It is currently Sat Aug 19, 2017 9:14 pm



Reply to topic  [ 23 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next
Dont go to "PrivateAudioSchool" Summary and References 
Author Message
AT Regular
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2011 10:05 am
Posts: 336
Location: Hobart
Ok after my other post was shut down (not continuing previous thread) I will continue and as I promised give references and resources to back up my claims just as any good academic does.  This is in response to the fact I might have gone off topic, these are the threads of my arguments that I was posting in the previous topic and as you can see once I put it into a linear argument it all links up.  I think, therefore I am I think!!!

 

First to my assertion about private audio schools and that they are indeed a waste of money:

http://melbournemaniac.livejou.....53557.html this forum is full of people who have attended JMC and most are disparaging if not down right angry.  Also the “Just Making Cash” Slogan pops up as does George sprouting the same brochure stuff as he does on this forum.

 

Then there is this forum, http://www.inthemix.com.au/for.....p?t=256489 once again people are very disparaging toward JMC, SAE and there is even a couple of pot shots at AIM.

 

This forum is quite interesting as well, what I did see was one guy suggesting that the Australian music industry is only 1% of a global market.  http://forums.whirlpool.net.au.....ive/709044 also scurvy has an interesting comment.

 

Finally if you are not convinced by popular opinion try these two out, one of them works for the BBC in London and he is damming in his assessment of these  private audio schools. http://inchbrakie.tripod.com/a...../id13.html

 

Ok not much new ground could be the argument thrown at my assertions but it is one that I will happily wear because the evidence I believe is overwhelming.  That is going to “private audio school” gives you a worthless piece of paper, they are an expensive way of keeping mum or centerlink off your back and that the industry has no respect for graduates coming out of these courses.

 

Ok for my next assertion that the music industry is on its knees, http://www.themusicnetwork.com.....oly-grail/ this article is very interesting it suggests that the music industry keeps on shrinking in terms of profit.  What is most interesting is Australia’s music industry was the only one in the world that actually had growth but if the guy on the above forum is right and Australia’s music industry only accounts for one per cent of the total music economy of the world it is perhaps cold comfort.  Also some of you may spy that record sales digital and cd’s accounted for 16.9 billion worldwide wow I can hear some of you say I want me a piece of that pie.  The only problem with this is once the trickle down effect is applied very few people at the grass roots level see this money.

 

Ok not enough to convince you how is this,http://finance.ninemsn.com.au/.....-label-emi so a bank has now taken control of the biggest single record company.  This record company who owns the recording copyrights of three of the biggest acts in music history namely The Beatles, Pink Floyd and Queen then there is ColdPlay and Lilly Allan and all because of falling record sales.  Also look at what is happening over at Warner records.  http://www.waynerosso.com/2011.....d-company/

 

Sounds pretty ominous ok still not enough how’s this falling concert ticket revenues means cheaper seats for you and me but still it shows a worrying trend of consumers devaluing the musical commodity, why? possibly people have had enough of the greed. http://www.billboard.biz/bbbiz.....7184.story

 

How about this it now takes only 71,000 dollars to buy a number one album in Australia or 3600 actual physical sales.  Doesn’t leave much room to actually record an album over a longer period of time because the profit is not there,

http://www.pedestrian.tv/music.....402.htm.  Did anybody mention it took over 6 months to record Sgt Pepper wow today you be lucky to have anytime just to record the song Sgt Pepper let alone the months it took to record Strawberry Fields.

 

Ok I have been looking for facts and figures, the live industry in this country is alive and well or so we are told and on the facts and figures of it at over a billion dollars it sounds like one of those “can I have a piece of that pie” http://www.themusicnetwork.com.....ket-sales/ but once we read down the list small acts and live music at pubs doesn’t even rate a mention but who dominates that list, Pink and Brittany.

 

So on the evidence its not looking good, our 40,000 education is worthless, our art is devaluing daily perhaps because of a few peoples greed and we have less and less places to practice and perform our art this is backed up by this article by an academic researching the idea of the “live music scene”  in Australia.  http://www.fbe.unsw.edu.au/cf/.....%20Amy.pdf  In it he suggests that live music scene in this country (this is my interpretation) is small, parochial and disorganised.  It is also as I have suggested under threat by urban planning, inner city residents and poker machines.

 

Ok once again nothing new but I think it is enough evidence to suggest it is time for a serious discussion into the music industry before it is too late.

 

Ok on to the future paradigm and my assertions that it’s mid pieced equipment all the way.  First my assertion that plug-ins can emulate and be as good as the real thing and in turn make up for the limp sound of digital.  Well according to Paul Frindle you can and I like his credtials. http://www.gearslutz.com/board.....-myth.html and as I have already said by just placing the UAD Pulteq over the program audio the depth of that audio changes “it gets warmer” also I use a tape sim plug-in effect on the kick, snare and the toms.  This too changes the program audio. 

 

What this is suggesting to me is that we have to employ a new way thinking with digital audio and it is one suggested by Stav as well.   In AT issue 13 pg68 Stav detailed the differences of recording to digital and to tape and it is one that I believe has not been fully understood (this article suggests that digital gives a clearer picture but at the cost of having to record at higher level to enjoy the full benefits).   

 

This is pretty radical stuff and stuff that I believe has not been fully explored, here is an article from soundonsound.

 

This brings me neatly on to the subject of headroom. In the good old days of hand-crafted studio furniture and analogue audio, we used to work with a fairly generous amount of headroom above the nominal system alignment level (typically +4dBu or 0VU), and the provision of headroom has been taken so completely for granted that none of our standardised analogue metering systems even bother to show it! Possibly because of this, few younger sound recording engineers seem to be aware of the provision of headroom, let alone why it is there.

Typically, if the reference level of an analogue desk or recorder's metering is calibrated to +4dBu, say, the system can cope quite happily with transient peaks well above that. Commonly, 18dB of headroom is provided in the majority of professional systems, which means they can accommodate peak levels of +22dBu or more before clipping or suffering excessive distortion.

So for much of the time the average signal levels would probably be between 12 and 20dB below the system's true clipping point — which is something we've never been concerned about in the analogue world (not least, I suspect, because the traditional analogue meters don't show us how much headroom we aren't using!).

Even with such an apparently generous amount of headroom, the average level is still at least 90dB above the console's noise floor, and we rarely have to worry about poor signal-to-noise ratios. The total dynamic range available in an analogue console is around 115dB — the difference between the noise floor at -90dBu or so, and clipping at around +22dBu. OK, analogue tape recorders would struggle to match that, but with modern noise-reduction systems it is possible to achieve a dynamic range of 90dB or more without too much trouble.

Guess what? The best of the early 16-bit systems matched the dynamic range of analogue tape a long time ago, and modern 24-bit digital systems generally exceed the dynamic range of even the best analogue consoles. Even budget converters now routinely achieve a dynamic range of 112dB or more, and easily match good-quality analogue systems in that regard.

So, given that 24-bit digital systems enjoy a similar dynamic range to good analogue systems, we can (and, I would argue, should) adopt the same kind of working levels and headroom margins. These practices were developed for good engineering and operationally pragmatic reasons, and those same arguments still apply — which makes me wonder why so many people still insist on peaking original digital recordings to within a gnat's whisker of 0dBFS. I'm not talking about mastering to 0dBFS (an entirely separate discussion) but making original, live recordings in the studio or on location.

Perhaps the widespread misunderstandings of how sampling, quantisation and dithering works, combined with some very specific (but now seriously outdated) working practices associated with early 16-bit digital systems, have led many people into thinking headroom is a bad thing, and that signal levels should be peaked as close to 0dBFS as possible. In fact, quite the reverse is true. A lack of headroom is a very bad thing as far as recording and mixing is concerned: it makes recording fraught with worry about accidental clipping, and mixing a nightmare of poor gain structure and non-optimal signal processing.

By adopting similar gain structuring and signal levels to traditional analogue techniques, working with digital equipment becomes just as easy, and, to my ears, sounds at least as good and probably better. If you routinely allow something like 12dB of headroom above normal signal peaks, you won't have to worry about accidental overloads on brief transients.

Equally, you won't have to worry about poor signal-to-noise ratios (or 'lost resolution') because the lovely smooth dithered noise floor is still something like 100dB below your peaks and probably 70dB or more below even the pianissimo parts. In 99 percent of cases the digital system's noise floor isn't the limitation anyway; the ambient noise floor of your recording room will be considerably higher.

Furthermore, when you come to mix a hard drive full of tracks with average levels of around -20dBFS, they will sum to something under 0dBFS. You won't have to pull down the master fader to remove the output converter overloads, and the plug-ins won't have to calculate values in excess of 0dBFS. The result will often be a smoother, more analogue-like sound, and there will also be a lot less operational hassle.

http://www.soundonsound.com/so.....laudio.htm, the above article explores Stavs word in a little more detail and even goes on to suggest just as I have done that even budget converters have a dynamic range of 112 db or and match good quality analogue systems.

Once again pretty radical stuff, to me it’s all pointing to “we have got this digital thing wrong” and it seams that audio schools are not keeping up with this new paradigm.  They are still telling us outdated information, why because most of the audio engineers are still stuck analogue land or have been trained in analogue land.  Hell even Stav is saying we have to look at this digital thing differently.

 

Not enough how about this, http://www.soundonsound.com/so.....lmyths.htm  this article suggests that all our pre conceived notions of bad digital came about because when the technology first appeared it did indeed have inherent problems but hell digital first appeared in the 1930’s as telephone technology and the first digital recorders didn’t appear for another 40 odd years.

 

What this parallels is analogue tape recorders and how it took Bing and Les Paul quite a number of years to perfect multi track recording and of course build that technology.  Once that technology become more stable and once people figured out how to actually get the benefits form these new systems 20 odd years had passed and it was now 1966.  I think you see what I am saying.  Just as in analogue days the technology had to catch up with the dreams, analogue in its early days had as many inherent problems as digital does in its early days.  By all accounts and if we believe the two above articles then digital has arrived and sorry Greg’s assertion that there is a difference between 5000 dollar “boutique” converters and my MOTU converters is starting to look a little flimsy.

 

Ok not enough here is the black lion site http://www.blacklionaudio.com/.....t.php?p=10 that suggests all the mid priced audio interfaces use the same brand of converter chips.  Ok as Greg has said not the same chip but as I have said the same brand.  Here is the converter chips website http://www.asahi-kasei.co.jp/a.....audio.html so now we can actually see what is going into our machines.

 

The final point that needs to be made about converters is that if the same company is making most of our converters on our mid priced equipment and if the Sound on Sound articles are correct then in the “right hands” mid priced digital converters will do the job.

 

Ok on to the next assertion that is mid priced equipment if used properly will once again do the job.  According to Rick O’Neil issue 44 pg 114 even your cheap microphone preamp has an optimum operating level and if used correctly will give good results. 

 

Ok so perhaps not audiophile quality but this audiophile quality flies in the face of the argument because everyone complains about how clean digital sounds.  What I am suggesting if we add a bit of dirt somewhere in the chain it can in fact enhance the recording by making it feel a little more real.  What I am also suggesting is Low-Fi digital is the future. 

 

Ok once again not for everything acoustic music, classical, jazz all needs an audiophiles perspective but for those of us who operate out of their home digital recording has indeed arrived and this notion of quality no longer exsists.  It’s just up to the bedroom engineer or producer to enhance their knowledge so as to make this equipment operate in the words of Rick O’Neil at “Acoustic Critical Mass” ok he made that term up but the principles that he suggesting in this article are solid and what I have based my argument on.

 

Next I also suggested that the future was indeed hybridisation and that we had to start looking at the DAW, computer and interface as an ecosystem.  Here is where I got that idea from http://blog.audiojungle.net/re.....kstations/.

 

Here is a link also to the digital orchestra, http://www.paulhenrysmith.com/.....orchestra/

 

Once again pretty radical stuff but it suggests to me that the future is indeed the one that I have been suggesting.  One where we are no longer tied to the antiquated ideas of needing to go into a recording studio to produce our art and this is at all levels from classical through to rock and roll.

 

Ok on to my final assertion that JMC is affiliated with Yamaha, http://www.jmcacademy.edu.au/a.....g%2007.pdf it says it all doesn’t it now it does not mean that any other private audio school has the same kind of sponsorship deals but it would a pretty naïve person to suggest that they didn’t.

 

Ok if I have missed anything let me know and I will look into it.


_________________
"In search of the lost digital chord"
"Opinions are like arseholes, everyone has one-so exercise yours"
Ben BCT (Bachelor of Creative Technology, JMC Academy) MMusTech (Master of Music Technology, The University of Newcastle)
http://www.aaudiomystiks.com


Tue Apr 26, 2011 8:18 am
Profile
AT Regular
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2010 7:36 pm
Posts: 496
Location: Sydney
Here's a man with a bee in his bonnet!

I meet a lot of young people with stars in their eyes, sometimes they ask advice and sometimes I give them a few home truths anyway..........some of it about audio schools.

I won't go into that advice here as it varies from person to person.



That said, I wish there was something like these when I had stars in my eyes....even just a basic course.

Mind you, those were the days before digital everything.

I recall going into a music shop when I was about 14/15 and a salesman telling me I had to have a compressor to get a killer lead sound. He didn't say why. (I think he just heard that other people were using them)

So he sets up a demo .............neither of us could get a killer lead sound out of this thing through a Roland amp, except a bit more sustain was forthcoming.

Really, I could get more by turning my valve amp up more, and yes, I later learnt about how valves have a natural compression when pushed........and a lot more.

My point is, this was before the interweb and no one put this Ship in books back then!

(maybe there were some technical manuals etc about..........but how uncool were they!)



I think these schools fulfill a genuine need and as we know, nothing is perfect in this world.

It's up to us to make the best of it.


Tue Apr 26, 2011 10:26 am
Profile
AT Regular
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2011 10:05 am
Posts: 336
Location: Hobart
Maybe I have a bee in my bonet but I am just prestenting facts as I am an academic (ok maybe I have given myself that title) this is what is expected of me. 

 

Also this was to clear up any confusion from the previous topic where some people suggested I was mad.  As I said perhaps but as you can see I can back up my assertions with research and references.

 

Yes you are right audio schools can be an important part of a whole education when it comes to this topic but BUT not "private audio schools".

 

Oh yea I did forget one thing RMIT is not a private uni but they do run a private boys club.  Proof you may ask, I have!!! One Julie Abale who went to RMIT whilst I was there wrote a letter a detailing the mistreatment at the hands of Norris and in particular one Paul Thommas.  If need be I can scan this letter and post it, hell if I need to I can even get her to post in this forum.  She has gone on to succsefully complete the equilivent in her home country of France.

_________________
"In search of the lost digital chord"
"Opinions are like arseholes, everyone has one-so exercise yours"
Ben BCT (Bachelor of Creative Technology, JMC Academy) MMusTech (Master of Music Technology, The University of Newcastle)
http://www.aaudiomystiks.com


Tue Apr 26, 2011 10:55 am
Profile
AT Regular

Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 1:45 pm
Posts: 182
I think you can achieve a lot at home on hard disk recording system if you have an inquisitive mind and you are handy with the iron….  I mean the soldering iron. Honestly whatever genre you record, it is possible to yield great results at home, armed with a little knowledge, a good ear and a knack for troubleshooting and improvisation. I understand what the Dr. is trying to communicate. In simple terms he is saying that the gear available to the general public at prices that everyone can afford is at a level now where anyone can buy a computer and a mic, team it up with a sound card that has mic pre's built in and a DAW and can have a system that is capable of producing commercial quality tracks. Digital is capable of good results, we all know this. Private audio schools are expensive, we know this too.



We get it dude. If someone wants to go to SAE let em, who cares.

_________________
I like your old stuff better than your new stuff.


Tue Apr 26, 2011 11:09 am
Profile
AT Regular

Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2011 9:48 am
Posts: 22
You might enjoy this, Dr Hash:

http://www.fast-and-wide.com/b.....d-producer


Sun May 01, 2011 6:11 am
Profile
AT Regular
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2011 10:05 am
Posts: 336
Location: Hobart
simmosonic said:

You might enjoy this, Dr Hash:

http://www.fast-and-wide.com/b.....d-producer




Hey Greg thanks for that, does this mean I haven't turned the whole audio community against me and some actually got the argument that I was putting forward.

 

The I-Pad, all of its associated products and imitators are the thin edge of the wedge.  Ok I understand that the revolution that I am harping on about has contributed to this problem but Apple are the real problem and always have been.

 

From the ubiquitous I-Pod, I-Tunes and now the I-Pad; to the destruction of Logic when it was a windows/mac program (Yea I am still smarting over that one!) it is plain to see that Apple have been planning a monopoly for some time.  It is certainly no coincidence that Apple seam to be the only company that are making money from the music industry (distribution) opps sorry and “private audio schools”.

 

It is only going to get worse, here look at this and the guy who is designing it http://www.musicresearch.com/b.....ital-audio automatic mixing, I bet we are going to see an I-Crap application soon.

 

I suppose my argument seems to be a bit contradictory on the one hand I am championing the revolution on the other I am saying we need some caution and this will allow us to look at the revolution with more mature eyes. 

 

The biggest problem with that though is time is running out and the new generation of producers/engineers and songwriters are being infected with these new "toys" that if you believe the hype make you the next Beatles or whatever.

 

I suppose this is where my attack on "private audio schools" came from they are not positioning us for this future, or to be more fair when I was last at school, all though as you can see my point about these schools being a bad thing still stands.  That’s if you have read the links on the OP.

 

We need to stop thinking about things the way they were, ok we need to understand the techniques that came before digital and I for one am trying to do this but sitting in the studio to make music is dead.  We need to teach the old techniques in a new way and we need to put a rocket up this generation as they seem to have no respect to what has come before. 

 

History is our friend and will get us through the dark day's to come.

_________________
"In search of the lost digital chord"
"Opinions are like arseholes, everyone has one-so exercise yours"
Ben BCT (Bachelor of Creative Technology, JMC Academy) MMusTech (Master of Music Technology, The University of Newcastle)
http://www.aaudiomystiks.com


Sun May 01, 2011 8:33 am
Profile
AT Regular
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2011 10:05 am
Posts: 336
Location: Hobart
P.S the article that Greg has provided a link to does not in anyway devalue my argument about digital and that mid priced consumer audio interfaces/microphones and preamps will give you extrodinary results.  Yes the "black box/audio interface" has caused the revolution and in turn cause some of the problem that now exsists in the music industry but the links I have provided do demonstarte that today's little "black boxes" are so much better than yesterday year anybody remember the US-428 by Tascam.

 

But this new revolution, the one of recording and making music on I-Pads and phones is indeed the thin edge of the sword/wedge and it is one we must fight.

 

"We shall fight them on the beaches" "This shall be the finest hour" Democracy is the worst form of goverment but all the rest have been tried.  Winston Chrchill

_________________
"In search of the lost digital chord"
"Opinions are like arseholes, everyone has one-so exercise yours"
Ben BCT (Bachelor of Creative Technology, JMC Academy) MMusTech (Master of Music Technology, The University of Newcastle)
http://www.aaudiomystiks.com


Sun May 01, 2011 10:06 am
Profile
AT Regular
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2010 7:36 pm
Posts: 496
Location: Sydney
History shows us that generational change is pretty much the same.

I think young people have always annoyed older people forever.


Sun May 01, 2011 10:06 am
Profile
AT Regular
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2011 10:05 am
Posts: 336
Location: Hobart
LogicprObe said:

History shows us that generational change is pretty much the same.

I think young people have always annoyed older people forever.




I am not old in fact I am only 35, I have always been angry at my generation, my mothers generation and this generation.  They are selling us down the river!!!!

 

Perhaps this is the way and the fate of the world and our art that is to loose our integrity.

 

Look art is about progression, this is true if you are a musician or a dancer or a painter or whatever we define as art but where is the progression in music today, Christ how can you call Lady Who Ha or Justin Beiber or for that matter Angus and Julia Stone, Meagan Washington and Katie-Millar Hidike progression. 

 

The last great musical progression (my opinion) was Nirvana and even I have trouble calling it a progression for the fact it is just so called punk music wrapped up in another name.

 

Ok so I am not old and I do have my finger on the pulse, perhaps I have a warped opinion on what is great art but I like what Robert Fripp thought as quoted from the book Robert Fripp From King Crimson to Guitar Craft.  "He thought of mass culture as when the music is awful and everybody goes "Yea!" and of popular culture as when the music is great and everybody goes "Yea!" again.

 

So today we have a mass culture where artistic good taste is thrown out the window but we all go yea.  Fripp believed that popular culture (music) could be a first order meta language and divided the idea of popular culture and mass culture and how we interact as artists with these two ideas into 3 distinct categories:

 

On the third level, Artistic research and development, where the artist has no chance of making any money but does it for the love.

On the second level (where most of the music is today) Gainful employment as a working professional musician, a certain level commercial success but very little impact on mass culture, "you won't change the world"

On the first level exposure at the level of the mass media, with all its risks and rewards, for all that it is worth you become a mythical figure in contemporary consciousness.

 

So what does this have to do with generational change a lot, because the music technology and the attitude of people working in the business plus with the whole idea of social networking driving music sales and the like we are left with artists stuck on the 3rd and 2nd level and not a lot getting through to the first level.  On the other hand we are getting a lot of performers and entertainers getting through to the first level.

 

This is diluting the industry and devaluing our musical commodity, without more artist getting through to the first level as we did in the 60's and 70's we start to move away from popular culture to mass culture or one rather than being dominated by the Lennon's, Beatles, Syd Barret and Pink Floyd's hell even Kurt Cobain, we are left with an industry that (what there is left of it) is dominated by Lady Who Ha and Justin Beiber. 

 

I know what I want, how about you?  

_________________
"In search of the lost digital chord"
"Opinions are like arseholes, everyone has one-so exercise yours"
Ben BCT (Bachelor of Creative Technology, JMC Academy) MMusTech (Master of Music Technology, The University of Newcastle)
http://www.aaudiomystiks.com


Sun May 01, 2011 11:26 am
Profile
AT Regular
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2010 7:36 pm
Posts: 496
Location: Sydney
I thought we all did it for love.



Some of us (not me) are lucky enough to make enough to survive and keep doing it on a pro level and a few might make a real quid.


Sun May 01, 2011 12:04 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 23 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
© Copyright Alchemedia Publishing 2012.