 'Low Common Denominator' factor in that.....but that's the market.

Your tastes....are secondary....in the long $ run.....;)
sonicjoy
146 posts
 
It's sad but true that us audiophiles are the smallest segment of the market so our wants and desires are not very high on the priority list for music producers. The music has to sound "ok" for people listening on $5.00 ear buds, bluetooth speakers car stereos etc. High end audio systems reveal all the compromises that are made to meet those lowest common denominator requirements. If only they could do multiple mixes and let us choose which ones we want to buy. But that's not likely to happen.
millercarbon's avatar
millercarbon
12,531 posts
 
I thought it might be instructive (perhaps interesting) to have an insight into one engineer's thoughts and methodology into assembling what we listen to.

Engineer!?! Lol! Did you read the article? She's a glorified mouse-clicker! Several paragraphs about what she uses and what she likes and I'm not making this up, its all colors and how it looks. Not one word about how it sounds. She is literally using mixing software (not a board, software) based on how it looks. In her own words. Read it, if you can.

Engineer. Good one.
onhwy61's avatar
onhwy61
5,218 posts
 
Her resume is impressive.  I like her selection of microphones.  Thanks for posting.
asvjerry's avatar
asvjerry OP
4,615 posts
 
*G* Well, I didn't create her title; it goes with the trade after all...

And 'mousing' is pretty much SOTA these days, since the software is doing the 'heavy lifting; (such as that is...).

Yes, I do read BTW.  *S*  I opened this forum to see the range of responses to the methodology and the software applied to music 'processing'.  This includes the various and varied equipment used to do so.  The (presumably) nice young lady just happens to be the one interviewed.

I'm not going to a personal stand on this; no interest in supporting/defending the article's content.  It is what it is, and likely is what is pretty much SOP....
More to discover