
flatfinger
Use every dam bit!
hey flatfinger, you gonna Bogart that big honkin' spliff?![]()
. Man, what a wild post!
(the actual gist of which I agree with, BTW
)
Wait till I post stone cold sober ;

If you haven't got the ear to EQ something manually and not need something like a hairball, how can you possibly have the ear to know if/when you or your software actually does hit the jackpot? And conversely, if you do have the ear to know, then why in God's name would you want to waste your time yanking the one armed bandit of something like hairball?
Chickens and eggs ; which crossed the road first ??
I think allot of laymen can tell when something sounds extraordinary, I mean that's why I kept buying all those steely dan records back when a A four-track mini studio cost so much that I did'nt dream I could afford one . I still knew which records made the hair stand up on the back of my neck. ( as opposed to "hair balling!)
I think it takes a tremendous, way underappreciated amount of time an effort to be trully skilled on the "otherside of the speaker". I'm with you;................ the Idea of a slot machine " sound helper" is ludirus.....Did'nt I point out from the start that it was a weak analogy ??? I saw a gentleman start a thread the other day (elsewhere) asking where he could find more pre-sets for Izotope Ozone !!!!! Even eliminating the module order , the mind still boggles at the infinitesimal chances of all those variables aligning to the source material.
In another thread a member asks if it's strange that he doesn't EQ his guitar tracks. What's strange to me is that that question even needs to be asked. It's only strange to skip EQ if your tracks will benefit from it's use. How else can you answer that question? What nobody wants to ever come out and say is that if you have to ask if a track needs EQ, you shouldn't be doing the mixing
I don't know .... I always felt sorry for the few odd teachers or instructors in the classroom situations I've been who insisted on maintaining the "no question is a stupid question " rule in effect . Inevitably some laggart is going to have you re-explain chapter one concepts whilst your busy lecturing on chapter ten !!
Im kinda hungry, so it's time for another one of my patented (US Patent #12744978) cooking analogies. If you can't tell what tastes "right" and what doesn't, you shouldn't be cooking.
G.
You do have to crack a few eggs before you can make an omelete.
I"m not privy to the sincerity levels of software devs ( nor anyway to verify them ) ; But I do think those dsp geeks mean well . It's up to the individual to survey the scene and try to focus on genuine techniques .
I know that when you were coming up , ( resisting the temptation to make references to the jurassic era!!!! Cause that's me too !!

I have Hugnormus respect for the crumudgeny A.E.'s out there , but I like some of the new technology that's afoot these days too.( poor me ,; I missed out on fooling with tape deck repair and maintenance)
So I guess the newbs ( like me still , cause I know that there's lot's I don't know !!) are going to potentially have allot more distractions and potential blind allies to go up. I guess I'm just expressing MY opinion That HB was'nt the worst thing thats ever happend to me .
I was just trying to avoid the usual trainwreck on the subject of HB and say something positive ; It's not the first dsp thingy I'd be hoping to get my cabbage back on .( let's face it , as you're suggesting , there can be some real doosies out there)
But you are right . Better to concentrate on the tried and true , old school methodology and ignore much of the new fangled toys that are fraught with shiny distractions .(One exception of course for the RTA in WL ,zoomed to occupy the whole 2nd monitor!!!All those pretty colors


Thanks for your web based resources and wisdom sharing activites. Just remember , for newbs and not as newbs like myself , the old adage could never be truer....... You can lead a wannabe A.E. to water ...BUT.............
Cheers
Last edited: