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
Equipment is POINTLESS....especially moniters. Effects Pedals, Units & Accessories
Old 30th July 2014
  #31
Lives for gear
 

I think equipment is more important when recording live acoustic sources. We are in the hiphop forum where most instrumentals are made with a laptop. Not even a midi keyboard half the time. And for recent emerging producers sometimes on low end monitors, sometimes on Logitechs. Equipment is definitely less particular in hiphop production.

However, I like nice stuff. If I was devoted to making beats I would want a nice little studio. The right monitors are very inspiring, to hear your track in such a clear and defined way.
Old 30th July 2014
  #32
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by levern420 View Post
Equipment is cool. But I think if you can make an EXCELLENT product with ****ty equipment you can make a STELLAR product with great equipment. I am not saying I am the BEST but I am working on the process of making EXCELLENT music. I have only sold a handful of beats and I think I am not excellent or even great. But my product shows TALENT.

I don't know a single serious piano player who'd prefer a starter upright piano to a hand-made grand piano. Or a single serious guitarist who prefers a $100 factory Yamaha to a hand-made Martin.

In most cases, the equipment you use put a CEILING on how well you're able to DISPLAY YOUR TALENT. Not all cases, but many. If you have the talent to jump to 11 feet, and you're stuck in a room with an 8 foot ceiling, you're never able to fully display your talent in all its glory. External variables DO MATTER, its not all about core ability.

Monitors are by far the most important equipment to help the self-producer fully display his talent. Cheap computer speakers = low ceiling of possibility. Two sets of great monitors = the sky is the limit.
Old 30th July 2014
  #33
Gear Nut
 
Rob Lo's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by anstahc View Post
Quality monitoring is not the same as collecting a museum of unnecessary gear. A simple frequency response chart will tell you why good monitors are not pointless. Also don't mistake testing tools for quality as a violation in the process of making music. In the movie biz we expect continuous improvement and technological innovation, yet some pretend we've gone as far as we can go in music. You wonder why the commercial standard is fatiguing, cold, and has no unique sonic identity to it. "Hey James Cameron quit innovating and acquiring bigger and better cameras you don't need to do any of that it's pointless in art." I don't understand this mentality in music. If you're not interested or passionate about the tech side, that's fine. But shooting down its value simply because you don't care about it yourself is foolish. It doesn't distract from the art if you have a logical mind about. Before Hans Zimmer starts a new project his team plays around with tons of instruments and gear to see what sources he can get a certain aesthetic from. It's not like "ok I just did the brass line, let me test every plugin and see what sounds good on this brass line. Okay now I've done strings, let me test everything again for strings." All of this stuff is decided beforehand, outside of the process of production. There is no distraction. It's just another facet of the art. Developing a sonic signature is just as artistic as the music you make, and the tools you choose are absolutely essential in doing that. It's honestly the equivalent of cinematography in film. Take away the look and feel of a Christopher Nolan film and you have a very different movie. Produce the first couple Zeppelin records with a completely different team. No big drums, no ambience, no vocal leaks. Completely different result. I don't understand how this whole side of things has no artistic value when it's such a big determinant in the final result.
Pretty simple, IMO. It DOES have artistic value. But how "big" is very subjective.

I have heard undermixed/poorly mixed tracks that I have thoroughly enjoyed because of the content.

I have never heard a song/content I downright disliked and recognized it for the mix. The mix doesn't turn blues fans into pop fans.

A good mix may bring out the best of a song, indeed. Never would argue that. But the content, the arrangement trumps all 10/10.
Old 30th July 2014
  #34
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Lo View Post
Pretty simple, IMO. It DOES have artistic value. But how "big" is very subjective.

I have heard undermixed/poorly mixed tracks that I have thoroughly enjoyed because of the content.

I have never heard a song/content I downright disliked and recognized it for the mix. The mix doesn't turn blues fans into pop fans.

A good mix may bring out the best of a song, indeed. Never would argue that. But the content, the arrangement trumps all 10/10.
I agree with that. I don't think anybody will challenge that content will always trump all. But some like to reduce everything else like it's meaningless salt and pepper, or worse, take the hippy mentality and talk like a big budget sound is cheap and tacky. The natural tendency to downplay things you don't or can't do as unimportant. I've enjoyed countless songs with low budget production and a less than stellar mix, but never in my life have I listened to something and said "damn, this song is good and all but I wish the production and the mix were of much ****tier quality." Why not strive to entertain on all levels? This is where I think film kills music IMO. Compare a movie from the 70s to Inception and do the same thing with music. Film has gone infinitely further. There's no negative stigma with trying to go balls to the wall on every aspect of production.
Old 30th July 2014
  #35
Gear Nut
 
Rob Lo's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by anstahc View Post
"damn, this song is good and all but I wish the production and the mix were of much ****tier quality."
Fair enough.

Quote:
Why not strive to entertain on all levels? This is where I think film kills music IMO. Compare a movie from the 70s to Inception, or Gravity, or Avatar and do the same thing with music. Film has gone infinitely further.
I think there is something to be said for technological advancements lending themselves more to film than the audio realm though. Because film is both audio AND visual stimulation. With music alone, the mind has to provide the imagery and the setting based of however it stirs the emotion.

I think there is something to be said for the limitations that 70's film (as well as 80's 90's etc etc) faced. They lent themselves to a certain aesthetic and charm. For example, you mentioned Gravity. That is a great example. Compare Gravity to 2001: A Space Odyssey. Gravity blows it out the water with over the top CGI. It's not even a comparison. But, IMO...2001 is the much more superior film for a myriad of reasons.

I think of audio the same way. The technology has really been felt in the editing capabilities...but as far as mojo? The field has spent half a century trying to get more headroom and less noise, for what? The pristine clarity afforded the recording industry has been met with people trying to put the dirt BACK into the music with vintage gear, lol.

I know this is a tangent and it really is all subjective. But I think there is something to be said for quirks in music or striving for an antiqued approach. You are right that people take the salt and pepper approach...things don't hve to be mutually inclusive/exclusive. But I think the perception that all mixes have to be super accurate or stereo fields have to be as wide as Miley Cyrus' gap are just that, perception. People go as the herd goes....the consuming public takes whatever is most available. Sure, I may very well prefer a wide stereo field....or vocals at the super front of the mix...but the perception of the public is what is driving those ideas as a priority.
Old 30th July 2014
  #36
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Lo View Post
I think there is something to be said for the limitations that 70's film (as well as 80's 90's etc etc) faced. They lent themselves to a certain aesthetic and charm. For example, you mentioned Gravity. That is a great example. Compare Gravity to 2001: A Space Odyssey. Gravity blows it out the water with over the top CGI. It's not even a comparison. But, IMO...2001 is the much more superior film for a myriad of reasons.
Right. I mentioned Gravity and Avatar because while they are both visually impressive movies, everything else about them is whatever and they are the type of movie I never feel compelled to watch a second time. But people still enjoy that first watch. People still make a huge fuss about it. So there is something to be said about the effectiveness of eye candy in spite of mediocre everything else. I'm not even saying presentation should be on an even keel. I'm just saying to disregard it as borderline meaningless is so far off the mark and really just stifling one's own potential. How many kids are obsessed with Noah 40 Shebib's production today? It's not the melodies he's coming up with. It's the aesthetic he creates. It's that ethereal world he puts Drake in.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Lo View Post
I know this is a tangent and it really is all subjective. But I think there is something to be said for quirks in music or striving for an antiqued approach. You are right that people take the salt and pepper approach...things don't hve to be mutually inclusive/exclusive. But I think the perception that all mixes have to be super accurate or stereo fields have to be as wide as Miley Cyrus' gap are just that, perception. People go as the herd goes....the consuming public takes whatever is most available. Sure, I may very well prefer a wide stereo field....or vocals at the super front of the mix...but the perception of the public is what is driving those ideas as a priority.
Agreed, and I'm in no way saying there is some gold standard sound that everyone should strive for. If you want your stuff to have an old, vintage sound, go for it but use the proper gear and techniques to achieve the sound. Dan Auerbach just did it with Lana Del Rey's latest record. But he didn't do it just by not giving a **** and disregarding the process altogether. Lincoln was made to look like the 1800s, and they didn't get there by abandoning cinematography and using the oldest working camera they could find. Just defending against the idea that technology is a hindrance. Complete nonsense.
Old 31st July 2014
  #37
Gear Addict
Monitors in a crap room are kind of overrated. Might as well use headphones with some cheap bookshelf speakers to reference.
Ever see the kids with KRK's setting 1 sideways, and the 2nd on the other side of the room with a a t-shirt sitting on top, lol.
Why even bother with investing when the room is no good.
That's why I still run a set of Alesis monitor one passives, destination audio bookshelf speakers, and some grado headphones.
Good enough for the rooms I'm in.
Old 31st July 2014
  #38
Quote:
Originally Posted by levern420 View Post
I am not saying there is not artistic value in being a "gearslut" but lets not get it twisted, some people have it, some don't. Hording equipment is cool but it you don't have SKILL its pointless. This skill will show through anything you use. Hell, look at leadbelly. He just had a guitar and a dream. SKILL is whats important and we can't lose track of this.
So in other words, you (as a newbie to this forum) have started a thread to say "who cares about gear, if you don't have a good song/talent it's pointless!"

That point is made in just about every thread of any length (have a read around). We get that. It kinda goes without saying. Owning anything - a car, a jet plane, an x-Ray scanner - is pointless unless you know how to use it.

The whole premise of GS and gear purchasing in general has to assume the music/skill is there - otherwise it IS all pointless. A bit like car magazines assume you can drive, or research journals assume you know the standard terminology.

So yes - if you don't know what you're doing, all the gear in the world won't save you. Thanks for letting us know that
Old 31st July 2014
  #39
Lives for gear
 
PettyCash's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by MattmaN View Post
Monitors in a crap room are kind of overrated. Might as well use headphones with some cheap bookshelf speakers to reference.
Ever see the kids with KRK's setting 1 sideways, and the 2nd on the other side of the room with a a t-shirt sitting on top, lol.
Why even bother with investing when the room is no good.
That's why I still run a set of Alesis monitor one passives, destination audio bookshelf speakers, and some grado headphones.
Good enough for the rooms I'm in.
The Monitor Ones are actually very useful speakers, more than what most people would think, especially when driven by a good amp. One of the studios I came up working in use to have a set, along with their wall mounted mains and an active set of near-fields. They were my version of the NS-10s while working in that place. I could always tell if I nailed a mix the way I wanted to from how it sounded on those speakers.
Old 31st July 2014
  #40
Lives for gear
 
12tone's Avatar
 

Gear is what you make of it, that goes for monitors as well.

Being as it may we're talking about gear to make music, what and how you hear/listen is an important part of the process.
Old 31st July 2014
  #41
Lives for gear
 

re

I could build a house without a hammer, saw, or any measuring device but would it be easy, fast, or remotely comparable to a house built by normal means?
Old 31st July 2014
  #42
Lives for gear
 
3rd Degree's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
So in other words, you (as a newbie to this forum) have started a thread to say "who cares about gear, if you don't have a good song/talent it's pointless!"

That point is made in just about every thread of any length (have a read around). We get that. It kinda goes without saying. Owning anything - a car, a jet plane, an x-Ray scanner - is pointless unless you know how to use it.

The whole premise of GS and gear purchasing in general has to assume the music/skill is there - otherwise it IS all pointless. A bit like car magazines assume you can drive, or research journals assume you know the standard terminology.

So yes - if you don't know what you're doing, all the gear in the world won't save you. Thanks for letting us know that
Yup, that point comes up way to often and is an inherent truth of anything that requires skill.

Same with the idea of "if you don't know how to use something, you don't need it". I don't think anyone is going to argue with that either. That's not exclusive to music either, it's no different than buying every tool under the sun for your car, making your garage into a professional shop, yet not knowing how to do your brakes, it's stupid, it's pointless, it's expensive. Ironically, it's also far cheaper to have a qualified professional do it, just the same as many hear who would likely save money going to a professional studio, yet that does not need to be brought up in every thread.



I do actually have one point that should be said, monitors in particular. Monitors, in some way, have this ironic part about them. Most of us are aware that speakers need to fit the room, some do something about it some do not. The reason why it's ironic is, you may actually do a better job and some really crappy speakers, especially if they have single drivers. You likely won't be able to do very fine things, eqing very fine details, getting that reverb perfect, you may not even really hear the compression start pumping. BUT, you ofter can dial in the levels and get a fairly balanced mix off of them. Because these speakers often lack the very fine details, it's also often easier to hear the major problems, rather than getting caught in some more minor problems that tend to pop up when you can hear more detail.

Now, my point is not that monitors are unimportant or crappy speakers are helpful but their is a reason why many do use a single driver speaker for reference and it's not to imitate a consumer setup anymore. It just really gives you a very basic overview of the levels and the balance, just on the "at a glace level". Combine that with the fact their are very few, if any, cheap monitors that are easy to mix on, sometimes monitoring can become one of those things where you just throw your hands up and say, I am done, I was doing better on my $20 headphones.
Old 31st July 2014
  #43
I think this is a lame topic..... I wanted to reply to a lot of the ignorance here but ill save my breath. Like "Psycho_Monkey" said the assumption here is that you know what your doing. Technical tools do not in any way equate to artistic quality. So yes your point has been made time and time again in this forum. "Good Music" can be made on anything.

But remember this, good mixes will help good production shine. Just because your favorite artist uses KRK Rockets does not mean he or she mixed their own record playing on radio that sounds like a million dollars.
Old 31st July 2014
  #44
Gear Head
 

incredibly short sighted post
Old 1st August 2014
  #45
All you really need is to watch Pensados Place and you're good.
Old 1st August 2014
  #46
Gear Addict
 

If you are a mix engineer / mastering engineer, quality monitors and expensive products are a must, and they will definitely improve your work. However, if you are a producer or songwriter, costly gear is not necessary. A truly captivating song / beat can, should, and will shine through low-fidelity recordings and the frequency imbalances that will inevitably occur as a result of mixing samples with cheap headphones.

I think that is what OP meant to say, not that that quality monitors are a waste of money for everybody.
Old 1st August 2014
  #47
Lives for gear
 
PettyCash's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by killsganti View Post
If you are a mix engineer / mastering engineer, quality monitors and expensive products are a must, and they will definitely improve your work. However, if you are a producer or songwriter, costly gear is not necessary. A truly captivating song / beat can, should, and will shine through low-fidelity recordings and the frequency imbalances that will inevitably occur as a result of mixing samples with cheap headphones.

I think that is what OP meant to say, not that that quality monitors are a waste of money for everybody.
OP was trying to make a simple point, but took an ignorant approach toward doing it.

Mix and mastering engineers should invest into quality monitoring, because they are getting paid specifically to do what they do. Expensive products aren't absolutely a must, and price alone shouldn't be the determining factor in how someone chooses the equipment they end up working with. The use, function, and quality of each component should be the key deciding factor. Budget should be decided based on the current demand for one's services, if they want to get the most for their investment.

The same goes for songwriters and producers. It's not about cheap or expensive gear, it's about choosing the right gear for the tasks they need to complete. Deciding what is right comes down to preference.

Gear is a hot topic amongst producers around here for the simple fact that most are trying to do more than just make beats/ideas to pass off to somebody else. A lot of producers here are striving to be able to handle as much of the creative process as they can.

Moral of the story... figure out your main focus, buy gear based on supporting that focus, then shut up and get to work.
Old 1st August 2014
  #48
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by killsganti View Post
If you are a mix engineer / mastering engineer, quality monitors and expensive products are a must, and they will definitely improve your work. However, if you are a producer or songwriter, costly gear is not necessary.
These roles are just a bit one-in-the-same these days.

Unless you're at the level of a label having a studio or engineering budget, you either hit the mark yourself, or your music never gets listened to for more than 15 seconds. There are really only a few real-world cases where a good idea that's engineered poorly will ever shine through and catch people's attention. . and most of them come once you've already proven yourself.

Every "producer" out there needs to learn how to get a good sound, if success is at all a concern. The "an engineer will fix it" days are mostly over for anyone un-established. Many labels put out self-masters these days, your Logic or ProTools bounce needs to sound as close to done as you can get it.
Old 1st August 2014
  #49
Lives for gear
 

To the OP:
just do what inspires you. Or not. Nobody gives a sh*t either way. This thread is a waste of space
Old 1st August 2014
  #50
Lives for gear
 
medearis's Avatar
 

Ryu doesn't need Shoryukens. C'mon, guys.
Old 1st August 2014
  #51
Gear Nut
Yes it have always been awakward. "Hey i bought synth for money i've been keeping for year. What? Why do i need some expensive speakers? I just wanna make music! I have an instrument, what's more!"
Old 1st August 2014
  #52
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by medearis View Post
Ryu doesn't need Shoryukens. C'mon, guys.
On the floor
Old 2nd August 2014
  #53
Gear Addict
 
mitchiemasha's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by levern420 View Post
Hording equipment is cool but it you don't have SKILL its pointless. This skill will show through anything you use. Hell, look at leadbelly. He just had a guitar and a dream. SKILL is whats important and we can't lose track of this.
This can be insulting. My skills are very lacking but that doesn't mean doing what i like is pointless. Unless saying everything is pointless. Just because one isn't blessed at creativity of music shouldn't deny them the right to purchase 'toys' to play with, with in the field they love.
Old 2nd August 2014
  #54
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by mitchiemasha View Post
This can be insulting. My skills are very lacking but that doesn't mean doing what i like is pointless. Unless saying everything is pointless. Just because one isn't blessed at creativity of music shouldn't deny them the right to purchase 'toys' to play with, with in the field they love.
I agree with you.

I think he provably means "creativity". Don't confuse that with skill. Everyone has a story to tell.
Old 2nd August 2014
  #55
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mitchiemasha View Post
This can be insulting. My skills are very lacking but that doesn't mean doing what i like is pointless. Unless saying everything is pointless. Just because one isn't blessed at creativity of music shouldn't deny them the right to purchase 'toys' to play with, with in the field they love.
Honestly. By OP's logic Manny Marroquin, Chris Lord Alge, etc. are all useless.
Old 2nd August 2014
  #56
Lives for gear
 
12tone's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by anstahc View Post
Honestly. By OP's logic Manny Marroquin, Chris Lord Alge, etc. are all useless.
To some they maybe...rock and pop ain't the end-all...

Back to the OP, in the least have decent monitoring - it's the window that you can see your sound and music...everything else, just use what feels right to you...
Old 2nd August 2014
  #57
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by 12tone View Post
To some they maybe...rock and pop ain't the end-all...
It takes more than one snide comment on a message board to push those guys off the world class platform.
Old 2nd August 2014
  #58
Lives for gear
 
12tone's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by anstahc View Post
It takes more than one snide comment on a message board to push those guys off the world class platform.
It wasn't a snide comment, nor to say they aren't world class...it's just that their skills don't apply to every style or genre.
Old 2nd August 2014
  #59
Oh my god the things I've learned from gear. Far exceeds the price I paid for it, and I'm the bargain shopper of peoples nightmares.

The day you get that $2000 monitor setup and hear it is the day those computer speakers take a backseat in your mix process. But KEEP THEM! because you know them now, there a great reference tool. Those new monitors will complete your knowledge of the old monitors....there weak points!
Old 2nd August 2014
  #60
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by 12tone View Post
It wasn't a snide comment, nor to say they aren't world class...it's just that their skills don't apply to every style or genre.
"Lebron is a world class athlete...he's only good at basketball though...just sayin..."

Snide
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