Auto-Mixing...you knew it was coming...

[miroslav]

If someones small studio business is threatened by a $200 computer program, they really shouldn't be calling their studio a business. And if they can't outthink a $200 algorithm, they shouldn't be charging people money for the service. We're not talking about Kasparov vs Deep Blue here. Just let the people live in denial. You are choosing to let that bother you. As far as competition, this is a non-factor for any professional studio, small, medium, or large. It in no way enables a user to render a product competitive against that of a pro engineer.

First off...I'm not bothered by the potential loss of any studio biz....because I am not running a studio biz.
It was just a thought about what these auto-tools will do for the small studio biz.

Also...it's not about "a $200 computer program" itself...it's about thousands of home rec users opting for the program to do what they might have farmed out to a small studio. There are many online small studio service providers that have put up their DBA shingle in the last few years. We have a bunch of them here on HR.

My speculation was/is that if someone simply *thinks* that this program is going to do for them what the small studios guys are doing....they will opt for it.
It's go nothing to do with the small studio guys not being able to out-think $200 algorithm...it's more about the newbs not understanding the value of a using a real studio with people that know what they are doing...but that bit of denial is a tough nut to crack.

I don't care if auto-mixing takes potential business away from the small local home studio. I do care that auto-mixing is dumbing down music production even further than it already is, and it's pretty fucking dumbed down already. I'm not anti technology. I'm anti laziness and ignorance.

Yeah...me too.
The biz angle was just something that came to mind...but for me, it's most definitely about the dumbing down aspect.
I've gotten to the point where I will not bother to help anyone on HR when I see that their main goal is to find a quick, lazy solution to something, and/or when they reject the notion of putting in some time/effort to learn.
They just want you to tell them what button to press...and they don't want to know why.

 

[VomitHatSteve]

it's more about the newbs not understanding the value of a using a real studio with people that know what they are doing...but that bit of denial is a tough nut to crack.

But the end result is all that maters!

And that's why I called it a religious war.
If the concern is quality results, then it's just a matter of time until software surpasses everyone but the real experts. (who will charge appropriately). The same way none of us have tape ops because software made that role mostly irrelevant outside of a few niches, software will eventually approach that "10,000 hours" level of expertise for most every skill. Maybe it's garbage right now, but I can't picture it staying that way.
If the concern is orthodoxy of method (i.e. "doing it right"), then it's religious.

 

[miroslav]

See...that's where I disagree, about software surpassing the expertise of most people.

One simple reason it NEVER will....it's called...subjectivity.
I don't know about other people...but when I write and then track and then mix...etc...the bulk of my decision making has to do with my subjective perspectives. Oh sure, I may also take an analytical look...like..."maybe that 7k peak is adding to the sibilance" ...and adjust it from that analytical/mathematical perspective...but most decisions are driven by the feel, the emotional impact, by how it sounds to me.

Oh...and that's another thing.
Auto-tools hear NOTHING...so how does it know what's best when it's actually heard and listened to in your space, on your monitors...etc?

I just don't get why people often see anything coming from a computer as some sort of "higher, intellectual entity"...that it's always smarter than you and will do a better job than you...?
It's all just presets...programmed responses based on mathematical comparisons and computations. I just don't see that ever being more of an "expert" to judge how a mix should sound.
Sure...some people may have difficulty in manipulating the tools to get the sound they want...but that doesn't mean that a machine is a better judge than you are about the message and feeling an audio mix is supposed to convey.

We are so damn close to just about everything with music becoming a canned product, derived from some set of algorithms.
If people don't see that...well...it's just sad.

 

[Greg_L]

If the concern is orthodoxy of method (i.e. "doing it right"), then it's religious.

Cool then. I follow the religion of recording actual sound with actual microphones and then actually mixing that stuff by making actual human decisions. I find that to be better than being some mindless hack letting a computer program make those decisions for him. And I will fight for and defend my religion just like any other religious nutcase. That's what us religious people do.

 

[miroslav]

Can I get a "Amen".

 

[Greg_L]

Praise-ah da lawd-ah! May we ride the fade-ah of glory all da way to da promise land-ah and banish these hack-ah automix fool suckas to eternal damnation-ah!

 

[VomitHatSteve]

One simple reason it NEVER will....it's called...subjectivity.

That is true. I suppose what I mean more is that technology will eventually surpass most people's ability to mix/master/whatever to a certain pre-determined standard.

i.e. we will one day reach the point where a home PC can record, master, mix, and write (probably in that order) a dance pop song in a matter of minutes that would take a whole team of people days worth of man-hours.

Psychedelic, avant-garde whatever will be a lot harder to replicate due to that subjectivity.

At least until we hit the singularity. Then PCs will do it better because they will actually be human brains but smarter.

Can I get a "Amen".

Praise-ah da lawd-ah! May we ride the fade-ah of glory all da way to da promise land-ah and banish these hack-ah automix fool suckas to eternal damnation-ah!

Ha ha!

 

[RFR]

The producer/ mix engineer Manny Marroquin said; "It's better to do an exciting mix than a perfect mix"

It takes a human being with vision to do that. A computer program can't.

Im sure this automix pgm will get better but all this leads to more and more sterile ' canned' music.

Come on, listen to most modern popular music. Quantized to perfection, all sounds the same. Boring and uninspiring.

Automix will give us more of the same.

Listen to some classical music (which was the 'pop' music of the day) and the listen to any crap on top40 radio, and one can see how far we have fallen

 

[miroslav]

i.e. we will one day reach the point where a home PC can record, master, mix, and write (probably in that order) a dance pop song in a matter of minutes that would take a whole team of people days worth of man-hours.

i think that point was reached years ago....maybe not all by software, but certainly the master cookie cutter has been in use for a long time. I just feel that auto-software will only make that ever worse.

That said...I do think...or at least hope...that people will notice it, and get sick of it. The songwriting all being the same, the sounds used/tracked all pulling from the same "approved" sources, the mixing all done to some mathematical preset standard, and the auto-mastering following predetermined frequency response curves that some algorithm deemed as "most pleasant" to the ear for that genre.

I mean...you do see that don't you?
The more you remove the human element, the subjective contradictions and quirks...while it may become surgically precise in the exact same way every time...it will also sound the same, and become boring to listen to.

 

[einstein magoo]

M=mc2

Where:
M = Mundane
m = musician
c = computer (program)

 

[jkuehlin]

And that's why I called it a religious war.

...If the concern is orthodoxy of method (i.e. "doing it right"), then it's religious.

As I've listened to what Miro has been saying, I think it even goes beyond that for him. Its down to actual ideology...I don't think he cares about the plugins or the hardware or workflow (methodology) or how things have been done for the last 50 yrs (orthodoxy). He seems to care more about the new users to be forced to attain the 'proper' techniques through a conventional method of study. I agree with him to a certain extent. But I disagree with him on 3 points. The first is the assumption that most people will only ever use it as a crutch. The second is the relevance of the first point. I mean...who cares? The third is that this program he equates the crutch to laziness, I equate it to efficiency. Again, respect his opinion but disagree on those three points.

Miro, if I mis-stated any of your premises, feel free to rebuttal.

I'm all for using technology for tasks you don't want spend the time doing, or learning how to do. I don't want to learn how to maintain an SSL or a Neve. So I bought a digital console. I don't want to patch in analog hardware. So I bought a digital console with an automated and recallable patch matrix. I'm to lazy to get out of my chair to to adjust the gain on my rack preamps. So I bought preamps with a remote control, then I assigned the remote controllable gain knobs to knobs closer to my chair.

Do my competitors that spent $200+ on their SSL or API vision consoles get annoyed that clients don't pay the higher price ($80-$120/hr) for their 'superior sounding consoles'? You bet. Do I care? Hell no.

 

[jkuehlin]

i think that point was reached years ago....maybe not all by software, but certainly the master cookie cutter has been in use for a long time. I just feel that auto-software will only make that ever worse.

That said...I do think...or at least hope...that people will notice it, and get sick of it. The songwriting all being the same, the sounds used/tracked all pulling from the same "approved" sources, the mixing all done to some mathematical preset standard, and the auto-mastering following predetermined frequency response curves that some algorithm deemed as "most pleasant" to the ear for that genre.

I mean...you do see that don't you?
The more you remove the human element, the subjective contradictions and quirks...while it may become surgically precise in the exact same way every time...it will also sound the same, and become boring to listen to.

If you remove the human element from the sound design process, the human energy can be spent elsewhere. I have the NI machine. I can recall a stored preset in 3 seconds, that it would take a sound designer hours to create from scratch. Then I can have it randomize a beat pattern that would take a midi programmer hours to create from scratch. If I don't like it, I can hit the randomize button again, and it'll spit out another one. The algorithms that generate random appreciation patterns in U-he zebra, Massive, or Machine are not only adequate, they're sometimes better than what I'd come up with on my own. So why bust your ass trying to beat a chess computer when you can let the computer play in the tournament for you? Either way you in! In this day and age, and in the music biz, computer algorithms are fair game. If the client doesn't give a shit weather I spent 10 hours programing a midi sequence or 2 min, why in dogs name would I spend the 10 hours? For bragging rights? For my own egotistical amusement?

No man. Let the computer do the work for you. That's the reason I bought it!

To me the same line of reasoning applies to autotuners, quantize functions, automated sequencer engines, pre-made sample libraries, and room calibration software. People that fight against technological efficiency usually lose. Sorry.

 

[RFR]

Interesting, the ideological passions this conversation brings to light.

 

[miroslav]

OK...so we're onto ideology.

I mean...who cares?

Yes...that is the current perspective for a lot of things these days, not just music recording...but for now, we're talking about music recording here.

I don't have an argument for people who take the "who cares/I don't care" position.
That's become a way out for everyone who doesn't ...well, care.
While that doesn't have any direct effect on me whatsoever, and it's not like I'm going to suffer if you don't care, and I guess you could even say that I don't care that you don't care...I do find that to be a rather "empty" way to look at things...especially when it comes to art, because it removes the whole point of art, of doing art.
That "who cares" attitude.

The way I see it...
It's not about why should I do something when I can program a computer to do it...it's about how am I the artist and the one creating art...when in fact, I'm just hitting a button and letting the computer randomize and/or engage some presets that someone else create, and the result of that is what I'm calling "my art"...."my creation".

Sorry for being blunt...but where the fuck is the human imagination in that, and while it can be somewhat amusing and rewarding in an entertaining sort of way watching a computer churn out random phrases...is that REALLY what songwriting and making music is about?

Look...the whole "sound design" thing may have a slightly different angle to it...because sound design in many cases is audio filler, IMO...so maybe sitting there and simply picking out one computer generated musical "theme" from a choice of 5, is seen as some sort of "creative" decision in that field...and for the bulk of sound design work, it beats sitting there and actually using your own imagination to compose shit from scratch...which you maybe only do when it's a major project and you've got the time, money, etc...
...but I think for the majority of folks here, it's about basic songwriting...sitting down, and using your imagination and your inspiration to write a song and lyrics from scratch.
There's a real sense of creative accomplishment...it's not about just churning out some cereal for mass consumption.

Well...that same feeling, IMO...extends out to the recording process...and if you're going to get your ass involved with it, then do it...don't look to some program to do it for you.
If that skill is truly out of your reach...then hook up with other people to work with, take it to one of the many small studios who will do it decently for you and it won't cost a fortune. If you're just lazy, and want the quick, cheap short cut to the end result...then yeah, I can understand why people say, "who cares".

If you want to learn to fly...you need to eventually get in a plane and do it.
If you just want to go for a ride in a plane and not fly it, then you get someone else to fly it, and you ride.
You can't just sit in front of a computer simulator and think you've actually learned to fly or that you are flying...
...no matter how realistic the computer makes it seem.

There's a difference in using the computer to do things how you want them done...and letting the computer do them for you...
...but who cares, right?

People that fight against technological efficiency usually lose. Sorry.

And IMO...people that replace their own imagination and effort with some synthetic process will lose even more. Sorry.

 

[jimmys69]

OK...so we're onto ideology.

OK.



Yes...that is the current perspective for a lot of things these days, not just music recording...but for now, we're talking about music recording here.

I don't have an argument for people who take the "who cares/I don't care" position.
That's become a way out for everyone who doesn't ...well, care.

That doesn't have any direct effect on me whatsoever...we're just talking about things here. It's not like I'm going to suffer if you don't care. I guess you could say that I don't care that you don't care....but...I do find that to be a rather "empty" way to look at things...especially when it comes to art, because it removes the whole point of art, of doing art.

It's not about why should I do something when I can program a computer to do it...it's about how am I the artist and the one creating art...when in fact, I'm just hitting a button and letting the computer randomize and/or engage some presets that someone else created....and that's what I'm calling "my art"...."my creation".

Sorry for being blunt...but where the fuck is the human imagination in that, and while it can be somewhat amusing and rewarding in an entertaining sort of way watching a computer churn out random phrases...is that REALLY what songwriting and making music is about?

Look...the whole "sound design" thing may have a slightly different angle to it...because sound design in many cases is audio filler, IMO...so maybe sitting there and simply picking out one computer generated musical "theme" from a choice of 5, is seen as some sort of "creative" decision in that field...and for the bulk of sound design work, it beats sitting there and actually using your own imagination to compose shit from scratch...which you maybe only do when it's a major project and you've got the time, money, etc...
...but I think for the majority of folks here, it's about basic songwriting...sitting down, and using your imagination and your inspiration to write a song and lyrics from scratch.
There's a real sense of creative accomplishment...it's not about just churning out some cereal for mass consumption.

Well...that same feeling, IMO...extends out to the recording process...and if you're going to get your ass involved with it, then do it...don't look to some program to do it for you.
If that skill is truly out of your reach...then hook up with other people to work with, take it to one of the many small studios who will do it decently for you and it won't cost a fortune. If you're just lazy, and want the quick, cheap short cut to the end result...then yeah, I can understand why people say, "who cares".

If you want to learn to fly...you need to eventually get in a plane and do it.
If you just want to go for a ride in a plane and not fly it, then you get someone else to fly it, and you ride.
You can't just sit in front of a computer simulator and think you've actually learned to fly or that you are flying...
...no matter how realistic the computer makes it seem.

There's a difference in you using the computer to do things how you want them done...and letting the computer do them for you...
...but who cares, right?

I have to give a shout out to this! ^^^^

I personally have no issue with using a tool to make the best of a recording. I use them all the time. For example: Melodyne. But-and a really big but-you have to have a human to control the software. There will never be a software made that can actually listen and 'feel' what is necessary. It is not possible for a computer to give what is necessary to make 'personal' decisions.

A mastering software that 'compares' similar genres is a cool idea. It may work for some. But it is basically a over-hyped preset IMO. Don't get me wrong, I have used OZONE and it's presets as a start to learning what it can do. Shit, I will pull up a preset for any plugin just to see how it does with a track.

The issue is that without the dood sitting in the room changing parameters so that it works for each situation, it isn't even going to be close to what the best choice is.

Send me raw shitty tracks from any vocal forum or even the MP3 Clinic here. Am I/anyone going to be able to mix them to sound like the industry standard? Fuck no!

Software is a tool. A tool will not build a house without someone using it.

Show me a hammer that knows where the nail goes and I'll tell you whether the chicken came before the egg. Yeah, never gonna happen...

 

[BroKen_H]

The chicken did come before the egg ...
The main idea I like about this particular software is not any ability to "auto mix", but it's ability to auto preset. Presets are really nice. I've got a stock one I use for my voice. Use it on every song. Change it for every song, too. Sometimes by the time I'm done listening to the mix, my preset doesn't look or sound anything like how it starts. But it's a starting point. From what I've seen, this thing can give you presets that are CLOSER. Won't be perfect. Still leaves it open to my skill to tweak those presets. But if I can have a tool to get my EQ and dynamics presets closer, I can certainly learn from it. I'll still go up and down on the knobs a bit (get yer minds out of the gutter) just to see what sounds best. Probably going to wait for a while before purchase, though. Maybe by the time I decide I'd like to try it, I'll decide I don't need to because I understand EVERYTHING about compression/limiting/leveling/EQ, but I doubt it. I've got about 9900 hours to go.

 

[RFR]

The chicken did come before the egg ...

Actually no. The egg came before the chicken.
Dinasours laid eggs, and they came long before the chicken.

 

[BroKen_H]

Evolutionism vs creation science...

 

[Martin Maniac]

OK...so we're onto ideology.



Yes...that is the current perspective for a lot of things these days, not just music recording...but for now, we're talking about music recording here.

I don't have an argument for people who take the "who cares/I don't care" position.
That's become a way out for everyone who doesn't ...well, care.
While that doesn't have any direct effect on me whatsoever, and it's not like I'm going to suffer if you don't care, and I guess you could even say that I don't care that you don't care...I do find that to be a rather "empty" way to look at things...especially when it comes to art, because it removes the whole point of art, of doing art.
That "who cares" attitude.

The way I see it...
It's not about why should I do something when I can program a computer to do it...it's about how am I the artist and the one creating art...when in fact, I'm just hitting a button and letting the computer randomize and/or engage some presets that someone else create, and the result of that is what I'm calling "my art"...."my creation".

Sorry for being blunt...but where the fuck is the human imagination in that, and while it can be somewhat amusing and rewarding in an entertaining sort of way watching a computer churn out random phrases...is that REALLY what songwriting and making music is about?

Look...the whole "sound design" thing may have a slightly different angle to it...because sound design in many cases is audio filler, IMO...so maybe sitting there and simply picking out one computer generated musical "theme" from a choice of 5, is seen as some sort of "creative" decision in that field...and for the bulk of sound design work, it beats sitting there and actually using your own imagination to compose shit from scratch...which you maybe only do when it's a major project and you've got the time, money, etc...
...but I think for the majority of folks here, it's about basic songwriting...sitting down, and using your imagination and your inspiration to write a song and lyrics from scratch.
There's a real sense of creative accomplishment...it's not about just churning out some cereal for mass consumption.

Well...that same feeling, IMO...extends out to the recording process...and if you're going to get your ass involved with it, then do it...don't look to some program to do it for you.
If that skill is truly out of your reach...then hook up with other people to work with, take it to one of the many small studios who will do it decently for you and it won't cost a fortune. If you're just lazy, and want the quick, cheap short cut to the end result...then yeah, I can understand why people say, "who cares".

If you want to learn to fly...you need to eventually get in a plane and do it.
If you just want to go for a ride in a plane and not fly it, then you get someone else to fly it, and you ride.
You can't just sit in front of a computer simulator and think you've actually learned to fly or that you are flying...
...no matter how realistic the computer makes it seem.

There's a difference in using the computer to do things how you want them done...and letting the computer do them for you...
...but who cares, right?



And IMO...people that replace their own imagination and effort with some synthetic process will lose even more. Sorry.

Thou dost protest too much.

 

[RFR]

Its close to an election. Election years always seem to have people generally at odds.

Haha! A nation divided over mastering and mixing programs.
Good thing we're not all in a bar, could turn into a fistfight.