Magazine handing out bad advice?

[Robert D]

I said I'd accept it if someone provided some sort of concrete evidence that it was in fact a joke.

No one owe's you any concrete evidence, or cares if you accept it. As someone else said, get over yourself.

I said "ask crap when 99% of the time the answer exists elsewhere on the forum".. you act as if that is insulting to someone..

Just all the people who ask "crap", but sorry for the mis-quote.

Did anyone say "Well they explained it in issue so-and-so"? Nope. Just "you clearly fell for it! ha haw!" So I'm the bad guy?

Again, I wasn't aware that was anyone here's job. I can point you to the definition of "persecution complex" though.

Cheers to Benny though for actually providing something useful in his posts.

As opposed to all us who were simply bent on calling you a fool? Man, go smoke somethin or somethin. Life is too short.

 

[Mistral]

But not too short for you to sit around picking apart posts, apparently.

 

[fraserhutch]

Did anyone say "Well they explained it in issue so-and-so"? Nope. Just "you clearly fell for it! ha haw!" So I'm the bad guy? Something odd there..

No, you are stubbornily refusing to see what's up - we initially found it funny that you had fallen for an April Fool's joke. Even after we indicated that to you (with no malice, because after all, if people didn't fall for it, why would they print it?) you refuse to believe us. We all believe that the claims are too preposterous to be seriously intended. Argue with that all you want.

No one thinks you're a bad guy for falling for it. It's taking yourself and the prank too seriously that peole are taking you to task for (myself included).

 

[Mistral]

I'm not arguing anything about whether it's a joke or not, that's the whole point, that I don't know, and clearly, neither does anybody else.

 

[fraserhutch]

I'm not arguing anything about whether it's a joke or not, that's the whole point, that I don't know, and clearly, neither does anybody else.

ok, fine, whatever dude.


Sheesh.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Well, I tried: "You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to bennychico11 again."

I got him for you

Mistral, I apologize if my early posts came of as sounding like I was smacking on you. I really had not intended that. Someone here siad (I can't find the post now) that we were just having some friendly fun over the fact that the magazine actually caught some people with that stuff. An April Fool's joke is no good if no one falls for it .

No need to feel bad about falling for it, we've all done it at one point or another. However, your refusal to accept it when everybody who responded to this thread has said the same thing is starting to make you look a bit stubborn for stubborn's sake. You wanted a response to those articles, and you not only got it, you got a virtually unanimous response from everyone so far, that those quotes have virtually no basis in truth. What more do you want?

First you took the position that there was no way that a magazine would do such a thing. When it was demonstrated to you that such things are done all the time, then you retreated - but still refused to capitulate - to the point that "there is no proof" that this is what indeed happened here. You are a stubborn guy, aren't you?

You want "proof?" The proof is right there in the very first quote you provided us:

"We can't stress this enough - compress, compress, and compress again. The compressor should be the first thing, and often the last thing you add to any channel."

To anybody who has left the house and been around the block in this industry, including virtually everybody who has responded to this thread, that quote is so blatently and obviously packed to the brim with sarcasm that you can practically see the sarcasm dripping off the page and pooling on the floor. One would almost think that chessrock posted that . There simply is no question that printing such a thing was never meant to be a serious position.

As far as the digital thing goes, "in the red" is a slang term whose definition is running a VU meter above 0dBVU (over 100% modulation) in an analog circuit. In digital, there is no such thing. Once you get to 0dBFS, everything stops. Period. There is no such thing as +1dBFS or any other value above 0dBFS; all those digital "1"s and "0"s are all maxed out at 0dBFS and there just ain't no more. There is NO digital "in the red". This is yet another joke.

It's easy to understand those that at first thought the original Orson Welles radio broadcast of "War of the Worlds" was real and not fiction. Those that continued to believe it after everyone else told them what was up are much harder to understand.

G.

[EDIT:] P.S. As proof that it can happen to anybody, I got taken by Benny's May Fool's joke . Silly me, I should have known that it was unlikely that he'd receive such a fast response. But it said what I wanted it to say, so I believed it. That's how such things work. That is how people get duped. Do I feel humiliated? Not really. I said "D'oh", slapped myself in the head, had a chuckle and moved on.

And, Benny, I owed you those points from a long time ago anyway.

 

[Mistral]

Glen,

You're right that I'm stubborn.

And typically, if I'm stubborn about something it is because I approach it from a different perspective most people don't bother looking at. Put it this way.. You say that to all of you, it's an obvious joke. To me, sure it may as well be, or I wouldn't have made the thread - but it doesn't necessarily mean it was meant to be one.

The most frustrating part is that while on one hand, if you asked what people thought of magazines like CM, the popular response would be that "their reason for existing is to hock products", or something to that effect, completely cynical right? On the other hand they can do no wrong when it comes to the content of their articles.. "oho ho, what nonsense, they must have done that on purpose."

Consider this. CM and mags like it are aimed at beginners, are they not? What fun is a joke when it is not aimed at people who SHOULD know better, but at those who most likely do not.

So I don't think I have been entirely unreasonable, stubborn maybe, however if you can't see the logic of what I'm saying here then I really have nothing more to say on the matter..

Thanks for your response and insight.

 

[Fireal402]

Mistral,
In the world of magazines, april fools jokes are almost 100% common. Every single magazine I've read (except Time) has had jokes, sometimes covering the entire issue. Once you notice how common it is, it's easy to detect, but with no knowledge of that it can be a bitch.
Question: Are you subscribed, or did you buy it from the newsstand? Magazine writers generally write for longtime subscribers, which would explain why they print the advice 'seriously'. If you've gotten the magazine for the past three years, you'll notice they do that every april, but without that, it can fool people. In fact, one magazine I'm subscribed to just got flamed out for their joke. It was obvious to people who knew the context (computers), but not to the large reader base that didn't.
Ignore CM's advice and get back to recording, because someone needs to do it and it's not going to be me.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Well, I just looked over the articles that Benny had linked to, which are CM's 2006 versions of the "The Computer Magazine Guide to Mixing" and "CM's guide to Dynamics." These are taking a decidedly different tone than the '05 articles you describe. Frankly these articles are filled for the most part with fairly common sense general advice that goes completly against the quotes you attirbute. There are a couple of places that I rather disagree with, but on the whole the articles aren't bad. In fact, I didn't find anthying even close to the feel of your quotes anywhere. Here's examples of what I did read:

"Easy on the EQ - don't destroy your mix."

"Treat these knobs with the respect they deserve."

"Adding Effects: Keep it simple."

"...as your studio expands, noise can become a major problem, so once again this is good practice. At this point it should be said, TURN ALL YOUR EFFECTS PROCESSORS OFF. As a novice sound engineer, balancing your sounds using 'dry' signals can help you to become aware of every element of a mix and how each part interacts with the others. Effects are usually added towards the end of a mix as the final icing on the cake."

"...in certain places throughout the track the vocals, guitar or chord parts can push the signal indicators into the red, which results in the sound distorting, so you have to turn the volume of the mix down to prevent it."

"In our example this would be set just below the offending part's peak. If the offending signal tries to go into the red during playback, the compressor immediately reduces the signal, preventing the sound from distorting"

"as tempting as it may be to keep compressing and pushing the volume up louder and louder, there are limits. Too much compression can force your mix to lose its dynamic edge, resulting in a rather flat sound."

"As with every other processor and effect in today's studios, compressors and noise gates have been used and abused way beyond what they were originally designed to do."

and my absolute favorite:

"many engineers and producers avoid finalizers like the plague, as they can add too much polish at the expense of the energy and grittiness that you might have originally wanted, resulting in an over-produced sound. There's also the problem of users attempting to use them to make a bad mix sound better, which simply doesn't work. Instead, it merely emphasises the worst parts."

Not exactly "compress, compress and compress", or "Compress early and compress often", is it?

Now, if a year earlier they were saying just the opposite, and in fact giving advice so bogus that it looked like a fake deed to a bridge over swampland, and they were serious about it. do you really think they'd A) be staying in business long enough to print the exact opposite advice in their articles a year later? and B) that the editor would knowingly publish such bad advice without having his tongue in his cheek, *and* publish somethng totally contradictory a year later?

And finally, when RD first asked you in this thread if your article was published in April, do you think his guessing right was just a coincidence? Take the April Fools element out of it and he had only a 1 in 12 chance of being right. That's an 8.3% chance of guessing the right month of publication, out of the blue. And a 91.7% chance of getting it wrong. But his hunch (which was all it was) was right.

That alone could be coincidence, sure. But he had a reason for that hunch. He knew that those quotes sounded like headlines from The Onion, so he guessed it might be an April Fools Joke. Add the fact that he was right about the month, that the data fits the theory, that there is precidence for this kind of joke in many other magazines including at least one other audio magazine, that you have a slew of "expert witnesses" (so to speak ) on this forum who back the joke theory up, and the fact that this year's articles from the same magazine solidly contradicts the essence of their quotes from last year, and you've got a solid case for an April Fool's joke that any district attorney would be ready to bring to court.

I'm not going to beat you over the head with this. You either get it or you don't.

G.

 

[littledog]

There is another possibility, which I don't think has been mentioned. And it is purely a guess on my part, because I haven't been hanging around here and have no idea who Mistral really is...

But perhaps it is Mistral who is playing all of us for fools, in the grand trolling tradition of Walters, EDAN, and others of that ilk. It is not just magazines that get their kicks making us all look foolish - it's just that magazines only tend to do it once a year.

 

[MadAudio]

There is another possibility, which I don't think has been mentioned. And it is purely a guess on my part, because I haven't been hanging around here and have no idea who Mistral really is...

But perhaps it is Mistral who is playing all of us for fools, in the grand trolling tradition of Walters, EDAN, and others of that ilk. It is not just magazines that get their kicks making us all look foolish - it's just that magazines only tend to do it once a year.

No, I think this is more a cultural difference than anything. I'm willing to bet that media-based April Fool's gags are more common in the U.S.

But, honestly, I'd be hard pressed to describe Mistral as having a sense of humor.

IMHO, YMMV, etc, ad nauseum.....

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

No, I think this is more a cultural difference than anything. I'm willing to bet that media-based April Fool's gags are more common in the U.S.

Yeah, being a Damn Yankee, maybe I don't know how much or how little of a global phenom April Fools may be. Maybe it's easier for us to accept here in the States than it is east of the Meridian. I honestly don't know.

I will say that Mistral's opinion that such published pranks might be a little irresponsible is not entirely indefensible, not unlike the whole "War of the Worlds" radio thing. I'll give him that.

But come on, we're not talking about national security issues here. And anyone who reads more than that one article will quickly learn just how much it sticks out like a snowball in a coal bin. Even Mistral knew that it was peppered with bogus info, he just didn't understand the reason for it.

Mad, I think you're right, it really comes down to having a sense of humor, I think.

G.

 

[Mistral]

There is another possibility, which I don't think has been mentioned. And it is purely a guess on my part, because I haven't been hanging around here and have no idea who Mistral really is...

But perhaps it is Mistral who is playing all of us for fools, in the grand trolling tradition of Walters, EDAN, and others of that ilk. It is not just magazines that get their kicks making us all look foolish - it's just that magazines only tend to do it once a year.

I've been registered and posting on this forum since 2001, does that look like the behavior pattern of a troll? Granted, I may not have 1/100 the posts of some of the people here, but perhaps it might tell you that I'm hardly a newb to this place or this business...

 

[Mistral]

Yeah, being a Damn Yankee, maybe I don't know how much or how little of a global phenom April Fools may be. Maybe it's easier for us to accept here in the States than it is east of the Meridian. I honestly don't know.

I lived 24 years of my life in North America.. your cultural phenomenon are nothing foreign to me. By the way, I guess it didn't occur to you that the magazine is British.

I will say that Mistral's opinion that such published pranks might be a little irresponsible is not entirely indefensible, not unlike the whole "War of the Worlds" radio thing. I'll give him that.

Comparing the way we must sift through and classify information in the 21st century to the way the world was in the pre WWII era is a stretch...

Even Mistral knew that it was peppered with bogus info, he just didn't understand the reason for it.

Ha ha, "even".. I like that. I do understand the reason for it.. the author is a dolt.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Yes I do know the the magazine is British. Anyone looking at the URL knows that. And anyone readingthis thread knows that it's not a Brit that has no sense of humor, it's someone who hails from Sweeden. Why od you thing is said "east of the Meridian"? And how are we supposed to know you spent so much time on this side of the pond? Again, I was trying to be nice and give you the benefit of a doubt there and for some reason you get defensive about it.

And that thing about "even", what that meant was that "even" the guy that was complaining abut the article knew that the info was bogus, that it wasn't that he was misled. And somehow you feel that I was digging at you again.

Finally, and YET AGAIN, I was saying that your position that an April Fools article in a magazine might be a bit on the irresponsible side had some validity to it, using the WotW thing as an analogous situation. I'm thrying to throw you yet another bone and your snide response is that it's "a stretch".

Christ, a guy says good things about you and you still take offense. I give up.

I'm also starting to understand why you don't post very often.

Lighten up.

G.

 

[littledog]

I've been registered and posting on this forum since 2001, does that look like the behavior pattern of a troll? Granted, I may not have 1/100 the posts of some of the people here, but perhaps it might tell you that I'm hardly a newb to this place or this business...

I apologize if I was off base - you'll note that I said it was on ly an alternate possibility. I took a long vacation from this site, and am not familiar with you.

But, if one was to look at this thread in isolation, the EDAN/Walters theory is not that far-fetched.

However, I'll withdraw my theory, and agree to agree with the majority - you are simply one of those people who are basically humorless, especially when it comes to having the ability to laugh at oneself.

 

[Mistral]

Glen, if I am continuing to come off defensive it's because even your compliments as you call them come off like I'm some kind of ignoramus. You're comparing my stance to that of people that continue to believe a hoax about frigging ALIENS.. this is so completely different I don't know where to begin.. so don't try to patronize me.

If it eases your minds that much, then yes, I could see it as being more than a coincidence that the issue was April's, and that it is conceivable that they thought it would be a "good one" to their regular readers.. but I don't think it would be necessarily detrimental to the mag, if it was genuine.

You can think what you wish about my sense of humor, or my gullibility.. but for all the meaningless talk here since basically the first or second reply, you can bet I'd have a good laugh if/when the editor's response came saying they have never done such a thing.

Catch you dudes later..

 

[masteringhouse]

This particular article aside, there are tons of sources of bad information often from "reputable" magazines. Remember the purpose of a magazine is to sell ad space, if there's controversy over an article it's even better advertisement. I wouldn't be surprised if there were a few compressor ads next to this one.

Take everything that you read/hear in magazines, forums, and word of mouth with skepticism. If it's a new idea to you, experiment and find out for yourself, see if it works for you. What you choose as part of your arsenal of techniques is what makes you unique as a mix engineer. Tom Lord Alge from what I've read often uses multiple compressors. Geof Emerick used to compress the crap out of the bass on Beatles records to try to acheive that Motown sound. Over compression has it's uses at times.

Recording in the red is fairly common in analog rock recording. Ocassionally it also has uses in digital recording to get grunge.

The worst advice is that which states there's only one way to do things.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

I'm not saying you're ignorant, I'm saying you're ignoring. You have been informed nine ways to Sunday from several informed people what the truth is here, and you just refuse to believe it because it doesn't match your original theory. You simply refuse to accept that you got pranked, the same way that Benny pranked me. There's nothing wrong with that part of it. Refusing to admit you got pranked out of some kind of stubborn pride, on the other hand, is not exactly flattering to you and in fact is rather insulting to those of us who tried answering your question as diplomatically as we could.

G.

 

[fraserhutch]

Lighten up.

And get over yourself.