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
Spectral curve? Equalizer Plugins
Old 11th August 2008
  #31
Lives for gear
 
Masterer's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Un ****ing believable

I fear for the children that seek and take advice from forums.


Caveat emptor like hell.
Old 12th August 2008
  #32
Lives for gear
 
masteringhouse's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Masterer View Post
Caveat emptor like hell.
Cavett emperor indeed!

Cavett & Sly
Old 12th August 2008
  #33
Gear Addict
 
jordanstoner's Avatar
 

If "web-poisoning" is now a coined term, perhaps we should rank posts and posters with a toxicity level - from "Brown Recluse" to "Black Mamba."
Old 12th August 2008
  #34
jdg
Lives for gear
 
jdg's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Masterer View Post
Un ****ing believable

I fear for the children that seek and take advice from forums.


Caveat emptor like hell.
im pretty sure the "smarter" ppl looking for advice on the internet check the source.

maybe?
Old 12th August 2008
  #35
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdg View Post
im pretty sure the "smarter" ppl looking for advice on the internet check the source.

maybe?
That's true here for me... but I wouldn't say it's true overall unfortunately.

As far as the OT, I am afraid to side with "joerod" here but I do agree with him just a little.

I don't make mix decisions on a spectrum analyzer but I do put one on my mixes from time to time just to check my ears.

I don't do it often but I like to think of it as a reality check. I see it as a lot like putting up a reference track from a different band, producer, mix engineer. I don't let it dominate my mix decisions but I have noticed after years (and years *sigh* I just had another b-day last week) of doing this my mixes have gotten better and more focused.

Now I don't think this is the only thing that has made me a better mixer and THAT is the point. It's just another tool.

When I first starting mixing I used to use pink and a graphic EQ. With my eyes closed I would move sliders up and down and try to guess the frequencies. My ears got MUCH better because of it.... again just another tool.

In this case it's a tool that you can use to sharpen your skills. I put what I feel is my finished mix up, make a mental note of what I think the tune is going to "look" like based on what my ears are telling me and then I slap an analyzer on it. I know it sounds strange but I use the analyzer to help me focus my hearing.

I don't think that should be a problem, I see it as practice and working on my craft.



That said, if the mix "looks" wrong but sounds good the ears win...... every time.
Old 12th August 2008
  #36
Lives for gear
 
polybonk's Avatar
So which RTA is the one joerod. I'm genuinely interested to see what you use.

Also I think if you replaced you use of the word "NEED" with "can be useful" etc you will have a easier time here.
Old 12th August 2008
  #37
Lives for gear
 
Adam Dempsey's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by macc View Post
So I said:

'Let me ask you 2 questions'

'ok'

'1 - do you have any monitors, or headphones or anything?'

'yes of course'

' ok - q 2 - are they turned on while you're doing all of this?'


I then went on (being extremely patronising, frankly, but he got where I was coming from) about how I painted a picture the other day by putting the brush in my ear, and then when I turned my head back around, I was shocked to see the picture was crap.
Love it. thumbsup
Old 12th August 2008
  #38
Gear Addict
 
joerod's Avatar
 

Back to the topic.

FWIW: The sound of the sample that I made on a cheap computer/software, but guided with a RTA, resulted in the band wanting to hire me to do their whole album (not on a cheap computer, of course).

If you don't believe me ask user Dopamine...

What does this proof? It proves that when you are 'versed' reading frequencies with the guidance of a RTA, it is possible to master music in a non professional environment (not that I recommend this, OK?).

EDIT: And please, understand this: You need to have an ear to hear sounds, separate them in your mind and predict the outcome of your processing. That's a must.
Old 12th August 2008
  #39
Gear Addict
 
jordanstoner's Avatar
 

Know what, Joe? You're right. I just test mastered a tune using cheap desktop speakers and the Inspector XL Multimeter (with spectrum analyzer). By relying on the spectrum analyzer, I was able to make it sound "good" in my "non-professional" playback environment. Does this validate your post? Not really.

Your comparison is like driving while relying on the speedometer and not watching the road - sure, you're driving the speed limit, but you're missing the big picture. An RTA is simply a tool at your disposal - it feeds you relevant information that is visual, rather than auditory. If you like having that additional sensory perception at your disposal to do your job comfortably, then so be it. I don't think anyone here is arguing that RTA's are useless. HOWEVER, if you are saying that a professional mastering engineer who's been in this business a long time will not be able to do his job at the top of his ability without an RTA in constant view, then you are sorely mistaken. These guys rely on their EARS - they've honed their skills to the top degree, and could probably do their job just as well if they were blind.

I think that your insistence and rebuttals on this matter (and many other) stem from your insecurity. Quit trying to validate your shortcomings by lashing out at established professionals. And if you think this is an attack, then tough tit$. Get used to it - it's obvious by your interactions here that you're going to need a thick skin to deal with all the criticisms that are no doubt in store for you in your future endeavors and dealings with "peers" (and I use the term lightly) in the industry.
Old 12th August 2008
  #40
Gear Addict
 
joerod's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jordanstoner View Post
Know what, Joe? You're right. I just test mastered a tune using cheap desktop speakers and the Inspector XL Multimeter (with spectrum analyzer). By relying on the spectrum analyzer, I was able to make it sound "good" in my "non-professional" playback environment. Does this validate your post? Not really.
I don't have to validate any points to you? Do I? Yet, you claim to have done it (RTA) and it sounds good, imagine now if you have done it 1000 times. That said, I don't think you have done that because if you've had. you wouldn't be posting this...

Quote:
Your comparison is like driving while relying on the speedometer and not watching the road - sure, you're driving the speed limit, but you're missing the big picture. An RTA is simply a tool at your disposal - it feeds you relevant information that is visual, rather than auditory. If you like having that additional sensory perception at your disposal to do your job comfortably, then so be it. I don't think anyone here is arguing that RTA's are useless.
You repeating things I've already said but conveniently omitted the whole explanation, that's not fair. Hmmm, maybe you just missed my entire explanation on page 1. Go ahead, please read it...

Quote:
HOWEVER, if you are saying that a professional mastering engineer who's been in this business a long time will not be able to do his job at the top of his ability without an RTA in constant view, then you are sorely mistaken.
I never said that, did I?

Quote:
I think that your insistence and rebuttals on this matter (and many other) stem from your insecurity. Quit trying to validate your shortcomings by lashing out at established professionals.
It really doesn't take too much common sense to know that I AM a professional and I AM entitled to voice my opinions without : personal attacks, mockery and disrespect, does it?


Quote:
And if you think this is an attack, then tough tit$. Get used to it -
I don't know about that, Jordan. Let other GS members make their own conclusions about it.


Quote:
it's obvious by your interactions here that you're going to need a thick skin to deal with all the criticisms that are no doubt in store for you in your future endeavors and dealings with "peers" (and I use the term lightly) in the industry.
Fair enough, are we done with this, then?
Old 12th August 2008
  #41
Gear Addict
 
joerod's Avatar
 

Mr. Bob Weston was here a moment ago, wasn't he?
Hmm...it would have been great to hear his opinions on how helpful the RTA is in their room...Oh well...


Old 13th August 2008
  #42
Lives for gear
 
Adam Dempsey's Avatar
 

Verified Member
Quote:
Originally Posted by MASSIVE Master
HOWEVER, if you are saying that a professional mastering engineer who's been in this business a long time will not be able to do his job at the top of his ability without an RTA in constant view, then you are sorely mistaken.
Quote:
Originally Posted by joerod View Post
I never said that, did I?
Well, you said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by joerod
Those who speak nonsense about it and make fun of RTA users, are people who are talking from inexperience and most likely they are just too lazy to try one RTA of their own and stick with it for years.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MASSIVE Master
I don't disrespect people for using them (as unnecessary as I find them) - You disrespect people who don't..
And I totally agree with John's comments, as I'm sure others do. And from a pm, Joe, you respect my views. So Joe, really... I suggest you may get far more out of reading here than from writing so much. Maybe Edward (ME from your facility) could chime in?
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
Sigma / So much gear, so little time
4
IPLayHamers / Music Computers
0
Greg Wells / High end
26
scius / Rap + Hip Hop engineering and production
0
cymatics / Music Computers
5

Forum Jump
Forum Jump