Write a new blurb for this board

[lifelyrics]

Got you back!

Still couldn't hit up SSG though...

I just did. I could, because it was my first time.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

I just did. I could, because it was my first time.

Ahhhh, nothing like getting hit upon by a virgin! Woo hoo!

Thanks, Chili and lifelyrics. And Massive, of course I still owe you about a trillion rep points too. I'll hit you up ASAP.

Lifelyrics, you're welcome .

G.

 

[masteringhouse]

But, I'm still waiting to hear back from her about the "Ears" one??? A couple of people have asked or intimated the question: what would that forum discuss, exactly? Would that be the monitoring of tracks, or mixes? I'd really like to know what the original intent was of that one on the list.

Not sure if this is what was intended, but I feel that crtitical llistening would (should) be a part of a new mastering section. It was tried here for a bit but really didn't get full traction. I have some better ideas regarding this now.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Not sure if this is what was intended, but I feel that crtitical llistening would (should) be a part of a new mastering section. It was tried here for a bit but really didn't get full traction. I have some better ideas regarding this now.

I don't know, Tom; critical/analytical listening is needed just as much, if not more, for tracking and mixing as it is for mastering. Quality is supposed to be front-loaded in the process, not held off until the end.

The whole pervasive attitude that somehow mastering should be the more "refined" of the three disciplines is one of those myths that contributes to the abuse of the mastering phase to try to make up for bad tracking and mixing.

I'm all for promotion of critical (I prefer the term analytical) listening skills; if you don't have the ear, you got nothin'. You're shooting blanks. But I have to admit that I'm not sure how a forum devoted to it would work other than for a sticky with links to resources?

G.

 

[masteringhouse]

Glen, I'm certainly not going to debate that critical or analytical listening skills are the sole domain of mastering, it just seems to fit better there and is the approach that I've seen used most often.

It's much easier to analyze a stereo recording and then expand that knowledge to multiple tracks than the other way around in my opinion. In the process people also get a better idea on what can't be done or is a compromise when mastering from stereo so would help support your argument and concern.

I would expect there to be references. Quite honestly I find some of the refs on your site, my site, and others very useful for this. However there can also be exercises and submissions from forum members with feedback. Brad Blackwood's forum has had many of these.

 

[TheChikenMaster]

Isnt it amazing how we all work on listening better, But we still cant hear our wives.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

Glen, I'm certainly not going to debate that critical or analytical listening skills are the sole domain of mastering, it just seems to fit better there and is the approach that I've seen used most often.

Well, the "more often" part is part of that pervasivness I was talking about.

With all respect, Tom, (and with my usual frankness ) the idea that critical listening skills "fit better" in mastering than elsewhere is just the kind of attitude that needs changing, IMHO. The whole idea that better ears belong in mastering more than they do in tracking or mixing - or arranging or performing or producing or gear selection - is a disingenuous premise.

And isn't it easier to analyze a mono, single-instrument track than it is a stereo mix of x number of instruments? And doesn't learning how to listen to and analyze what we actually hear start outside the realm of the studio or suite altogether?

No, put in my three votes (I'm from Chicago where we get to vote more than once ) for a completely separate forum not related to any specific phase of the recording process whatsoever.

G.

 

[legionserial]

Isnt it amazing how we all work on listening better, But we still cant hear our wives.

That's why it's called critical listening.

 

[masteringhouse]

Well, the "more often" part is part of that pervasivness I was talking about.

With all respect, Tom, (and with my usual frankness ) the idea that critical listening skills "fit better" in mastering than elsewhere is just the kind of attitude that needs changing, IMHO. The whole idea that better ears belong in mastering more than they do in tracking or mixing - or arranging or performing or producing or gear selection - is a disingenuous premise.

I sse your point Glen, remember I was a recording and mix engineer before I was mastering so it's not like I feel that MEs own the concept of CL. I feel that a mixing forum should be more focused on mixing techniques and fitting individual tracks together to make the "whole". The type of listening while mixing is at a more granular level, while an ME's gig is more concentrated with building on that process to make the "wholes" work together. Since we usually listen to music as a completed song rather than the sum of its parts CL seems to make more sense from approaching it as a completed song and knowing the overall goal before touching the individual tracks if you follow me.

I suppose the most neutral place for putting a critical listening thread would be in the mp3 clinic. I don't see a need to splinter this off on its own.