That's a great question. What would you say comes to mind as possible answers?

Answering a question with a question?

Should be obvious that is what just happened. Why are you asking a question of the obvious?

Your question was obviously not obvious, else you would not have asked and I would not have asked you for input.

I'm interested in your view. It's not an easy thing to give you 40 years of experience in a one liner knowing nothing of you.

Or maybe you're being a smart ass, I have no idea. Thus my question.

Personally I think for some users a forum is just there to easily help them soaking up knowledge and experiences of others, not for real discussion or interaction. Especially not in a Q&A with a superstar engineer. They just want easy answers helping them to construct their own work philosophy around...


But I'll take it...:
Fear based moves might be the obvious question about "Am I loud enough"?
Or:
will the Drummer loves the snare sound?
Or:
what is this ugly looking freq on my analyser?
Or:
did I really add enough procesing to this track to justify my needs?
Or:
will Brian L. may like my work?

Thanks for being so clear on the fact that MQAed albums never went back to you for quality check or authentication.

Still, the MQA version lists you as the Mastering Engineer on Tidal (which is my source).

I guess this raises the question what is legally OK and/or good business practice regarding using and altering other people’s work. Is MQA’s business practice ethical when they alter «the art», pretending (using the ME’s name on the credits) it’s been authenticated by the mastering engineer

Just reading the «credits» of the album, ignorant audiophiles could be led to believe that Brian Lucey is supporting MQA. We know, that’s absurd and as far away from truth you could come.

Do you see my point?

Oh yea

I'm agreeing with you

It's unethical, they lie, it's a bad deal for everyone with any integrity.

If MQA was so great we would all hear it, and there would be no controversy.

"Am I loud enough" ... is a practical concern. The choice to go MEGA loud is up to the client. In me experience even when people say "don't make it too loud" what they really mean is "I want it loud just not flat and ****ty sounding".

The rest are A+ ideas.

Love the heckle. But I reckon a fear based move is one you need to find a reason for by going cerebral. As in, you have to dig out something that could pass for a problem with your mind. As opposed to one that comes to you on feel, so you sort it without thinking much and done.

The way I understand Brian is that he tries to be very aware of that tipping point where the flow of moves that come from feels/being antenna/whatever you want to call it, but non cerebral flowing slows down and at some point it becomes that you actively 'look for problems'. Based on the fear that your feels might have missed something. When in fact, if it actually feels great, it probably is. If your feels are developed/experienced enough, that is.

Makes utter sense to me as it goes. I wish I would see more people think like this about studio behaviour in general. It would mean more exciting records.

EDIT: But then it's no surprise, as the societies we live in program people to live entirely fear based lives, so....

Thanks Brian for the time, that all made a ton of sense. I especially relate to your process about "first-listen" revealing alot of what you need to do.

Definitely think you and Rick could make something special.

I would assume a "fear-based move" would be making an adjustment more based on metering/specs, than what your ear is telling you?

Well fear-based move could be also, no move