![]() | All Advertisers |
| Member Services Directory | Classifieds | Reviews | Jobs | Deal Zone | Merchandise | Marketplace | Facebook App | Books, DVDs & Gadgets | Video Vault | Tips & Techniques |
| |||||||
Closed | Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| | #31 | |
| Lives for gear Joined: Oct 2008 Location: NYC
Posts: 938
| Quote:
__________________ Edward Vinatea Audio Engineer ---------------------------- | |
| |
| | #32 |
| Gear addict Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 400
|
General statement: There is nothing inherently wrong with two signals which do not have a coherent or even correlated phase relationship. Even two same signals with an inverted phase relationship is not necessarily a "problem" - if it was intended to be that way and the loss of the resultant combined signal when summed to mono is not a concern. Now for three statements that should end the back-and-forth bickering of all visual tools on every thread, ever: If it sounds good, then who cares how it looks? If it sounds bad, and you feel this tool helps you make it sound better, then great. That's assuming that the presence of this additional display tells your brain to make adjustments above and beyond what your ears alone tell your brain to do - and the result is more pleasing to your brain and your ears, not necessarily your eyes. If it looks good but sounds bad, then just relax and enjoy the visuals. It'll take your mind off of the crap you're hearing.
__________________ http://www.twistedsessions.com/Jordan_Stoner/ __________________ I don’t care if they died in puddles of their own vomit, I want someone who plays from his f***ing HEART! -Bill Hicks Humanity has advanced, when it has advanced, not because it has been sober, responsible, and cautious, but because it has been playful, rebellious, and immature. -Tom Robbins |
| |
| | #33 | |
| Gear maniac Joined: Dec 2007 Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 247
| Quote:
I don't get Waves sometimes. They're capable of absolutely brilliant things, but sometimes they release the darndest stuff. Fills up the bundles, I guess.
__________________ "Yes, I know what I'm talking about, but that doesn't mean I'm right." -Randall Thomas | |
| |
| | #34 | ||||
| Lives for gear | Quote:
Quote:
Don't start a poll about that... Quote:
Quote:
Ed, I don't know if you've noticed, but these things tend to be "almost all of us" vs. "You." You accuse us of being hypocritical (although that still confuses me, because I'm truly convinced that you don't understand the definition of the word), you try to make it seem as if you have some magical connection to - a RTA. A meter that shows frequencies. If you don't like the way that almost all of us feel about it, then just leave it alone maybe. You're not the first person to rely on a visual tool - You won't be the last. We don't really care. Go write a diatribe to EQ (or whatever that magazine was) arguing about those last few paragraphs posted earlier here. I'd bet they'd print it, and I'd bet there would be a long list of people disagreeing with you in the following issue. But now, as usual, in your typical passive-aggressive manner, you've made this thread a "personal" thing and most of it will probably be deleted. Congratulations once again - I'm sure you have the record.
__________________ John Scrip - Massive Mastering, LLC - www.massivemastering.com Spoon-feed a newb some answer and he'll mix for a day - Get him to *think* about it and figure it out for himself and he'll mix for a lifetime --- JS | ||||
| |
| | #35 | |
| Lives for gear | Quote:
I quoted from a reputable magazine that actually summarised the use of RTAs quite well. People don't have to agree with you all of the time, and from what I can see YOU are the one that can't deal with it. None of us really care if you use an RTA or not- seriously. It's not off topic. It's just an opinion. If I may quote again: "Analysis tools give us useful data, but it is only data, not knowledge about the audio. So, in the final analysis, the ears remain the best and most important source of knowledge about whether something sounds good. But data can be seductive, and people sometimes come to rely more on what they think meters are telling them than on what their ears tell them. That becomes a problem if someone is not metering the appropriate information or if the quantitative data supplied by a meter does not map well to the most closely related perceptual attribute. For instance, level meters mostly give representations that are of the power in a signal. But loudness is a perceptual attribute that does not map directly to signal power as shown on a typical meter. Or the problem may be as simple as not metering the right parameter. In any event, meters are best treated as supplements to what we hear. If there is a discrepancy between the two, further inquiry may be in order. But it is foolish to assume that the meters must be “right” and that you aren't hearing correctly."
__________________ Studios 301 | |
| |
Closed
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Similar Threads | ||||
| Thread | Thread starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Waves PAZ Analyzer settings? | edIT | Mastering forum | 16 | 14th January 2012 05:45 PM |
| Frequency analyzer plugin? Not PAZ. | elambo | Music computers | 8 | 22nd December 2008 07:05 AM |
| Waves PAZ Analyzer | gusegruv | Music computers | 5 | 12th July 2007 06:59 AM |
| filling gaps in the mic collection | garbagelarge | Low End Theory | 8 | 28th October 2006 11:48 PM |
| waves PAZ Analyzer "anti-phase" | jazzy655 | Rap + Hip Hop engineering & production | 2 | 17th June 2006 05:59 AM |
| |