Pro vs Audiophile Obssession

[xyzzy1]

My standard for all things in life is that 95% of anything in life is crap. Holds true pretty much for anything.

 

Same applies to pro recording engineers. I know several for local bands and the studios they use for recording and also, of course, I am observing the recording industry in general.

 

About 5% of the recording community understands high-end principles of audio recording. This is all about using good recording equipment which bypasses as many board controls as possible, using good quality ADC, mikes, cables. Placing mikes carefully so as to remove the need for mixing board controls. The more useless gizmos on the board (pots, pans, whatever) to reduce the need for good mike placement the worse the sound. Very few recording engineers are purists avoiding useless gizmos as much as possible.

 

Recording for most current music "stars" are as abysmal as their “music”.

[xyzzy1]

Good for you! Monster cable, which has some creds for starting the cable revolution in the late 70's early 80's, turned into crap in the late 80's after being bought out by the usual elite folks who understand nothing except how to drive a good product into the ground while using their name for marketing. Anyone who buys monster cable now knows nothing about sound and is just pursing/victimized by marketing.

[xyzzy1]

Not a fan of Monster cable at all. Mogami or Canare only in my studio. Cabling was the single most expensive cost for me and I've got some pretty hi-end gear. Sad but it does make a difference especially with the usual long runs found in studios.

 

Good for you! Monster cable, which has some creds for starting the cable revolution in the late 70's early 80's, turned into crap in the late 80's after being bought out by the usual elite folks who understand nothing except how to drive a good product into the ground while using their name for marketing. Anyone who buys monster cable now knows nothing about sound and is just pursing/victimized by marketing

[xyzzy1]

Can't speak to recording/mixing, but many of the so-called "Grammy-winning" albums in recent years have some of the worst mastering ever, so the audio quality of the final product is seemingly not important, which may explain your friend's indifference.

 

Agree with you a google percent (no, not search, the number! :-) ).

Grammy's are about creating popularity for the mass music market.

Its not about the quality of the musical performance and certainly not about the sound quality of the recording.

More a vehicle to generate sales for the record companies.

 

Honestly this "Grammy winning engineer" should be fired if anyone acutally cared about sound quality in the mass music market.

[xyzzy1]

....

[xyzzy1]

I find no evidence of slop attitudes or crappola equipment in pro recording studios. I'd agree that plenty of indie artists generate low-fi work because of cost constraints, or straight out desire for a homebrew, DIY aesthetic. Maybe that's what some refer to here. But let's make that distinction.

 

In my experience, spectacular capture has little to do with the brand of cables, etc. -- sometimes it just happens -- often it doesn't.

 

Disagree with you based on my listening to lots of new and old recordings. Doing good recordings is becoming a lost art in the mass market so if you haven't ventured outside mass market recordings of music I could see why you would say you "find no evidence".

 

Most "pro recording studios" (quotes on purpose because being a "pro recording studio" now has nothing to do with creating a good quality recording) recordings lack depth and ambience and are often antisceptic, sbiliant, and strident making them fatiguing to listen to.

 

Good recordings have a lot to do with microphone quality and placement along cables, connections, and the number of useless gizmos on the mixing boards and also the analogue to digital converter in use also will affect the recording

[xyzzy1]

I have read this strange myth about major label engineers not caring about sound here a number of times and am unsure where this comes from. Sure they have deadlines and large volumes of work, so they have to draw the line on perfection somewhere.

 

These companies can hire the cream of the crop, and it is with any specialty where it is highly competitive, if you do not perform well you will be replaced. Add to that the quality of studio equipment they can afford.

 

Check out some of the vids here to gain appreciation for these highly skilled pros that do very much care about sound and making the artist sound as good as possible:

 

https://m.youtube.com/user/MixWithTheMASTERS?

 

Or

 

 

Respect!

 

I go by what recordings actually sound like on my good home audio system (and through my good quality earbuds).

I have to disagree strongly that major labels are hiring the "cream of the crop" because it depends on the definition of "cream of the crop". If "cream of the crop" means "recording engineers" who are marketable and have cozied up to the latest mass market pop artist than its a popularity contest and has nothing to do with their skills when it comes to creating great natural sounding recordings. This is very evident with the horrendous sound of most popular music (flat, congealed, harsh) from the big labels (note the other post that "grammy award" winning albums being horrible recordings).

 

Don't even get me started on "quality of studio equipment". While I'm sure they spend a lot they are usually buying crap for equipment from big name companies that could care less about sound quality. It more of a "look how many dials we have on our board" endeavor. Evident again by what the recordings from major labels actually sound like.

 

Do any of you folks actually listen carefully to recordings and their quality of naturalness to come to your own conclusions and judgements?

[xyzzy1]

I thought Grammy awards best engineered albums too. The sound quality there is pretty good.

 

Best response I can give you is that the grammy's are about "best engineered albums" about as much as they are about best anything else for all their categories. "Best" Album of the year from "taylor swift" as one of the many other forgettable albums candidates? jeez.