2. misc-audio
  3. 1363488219

The Engineer's Shoes..

We Audiogoneers share a love of audio and music. Discussions can be impassioned; feelings frequently run high, and sometimes debate will descend into pitched battle.
But why? Consider the Chain.

1. The choice of music.
2. Is the music electronic, amplified, or acoustic?
3. The choice of musicians.
4. The choice of recording venue.
5. The choice, and positioning of microphone(s)
6. The choice of equipment to record.
7. The choice of transducer to listen to the recording
8. The choice and tastes of the engineer.
9. The choice and tastes of the final mixer.
10 The transducers used by the mixer.
11.The final transfer medium.
12.The listener's playback device.
13.The listener's speakers.
14.The listener's mood.
14.The listener's room.
15.Everyone's ears and hearing.
16.Etc, etc, etc

And we debate the merits of cables?
In this veritable sea of arbitrariness where every variable there could be is loud and clear I wonder how it's possible to debate anything but the music itself - and that of course is nothing but taste defined! A properly conducted debate would have clearly defined goals, and in an ideal situation where there are multiple variables then these would be eliminated in advance. But we allow (and maybe enjoy) the reviewers to use words like "liquid" to describe a midrange - and how can we not! To reduce everything to a set of graphs and numbers is an approach doomed to failure -because the recordings themselves have absolutely no Absolutes.
And what if the engineer's shoes were pinching on the day of the recording? Wouldn't that make a difference too?. I'd like to think of him or her as a person, not a machine.
As most of us do, I love this hobby: I love most things about it. I especially love the fact that ultimately it's just about the music. I even enjoy some of the fringier debates. But I do wonder how any debate could be successfully prosecuted. My speakers, your speakers, my amp, your amp? Ultimately they're all pretty marvelous: perhaps even cables are cool.
But I can't help thinking about that chain, and maybe those shoes....
57s4me
stevecham
3,340 posts
 
Number 6, the equipment used to record, also has multiple variables if expanded, the preamps, the AD/DA converters, the software/tape format, latency if digital, resolution settings, mastering algorithms, the board used to mix, the cables used thoughout that whole chain. A very large portion of the total outcome depends on the environment of this area.

Also as a vocal proponent of time and phase correct speaker designs, I feel that the monitors used for mixing and mastering should also adhere to these principles.
csontos
1,311 posts
 
An absolute...hence the amp used for playback must be as close to perfectly transparent and neutral as possible if the desired effect is to accurately replicate or execute the construction of the actual recording. Whether the outcome is what was intended is anybody's guess. However if the amp adds or subtracts anything, then something will be missing. This is probably where the issue of subjectivity stems from.

How close am I?
nonoise's avatar
nonoise
10,826 posts
 
I like going barefoot myself.
The purer the recording (the less it's messed with) the better.
It makes determining amps, speakers and cables that much easier.

All the best,
Nonoise
ngjockey
1,042 posts
 
You could limit yourself to Grateful Dead bootlegs.
More to discover