What should be the target loudness? MASTERING

Have an urge to learn, or a calling to teach? Want to share some useful Youtube videos? Do it here!
User avatar
Marco Raaphorst
Posts: 2504
Joined: 22 Jan 2015
Location: The Hague, The Netherlands
Contact:

30 Mar 2018

aeox wrote:
30 Mar 2018
Marco Raaphorst wrote:
30 Mar 2018


A bad arrangement can not kill the composition. Badly written stuff can never be a good book.

These are old things. Will never change 😎
We're going to have to agree to disagree here.

I personally think the sound design and production quality can be just as important as the composition itself. Not to say that the composition doesn't matter.. it does!
It's always intrigued me how composers seem to get all the credit for their scores/soundtracks, when there is really a whole team of people behind the soundtracks. Without that team, the composition is merely notes on a piece of paper, not a fully realized story IMO.
Check Aphex Twin. And check people who cover his music. It's all there, the melodies, the harmonies, the rhytm. Aphex is a genius in sound, but it is not part of the composition. You can cover his music on guitar. That's why it is so good. It is all there in the composition, not in the sounds, in the presets.

In blues, using the best sounding Fender Strat might create a great blues tone, it doesn't make the composition any better. Neither will a Stradivarius violin make any classic composition any better. It might be useful for a great performance, but a violin which is just 2 days old might create the same effect.

Sound is important, but it is simply not part of the composition. Music can still be written on paper and it comes down to melodies, harmonies and rhythm. All copyright organisations work like this. Compositions cannot contain sound data. BMI or ASCAP doesn't accept this. Material rights do contain the recording/sound data though. But that's the recording of a composition.

User avatar
aeox
Competition Winner
Posts: 3222
Joined: 23 Feb 2017
Location: Oregon

30 Mar 2018

Marco Raaphorst wrote:
30 Mar 2018
aeox wrote:
30 Mar 2018


We're going to have to agree to disagree here.

I personally think the sound design and production quality can be just as important as the composition itself. Not to say that the composition doesn't matter.. it does!
It's always intrigued me how composers seem to get all the credit for their scores/soundtracks, when there is really a whole team of people behind the soundtracks. Without that team, the composition is merely notes on a piece of paper, not a fully realized story IMO.
Check Aphex Twin. And check people who cover his music. It's all there, the melodies, the harmonies, the rhytm. Aphex is a genius in sound, but it is not part of the composition. You can cover his music on guitar. That's why it is so good. It is all there in the composition, not in the sounds, in the presets.

In blues, using the best sounding Fender Strat might create a great blues tone, it doesn't make the composition any better. Neither will a Stradivarius violin make any classic composition any better. It might be useful for a great performance, but a violin which is just 2 days old might create the same effect.

Sound is important, but it is simply not part of the composition. Music can still be written on paper and it comes down to melodies, harmonies and rhythm. All copyright organisations work like this. Compositions cannot contain sound data. BMI or ASCAP doesn't accept this. Material rights do contain the recording/sound data though. But that's the recording of a composition.

We're going to have to agree to disagree here.

User avatar
selig
RE Developer
Posts: 11685
Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Location: The NorthWoods, CT, USA

30 Mar 2018

aeox wrote:Without that team, the composition is merely notes on a piece of paper, not a fully realized story IMO.
No more than a book is just words on paper - it is definitely a fully realized story, and doesn’t require a play or film performance to “realize” it. Unless you don’t know how to read, of course.

The composition IS the notes on the paper, or the words on the page. The performance and the recording are simply different ways to realize the composition. These are, at least, the legal definitions of the terms…


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
Selig Audio, LLC

User avatar
aeox
Competition Winner
Posts: 3222
Joined: 23 Feb 2017
Location: Oregon

30 Mar 2018

selig wrote:
30 Mar 2018
aeox wrote:Without that team, the composition is merely notes on a piece of paper, not a fully realized story IMO.
No more than a book is just words on paper - it is definitely a fully realized story, and doesn’t require a play or film performance to “realize” it. Unless you don’t know how to read, of course.

The composition IS the notes on the paper, or the words on the page. The performance and the recording are simply different ways to realize the composition. These are, at least, the legal definitions of the terms…


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
To me, the composition is the idea of the "story" not written yet. It is written when it is performed or recorded, mixed, and mastered.

Maybe this is just the way I see it? Again, I don't think of music as story telling.. maybe that's part of my problem understanding this.

I think the main issue is that we are trying to compare music to books. :D

User avatar
selig
RE Developer
Posts: 11685
Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Location: The NorthWoods, CT, USA

30 Mar 2018

Marco Raaphorst wrote:Compositions cannot contain sound data. BMI or ASCAP doesn't accept this. Material rights do contain the recording/sound data though. But that's the recording of a composition.
Probably stating the obvious - apologies if so!

The US copyright office DOES accept sound recordings for “Musical Compositions”, and has done so for many years. But they still only “copyright” the melody and lyrics. You would need to copyright the “Sound Recording separately.


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
Selig Audio, LLC

User avatar
aeox
Competition Winner
Posts: 3222
Joined: 23 Feb 2017
Location: Oregon

30 Mar 2018

Marco Raaphorst wrote:
30 Mar 2018
Check Aphex Twin. And check people who cover his music. It's all there, the melodies, the harmonies, the rhytm. Aphex is a genius in sound, but it is not part of the composition. You can cover his music on guitar. That's why it is so good. It is all there in the composition, not in the sounds, in the presets.
I've heard amazing pieces that were single drone notes.. all relying on amazing sound design and production skill. Just something to think about :) I'm not trying to say the composition isn't important at all, I agree with you for the most part.

User avatar
selig
RE Developer
Posts: 11685
Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Location: The NorthWoods, CT, USA

30 Mar 2018

aeox wrote:
selig wrote:
30 Mar 2018
No more than a book is just words on paper - it is definitely a fully realized story, and doesn’t require a play or film performance to “realize” it. Unless you don’t know how to read, of course.

The composition IS the notes on the paper, or the words on the page. The performance and the recording are simply different ways to realize the composition. These are, at least, the legal definitions of the terms…


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
To me, the composition is the idea of the "story" not written yet. It is written when it is performed or recorded, mixed, and mastered.

Maybe this is just the way I see it? Again, I don't think of music as story telling.. maybe that's part of my problem understanding this.

I think the main issue is that we are trying to compare music to books. :D
All music is story telling. Design is story telling, painting is story telling, dance is storytelling.

Sometimes the “story” is that nothing changes (ambient sound-scapes, for example). Sometimes the story is simple (starts small, gets big). But it’s the story that we “follow” when we engage emotionally with a piece of art, or information, or design, etc.

Without the story, it’s just random information!


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
Selig Audio, LLC

User avatar
aeox
Competition Winner
Posts: 3222
Joined: 23 Feb 2017
Location: Oregon

30 Mar 2018

selig wrote:
30 Mar 2018
aeox wrote:
To me, the composition is the idea of the "story" not written yet. It is written when it is performed or recorded, mixed, and mastered.

Maybe this is just the way I see it? Again, I don't think of music as story telling.. maybe that's part of my problem understanding this.

I think the main issue is that we are trying to compare music to books. :D
All music is story telling. Design is story telling, painting is story telling, dance is storytelling.

Sometimes the “story” is that nothing changes (ambient sound-scapes, for example). Sometimes the story is simple (starts small, gets big). But it’s the story that we “follow” when we engage emotionally with a piece of art, or information, or design, etc.

Without the story, it’s just random information!


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
Suppose you're right about that. I usually think of a story that is the same for each person experiencing it, but with music it's different. Everyone listens and has their own experience regardless of the creators intent.

User avatar
Marco Raaphorst
Posts: 2504
Joined: 22 Jan 2015
Location: The Hague, The Netherlands
Contact:

30 Mar 2018

selig wrote:
30 Mar 2018
Marco Raaphorst wrote:Compositions cannot contain sound data. BMI or ASCAP doesn't accept this. Material rights do contain the recording/sound data though. But that's the recording of a composition.
Probably stating the obvious - apologies if so!

The US copyright office DOES accept sound recordings for “Musical Compositions”, and has done so for many years. But they still only “copyright” the melody and lyrics. You would need to copyright the “Sound Recording separately.


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
yes, works the same also here in holland. material/master rights and composition rights.

User avatar
Marco Raaphorst
Posts: 2504
Joined: 22 Jan 2015
Location: The Hague, The Netherlands
Contact:

30 Mar 2018

aeox wrote:
30 Mar 2018
Marco Raaphorst wrote:
30 Mar 2018
Check Aphex Twin. And check people who cover his music. It's all there, the melodies, the harmonies, the rhytm. Aphex is a genius in sound, but it is not part of the composition. You can cover his music on guitar. That's why it is so good. It is all there in the composition, not in the sounds, in the presets.
I've heard amazing pieces that were single drone notes.. all relying on amazing sound design and production skill. Just something to think about :) I'm not trying to say the composition isn't important at all, I agree with you for the most part.
Yes, that SOUNDS nice, but it is not a compositon if it's just one note.

I love sound. But I cannot find anything it has to do with composition. It's something else. An actor on a stage needs a dress and that might be a nice dress designed by a designer but it is "just a dress", it is not Shakespeare's story/act.

User avatar
selig
RE Developer
Posts: 11685
Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Location: The NorthWoods, CT, USA

30 Mar 2018

aeox wrote:
30 Mar 2018
selig wrote:
30 Mar 2018


All music is story telling. Design is story telling, painting is story telling, dance is storytelling.

Sometimes the “story” is that nothing changes (ambient sound-scapes, for example). Sometimes the story is simple (starts small, gets big). But it’s the story that we “follow” when we engage emotionally with a piece of art, or information, or design, etc.

Without the story, it’s just random information!


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk
Suppose you're right about that. I usually think of a story that is the same for each person experiencing it, but with music it's different. Everyone listens and has their own experience regardless of the creators intent.
That can actually happen in some written "stories" as well, especially modern/abstract stories, but also ancient stories intended to have a different meaning depending on who is hearing/reading it (which is how they hold up over time, besides the obvious "universal" themes).

Even some more literal stories impact folks in different ways, each taking from it what is relevant to them.

And then there's the time factor - have you ever re-read a book you first read years ago and gotten a different feeling from it? Could be because you're simply older, or maybe you have a deeper understanding of the subject. Most great stories have many layers IMO, some only revealing themselves after multiple passes (like all great art IMO).
Selig Audio, LLC

User avatar
selig
RE Developer
Posts: 11685
Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Location: The NorthWoods, CT, USA

30 Mar 2018

Marco Raaphorst wrote:
30 Mar 2018
aeox wrote:
30 Mar 2018


I've heard amazing pieces that were single drone notes.. all relying on amazing sound design and production skill. Just something to think about :) I'm not trying to say the composition isn't important at all, I agree with you for the most part.
Yes, that SOUNDS nice, but it is not a compositon if it's just one note.

I love sound. But I cannot find anything it has to do with composition. It's something else. An actor on a stage needs a dress and that might be a nice dress designed by a designer but it is "just a dress", it is not Shakespeare's story/act.
I guess you could also say a stage play with only one repeated word (or no words at all) would be similar. I'm a fan and student of all forms of music, from pure traditional to noise pieces, including experimental music from Stockhausen and Cage etc.

It's all "music" to me, but not all of it is strictly composed. Some of it is "realized" (a term used for early electronic music), some is "found". It's like saying that splattering paint on a canvas is not "art", that there has to be a strict "composition" in the traditional sense.

While I may not totally relate to all forms, I appreciate them. It's not like I sit around listening to experimental music, but I DO listen to extreme ambient and drone music (and have made my own for years as well as performed it in live settings). I'm weird like that, having studied classic electronic music in college and written for Warner Chappel - Nashville isn't just country music, after all!
Selig Audio, LLC

User avatar
aeox
Competition Winner
Posts: 3222
Joined: 23 Feb 2017
Location: Oregon

30 Mar 2018

selig wrote:
30 Mar 2018
aeox wrote:
30 Mar 2018


Suppose you're right about that. I usually think of a story that is the same for each person experiencing it, but with music it's different. Everyone listens and has their own experience regardless of the creators intent.
That can actually happen in some written "stories" as well, especially modern/abstract stories, but also ancient stories intended to have a different meaning depending on who is hearing/reading it (which is how they hold up over time, besides the obvious "universal" themes).

Even some more literal stories impact folks in different ways, each taking from it what is relevant to them.

And then there's the time factor - have you ever re-read a book you first read years ago and gotten a different feeling from it? Could be because you're simply older, or maybe you have a deeper understanding of the subject. Most great stories have many layers IMO, some only revealing themselves after multiple passes (like all great art IMO).
What you're saying makes a lot of sense.
To be honest, I have not read many books in my life. Not for over 10 years at least, in high school. Though, I've felt this way about films!

You've given me some good things to contemplate and opened my mind a little bit more on the subject.

This is why I like the Reasontalk forums :D

avasopht
Competition Winner
Posts: 3932
Joined: 16 Jan 2015

30 Mar 2018

I think it's difficult to judge what one does not perceive.

There is no less value in composing by modulation or sound design. Those imperceptive or less perceptive to its impact may be quick to dismiss its artistry.

I've been to those experimental performances with unpitched violin arrangements, conceptual pieces and symbolic poetry.

I think everyone gets the concept that compositions that are based on the melodic, harmonic and orchestrated compositions are just as valuable played with Sound Blaster MIDI sounds. Nobody is doubting that.

But there is also way of composing by timbre, tone and texture. It can become cliché or a genre signature of overused, but is no less of a good composition, it's just a composition heavily invested in the arrangement of effects.

There are for sure poorly composed songs dressed up with effects, but that is not to say that a song heavily dependent on its effects is a weak or less sophisticated composition.

User avatar
aeox
Competition Winner
Posts: 3222
Joined: 23 Feb 2017
Location: Oregon

30 Mar 2018

avasopht wrote:
30 Mar 2018
I think it's difficult to judge what one does not perceive.

There is no less value in composing by modulation or sound design. Those imperceptive or less perceptive to its impact may be quick to dismiss its artistry.

I've been to those experimental performances with unpitched violin arrangements, conceptual pieces and symbolic poetry.

I think everyone gets the concept that compositions that are based on the melodic, harmonic and orchestrated compositions are just as valuable played with Sound Blaster MIDI sounds. Nobody is doubting that.

But there is also way of composing by timbre, tone and texture. It can become cliché or a genre signature of overused, but is no less of a good composition, it's just a composition heavily invested in the arrangement of effects.

There are for sure poorly composed songs dressed up with effects, but that is not to say that a song heavily dependent on its effects is a weak or less sophisticated composition.
Well put!

User avatar
Marco Raaphorst
Posts: 2504
Joined: 22 Jan 2015
Location: The Hague, The Netherlands
Contact:

31 Mar 2018

avasopht wrote:
30 Mar 2018
I think it's difficult to judge what one does not perceive.

There is no less value in composing by modulation or sound design. Those imperceptive or less perceptive to its impact may be quick to dismiss its artistry.

I've been to those experimental performances with unpitched violin arrangements, conceptual pieces and symbolic poetry.

I think everyone gets the concept that compositions that are based on the melodic, harmonic and orchestrated compositions are just as valuable played with Sound Blaster MIDI sounds. Nobody is doubting that.

But there is also way of composing by timbre, tone and texture. It can become cliché or a genre signature of overused, but is no less of a good composition, it's just a composition heavily invested in the arrangement of effects.

There are for sure poorly composed songs dressed up with effects, but that is not to say that a song heavily dependent on its effects is a weak or less sophisticated composition.
But why not use the words sound, sound designer and arranging? These words are important for ages. Classic music is also fully aware of sounds (even tuning!). That's why there's still discussion on Stradivarius violins. It's the same discussion modern musicians discussing the "real" 808 kick drum sound.

Applying the right patches cannot save a composition imo. Like a Stradivarius won't say badly composed melody lines or a perfect Strat make a weak blues song great.

I guess the old terms are still okay. You have composition, sound and arrangement. Nothing wrong with it.

I can understand that some people say that patches are composed. Weird thing is, patches are often seen as cheating. And so the discussion continues... :)

In the end I must say: it is all good, these are just words. Call it what you like. Might be confusing for communication, see the above discussion, but in the end these are still just words.

RobC
Posts: 1833
Joined: 10 Mar 2018

31 Mar 2018

Everyone can have a different opinion. As long as having the opinion itself isn't debated, everything's fine.

My opinion is that everything deserves equal attention. From start to finish.

User avatar
Reasonable man
Posts: 589
Joined: 14 Jul 2016

31 Mar 2018

I guess its why The Beatles were gamechangers and their albums are studied in every music and engineering course under the sun.

User avatar
O1B
Posts: 2037
Joined: 26 Jan 2015

01 Apr 2018

I feel about the Beatles the same was Jimi Hendrix did... meh...
Image
Gamechangers.... how exactly?
Quincy Jones on The Beatles: “They Were No-Playing Motherf**kers”

This conversation has taken its usual existential, less-than-practical turn.

OP asked about target loudness.
-19 or -16 RMS... -1 or -0.0 Peak...? that is the question...

the delimma.... how do you fit everything - including the kitchen sink in there?

any chance of getting back to that....?

Reasonable man wrote:
31 Mar 2018
I guess its why The Beatles were gamechangers and their albums are studied in every music and engineering course under the sun.

RobC
Posts: 1833
Joined: 10 Mar 2018

01 Apr 2018

Hehe, some of my threads spread, though with somewhat relevant inputs.

Well, the suggested maximum peaks are 1 dB below the ceiling, to avoid analog distortion by the time we hear it - so they say about "inter sample peaks" - these need less headroom, it seems; and there's also some data compression peaks after conversion to files like mp3.

As for target loudness. Haha. xD I'll still give making/equalizing my own gray noise a try, normalize an 8 second or so sample from it, maybe control some spikes, add 1 dB headroom, and whatever fits in there, will decide my reference loudness. Everything can be tops that loud which I set with constantly switching between listening to reference gray noise and the given sound.

I hope my project will work and that I can surprise people positively.

User avatar
Marco Raaphorst
Posts: 2504
Joined: 22 Jan 2015
Location: The Hague, The Netherlands
Contact:

01 Apr 2018

RobC wrote:
01 Apr 2018
Hehe, some of my threads spread, though with somewhat relevant inputs.

Well, the suggested maximum peaks are 1 dB below the ceiling, to avoid analog distortion by the time we hear it - so they say about "inter sample peaks" - these need less headroom, it seems; and there's also some data compression peaks after conversion to files like mp3.

As for target loudness. Haha. xD I'll still give making/equalizing my own gray noise a try, normalize an 8 second or so sample from it, maybe control some spikes, add 1 dB headroom, and whatever fits in there, will decide my reference loudness. Everything can be tops that loud which I set with constantly switching between listening to reference gray noise and the given sound.

I hope my project will work and that I can surprise people positively.
so what you're trying to do is get all channels at the same level?

RobC
Posts: 1833
Joined: 10 Mar 2018

01 Apr 2018

It will not exactly happen: See, a perfectly equalized kick drum and a hat, at the same loudness will never sound the same to begin with. Imagine a fat and a skinny person of the same height standing next to each-other.
A kick rather has a click in the higher frequency regions, but the basses will make it appear thicker. It will never ever be death accurate, because ears naturally do some compression, and thus will be more forgiving with transients; therefore that click in the kick drum will very likely much-much louder as I do the leveling and equalization, than the hat's higher frequency levels. There will be differences, no matter what. I'm not even gonna go to how I position sounds in the stereo field. Radical.
You can guess that I work apparently minimalistic, but then again everything will be very worked out and detailed. If you make shorter melodies, you have to make them outstanding, so they remain interesting. You have to make multiple sections in your arrangement, so it will be at least 2 minutes long...
Long story short, if you pay equal attention to everything, you have to be a little bit minimalistic, otherwise you work on a song forever, and get bored in a few days. However, "limiting" yourself, forces you to be creative, and you never-ever get bored. One creative limitation forces another. There's only so much you can put into a loop, so you have to make another loop of your own loop. But there's only so much you can arrange out of that, so you have to mess around a lot with your arrangement, too, to keep it interesting. That won't be enough either, so you have to add interesting master effects and transitions. Tons of tiny, quick works, but in the end, they all add up.
What does this for you? You end up completely unique. And you will master the knowledge of writing lyrics, melodies for the lyrics, performing and recording them, design sounds (synths, drums, sfx) accordingly (from scratch! every single sound!), write fitting melodies and rhythm, make loops of everything you did, pre-master them, then create loops out of the loops, start arranging (including making gaps, stops, anything creative - and juggling around here and there with the whole song), mix (automation, macro dynamics, fadings in-out) add master effects/transitions/filters (including gating effects), and mastering (where with a perfect mix you need to do little to nothing). All with maximum attention, one at a time. A lot of entertaining tiny work, that progresses faster than you think, cause you always know what to do. You don't sit there, frustrated, looking for the perfect samples, presets, etc. Wondering why you're not unique, why problems arise with your mix.

Wanna hear a song like that? Haha, I got none! xD Cause I'm looking for a few bricks, so my "Tetris" knowledge can finally clear up!

Will your music be 100% professional. No, it will be much more. Will you be able to work in all these fields? - Depends on your creativity. If somebody gives you a sound and asks you to remove a "glaring error", and what pops up in your mind is a solution like doing a parallel processing, where you equalize out the problem frequency; frequency limit it; maybe try automated equalization; then mix-match until you get an as transparent solution as possible out of these three, then you have a chance. You learn a core knowledge, then defeat every obstacle.
Will you be able to impress audio geeks and nerds? If you learn the fancy words, yes. If you speak multiple languages, and are bi, or trilingual like me, (I meant bilingual, not something else!!!) and are more interested in what matters the most, the final sound - then you may mix-match definitions, which only you will understand. I accidentally may say things as if "the moon shines brightly during the day and pales the skin nicely" whereas in my head you see the sun tanning somebody's skin. Of course things won't make sense to others like that, so don't expect to make scientific publications. xD Unless you're willing to spend a few days/weeks, clearing terms up in your head. I know 'I' won't, until I fill in the few info I need, so my "picture" (sound, actually), will be complete.

I suspect, I'm hyperactive. I switch topics a lot. I can't sit for too long, making music. I tend to get outside, run/dance around, clap rhythmically, and beat-box at the same time (that's when I can think clearly and focus). xD

P.S. you're nobody until you are a super star with diploma(s), Doctor, Professor, have a lot of money, filthy connections, etc. Kidding, nobody will ever show you real respect who isn't your true fan, true friend, true supporter.

Yes, I'm done! xD (Coffee, Black tea, cola.)

User avatar
Biolumin3sc3nt
Posts: 662
Joined: 16 Jan 2015

02 Apr 2018

RobC wrote:
01 Apr 2018
It will not exactly happen: See, a perfectly equalized kick drum and a hat, at the same loudness will never sound the same to begin with. Imagine a fat and a skinny person of the same height standing next to each-other.
A kick rather has a click in the higher frequency regions, but the basses will make it appear thicker. It will never ever be death accurate, because ears naturally do some compression, and thus will be more forgiving with transients; therefore that click in the kick drum will very likely much-much louder as I do the leveling and equalization, than the hat's higher frequency levels. There will be differences, no matter what. I'm not even gonna go to how I position sounds in the stereo field. Radical.
You can guess that I work apparently minimalistic, but then again everything will be very worked out and detailed. If you make shorter melodies, you have to make them outstanding, so they remain interesting. You have to make multiple sections in your arrangement, so it will be at least 2 minutes long...
Long story short, if you pay equal attention to everything, you have to be a little bit minimalistic, otherwise you work on a song forever, and get bored in a few days. However, "limiting" yourself, forces you to be creative, and you never-ever get bored. One creative limitation forces another. There's only so much you can put into a loop, so you have to make another loop of your own loop. But there's only so much you can arrange out of that, so you have to mess around a lot with your arrangement, too, to keep it interesting. That won't be enough either, so you have to add interesting master effects and transitions. Tons of tiny, quick works, but in the end, they all add up.
What does this for you? You end up completely unique. And you will master the knowledge of writing lyrics, melodies for the lyrics, performing and recording them, design sounds (synths, drums, sfx) accordingly (from scratch! every single sound!), write fitting melodies and rhythm, make loops of everything you did, pre-master them, then create loops out of the loops, start arranging (including making gaps, stops, anything creative - and juggling around here and there with the whole song), mix (automation, macro dynamics, fadings in-out) add master effects/transitions/filters (including gating effects), and mastering (where with a perfect mix you need to do little to nothing). All with maximum attention, one at a time. A lot of entertaining tiny work, that progresses faster than you think, cause you always know what to do. You don't sit there, frustrated, looking for the perfect samples, presets, etc. Wondering why you're not unique, why problems arise with your mix.

Wanna hear a song like that? Haha, I got none! xD Cause I'm looking for a few bricks, so my "Tetris" knowledge can finally clear up!

Will your music be 100% professional. No, it will be much more. Will you be able to work in all these fields? - Depends on your creativity. If somebody gives you a sound and asks you to remove a "glaring error", and what pops up in your mind is a solution like doing a parallel processing, where you equalize out the problem frequency; frequency limit it; maybe try automated equalization; then mix-match until you get an as transparent solution as possible out of these three, then you have a chance. You learn a core knowledge, then defeat every obstacle.
Will you be able to impress audio geeks and nerds? If you learn the fancy words, yes. If you speak multiple languages, and are bi, or trilingual like me, (I meant bilingual, not something else!!!) and are more interested in what matters the most, the final sound - then you may mix-match definitions, which only you will understand. I accidentally may say things as if "the moon shines brightly during the day and pales the skin nicely" whereas in my head you see the sun tanning somebody's skin. Of course things won't make sense to others like that, so don't expect to make scientific publications. xD Unless you're willing to spend a few days/weeks, clearing terms up in your head. I know 'I' won't, until I fill in the few info I need, so my "picture" (sound, actually), will be complete.

I suspect, I'm hyperactive. I switch topics a lot. I can't sit for too long, making music. I tend to get outside, run/dance around, clap rhythmically, and beat-box at the same time (that's when I can think clearly and focus). xD

P.S. you're nobody until you are a super star with diploma(s), Doctor, Professor, have a lot of money, filthy connections, etc. Kidding, nobody will ever show you real respect who isn't your true fan, true friend, true supporter.

Yes, I'm done! xD (Coffee, Black tea, cola.)
TL; DR - I'd be willing to challenge you to a Tetris match, or Chess. Pick Your poison.

User avatar
Biolumin3sc3nt
Posts: 662
Joined: 16 Jan 2015

02 Apr 2018

selig wrote:
29 Mar 2018
Years ago I worked with legendary songwriter Tony Joe White, and while mixing I asked how he wanted it to sound. His answer still sticks with me today. He said he likes it when not everything is in it’s place, when some things stick out too far, and others cause the listener to have to lean in to hear it. To paraphrase, he wants the listener to be engaged, to almost have to work for the experience of getting the whole picture. Amazing educational experience on so many levels!

So if/when you hear a mix that isn’t ‘perfect’, don’t assume it’s lack of skill or accidental. Especially if the soul of the music shines through!
;)


Sent from some crappy device using Tapatalk

Well said Giles! I re- read that again and yeah...

User avatar
Reasonable man
Posts: 589
Joined: 14 Jul 2016

02 Apr 2018

O1B wrote:
01 Apr 2018
I feel about the Beatles the same was Jimi Hendrix did... meh...
Image
Gamechangers.... how exactly?


I can't take you seriously after that question not to mention the overly dramatic nature of your post

Post Reply
  • Information
  • Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests