miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
But then what's the "norm"....?
Should one always aim for some specifc sound or play up to a particular audience in order to fit into their sense of "norm"...?
But then what's the "norm"....?
Should one always aim for some specifc sound or play up to a particular audience in order to fit into their sense of "norm"...?
SouthSIDE Glen
independentrecording.net
I think around here, "the norm" is whatever the person writing the post would do.
This is one of the (many) reasons why I don't do the MP3 Clinic forum much, because most judgements are made against what the responder would have done instead of a discrete, objective judgement of what the creator *did* do.
This is (only) partly understandable in that it is a "clinic", and the default assumption is that the MP3 being judged has problems and needs to be changed.
This is another difference between a song in the clinic and a song on the radio; the absolute opposite assumption is made about the radio songs - that since they are "professional" and on the radio, that they are not anything to be critiqued, but instead something to be emulated.
The reality is they both probably should meet somewhere in the middle of those two extremes.
G.
R
RAMI
Guest
Um....no, did I say they should????
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
Did I say...that YOU said...they should?
I was just keying off your comment about "norm, as it does bring up a relative point...and so I put forth a question.
I find that with forums and other group/collective sites...there IS always some unspoken "norm" that emerges simply out of the general makeup of the participants/members...and somehow that is what gets superimposed on many discussions/decisions.
Like...if you were on a forum where a lot of Metal heads hung out...and someone posted up a Country & Western tune for critiques.
I doubt the majority of the Metal heads would "get" the substance of C&W music...so their "norm" would skew their views/opinions.
Not always the case, but certainly happens a lot.
Likewise...you hit a group made up mostly of 17-25 year olds...they ain't gonna think or have the same tastes as a group of 40-45 year olds (in most cases)...so each group defines a "norm" the is created subconsciously by each individual taste/style preferences within that group, and it WILL permeate a general discussion and impose a "norm" view...most times.
AFA “should” people follow norms…
…no, I generally don’t. 
I was just keying off your comment about "norm, as it does bring up a relative point...and so I put forth a question.
I find that with forums and other group/collective sites...there IS always some unspoken "norm" that emerges simply out of the general makeup of the participants/members...and somehow that is what gets superimposed on many discussions/decisions.
Like...if you were on a forum where a lot of Metal heads hung out...and someone posted up a Country & Western tune for critiques.
I doubt the majority of the Metal heads would "get" the substance of C&W music...so their "norm" would skew their views/opinions.
Not always the case, but certainly happens a lot.
Likewise...you hit a group made up mostly of 17-25 year olds...they ain't gonna think or have the same tastes as a group of 40-45 year olds (in most cases)...so each group defines a "norm" the is created subconsciously by each individual taste/style preferences within that group, and it WILL permeate a general discussion and impose a "norm" view...most times.
AFA “should” people follow norms…
…no, I generally don’t. 
Chili
Site Moderator
Well, most of the comments in the Clinic are tagged with disclaimers such as IMHO, I suggest, I think, etc. clearly invoking opinion rather than fact. Most people recognize that their way is not the only way. But sometimes a clip is posted that is so far out of whack that critiques and comments are less opinion and more judgemental. I ought to know
Yeah, that default assumption is usually made by the OP. That's why he/she is submitting his clip to the clinic. You bring a lot to the recording/mixing/mastering forums, I really don't understand why you are hesitant to apply your contributions to actual mixes.
Yeah, by the time a song has made it to the radio it's had its life critiqued out of it. ha haha.This is another difference between a song in the clinic and a song on the radio; the absolute opposite assumption is made about the radio songs - that since they are "professional" and on the radio, that they are not anything to be critiqued, but instead something to be emulated.
R
RAMI
Guest
Did I say that you said that I said that they should.Did I say...that YOU said...they should?
I dig what you were getting at.
SouthSIDE Glen
independentrecording.net
I appreciate the compliment, Chili, but for me there is a big difference between helping someone with *how* to do something and advising then *what* they should do.
For example, I have no problem with advising someone on guidelines for mix levels in general (no clipping, A/D conversion levels and all that), but what levels they set their guitar to within a mix is none of my business, and even if it were, my opinion is irrelevant.
It's like advising someone how to use his brush to achieve a certain painted effect, which is just dandy, but what it is he/she wants to paint and what kind of look they want it to have is entirely their call and no one else's (IMHO). If they want me to produce a mix FOR them, I will, but telling them what to do themselves just doesn't make any sense to me.
That's not to say I have never done that kind of thing; I have helped a few people here with their mixes; but it's not something I wish to make into a habit.
The thing about the clinic is that almost everybody has their own ideas of what *they* would do if they were producing the mix, but only a minimum of thought given to what the OP would really like to do with it. That's the false "norm" I was referring to earlier.
The OP should not give a shit what *I* would do with the mix and start thinking more about what he/she wants to do with it; to hell with anybody's "norm". Once they can articulate that, I'll be glad to help them with the techniques they need to apply.
G.
Paulie Jay
New member
I was having the exact same thought process that inspired this thread a few weeks ago when I was listening to an old Kinks compilation. I absolutely love the sound of those old recordings, but even if I was somehow able to fluke it so that I produced a recording with the same sonic quality, it wouldn’t be long before I found myself tweaking the mix to make it sound more… what’s the word… modernly acceptable.
DrewPeterson7
Sage of the Order
You know, another thing just occurred to me - the obverse of this thread is just as true. There's a ton of stuff on top-40 radio that is immaculately produced. Take Lady Gaga's "Bad Romance," or Miley Cyrus's "Party in the USA." Mix-wise, it's absolutely spectalular stuff. However, if someone posted up an original piece that opened with something like "ra, ra, ro-roma, ro, ma, ro-ro-ma," or however the fuck that tune starts off, something tells me the first six or seven comments would be variations of "what the fuck is this shit."
So, I'm not sure how, but I think just maybe there's hope for us, after all.
So, I'm not sure how, but I think just maybe there's hope for us, after all.
D
dintymoore
Guest
Also note that I've always known this, and everyone I know has always known this: musicians are the worst audience in the world. You are absolutely nuts if you even consider musicians when you make music. In a band the worst thing you can do (it's suicide) is consider musician's views or cater to musicians.
R
RAMI
Guest
I agree 100%. I play in 2 good cover bands and work every week end, so it's not that bad. But both bands would be making more money if the guitar player didn't worry so much about choosing songs with "good" guitar parts. The same applies to originals. It's nice to get a compliment from your peers, but it doesn't mean shit because they're not the average listener.
T
TripleM
Well-known member
In the Clinic, I tend to focus on the sound quality alone. If there's a song or performance I like, I'll mention it. If I liked the writing, I might mention it. But that's not my focus.
But those things that I (nearly) ignore in the Clinic are huge factors in whether I like a recorded piece of music or not.
So yeah I'd probably nitpick at some classic songs if they were posted here. But I'd probably also mention that I love the song.
Maybe it's just me, but I love finding mistakes on old songs. I think it's just fun. If Paperback Writer were posted in the Clinic I would have said, "In the outro you can clearly hear the background singer on the right clear his throat and find his pitch before he begins singing. You should edit that out. Paul, or whoever his name is, should be more careful next time."
But those things that I (nearly) ignore in the Clinic are huge factors in whether I like a recorded piece of music or not.
So yeah I'd probably nitpick at some classic songs if they were posted here. But I'd probably also mention that I love the song.
Maybe it's just me, but I love finding mistakes on old songs. I think it's just fun. If Paperback Writer were posted in the Clinic I would have said, "In the outro you can clearly hear the background singer on the right clear his throat and find his pitch before he begins singing. You should edit that out. Paul, or whoever his name is, should be more careful next time."
D
dintymoore
Guest
Most don't even listen because they have their own agenda. Regular Joe's don't have an agenda. So fuck musicians!
D
dintymoore
Guest
The worst part of catering to a musician's audience is that they all smoke joints in the parking lot before they come in and then they nurse a diet coke for the next two hours, so the club owner will hate you!
If musicians hate you it's probably a good sign.
If musicians hate you it's probably a good sign.
grimtraveller
If only for a moment.....
If ever I play something for someone and they start telling me I shouldn't use irregular meters or should scoop out the mids (reminds me of the MC5 !) or how they wouldn't use that electric piano phrase or put more presence on the vocals.........I feel like telling them to dust my pyramids ! I've never been interested in how someone would do my stuff. I'm aware that there are a zillion different ways of mixing any given piece.
On the other hand, if somebody does need those pointers, the MP3 clinic can be useful. But I come back to something that came up in a thread a while back. I think it was Acidrock that said that most of what we technically discuss and argue about is of no interest to the average listener. And one of the really interesting aspects (among many) of Rami's OP is the gulf that sometimes exists between the average listener and those of us that make music at home. The bar is really high here sometimes !
Last week, I spent the week as I drove around delivering stuff listening to "Face to face", "Something else", "Village Green Preservation Society" and a Kinks 60s singles compilation. It was fantastic ! Much rewinding there. The Kinks were very much unlike their Beatle/Stones/Who/ Floyd/Hendrix/Cream/Pretty Things/Tomorrow etc contemporaries because they never really went psychedelic ('psychedelic lite', maybe) and their music remained fairly basic and straightforward with a few flourishes here and there. Sonically, they couldn't touch the bands that went or were psych. So they stayed kind of lo-fi. But they were, like so many of their contemporaries, so skilled in creating songs. It didn't matter if they used a trombone or a mellotron or used words like 'almanac' or 'vernacular' or wrote about cigarettes or job ads in the papers. I understand what Drew was saying about things like that now being viewed as contrived or pretentious if we try them now. But why should they be ? Ironically, having the view that being 'creative' and 'artistic' is pretentious and suckish ensures the preservation of the 'golden age' that so many that hold that view rail against because any attempt to be 'different' from the present norm is kind of seen as something that happened "then" and is now passe`.
Man ! What a mouthful !
ez_willis
.
not true. miroslav is still here.
grimtraveller
If only for a moment.....
I think one of the changes that may have occurred {and the change is an almost unwritten law in a home recording forum} is that artists used to do their song, they might sweat a little at the possible reaction, but essentially their view was "This is the song - take it or leave it". Many artists reached a point where commercial considerations were largely irrelevant. It was like "this is how I want it - love it or hate it but don't dare dictate to me how my songs should be". Whereas in a sense, a mix clinic type environment or it's equivalent to a large extent is saying the opposite.
gcapel
boom box recordings
I heard that. My wife is the opposite, she hates my material. But that means somthing good. Her favorite group is the counting crows.
I really think most people I know feel the same way as my wife. But they are not influenced by the same music as I. This doesn't bother me.