X
XLR
______
I think any term with 12 or more syllables kicks ass.I sure do like this term for what we do.
![]()

I think any term with 12 or more syllables kicks ass.I sure do like this term for what we do.
![]()
I don't remember the exact year, but I think it was somewhere around 1993 that it came on. It's called "the Internet"..What year is skynet suppose to be turned on?![]()
And most don't have the slightest idea what they are doing. If they did, this board would not be necessary.Fact is though, that most - maybe nearly all - home recorders mix themselves. And some do it skillfully and creatively
You say that as if it's a bad thing. Many do recording out of a pure love of making music themselves, and learning to mix is part of it.And most don't have the slightest idea what they are doing. If they did, this board would not be necessary.
I wouldn't call someone a shyster because they offer or endorse a product that will do a rough mix.Another fact... is that most newbs believe or are led to believe by morons and shysters like the ones who put out the software on which this thread is based that mixing is a simple mechanical process that anyone or any program can perform with virtually no skill or experience.
I don't see it as the same. It would be inaccurate if they claimed it would provide professional results. But that's not what I've seen. In fact, the toontrack person who was discussing it in Reaperland was very practical about it, as is the company ad copy I've seen. But I'm a musician who sometimes mixes. If I were a mixer I'd probably be angry too.That's tantamount to saying that building your own house or designing your own automobile is something that anyone can do well.
That's why god created other human beings. Because we are not supposed to try and do everything ourselves.
G.
lol. let me ask you a question. are you writing your own songs and tracking every single instrument on every recording you make? AND working 40 hrs/week?
But take the guy who is writing, playing, tracking and working 40 hrs a week. What is the most he will get out of software like this (and Ozone, and Harbal, and...)? He will get false hope, spin his wheels, and waste his time for a bland result.
I don't know about the rest of you guys, but I use my own creative talent to do as much or as little to a mix as is required to take it where the producer's vision guides it. (Always easier if I'm also the producer.)
It would seem to me that software that claims to do your hobby for you would suck all the fun out of it quicker than anything else.i think Ill give up on this hobby...some of you have sucked all the fun out![]()
It would seem to me that software that claims to do your hobby for you would suck all the fun out of it quicker than anything else.
That's the fallacy here; those that are truly in this for the hobby aspect of it would typically shun something that claimed to do their hobby for them, whether it's an engineer or a crappy piece of software. Yet somehow the software is OK, but the engineer isn't?
No, there's more behind that POV than just "this is only a hobby", whether the hobbyists want to admit it or not.
G.
That's the fallacy here; those that are truly in this for the hobby aspect of it would typically shun something that claimed to do their hobby for them, whether it's an engineer or a crappy piece of software. Yet somehow the software is OK, but the engineer isn't?
That's perfectly fine, kc. I appreciate, understand and respect that point. It is in fact pretty much the point I was driving at in my own way.Im all about learning new skills, which I do...but Im not that interested in mixing, or mastering for that matter
I own motorbikes too...Im not interested in fixing them...just improving my riding
I do remember David, and he had an excellent product.XLR said:BTW, using a pro mix engineer doesn't always have a happy ending. Anybody remember DavidK's story about his 2nd CD? He got a Sony deal, IIRC, and brought in symphony players for the non-fiddle parts (David's a violinist), pro studio tracking, pro mix engineer suggested by someone at the label. David was producer, which he was very good at. Tracking worked out well. The mixer was a total disaster. David couldn't use any of the guy's work, wasting mucho $ and time. Mixed it himself.
That's perfectly fine, kc. I appreciate, understand and respect that point. It is in fact pretty much the point I was driving at in my own way.
It still begs three questions:
1. Why is it OK to have software do it for you, but not OK to have a human being do it?
2. Which one do you really think can ultimately do a more respectful job to the music you have spend days to craft? I'm not talking about some guy with skills equal to your average hobbyist, I'm talking about someone who actually does this stuff with a serious attitude.
3. What is the final product you're actually interested in making? A perfectly fine song or a perfectly fine recording of a perfectly fine song? If it's the former, if it's really about making music and not making a recording, then why bother recording at all (or why bother worrying about the quality of the recording, at least)? If it's the later, than isn't that at least as important a part of the process as the music making itself, deserving of more than a phone-in by a piece of junk software?
G.