For every mix engineer who understands technology and human auditory processes and makes equipment choices based on that there are many more who are 'monkey see monkey want'. I suspect 90% of people who bought NS-10 bought them because someone famous used them or they saw them in a magazine and they figured that having the same nearfields as someone famous would suddenly make their music better. Not all mix engineers are mix monkeys, but many are. They are the audiophools of the sound creation arena, chasing fads and follys rather than using their brains.
I view the NS-10 as a musical instrument not a critical tool, esp when placed on their side. But that is my opinion, not fact.
Another opinion is that film sound production actually is of far higher quality than popular music. I hope I am wrong in this particular opinion
Oh hell yes! Those big 16 RPM records! I fixed a couple of those players, back in the day as a wet-eared teenager. Would've hated the music back then, but it doesn't sound bad at all right now! Thanks for the memories (and the link, hee!).
- Jim
I fully realize this *could* be a major issue, but do you have any evidence that major DAW software and plugins commonly used for mixing runs into these problems?
Yup, that was the method of Seeburg and, I think, several other companies. I mostly worked on the audio sections, doing things like replacing shorted output tubes (and screen grid resistors) on equipment that had been running 24/7 for decades.
- Jim
[EDIT] Still listening to Pano's link, 30 minutes on! Gotta love that original pre-Leslie, dry-martini Hammond organ sound! Shaken, not stirred...
Last edited:
Tnx, I agree that this often seems to be the case. If you are looking for well recorded voice, many TV-commercials are way better than the TV-programs they intersperse.
There are some "bit crusher" and arbitrary transfer function distortion plugins that could possibly do it. The professional plugin programmers know what they are doing, but there are a lot of people writing plugins and some of them are experimenters who don't know much about DSP.
Which lends us to believe that it should be relatively UNcommon in most produced music, no?
You are much more optimistic about professional programmers than I am--my roommate is one and, while I trust he'd be diligent in such an application (this is far away from his forte), the field is filled with sloppiness. But that's a bigger discussion about software development and production cycles than violating Nyquist-Shannon.
Killing Joke was great, but when I think of dissonance, I tend to think of this guy:
Charles Ives: Three Quarter-Tone Pieces [1/3]
(For some reason, I can only appreciate Ives during the cold winter months here.)
- Jim
Charles Ives: Three Quarter-Tone Pieces [1/3]
(For some reason, I can only appreciate Ives during the cold winter months here.)
- Jim
If you have the same hearing deficiencies the mixing engineer/producer has. If you don't have that useful 3 KHz dip in your hearing it can be pretty unpleasant.
My understanding is that some early CD player reconstruction filters couldn't handle intersample overs very gracefully. Supposedly, it's no longer a problem. At the same time there are now free and payware VU meter plugins with their own reconstruction filters that can detect intersample overs, for those who care to have that information. Intentional digital clipping is used on a lot of modern recordings now, which makes inadvertent intersample overs seem fairly mild by comparison.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.