My apologies. I thought you were soliciting honest opinions from people who gave this a try, rather than looking for a predetermined answer or affirmation.
Yes, and in a modern hi-end studio, there is no difference. If there was, we would be getting constant warranty calls to "Send some ****er around now to fix this ****ing piece of **** that's ****ing up my mix!"
Ten or fifteen years ago, with analogue tape, it happened all the time. 😉
A couple of years ago I made a recording with microphones out of the window while I was on vacation on the island of Schiermonnikoog, trying to record the sounds of all the birds in the garden. I used two AKG C900 microphones in ORTF set-up, a home-built microphone amplifier and a Strasser HD-S1 DAT recorder.
When I listen to this recording through headphones, I always shake my head when I reach the point where a mosquito approached the mikes. I know it is just a recorded sound, but before I have time to think about it I've already shaken my head to get rid of the mosquito.
When I listen to this recording through headphones, I always shake my head when I reach the point where a mosquito approached the mikes. I know it is just a recorded sound, but before I have time to think about it I've already shaken my head to get rid of the mosquito.
Good god, it was a simple question - why try to make something of it that it isn't - calling it OT is your incorrect interpretation of the question. I was only asking you if it was actually your experience or not - not trying to enter into a philosophical epistemological discussion! So was it your own experience or not?
Pinkmouse, it may be like Wavebourn said - that's why I'm asking if it's your experience:
i.e 10 or 15 years ago, with analogue tape, did audio-engineers engage in "constant warranty calls to "Send some ****er around now to fix this ****ing piece of **** that's ****ing up my mix!" ?
i.e 10 or 15 years ago, with analogue tape, did audio-engineers engage in "constant warranty calls to "Send some ****er around now to fix this ****ing piece of **** that's ****ing up my mix!" ?
Please take it down a notch guys..
Yes, and Wavebourn's point is irrelevant for one simple reason, the room distortions are exactly the same whether listening to live monitoring or the recorded playback.
But you miss the point of Wavebourn's post.
10 or 15 years ago, were audio engineers calling in warranty all the time as you contend "Ten or fifteen years ago, with analogue tape, it happened all the time." ?
10 or 15 years ago, were audio engineers calling in warranty all the time as you contend "Ten or fifteen years ago, with analogue tape, it happened all the time." ?
Hey where is my copy, email me one .......... 🙂
IMO ... Yes ......... !
The cost alone ....🙂
+10
Have I actually done this experiment? In a word - no. 🙂
All I have to do is listen to the recordings of Fine (Mercury), Leyton (RCA) and Wilkinson (Decca) to come to this conclusion. Wilma and Bob Fine used Telefunken mic's whose sensitivity required them to be brought in quite close to the orchestra which, in turn, gave us Mercury's signature sound -- up-front, dynamic, but with little ambiance. Leyton and Wilkinson, on the other hand, used Neumann M50's, whose FR and sensitivity allowed them to be used further away from the orchestra with a resulting change in dynamics and ambiance retrieval. The RCA's and the Deccas sound more alike than different, although I prefer Decca.
Both types of mic's were omni, and the rest of the recording chains were very similar.... with miles and miles of wire in the form of input and output transformers littering every piece of equipment.
All of this is oversimplified, but, for the most part, true. It was the microphones, and their placement, that determined and dominated the signature sounds of the different labels - not the electronics.
That's my story and I'm sticking with it. 😛 If somebody wants to show me similar observations, where the microphones were identical and the electronics can be pointed to as causing great differences in sound -- I'm all ears.
Interesting and good point ... Prefer the Mercury recordings , but splitting hairs.. 🙂
Wow , which label John .. ?
+10
@a.wayne, if you re-read Wavebourn's post he didn't say "room distortions" (as Pinkmouse incorrectly stated) he said "control room distortions" - a completely different animal.
Hello,
I believe pink mouse was referring to "control room" distortion , i guess he
will clarify .......
I believe pink mouse was referring to "control room" distortion , i guess he
will clarify .......
The recording was made at the Brevard Music Center during a special 4th of July concert. Modern reproductions of cannon from the "recent unpleasantness" were used. We never released it for we knew the CD mastering engineer would compress it. If not we would face lawsuits for blown woofers! Some recordings using the same equipment (Schoeps 301 stereo mic, Studer 169-modified by Harrison Systems, and Sony F1) were broadcast on "Audiophile Audition". There was a Russian Easter Overture that I was especially pleased with. The same system was used to broadcast a Hadyn-Stravinsky festival with the Chamber Music Society of Lincoln Center featuring Bernstein and Tilson-Thomas. Never released on cd due to copywrite wrangling.
I would signed the release for a copy ......... 🙂
C'mon John this is torture .......🙄................ 🙂
Why not? What was perfect for audio engineers could be unacceptable for their customers. For example, one fellow audiongineer told the story when some educated band come and asked, "Man, make our real record as is, we need no that #$%^ing compression and EQ"!
He did as asked, but the next day he come back with his CD and CD of the other band yelling, "We want to sound loud like this band!"
- Status
- Not open for further replies.