The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 All  This Thread  Reviews  Gear Database  Gear for sale     Latest  Trending
Tags: , , ,

News Flash about the "Remote Possibilities in Acoustic Music and Location Recording
Old 1 day ago
  #61
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruce Watson View Post
The problem is the name. It implies, whether that's your intention or not, that the forum is about acoustical music, recorded on location. Because, that's what it says. No one can read your mind; all they can do is read what you write.
THIS imo is spot on!

while i very much like listening to/read programmatic speeches on end, preferably in the sun and in a position of attention (and i therefore miss comandante en jefe fidel), i got no need for manifestos: they belong to politics and mostly fail!

just change the name/title (and maybe add/move a few things)! how about dropping 'possibilties'? how about adding 'electric'? or something along the line of:

'remote/location recording of all sorts, small and large, indoors and outdoors - ambient, word and speech, acoustic and electric music, old and new'

___

btw: how about broadcasting? shouldn't this also be included in the title assuming we're dealing with mixing on location here as well (but excluding mixing foh/monitors/studio)?

Last edited by deedeeyeah; 1 day ago at 10:51 AM.. Reason: question added
Old 1 day ago
  #62
Lives for gear
 
Yannick's Avatar
 

Just drop the “acoustic”.
Maybe substitute by “all” ?
Old 1 day ago
  #63
Lives for gear
 
Melgueil's Avatar
 

I wouldn't vote for compartmentalisation of this wonderful forum. The music industry has leveraged this commerce-driven approach for years (just recall the record bins in separate sections), it' great for marketing, and little else. Cross-pollination is what benefits us all.

My future plans include setting up a small studio in a dedicated separate area of my home to focus primarily on small classical music ensembles (because I think that's all my wife will really want to hear - another story ,) but also ethnic folk acoustic etc. It would be a shame to have to comb through multiple subsections and have these "sealed containers" not collaborate with one another. Currently I come here because the advice on microphones and acoustics is second to none.

I do understand the desire of those who focus exclusively on classical to have a section unto themselves, but there would be a downside as well, IMHO.

Cdlt
Old 1 day ago
  #64
As a relative newcomer to the forum I would say it's about the only section I look at and contribute to. The reason I like this section is that I like the people, and I like the things they talk about, and it is also a great help. If I look at other sections it's only because something has caught my eye, and that happens rarely.

So as far as I'm concerned, this section is about as perfect as it can get, and I don't see any reason to change it. If people complain about the content then it can be suggested that they look elsewhere, as politely as possible.
Old 1 day ago
  #65
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lurcher_lover View Post
As a relative newcomer to the forum I would say it's about the only section I look at and contribute to. The reason I like this section is that I like the people, and I like the things they talk about, and it is also a great help. If I look at other sections it's only because something has caught my eye, and that happens rarely.

So as far as I'm concerned, this section is about as perfect as it can get, and I don't see any reason to change it. If people complain about the content then it can be suggested that they look elsewhere, as politely as possible.
I agree with this 100%, and perhaps if the individual thread titles are named so that they accurately convey the intended content and subject matter of the thread, it will be a simple process for folks to selectively skim over those they think are unlikely to interest them.....which puts the onus back on the thread-starter OP's
Old 1 day ago
  #66
Lives for gear
 

We should be very clear about the impossibility of seeking universal protocols for all audio capture: be it live in concert or the studio. Several primary reasons are simply explained in post #27 & #29 . Most of us can relate to kibitzing various approaches to solving audio problems in work environments totally removed from our everyday endeavors. However the ability to deploy any protocol is highly dependent upon the given limitations of the subject genre. This is where "the rubber hits the road" and to this end pursuing rock and roll practices for an acoustic Bluegrass band is fools gold.
I replaced Bluegrass vocal SM58s and SM57s for instruments with 3 RE 20s in 1975. 20 years ago I began deploying card pattern tube mics for all of my acoustic Americana audio capture in both live and studio work. I deploy 1 KV2 EX10 wedge high passed to replace the mids and highs lost in the FOH stage bloom. The hot back line folks are highly skeptical of this protocol even if it works they see little or no sonic benefit to be gained. The ability to process the full harmonic range of acoustic instruments and vocals with FP32/96K processing that synergistically benefit greatly from high end tube mics is pure sonic magic. The unvarnished truth is amped instruments provide almost nothing sonically significant above 5K hz.
Hot back lines require hyper card "eat-um" vocal mics and rubber room acoustical treatment to tame or kill room reflections while in the acoustic music world we use mic choice and placement to work with the existing room reflections.
Hugh
Old 1 day ago
  #67
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by hughshouse View Post
We should be very clear about the impossibility of seeking universal protocols for all audio capture: be it live in concert or the studio. Several primary reasons are simply explained in post #27 & #29 . Most of us can relate to kibitzing various approaches to solving audio problems in work environments totally removed from our everyday endeavors. However the ability to deploy any protocol is highly dependent upon the given limitations of the subject genre. This is where "the rubber hits the road" and to this end pursuing rock and roll practices for an acoustic Bluegrass band is fools gold.
I replaced Bluegrass vocal SM58s and SM57s for instruments with 3 RE 20s in 1975. 20 years ago I began deploying card pattern tube mics for all of my acoustic Americana audio capture in both live and studio work. I deploy 1 KV2 EX10 wedge high passed to replace the mids and highs lost in the FOH stage bloom. The hot back line folks are highly skeptical of this protocol even if it works they see little or no sonic benefit to be gained. The ability to process the full harmonic range of acoustic instruments and vocals with FP32/96K processing that synergistically benefit greatly from high end tube mics is pure sonic magic. The unvarnished truth is amped instruments provide almost nothing sonically significant above 5K hz.
Hot back lines require hyper card "eat-um" vocal mics and rubber room acoustical treatment to tame or kill room reflections while in the acoustic music world we use mic choice and placement to work with the existing room reflections.
Hugh
hugh

i fear it's 'cause my english is no good enough but i'm not getting your point: are you saying you'd rather want to keep those folks using a r'n'r approach to record acoustic music out of this forum?

if so, i cannot agree: while i'm priviledged to mostly have/get the gear to record any ensemble the way i want, there were times when this clearly was not the case and i was using old sennheisers and m201's to record grand piano and a violin or a 57 for a singer.

while we can decry such circumstances, imo folks forced into working this way for whatever reasons should get applauded and not be dismissed - in fact, i feel any 'remotester' should occasionally be working with subpar gear under tricky circumstances yet be expected to deliver world class results...

it can be done and one can learn an awful lot by doing so!

please let me know if i got you entirely wrong - if so, i'll delete by post (or steve will do so should he decide it'd be inappropriate).

greetings from the old world,

didier

___

p.s. after reading your post #70 , i guess i got you wrong - sorry about that!

Last edited by deedeeyeah; 12 hours ago at 01:56 PM.. Reason: p.s. added after reading post A#70
Old 1 day ago
  #68
Lives for gear
 

Yes, a name change is all that is needed.
Here’s my suggestion:

“All Genre On-Location Recording; Plus Everything in Acoustic Music”

Feel free to suggest other options.
Once Steve has some suggested options
perhaps he can survey this Forum’s members plus his “non-participating” friends to see what title best conveys the Forum’s
intent?
Old 1 day ago
  #69
Gear Maniac
 

Steve,

I support your plan to 'straighten this up'.

I have one minor query or plea, which I am sure you have covered in your plans already. This forum, as I understand it and, indeed, as covered by 'All genres of music and sound production are welcomed as long as it has to do with on location work' also includes non-music location recording, yet threads on such recording are rare and, indeed, some of the posts above still seem to assume the forum covers music recording only. So I'd welcome it if the changes you have in mind help foster more threads and posts on non-music location recording that includes nature, ambient (including recording for posterity - like the London Sound Survey), sound effects, speech and, even, film location recording. Although the latter is perhaps less in need of this forum (e.g. given JWsound's established focus on this area), many of these location sound recording types do not have active forums elsewhere, and an increased presence here would be enriching all round.

Cheers,

Roland
Old 13 hours ago
  #70
Lives for gear
 

Deep apologies to deedeeyeah for not making more clear the nature of my comments. My comments were never at any point an effort to exclude any type of genre protocol discussion. However it was my intention to illustrate the importance of understanding the primary genre difference in dealing with room reflections and the corresponding protocol ramifications. Failure to recognize these critical differences can provide less than helpful miss-leading remedies for acoustic capture problems. If the goal of an acoustical recording of any type is to sonically capture sound as transparently as possible then the menu of problem remedies that would be most helpful will come from protocols and gear that work best within given room reflections. Consider as an example the necessary rnr "eat-um mics" that are not part of any acoustic performance best practice that I know anything about.
Hugh
Old 12 hours ago
  #71
Lives for gear
 

thx for clarification!
Old 11 hours ago
  #72
Lives for gear
 
Earcatcher's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Folkie View Post
Yes, a name change is all that is needed.
Here’s my suggestion:

“All Genre On-Location Recording; Plus Everything in Acoustic Music”

Feel free to suggest other options.
Once Steve has some suggested options
perhaps he can survey this Forum’s members plus his “non-participating” friends to see what title best conveys the Forum’s
intent?
"On-Location Recording" is enough to cover it all, in a clear-cut way. Everyone can understand it, it will not exclude any of the genres that are being recorded on location and Steve can see his dream protected, although it will be up to his friends to post. Blaming the acoustic recording crowds for not leaving room to the truckers seems like a very unjust logic to me. If the truckers were to post more themselves it would not be an "all acoustic" forum. And blaming the acoustic posters for interpreting the current forum title in a somewhat narrow way is just another unjust way to look at the situation. Nobody who posts here has changed the name of the forum and nobody of those who take the forum title rather strictly has the power to moderate what is happening.

Personally it is not my habit to point people away from this forum, but I frequently advise posters in other fora to pose their questions here, because I expect their chances of getting a better answer here bigger. Does that make me hostile towards the purpose of those other fora? Whenever any advise to a fellow member is well meant and aimed at helping them I see no reason to start pointing a finger at the advisor, even if the advise was not totally in line with the (unwritten) manifesto of the forum. We've got enough totalitarian places in the world already. I can do without another.
Old 8 hours ago
  #73
Lives for gear
I'd also point the finger of responsibility at Steve's Farm Aid friends who (incorrectly) assumed that this forum is "now all about classical music"

You can't just take a 'random snapshot' of the postings on any given day (or week) and assume that the spectrum of postings therein is necessarily representative of the drift or bias or focal point of the forum overall.

I can recall periods when there there might be a plethora of postings about ribbon mics, ambient soundscape captures and humidity hassles, getting squeezed out of paid work by undercutters and hobbyists, surround and Ambisonics, recording a calypso band in a small room, insurance woes, editing approaches, unwanted noise reduction etc etc.

In other words...hardly dominated by 'the classical crowd' by any means. Steve, you should have put them right on their incorrect assumptions....?

If they have a comment they'd like to air for sympathetic and interested discussion, or a problem that the broader experience-base here might have familiarity with...then post away, with every encouragement !

The worst that can happen is that their concerns could be left unresponded to....but I'm going to suggest that's very unlikely indeed !

These guys simply arrived at an incorrect assumption about the predominance of classical music here...and that assumption unfortunately went unchallenged and uncorrected.

As far as I can see, there is no real-estate shortage of posting space or economy of opportunity to do so...so nobody is being squeezed out of, nor excluded from, participation.

However..plain old malicious reporting of posts (and active discouragement) is another thing entirely....and here I agree with Steve that this should never be the prerogative or liberty of anyone but the moderator.
Old 7 hours ago
  #74
Lives for gear
Acoustic recording deserves to be supported
Outside Broadcast, location recording
PA
Film and TV are all interesting as are classic studio visits
We should be a broad church
However 'Remote Possibilities' is meaningless to non US recordists.......
Old 7 hours ago
  #75
Here for the gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rolo 46 View Post
'Remote Possibilities' is meaningless to non US recordists.......
Frankly speaking, I still do not know what 'Remote Possibilities' means. I am non USA and English is my third language.
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