Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#361
|
|||
|
|||
Ruud Broens wrote: "Ayn Marx" wrote in 2 messages oups.com... : : Clyde Slick wrote: : : If one hears it, its there. : : : A very comforting thought for schizophrenics. : : Wouldn't that be better expressed as 'If one hears it, one hears it'? : Ayn got a cat, too ? Not the last time I looked. |
#362
|
|||
|
|||
In article .com,
"Ayn Marx" wrote: Sander deWaal wrote: I can't speak for mr. Middius, but I don't sneer at people's choices. I know several gifted musicians who are extremely happy with a boombox or some such device. All my efforts to try and "educate" them that they could get better sound for just a little bit more, were utterly futile. But what I wan't to know is how these 'musicians' manage to tune their instruments and worse still, how do they choose them in the first place? A tone deaf musician who can't tell a Steinway from an upright out of tune pub piano? Something doesn't gell with this 'I'm happy with my ghetto blaster' theory. This is an interesting topic. It's true that the majority of good musicians have crappy home audio systems, at about the same rate, it seems, as the rest of the population. The fact is that most of my colleagues simply think of home audio as something quite separate from the music-making part of their lives. "It ALL sounds fake, so why bother trying to replicate the live experience?" seems to be the common mind-set. Home audio to them is mostly a background activity, so why spend hard to find disposable income on anything better? This seems to be the prevailing attitude. |
#363
|
|||
|
|||
Jenn wrote: In article .com, "Ayn Marx" wrote: Sander deWaal wrote: I can't speak for mr. Middius, but I don't sneer at people's choices. I know several gifted musicians who are extremely happy with a boombox or some such device. All my efforts to try and "educate" them that they could get better sound for just a little bit more, were utterly futile. But what I wan't to know is how these 'musicians' manage to tune their instruments and worse still, how do they choose them in the first place? A tone deaf musician who can't tell a Steinway from an upright out of tune pub piano? Something doesn't gell with this 'I'm happy with my ghetto blaster' theory. This is an interesting topic. It's true that the majority of good musicians have crappy home audio systems, at about the same rate, it seems, as the rest of the population. The fact is that most of my colleagues simply think of home audio as something quite separate from the music-making part of their lives. "It ALL sounds fake, so why bother trying to replicate the live experience?" seems to be the common mind-set. Home audio to them is mostly a background activity, so why spend hard to find disposable income on anything better? This seems to be the prevailing attitude. I accept it may be the case musicians are able to 'fill in the gaps' missing when listening to their crappy audio systems at home if they are gifted with some form of trained ear/brain skill that enables them to hear 'what it should sound like'. However, time and time again, I've observed musicians who don't care what their home audio system sounds like , use utterly crappy PA systems . Tough on the audience Hey, but who cares, sounds OK up hear on the fold back speakers. GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR ! |
#364
|
|||
|
|||
In article .com,
"Ayn Marx" wrote: Jenn wrote: In article .com, "Ayn Marx" wrote: Sander deWaal wrote: I can't speak for mr. Middius, but I don't sneer at people's choices. I know several gifted musicians who are extremely happy with a boombox or some such device. All my efforts to try and "educate" them that they could get better sound for just a little bit more, were utterly futile. But what I wan't to know is how these 'musicians' manage to tune their instruments and worse still, how do they choose them in the first place? A tone deaf musician who can't tell a Steinway from an upright out of tune pub piano? Something doesn't gell with this 'I'm happy with my ghetto blaster' theory. This is an interesting topic. It's true that the majority of good musicians have crappy home audio systems, at about the same rate, it seems, as the rest of the population. The fact is that most of my colleagues simply think of home audio as something quite separate from the music-making part of their lives. "It ALL sounds fake, so why bother trying to replicate the live experience?" seems to be the common mind-set. Home audio to them is mostly a background activity, so why spend hard to find disposable income on anything better? This seems to be the prevailing attitude. I accept it may be the case musicians are able to 'fill in the gaps' missing when listening to their crappy audio systems at home if they are gifted with some form of trained ear/brain skill that enables them to hear 'what it should sound like'. However, time and time again, I've observed musicians who don't care what their home audio system sounds like , use utterly crappy PA systems . Tough on the audience Hey, but who cares, sounds OK up hear on the fold back speakers. GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR ! 'Tis true all too often. I was mostly referring to musicians who perform altogether unamplified. I agree, though, that those who perform amplifed need to pay much more attention to the sound the audience receives. Two examples on a positive note: I caught two concerts on last year's Simon and Garfunkel tour and in each case the live sound was the best of this type that I've ever heard, especially in the case of Paul's acoustic guitar sound. Also, I perform a couple of times a year with a very well-known folk trio, and the member of that group who oversees the PA sound is FANATICAL about the quality of it. I've seen him stop the concert in order to run out to the seats in the hall to do a sound re-check. |
#365
|
|||
|
|||
"Jenn" wrote in message ... In article .com, "Ayn Marx" wrote: Sander deWaal wrote: I can't speak for mr. Middius, but I don't sneer at people's choices. I know several gifted musicians who are extremely happy with a boombox or some such device. All my efforts to try and "educate" them that they could get better sound for just a little bit more, were utterly futile. But what I wan't to know is how these 'musicians' manage to tune their instruments and worse still, how do they choose them in the first place? A tone deaf musician who can't tell a Steinway from an upright out of tune pub piano? Something doesn't gell with this 'I'm happy with my ghetto blaster' theory. This is an interesting topic. It's true that the majority of good musicians have crappy home audio systems, at about the same rate, it seems, as the rest of the population. The fact is that most of my colleagues simply think of home audio as something quite separate from the music-making part of their lives. "It ALL sounds fake, so why bother trying to replicate the live experience?" seems to be the common mind-set. Home audio to them is mostly a background activity, so why spend hard to find disposable income on anything better? This seems to be the prevailing attitude. besides, if they wanted realistically sounding music, all they have to do is call up three friends and they've got a live quartet. |
#366
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
"Clyde Slick" wrote: "Jenn" wrote in message ... In article .com, "Ayn Marx" wrote: Sander deWaal wrote: I can't speak for mr. Middius, but I don't sneer at people's choices. I know several gifted musicians who are extremely happy with a boombox or some such device. All my efforts to try and "educate" them that they could get better sound for just a little bit more, were utterly futile. But what I wan't to know is how these 'musicians' manage to tune their instruments and worse still, how do they choose them in the first place? A tone deaf musician who can't tell a Steinway from an upright out of tune pub piano? Something doesn't gell with this 'I'm happy with my ghetto blaster' theory. This is an interesting topic. It's true that the majority of good musicians have crappy home audio systems, at about the same rate, it seems, as the rest of the population. The fact is that most of my colleagues simply think of home audio as something quite separate from the music-making part of their lives. "It ALL sounds fake, so why bother trying to replicate the live experience?" seems to be the common mind-set. Home audio to them is mostly a background activity, so why spend hard to find disposable income on anything better? This seems to be the prevailing attitude. besides, if they wanted realistically sounding music, all they have to do is call up three friends and they've got a live quartet. Exactly. I'm kind of the exception to this "rule". |
#367
|
|||
|
|||
"Ayn Marx" wrote in message oups.com... Sander deWaal wrote: I can't speak for mr. Middius, but I don't sneer at people's choices. I know several gifted musicians who are extremely happy with a boombox or some such device. All my efforts to try and "educate" them that they could get better sound for just a little bit more, were utterly futile. But what I wan't to know is how these 'musicians' manage to tune their instruments and worse still, how do they choose them in the first place? A tone deaf musician who can't tell a Steinway from an upright out of tune pub piano? Something doesn't gell with this 'I'm happy with my ghetto blaster' theory. It mirrors my experience with the musicians I've known as well. They just don't care since the music itself is what matters for them. They don't seem to care about sonic accuracy nearly as much as the art. |
#369
|
|||
|
|||
Jenn wrote: In article .com, "Ayn Marx" wrote: Sander deWaal wrote: I can't speak for mr. Middius, but I don't sneer at people's choices. I know several gifted musicians who are extremely happy with a boombox or some such device. All my efforts to try and "educate" them that they could get better sound for just a little bit more, were utterly futile. But what I wan't to know is how these 'musicians' manage to tune their instruments and worse still, how do they choose them in the first place? A tone deaf musician who can't tell a Steinway from an upright out of tune pub piano? Something doesn't gell with this 'I'm happy with my ghetto blaster' theory. This is an interesting topic. It's true that the majority of good musicians have crappy home audio systems, at about the same rate, it seems, as the rest of the population. The fact is that most of my colleagues simply think of home audio as something quite separate from the music-making part of their lives. "It ALL sounds fake, so why bother trying to replicate the live experience?" seems to be the common mind-set. Home audio to them is mostly a background activity, so why spend hard to find disposable income on anything better? This seems to be the prevailing attitude. True. Symphony orchestra musicians by and large don't care what the domestic "system" sounds like. But there is one exception: "Turn it up louder. I can't hear my violin (flute, trumpet, oboe etc.) Ludovic Mirabel The alternative explanation is that by the time they reach 40 they are pretty deaf. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Studio Set-Up Time | Pro Audio | |||
Black History Month, It's Time For The Truth | Car Audio | |||
DCM Time Window History | General | |||
OK, time to face the truth | Audio Opinions | |||
What is a Distressor ? | Pro Audio |