I believe the correct response was made quite clearly and concisely way back in 2000:
MISTERQCUE said:
It all sounds to me that the underlying factors is.......
TALENT,EXPERIENCE,PATIENCE AND GREAT EARS!
If somebody absolutely MUST try to create categories, then the categories should be organized around the expertise of the person doing the recording. I would propose something like the following: (And please excuse the rather lengthy post.)
Stage 1) Totally without a clue - Has some vague notion that something called a "microphone" is used to pick up sounds so that it can be recorded. Might have some basic starter-level gear, and might even be able to get some things recorded, if the equipment is simple enough to use. If he (or she) reads the owner's manual, and experiments with the recording software, he might even have a rough idea of how to use some of the features, such as EQ and compression.
Stage 2) Trying to get a clue - Has realized that there is a bit of skill and knowledge involved in making good recordings. Mixing is more than just setting the levels of the tracks correctly, they have to "fit together" in a cohesive manner. At this point, our recording engineer will start the process of gathering more knowledge. Unfortunately, since he usually does not have somebody to
teach him the important stuff, then the process of learning how to make better recordings consists simply of gathering up various pieces of "recording lore" -- e.g. when recording an electric guitar amp, you should use an SM57, or a Sennheiser 421, or whatever. Why? Because people with more knowledge and expertise than YOU have told you that it works well, and sounds pretty good.
Stage 3) Starting to get a clue - Has finally had an epiphany - the great "ah-ha" moment. This is where he realizes that the most
important set of audio tools at his disposal are the two transducers mounted to the side of his head, and the analog signal processor inside the cranium. Begins to train himself to
hear what sounds good and what does not
in a particular context, irrespective of the price of the piece of gear he might be using at the time. Hopefully, at this point, he will have also picked up some of the IMPORTANT knowledge about recording. Meaning that, he has a basic understanding of the fundamental
design principles behind each type of microphone design, and how each processor does what it does. (In other words, to give a couple of examples,he understands WHY a dynamic mic might be a better choice than a condenser or a ribbon for a particular application, and understands the basics of how an optical compressor works, and why it sounds differently from some other type of compressor.)
Stage 4) Zen Master of the Recording Arts - At this point, the basic
conceptual principles behind different microphone designs (and so on and so forth) have become second nature to the point where it's not necessary to THINK ABOUT these things anymore - the knowledge is just there for your use, on a pretty much instinctual level. And, even more importantly, he has continued to train his ears, which have now become very sensitive to hearing incredibly subtle differences between, let's say, two different (very, very slightly different) settings on a compressor. At this level, when he hears a new piece of gear (regardless of whether it is inexpensive or costly) he is immediately able to figure out what type of situations that a particular piece of gear will work well for, and which applications it will not. No longer thinks in terms of broad rules of thumb about how to approach a particular instrument (i.e. I must use such and such sort of mic, when micing a guitar amp), but uses his vast experiential knowledge, his acute sense of hearing, and his deep understanding of design principles to determine how best to employ the gear that he has. This makes it possible for him to get excellent results with whatever gear is on hand, no matter the cost of the equipment.
Anyway, that's how I see it.
Bassman
