Zeke, Well hello again!
>I said I was through with you, but I just can't resist.
>It's just too much fun, and you make it too easy for me.
Good that I can help you in some way!
>quote:
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Originally posted by Boray
>No I didn't.
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Did too!!
>
>quote:
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Originally posted by Boray
>The topic name was to draw attention to the post (which it
>did apparently)... ...I have never said that using
>stereo speakers for monitors is better than using real
>monitors.
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>I love this stuff. Please explain how you reconcile these
>statements with the following statements, that you made
>only 7 posts back.
>
>quote:
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Originally posted by Boray
>I know that this is hard to coprehend for you pro-wannabes
>just because it's the common opinion that you need a pair
>of decent monitors to mix. You don't really. I (and many
>with me) have made some pretty good mixes on
>stereo speakers...
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Make up your mind Anders, you can't have it both ways.
>Statements like these sure sound like you are
>advocating stereo speakers over studio monitors.
Easy. In the second quote, did I say that speakers are
in fact better to use for monitoring than real sound monitors?
No, I just said that it's not neccesary to have real
monitors. If you are happy with your speakers and
feel confortable mixing on them, I think there are more
important things you can use your money on BEFORE your
you buy yourself a couple of decent monitors. For example
good microphones, good mic preamps, and if you are
a musician, that great guitar you always dreamt about.
If you are happy with your mixes and they sound good
on all systems you try them on, then what's the need
of buying new monitors, even if it would be the absolutely best
sollution if you had access of an unlimited source of money.
>The worst part of the whole thing, is that you are
>disseminating misinformation. For all your desire to be
>an audio pioneering genius, your grand ideas are
>easily deflateable.
I am just saying my opinion, just as you are.
>One more point, you speak of pro-wannabes like you
>have disdain for them. I don't share your sentiments.
>I'm a pro-wannabe. That's why I'm here, to learn, to
>take in information, and to acheive the best results I
>can, and yes, hopefully even results as good as the pros
>I respect. Or, even as good as some of the pros I don't
>respect. (BG, were you smart enough to catch that
>subtle reference to you?) I want that, so I guess
>I'm a wannabe. I've learned a lot along the way. I have
>a lot more to learn. But this discussion borders upon
>bizarre, and ludicrous. This is very very basic stuff. This
>is the first few steps. This is baby food. You have to eat
>some baby food and grow up a little before you can start
>eating solid food.
Pro-wannabe was probably the wrong word that slipped
through my fingertips while trying to defend myself. I should
probably have used some other word there...
If this is baby food, how come you have such a big trouble
attacking the basic idea of my method and instead try to
attack what I have said and what I not have said? I think
it seems like you are trying to attack me and not my EQ
idea here. At least in this your last post.
>So, I reiterate my advice to all newbies (recording
>newbies) There are no workarounds or substitutes when
>it comes to monitoring. You have to get some decent
>studio monitors. You can get some decent monitors fairly
>cheap. If you don't have a decent monitoring situation, you
>will never even get to the solid food.
That's your opinion and I respect that.
>quote:
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Originally posted by Boray
>The words of a bad loser that has no arguments left.
>You're overly sensitive. I think you serve yourself better,
>by growing a little thicker skin. (That's your own words by
>the way). You have not provided one single agrument
>against my method other than repeating what you have
>heard from others around here (that not even are
>real arguments). Have you any experiance with
>this whatsoever?
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>A couple of points here:
>
>A) You obviously have a different view of the exchange than
>I did. I viewed myself as being gloriously triumphant.
>Thus, there wasn't a need for either thick skin, or
>guarding myself against excessive sensitivity.
We obviously have.
>B) Just for the record, I do repeat advice from time to
>time, when I have no first hand experience of a matter.
>When I do, I always prequalify that advice with statements
>like this: "I heard somewhere that...", or "So-and-so
>recommends that..." I never dole out advice, like the
>advice I gave in this thread, without personal experience.
>I've had experience trying to go the cheapest route when
>it comes to monitoring, and I've discovered what thousands
>of people who came before me have. There are no
>work-arounds. Studio monitors are a "must buy" item.
Well, did you try my EQ method first? Just kidding! But what
I ment was if you had any experiance with EQ tuning speakers/
monitors for a more flat frequency response?
>quote:
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Originally posted by Boray
>I think it's strange that people around here are so quick to
>judge people that you don't know and people that
>doesn't agree with you. I think you should try to keep a
>more open mind.
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>I think we've honed in on another flaw in your reasoning.
>You're right, people don't know you. However, they
>aren't judging you, they are judging your idea. It has
>been weighed in the balances and was found to be
>severely lacking. Having an open mind is one thing.
>Entertaining silliness is another matter.
How come nobody has taken the points I gave in a previos
post apart?
>Of course your belief that what you've experienced is a
>personal attack, and that people are "judging" you,
>would explain why you have spent 6 pages trying to defend
>an indefensible idea.
Read my reply to DarthFaders. I was away for a whole week while you spent your time flaming eachother. This thread would had been long forgotten if you hadn't hold it alive for that week.
>quote:
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>You are closeminded and live in a word where everything
>is black and white.
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>That's a nice try, but it doesn't really describe the world I live
>in. The world I live in is black and white, with a whole lot of
>gray in betwixt. Some things are as plain as black and white. >This is one of them.
Good for you to be that enlighted in this matter.
>Some people want everything to be gray. Everything isn't.
>quote:
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Sometimes it seem like scientists just guess and then hold their >assumption as truth until they are proven otherwise.
>
>What you losely describe, is what is called the
>"scientific method". The scientific method is described
>this way: "Observe what happens; based on
>those observations, form a theory as to what may be true;
>test the theory by further observations and by
>experiments; and watch to see if the predictions based on
>the theory are fulfilled.
Yes, and?
>>To keep an open mind and think for yourself instead of
>>blindly follow others will make you to learn more in the long
>>run, and even maybe let you come up with an idea or two
>>of your own.
>
>Well I'm all for going against the norm, trying new
>things, having your own ideas, even trying things that
>on paper seem ridiculous. That type of thinking is the
>mother of invention. But, you can't ignore the final step
>in the scientific method: "watch to see if the predictions
>based on the theory are fulfilled."
Yes, and?
>>Well, it has been an interesting experiance to talk with
>>you. Good luck with your recording and with your life
>>in general.
>>
>>Kind Regards,
>>Anders Persson
>>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Interesting to say the least. Thanks for the kind sentiments.
>For all the frustration that is involved in trying to reason
>with you, my perception of you is that you are a kind person.
>
>Kind Regards as well,
>Taylor
Thanks.
Kind Regards again
Anders Persson
