|
I understand that really I do, but the proof is in the pudding.
If the end result is me being able to make accurate eq, level and general production choices then it's a clear winner regardless of the exact science behind it.
To be honest I couldn't give two hoots how it works but the benefits are clear... in a room the size of mine no amount of bass trapping could fix it as it is just too small. It needs bass traping and a program like Arc.
Even if it just sorted the low end out I would be happy. So I've tried it 4 times in seperate bad sounding studio's and the benefits were huge compared to not having it....so the end result is it works.
Bear in mind that all 4 studio's pump out regular mixes for release so it really is a real world test. One of the rooms just didn't have enough room to put any traps in it was that small. It took all of 30 mins to fix one guys mix he had been having real trouble with.... after the Arc was setup you could hear how quiet the bassline was and the vocals.... but without the Arc on they sounded roughly correct although very 1 note boomy bass.
There is a bit of top end phasyness, but only slight... not that it's a problem as you would never export through Arc only monitor.
Mr Hudson, yes there is a volume difference but you have the volume make up gain for this.
Ethan I would however like to re calibrate the room whilst Arc is being used but not sure how I would go about running two arcs... maybe I will give the other software a shot running through cubase running arc.
|