NashBackslash
New member
I love how this thread is starting to turn into a piss war.
ah go fuck yourself sweet "25 years" nubs. I hardly think I need to be quizzed by you on basic tape machine operations. What, am I in school here? Is this a pop quiz? I forgot my no. 2 pencil at home. Oh look how he tries to mystify me by using abreviations of commonly known measurements and tape speeds. I feel my mind melting right now. I know I should have paid attention to his fountain of knowledge.. WHY WHY am I so stupid?? You said yourself you don't use digital, and that it is only possible to make a "record" with high end analogue gear... only touching the pro-tools because the tape machine was down. By the way, working with those old systems that you mention don't even resemble in the slightest the workflow, sound quality, or really anything other than that fact it's on a computer the way things are done in modern digital setups. Hell, pro tools is even starting to become the old school in digital now...even with the new pro tools, it's far behind everything else and 10 times the price. If you're so well versed in the world of digital why... 1. do you fall along with the typical analogue guy mindset of "all digital=pro tools".. like the hillarious thing you hear from people who don't have a clue.. "we can pro tools that and fix it in the mix, right?" 2. Do you not understand the differences of working with digital audio in a mix vs analogue tape/console/outboard gear style mixing, and just asume to get the same result on both mediums right from the start. 3. do you have such a moronic, egocentric viewpoint of the way audio is recorded and mixed that you actually think that unless it's recorded on a bloody tape, it's not "truely" great.
You get good results? Wow, you surely must be a victim of multiple personality disorder. This is the same person who basically said that you can't make real records with digital plugins such as "PSP Vintage Warmer", Oh yeah..btw...ever hear of a day off? Oh no, I forgot, your too busy maintaining all your high end analogue gear to have a day off. Ah well, I'll drink a beer for you tonight. You see, when you work efficiently, you tend to discover this wonderful thing called free time, which you can spend on things such as other hobbies, or purely relaxing. It appears from your user photo that you enjoy cross-dressing... imagine how much time you could spent at the drag bar, taking home post-op trannies with this newfound leisure time.
Get off your self appointed high horse oh mighty one. Your gear will not make you good at anything, and will only impress other faggots at the AES cruise. I know, you should all dress in drag and practice inserting your "patch cables" into each other's "patch point"... I wonder..would it more likely be the result of patching an "output" into another "output". Take your oh so impressive studio and shove it right up your ass, as that's no doubt where you form most of your thoughts and ideas anyway (hey, if it's closer to the source...it might make you actually use that expensive gear of yours).
Now that I've had my fun. . .
boingoman..yeah I agree..what my point is, all the gear does REALLY is make it easier and quicker...how much money is that worth. Sometimes it's worth it, sometimes not. I always weigh the cost vs. benefit. The ammount of time that it saves me is often not that much when you count the enormous price tag. When you look at something like an SSL console or something.. how much time or energy will it really save vs. the cost. And really, I'm finding as time progresses that the ammount of effort to get a great result (due to new and better software and plugins) is lessened. There are some people who have this rediculous idea that they have to get whatever is considered the best most expensive shit out there to get great sounding mixes... not true.. I find that the difference between really bottom of the barrel and mid priced gear is huge, but the difference between the middle of the road gear and the ultra high end gear is very small.. The way the high end gear sounds can usually be replicated in fairly convincing ways with enough know how. And, even if it can't... the chances are that you REALLY actually need that Avalon, vs. just love the way it sounds are small. Anyone with real engineering chops can make a multi million dollar studio sound great, and work equally as well in a home studio environment.
SonicAlbert is absolutely correct. I did say a-d tho My way of thinking is that as long as you have it really nice going in, and you can hear properly and accurately what's going on.. you can have a relatively easy time sculpting it into something just as good as an analogue mix...with all of the added, impossible to achieve, digital exclusive, techniques. Hell, if you want the analogue sound for a track you could even at that point send it out to a tape track, or through a console channel.
I love how this thread is starting to turn into a piss war.
Pro Tools is still very much the industry standard, and I imagine it will stay that way for some time.
Just a minor quibble, PT may be the Mix Magazine/Conservatory of Recording Arts and Sciences standard, but no recording industry standards organization has defined PT or any other DAW as a standard
By standard I'm sure he meant that it is the most commonly used, as in a de facto standard.
Just a minor quibble, PT may be the Mix Magazine/Conservatory of Recording Arts and Sciences standard, but no recording industry standards organization has defined PT or any other DAW as a standard
Oh yeah, I think we should change this threads name to,
yep, digital still isn't analog.
sweetnubs said:Yeah I can't give out unreleased material.
sweetnubs said:Hello I back from actually making a record.
Im pretty sure soundblaster or behringer is more commonly used
Here in LA, most if not all recording session dates are recorded to ProTools in commercial studios and sound stages. You just don't see anything else.
then we get into trying to define "pro"
I am sure you guys realize, that most of the "pro's" back in the day wouldnt touch PT or any DAW with a ten foot pole. Closest they would get, was RADAR
If by "pro" you mean someone who makes money in music, then behringer is spanking everyone. I would also hazard a guess that there are 100 times more cubase licences out there than PT, ditto for sonar
Most of the good studios are gone now. So if we narrowly define "pro" to mean ADAT generation guys, or conservatory/full sail created engineers, making money making records that sound so piss poor that anyone with a soundblaster and a week's training could make them, then yes, there are more "pro's" using
PT than anything else. I guess in a commercial sense, you could very honestly and accurately say: Records that SELL are made with PT by the majority, between years xxxx - xxx?
That is very true and I think that was your point
But that double edged razor is in a vinegar pit, in the exact same way we can say: Records that SELL are made by Brittney Spears
does that make her the industry standard?
I'm referring to high end Professional Digital studios (Fox, Paramount, Warner Bros, SB Sound Design, etc.)
So where are the samples?
then we get into trying to define "pro"