Crap 'phase' info in EQ mag Unbelievable.

  • Thread starter Thread starter mixsit
  • Start date Start date
I didn't do the math, Glen, I heard it from Marty McCann at Peavey during a lecture he gave. He actually brought it up in the context of why PA systems should be mono, but related it to mic placement afterwards. Plus, if you google 3:1 rule, it comes up in the very first article cited, by Bruce Bartlett at Crown, who also writes for a bunch of mags.:p

Something to note- Even though 3:1 basically calls for 9db of level difference, it has been shown that people can hear comb filtering even with level differences of 20db in some conditions. (Olive-Toole)
 
boingoman said:
Let's not overdo it here bro.
Click to expand...
I stand by that observation. It ain't easy to come into this joint on the minority defensive. It would have been much easier for him to just stay away.

G.
 
It's called humility Glen and I agree with your take on it. And as was mentioned earlier, something positive came out of what could have been just a big negative not helping anyone. Kudos (or its it koalas) to you and Mr. Anderton.
 
SouthSIDE Glen said:
I stand by that observation. It ain't easy to come into this joint on the minority defensive. It would have been much easier for him to just stay away.

G.
Click to expand...

That's an opinion, not an observation. He posted on the internet in a thread about his magazine, he didn't throw himself on a grenade to save his platoon. I'm glad he did, but he's just a guy. He may not have been scared or nervous at all, just wanted to post because he saw it somehow.

You'll notice I am not questioning his psychological motives, like he did ours.;) That first post of his left me a bit cold, I gotta say, especially the totally off-topic rant about PSW. WTF:confused: I mean, feel free to rant and question people's sanity, but realize in the same paragraph you are asking people to not rant and be civil and nice.:) But he rallied pretty good, and I'm very glad he came by.

I personally don't feel that editors are morons, nor do I enjoy pointing out people's mistakes for the sake of it. Mostly.:p What makes me groan inside is the waves of stupid being spread through the audio world when something like this gets out.:p And the thought of the countless hours I have already spent and will have to spend correcting this in my professional life. And a little disappointment, I have read a lot of stuff by him, and learned a lot, so I still have some innocence left.:D I still have my copy of Electronic Projects for Musicians that I bought in 1982! Crap, that's 25 years ago.

Anyway, most of this should really be addressed to Mr. Anderton, along with a welcome to the forum.



ps- I wonder how people would have reacted if Joe the Average Poster had stood up to say hey, nobody's perfect? I'm sure some people wold have come around, but nobody would be praising him up and down as the bravest man to ever post on the internet, I'm sure. "You've got guts, kid." Yikes.
 
Last edited:
pps- I also want to say that the way this thread turned out is just as much a credit to the fine people on this BBS as it is to him.:)
 
Did he make his play perfect? No, of course not. But he did make the right play, IMHO. And yes, the O in that is "opinion"...AND my "observation"; i.e. that's how I "see" it ;) :D.

Anyway, in the final analysis (IMHOpinion,), what's most important is not what has happened, but what will be done about it. Mr. Anderton has a heavy task in front of him to try and make his magazine ever better (as all business managers do). I'd rather eat crow and see him succeed at that than gleefully sit back and chide his failure (and NO, I'm am not talking about you, boingo). Everybody here would benefit from his success in doing so. No one here would benefit from his failure.

G.
 
Last edited:
Farview said:
But you finished it, I wish my thoughts were that well organized.
Click to expand...
Be careful what you wish for, Jay.:cool:...It's not exactly fun and games over here ;).

Besides, you hold your own just fine. You took care of "audiowhateverhisnamewas" over there just fine. I just came in to mop up.
boingoman said:
pps- I also want to say that the way this thread turned out is just as much a credit to the fine people on this BBS as it is to him.
Click to expand...
Very good point, boingo...... Now, please don't tell me you found that on Google somewhere ;) :D (J/K!!!) :D :D
 
Update from author

Just to update the situation, Jeffry Anderson - the author of the EQ article in question - responded in the EQ mag forum:

Jeff Anderson said:
Hello all, sorry for my delay I’ve been working on a very rough 100+ track per song mix for the past 2 weeks and am finally finishing up! I totally agree, the 3:1 rule did not come across the right way. What is printed in the mag is not correct. I will make sure that we publish the correct explanation in the next EQ.

Jeff
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
This was more mixsit and Farview's followup over there, I think. Mixsit started the issue here and followed it through over there, while Farview both started and ended the thread over there; both stuck to it all the way through. I just beat them to reporting the result here ;).

G.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top