The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Tracked on Neve, Mixed on API (or vice-versa) Other Modular Audio Processors
Old 4th December 2014
  #31
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drumsound View Post
I can't think of any better, and only a few in his league.
to each his own
Old 4th December 2014
  #32
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TranscendingM View Post
Character gear is not vague at all. It is indicative of non-linear processing, such as dynamic harmonic distortion as an example. "Good sounding" could mean anything, depending on context, perception, genre, etc. That's not my opinion, just logic. "Character," as a relative deviation or departure from the source can be measured, perceived, and quantified.
So it's every piece of gear then....
Old 4th December 2014
  #33
Lives for gear
 
Taurean's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samc View Post
So it's every piece of gear then....
It's a really strange point that you are contesting

Sure. You can say every piece of gear has character. But the power of the word is in its semantic value. There are some pieces of gear that convey more character than others, no surprise there; it's an implicit thing in which certain brand names carry more weight than others. It has character but is it coveted for its particular kind? Depends on what it is and its use for the context. Then its use is where it can be deemed as, you guessed it: "sounding good" or not.

Should we keep going in this circle?
Old 4th December 2014
  #34
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TranscendingM View Post
It's a really strange point that you are contesting
I could say the same about/to you…no? You are the person arguing the merits and correctness of using a colloquial phrase instead of a formally accepted one.

Quote:
Sure. You can say every piece of gear has character. But the power of the word is in its semantic value. There are some pieces of gear that convey more character than others, no surprise there; it's an implicit thing in which certain brand names carry more weight than others. It has character but is it coveted for its particular kind? Depends on what it is and its use for the context. Then its use is where it can be deemed as, you guessed it: "sounding good" or not.
Yet you keep saying it's not vague…wow.

Quote:
Should we keep going in this circle?
You need to ask yourself this question…I even declared you the 'winner' a few posts ago but, here you are still arguing the merits of "character gear" and as far as I know, you are not being forced to continue the debate.
Old 4th December 2014
  #35
Lives for gear
 
Taurean's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samc View Post
I could say the same about/to you…no? You are the person arguing the merits and correctness of using a colloquial phrase instead of a formally accepted one.


Yet you keep saying it's not vague…wow.
Here is the problem with "arguing" when the interlocutor either has poor memory or needs everything spelled out for them.
ONE more time: character gear implicitly denotes certain traits and "mojo"; color in a sense, most of which that can be measured and quantified. Some more than others. Some desired more than others. Semantically, the term has come to implicitly denote those coveted pieces of gear for what they can do. "Sounding good" is a subjective term that needs context and perceptive; it's what separates who desires what character and when. How can you formally accept it as definitive term when those terms can not be established before the fact!

Quote:
You need to ask yourself this question…I even declared you the 'winner' a few posts ago but, here you are still arguing the merits of "character gear" and as far as I know, you are not being forced to continue the debate.
Yes you spitefully placated me, very big of you. The winner? What does that even mean?? Where was the contest???
In fact you're original post, if you recall, read:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samc View Post
Okay, you win..
BUT then you came back to change it because you couldn't let it go.

If you recall, I never initially argued anything. I simply used a term that most engineers can quickly and casually understand the use of. "Sounding good" on the other hand? again, I don't know what can be more vague than that.
Old 4th December 2014
  #36
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TranscendingM View Post
Here is the problem with "arguing" when the interlocutor either has poor memory or needs everything spelled out for them.
I don't have a comprehension problem…I just don't agree with you…still don't in fact and don't think you'll change that.

Quote:
Yes you spitefully placated me, very big of you. The winner? What does that even mean?? Where was the contest???
The contest is in your head and it seems really important that you win…just look at your behavior, you're holding on to this like your life depended on it.

We don't agree and that's okay, let it go, move on, good bye.
Old 4th December 2014
  #37
Lives for gear
 
nosebleedaudio's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TranscendingM View Post
In fact "character gear" is the only way to describe it. I think saying "good sounding" or "properly designed" are misnomers. Historically a lot of that now coveted gear wasn't build with great specs. You even said it yourself! Depending on the intended goal, whether linearity was desired or the least footprint, then we can't simply say it was gear that was properly built nor can we throw around such subjective terms such as good sounding. The only thing we can establish objectively is that they certainly are gear with character; color; non-linearity. These are not debatable but whether one thinks that those characteristics are what entail "properly built" or sounding good, is debatable.
A Lot?
No doubt in my mind that MOST gear in the 60's thru 70's WAS designed & built very well and used the best components that WAS available at that time...And those designers were NOT building/using things like Transformers for a "Sound"..
Keeping in mind the VERY different terms "Pro" & "Semi-Pro" gear...Most engineers back then KNEW the difference with OUT any help..

And no doubt NOT all gear USED the VERY best of everything...
Let me assure you today those terms "Pro" "Semi-Pro" are not heard very often or is there much difference...Most of the time...

Some today think JUST because a Module is built for the "500 Series" it's top of the line in all respects...

My .02cents
Old 4th December 2014
  #38
Lives for gear
 
Taurean's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samc View Post
Character gear is a vague, meaningless term which does not have a definite meaning, everybody knows what "good sounding" is.

But okay, you win we don't need to debate this you're free to your opinion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samc View Post
I don't have a comprehension problem…I just don't agree with you…still don't in fact and don't think you'll change that.


The contest is in your head and it seems really important that you win…just look at your behavior, you're holding on to this like your life depended on it.

We don't agree and that's okay, let it go, move on, good bye.
We've come to a stalemate, you are debating opinion while I'm just letting you know the difference in the terms, not based on my opinion, but based on how they can be validated - simple as that. I never stated my opinion. I am not "holding" onto anything, I'm talking to you - you who addressed me initially.

I will keep in mind however when somebody tries to explain something to you, you take it as a "behavior." I said something. You dissected it, incorrectly. My responses to you concern that. There is no contest in my head just because I don't let people slide with erroneous and stubborn thoughts.

I will put you on ignore from this point on, I said everything I had to say. Anybody with sense can follow the conversation regarding that, there's no need for me to repeat any of it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nosebleedaudio View Post
A Lot?
No doubt in my mind that MOST gear in the 60's thru 70's WAS designed & built very well and used the best components that WAS available at that time...And those designers were NOT building/using things like Transformers for a "Sound"..
Keeping in mind the VERY different terms "Pro" & "Semi-Pro" gear...Most engineers back then KNEW the difference with OUT any help..

And no doubt NOT all gear USED the VERY best of everything...
Let me assure you today those terms "Pro" "Semi-Pro" are not heard very often or is there much difference...Most of the time...

Some today think JUST because a Module is built for the "500 Series" it's top of the line in all respects...

My .02cents
I have no doubt either, but that most of that gear was intended to be designed and built very well. Relative to a linear digital system, they are out spec'ed on paper. And taking your point of not all gear used the best of everything, absolutely no doubt about it. On paper, for example, even Mr. Neve has indicated how poor of an eq the 73 was/is. But back to the point, both "well-designed" and not so well-designed gear still establishes rank due to their character. And further, generally speaking, specific character whether highly coveted or not, serves a specific situation.

yea "500 series" is sort of a brand revival with cut costs.
Old 4th December 2014
  #39
Lives for gear
 
nosebleedaudio's Avatar
 

You mentioned Rupert Neve, I have an article from the Mid 80's where he stated "Would never use a ribbon cable for audio" or close to that..But what do you see today???
He also mentioned Minimum specs from a Module or it was rejected...Most can't afford to trash a $4000.00 module...
Since I was NOT there I can not say what REALLY happened...But what is VERY obvious..those early consoles WERE built great and sounded great...And COST real $$$$$$$...
Old 4th December 2014
  #40
Lives for gear
 
Taurean's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by nosebleedaudio View Post
You mentioned Rupert Neve, I have an article from the Mid 80's where he stated "Would never use a ribbon cable for audio" or close to that..But what do you see today???
He also mentioned Minimum specs from a Module or it was rejected...Most can't afford to trash a $4000.00 module...
Since I was NOT there I can not say what REALLY happened...But what is VERY obvious..those early consoles WERE built great and sounded great...And COST real $$$$$$$...
Perfect! another great testimony to the idea of character gear. All specs aside, all vague notions of good-sounding aside, character stuff is what wins out for its particular traits. And even within a system where you establish a linear base or somewhat relative, linear base such as those great consoles, the character stuff gets annexed and utilized for its color.
No doubt on those costs though!
Old 4th December 2014
  #41
Gear Addict
 

What's the benefits of tracking on a console vs. the benefits of mixing on a console and which consoles are the ones that excel at each of these areas?

I'm about to wrap up my project and I want to make sure it's the best sounding independent hip-hop album available on the market. Need to crush Riff-Raff, Mac Miller . . the production value may not be as high as the average Eminem record but my brand of music brings a unique character to the genre, I want to make sure the sonic signature is set rather than just sounding like an attempt to throw something together

I have 12 tracks, I can record all my takes rather efficiently. How many hours should I plan to spend on each track, assuming I'm going to be well-prepared, pre-planned and ready to move things along

Looking at a Sony C 800 G, Neve 1073 pre-amp, SSL board
Old 4th December 2014
  #42
Gear Nut
 

[QUOTE=Samc;10602843]Something tells me that all the great sounding albums would still sound great regardless of what they were recorded and/or mixed on…it was the people (musicians, engineers and producers) who worked on those records that made them sound great!

Well, I disagree on that.....sure, in the wrong hands crappy results can be had regardless of what gear used, thats a given. But in the right hands, the end result will only sound that much better when the best possible tools are available to them to use. Thats when the magic happens and legendary records are made that stand the test of time. When it all comes together.
Old 4th December 2014
  #43
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zanderwestcoast View Post
Well, I disagree on that.....sure, in the wrong hands crappy results can be had regardless of what gear used, thats a given. But in the right hands, the end result will only sound that much better when the best possible tools are available to them to use. Thats when the magic happens and legendary records are made that stand the test of time. When it all comes together.
I probably didn't compose that correctly, but I was not suggesting that they could use crappy gear. I suggested that they could have recorded and mixed on any of the consoles mentioned because it was the people involved that made them sound good, not the gear.
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump