Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
[email protected] yewtooberr@yahoo.com is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default Anything you think was consistently done better in the past in thepro/commercial recording world than how it's done today?

I'm talking about what one would label as the pro world of recording of material for mass consumption.

Is there anything about a particular arena of recording - pop, classical, opera, TV news, film, etc. - whatever - that you find lacking compared to an earlier era despite all the technology? Or do you think audio recording is at its zenith now?
  #3   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Trevor Trevor is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,820
Default Anything you think was consistently done better in the past in the pro/commercial recording world than how it's done today?

On 26/08/2020 2:54 pm, geoff wrote:
On 26/08/2020 4:48 pm, wrote:
I'm talking about what one would label as the pro world of recording
of material for mass consumption.
Is there anything about a particular arena of recording - pop,
classical, opera, TV news, film, etc. - whatever - that you find
lacking compared to an earlier era despite all the technology? Or do
you think audio recording is at its zenith now?


Recording technology is certainly at its zenith - one can achieve
whatever one wants, for better or for worse, and
recording/production/delivery is nearer to the actual acoustic (where
appropriate) that ever in the past.


I would agree, but I know plenty of people still argue tape is better
than digital. Or valve amps are superior to solid state (and not just
guitar amps) Or vinyl is better than CD. Or classic mics are superior
etc. So I'm sure you could have an endless debate with those people if
that's what you are after. These people simply don't get the difference
between *personal preference*, artistic *choices*, and actual
superiority of performance.


Whether or not 'most' of the music is as creative or worthy of
admiration is up for debate ...


Well at least that is *really* debatable! But once again it is more
about personal preference.



  #4   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
geoff geoff is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,812
Default Anything you think was consistently done better in the past inthe pro/commercial recording world than how it's done today?

On 26/08/2020 5:27 pm, Trevor wrote:
On 26/08/2020 2:54 pm, geoff wrote:
On 26/08/2020 4:48 pm, wrote:
I'm talking about what one would label as the pro world of recording
of material for mass consumption.
Is there anything about a particular arena of recording - pop,
classical, opera, TV news, film, etc. - whatever - that you find
lacking compared to an earlier era despite all the technology? Or do
you think audio recording is at its zenith now?


Recording technology is certainly at its zenith - one can achieve
whatever one wants, for better or for worse, and
recording/production/delivery is nearer to the actual acoustic (where
appropriate) that ever in the past.


I would agree, but I know plenty of people still argue tape is better
than digital. Or valve amps are superior to solid state (and not just
guitar amps) Or vinyl is better than CD. Or classic mics are superior
etc. So I'm sure you could have an endless debate with those people if
that's what you are after. These people simply don't get the difference
between *personal preference*, artistic *choices*, and actual
superiority of performance.


Many people believe religions and other irrational and ridiculous things
too.



Whether or not 'most' of the music is as creative or worthy of
admiration is up for debate ...


Well at least that is *really* debatable! But once again it is more
about personal preference.


But no matter how good (or bad) it can be done very well ;- )

geoff

  #5   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Scott Dorsey Scott Dorsey is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,853
Default Anything you think was consistently done better in the past in the pro/commercial recording world than how it's done today?

In article , Trevor wrote:
On 26/08/2020 2:54 pm, geoff wrote:

Recording technology is certainly at its zenith - one can achieve
whatever one wants, for better or for worse, and
recording/production/delivery is nearer to the actual acoustic (where
appropriate) that ever in the past.


I would agree, but I know plenty of people still argue tape is better
than digital. Or valve amps are superior to solid state (and not just
guitar amps) Or vinyl is better than CD. Or classic mics are superior
etc. So I'm sure you could have an endless debate with those people if
that's what you are after. These people simply don't get the difference
between *personal preference*, artistic *choices*, and actual
superiority of performance.


But that's WHY recording technology is at its zenith... there are more
choices than ever before. You want something that sounds like tape,
that's great because you have a bunch of tape formulations to choose
from. If you want something completely clean, we finally have digital
converters that can do that. Want to make an acoustic disc? Sure, we
can do that. Whatever is appropriate to the music, we have plenty of
production methods and systems to choose from.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."


  #6   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Les Cargill[_5_] Les Cargill[_5_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 44
Default Anything you think was consistently done better in the past inthe pro/commercial recording world than how it's done today?

Trevor wrote:
On 26/08/2020 2:54 pm, geoff wrote:
On 26/08/2020 4:48 pm, wrote:
I'm talking about what one would label as the pro world of recording
of material for mass consumption.
Is there anything about a particular arena of recording - pop,
classical, opera, TV news, film, etc. - whatever - that you find
lacking compared to an earlier era despite all the technology? Or do
you think audio recording is at its zenith now?


Recording technology is certainly at its zenith - one can achieve
whatever one wants, for better or for worse, and
recording/production/delivery is nearer to the actual acoustic (where
appropriate) that ever in the past.


I would agree, but I know plenty of people still argue tape is better
than digital. Or valve amps are superior to solid state (and not just
guitar amps) Or vinyl is better than CD. Or classic mics are superior
etc.


Those are mostly objectively wrong; it's not hard to define and
demonstrate the defects. Even guitar amps are this way these days;
Pat Quilter's made a big dent and modelling is all but
indistinguishable from the real thing.

So I'm sure you could have an endless debate with those people if
that's what you are after. These people simply don't get the difference
between *personal preference*, artistic *choices*, and actual
superiority of performance.


All they have to say is "workflow" and we're good to go. There's nothing
wrong with fetishism but insisting on your ... kink as correct
is when the eyebrows go up.


Whether or not 'most' of the music is as creative or worthy of
admiration is up for debate ...


Well at least that is *really* debatable! But once again it is more
about personal preference.




IMO? There's too much money in (pop) music now for it to be any good.
There's zero tolerance for risk. Any risk would need to be justified on
a "social media" or other marketing basis.

Same for theater.

Same for film.

Same for books.

There's good music out there but it's hard to find.

--
Les Cargill



  #8   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Ty Ford[_2_] Ty Ford[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 102
Default Anything you think was consistently done better in the past inthe pro/commercial recording world than how it's done today?

Musicians are playing software instead of instruments. I'm doing it with Apple Logic Pro X.
It's allowed me to "compose" with instruments I can't play and don't have time to learn in this lifetime. Is that a good thing? I don't know. It works for me; expanding my musical horizon. Should I be concerned about putting other musicians out of work? Here's one.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7M2-GIW9Ls

There was a magic involved in designing and build recording studios. People today don't always realize how great some of the old big rooms were. I feel lucky to have been in some of them. Just standing there and listening to the room.......Wow!
  #9   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
John Williamson John Williamson is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,753
Default Anything you think was consistently done better in the past inthe pro/commercial recording world than how it's done today?

On 26/08/2020 14:50, Ty Ford wrote:

There was a magic involved in designing and build recording studios. People today don't always realize how great some of the old big rooms were. I feel lucky to have been in some of them. Just standing there and listening to the room.......Wow!

Grin I am close to getting a lovely sounding room. 69 feet by 35 feet
by 30 feet or so tall at the top of the vaulted ceiling.

This one:-

www.oysterbroadcast.co.uk/Click_2.html

--
Tciao for Now!

John.
  #10   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
John Williamson John Williamson is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,753
Default Anything you think was consistently done better in the past inthe pro/commercial recording world than how it's done today?

On 26/08/2020 16:08, John Williamson wrote:
On 26/08/2020 14:50, Ty Ford wrote:

There was a magic involved in designing and build recording studios.
People today don't always realize how great some of the old big rooms
were. I feel lucky to have been in some of them. Just standing there
and listening to the room.......Wow!

Grin I am close to getting a lovely sounding room. 69 feet by 35 feet
by 30 feet or so tall at the top of the vaulted ceiling.

This one:-

www.oysterbroadcast.co.uk/Click_2.html

it is in he-

https://goo.gl/maps/PdBNqjaLT7hyRx3d8

--
Tciao for Now!

John.


  #11   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
geoff geoff is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,812
Default Anything you think was consistently done better in the past inthe pro/commercial recording world than how it's done today?

On 27/08/2020 3:29 am, John Williamson wrote:
On 26/08/2020 16:08, John Williamson wrote:
On 26/08/2020 14:50, Ty Ford wrote:

There was a magic involved in designing and build recording studios.
People today don't always realize how great some of the old big rooms
were. I feel lucky to have been in some of them. Just standing there
and listening to the room.......Wow!

Grin I am close to getting a lovely sounding room. 69 feet by 35 feet
by 30 feet or so tall at the top of the vaulted ceiling.

This one:-

www.oysterbroadcast.co.uk/Click_2.html

it is in he-

https://goo.gl/maps/PdBNqjaLT7hyRx3d8


Lovely ;- )

geoff
  #12   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Scott Dorsey Scott Dorsey is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,853
Default Anything you think was consistently done better in the past in thepro/commercial recording world than how it's done today?

wrote:
I'm talking about what one would label as the pro world of recording of material for mass consumption.

Is there anything about a particular arena of recording - pop, classical, opera, TV news, film, etc. - whatever - that you find lacking compared to an earlier era despite all the technology? Or do you think audio recording is at its zenith now?


In the late eighties I worked with a producer in Atlanta who assured me
that the music of the early seventies was the best ever, and that nothing
better would ever be achieved. His argument was that it was the drugs
that made the music what it was and "you can't get stuff like that any
more." He had a long list of products from quaaludes to gorilla
tranquilizers that he claimed were the key to the fine music of the era.

Personally I don't agree with this, but I was doing classical music at
the time. Drugs did not appear on the classical scene until much later.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
  #13   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
gray_wolf gray_wolf is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 38
Default Anything you think was consistently done better in the past inthe pro/commercial recording world than how it's done today?

On 26/08/2020 8:17 pm, Scott Dorsey wrote:
wrote:
I'm talking about what one would label as the pro world of recording of material for mass consumption.

Is there anything about a particular arena of recording - pop, classical, opera, TV news, film, etc. - whatever - that you find lacking compared to an earlier era despite all the technology? Or do you think audio recording is at its zenith now?


In the late eighties I worked with a producer in Atlanta who assured me
that the music of the early seventies was the best ever, and that nothing
better would ever be achieved. His argument was that it was the drugs
that made the music what it was and "you can't get stuff like that any
more." He had a long list of products from quaaludes to gorilla
tranquilizers that he claimed were the key to the fine music of the era.

Personally I don't agree with this, but I was doing classical music at
the time. Drugs did not appear on the classical scene until much later.
--scott



Scott,
I lived in Nashville from '70 to '75 and I encountered some of the top song
writers and such in the business at the local pill doctor's clinic. It was
certainly a trip.
  #15   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Scott Dorsey Scott Dorsey is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,853
Default Anything you think was consistently done better in the past inthe pro/commercial recording world than how it's done today?

Les Cargill wrote:
Why is all the pop music quantixed to death? Answer: artists
are fungible and replaceable ( and may not even be able to play their
own stuff ) and producers make up the balance. Quantization better fits
that risk profile. See Rick Beato on Youtube for details ( "How
Computers Ruined Music")


That's how pop music has always been. Menudo. The Monkees.

Hell, just about any time any actress sang in a Hollywood movie, her
voice was replaced with Marni Nixon's.

Why is the dialogue in film way too low in level and unintelligible?


Because we don't have big dubbing stages any more. People mix films in
tiny closets so that the mix will translate into someone's living room.
Show that film in a big auditorium with a second reverb time and you
won't be able to make out any of the words.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."


  #16   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Don Pearce[_3_] Don Pearce[_3_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,417
Default Anything you think was consistently done better in the past in the pro/commercial recording world than how it's done today?

On 27 Aug 2020 15:16:26 -0000, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

Hell, just about any time any actress sang in a Hollywood movie, her
voice was replaced with Marni Nixon's.


And any time any guitarist played on a British pop record, it was
actually Jimmy Page.

d

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

  #17   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Trevor Trevor is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,820
Default Anything you think was consistently done better in the past inthe pro/commercial recording world than how it's done today?

On 28/08/2020 3:12 am, Don Pearce wrote:
On 27 Aug 2020 15:16:26 -0000, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

Hell, just about any time any actress sang in a Hollywood movie, her
voice was replaced with Marni Nixon's.


And any time any guitarist played on a British pop record, it was
actually Jimmy Page.


HaHa. But don't think he ever played on a Beatles record. Or a Rolling
Stones, or Who, or Pink Floyd, or......



  #18   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Don Pearce[_3_] Don Pearce[_3_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,417
Default Anything you think was consistently done better in the past in the pro/commercial recording world than how it's done today?

On Fri, 28 Aug 2020 16:56:45 +1000, Trevor wrote:

On 28/08/2020 3:12 am, Don Pearce wrote:
On 27 Aug 2020 15:16:26 -0000, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

Hell, just about any time any actress sang in a Hollywood movie, her
voice was replaced with Marni Nixon's.


And any time any guitarist played on a British pop record, it was
actually Jimmy Page.


HaHa. But don't think he ever played on a Beatles record. Or a Rolling
Stones, or Who, or Pink Floyd, or......



They were rock, not pop.

d

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

  #19   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Les Cargill[_5_] Les Cargill[_5_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 44
Default Anything you think was consistently done better in the past inthe pro/commercial recording world than how it's done today?

Trevor wrote:
On 28/08/2020 3:12 am, Don Pearce wrote:
On 27 Aug 2020 15:16:26 -0000, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

Hell, just about any time any actress sang in a Hollywood movie, her
voice was replaced with Marni Nixon's.


And any time any guitarist played on a British pop record, it was
actually Jimmy Page.


HaHa. But don't think he ever played on a Beatles record. Or a Rolling
Stones, or Who, or Pink Floyd, or......




He played on at least one Who record.

--
Les Cargill

  #20   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Les Cargill[_5_] Les Cargill[_5_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 44
Default Anything you think was consistently done better in the past in the pro/commercial recording world than how it's done today?

Don Pearce wrote:
On 27 Aug 2020 15:16:26 -0000, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

Hell, just about any time any actress sang in a Hollywood movie, her
voice was replaced with Marni Nixon's.


And any time any guitarist played on a British pop record, it was
actually Jimmy Page.

d


When it wasn't Big Jim Sullivan.

--
Les Cargill


  #22   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Les Cargill[_5_] Les Cargill[_5_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 44
Default Anything you think was consistently done better in the past inthe pro/commercial recording world than how it's done today?

Scott Dorsey wrote:
Les Cargill wrote:
Why is all the pop music quantixed to death? Answer: artists
are fungible and replaceable ( and may not even be able to play their
own stuff ) and producers make up the balance. Quantization better fits
that risk profile. See Rick Beato on Youtube for details ( "How
Computers Ruined Music")


That's how pop music has always been. Menudo. The Monkees.


The Monkees records sound amazing. It was basically The Wrecking Crew
playing like Carole King songs. It's not quantized. For pop, as pop,
it's top shelf.

Hell, just about any time any actress sang in a Hollywood movie, her
voice was replaced with Marni Nixon's.





Why is the dialogue in film way too low in level and unintelligible?


Because we don't have big dubbing stages any more.


Whut? I could get the dialogue up to level here, in front of little MI
store monitors. My guess is that they overwork the mixers and they mix
too loud. No trouble making out the explosions, either.

I've read things that indicate they undermix the dialogue to get people
to listen harder, to "lean in".

But mainly, I'd bet there just a lot of hacks out there.

People mix films in
tiny closets so that the mix will translate into someone's living room.


This is America. People have massive living rooms now. I listen in a
living room. I still have the captions on.

Show that film in a big auditorium with a second reverb time and you
won't be able to make out any of the words.


The acoustics in theaters is a whole 'nother story. Meyer Sound
should think about packaging some of their correction stuff for
theaters - I bet they'd sell more than a few.

--scott


--
Les Cargill
  #23   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Will StG Will StG is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default Anything you think was consistently done better in the past inthe pro/commercial recording world than how it's done today?

On Wednesday, August 26, 2020 at 11:57:46 PM UTC-4, Les Cargill wrote:

Why is the dialogue in film way too low in level and unintelligible?


When I asked a credentialed film mixer that question a couple weeks ago, he insisted it was because film is mixed mixed on a calibrated system and I was unfortunate enough to have an uncalibrated consumer system.
He made sure to point out the letters after his name. I did ask him why he didn't check his mixes in his car (metaphorically.)

- WillStG
  #24   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Trevor Trevor is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,820
Default Anything you think was consistently done better in the past inthe pro/commercial recording world than how it's done today?

On 30/11/2020 7:36 pm, Will StG wrote:
On Wednesday, August 26, 2020 at 11:57:46 PM UTC-4, Les Cargill wrote:

Why is the dialogue in film way too low in level and unintelligible?


Yep, action films are the worst where dialog is usually considered
completely unimportant compared to impressive sound effects.


When I asked a credentialed film mixer that question a couple weeks ago, he insisted it was because film is mixed mixed on a calibrated system and I was unfortunate enough to have an uncalibrated consumer system.


So either he expects all consumers to have professionally calibrated
systems, or he simply doesn't care about his ultimate customers.


He made sure to point out the letters after his name.


A sure sign of a ******.

I did ask him why he didn't check his mixes in his car (metaphorically.)

:-)
I'm not sure that is even the problem. It's simply a choice of what is
important in the mix, and sadly the dialog is often considered
secondary, and completely unintelligible for anyone the slightest bit
hard of hearing. However if it's a usual 5.1 mix with dialog directed to
the centre, at home you can at least turn up the centre. If you dont
have a centre speaker then the simple answer is to get one.



  #25   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Chris K-Man Chris K-Man is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 42
Default Anything you think was consistently done better in the past inthe pro/commercial recording world than how it's done today?

On Tuesday, December 1, 2020 at 2:01:45 AM UTC-5, Trevor wrote:
On 30/11/2020 7:36 pm, Will StG wrote:
On Wednesday, August 26, 2020 at 11:57:46 PM UTC-4, Les Cargill wrote:

Why is the dialogue in film way too low in level and unintelligible?

Yep, action films are the worst where dialog is usually considered
completely unimportant compared to impressive sound effects.

When I asked a credentialed film mixer that question a couple weeks ago, he insisted it was because film is mixed mixed on a calibrated system and I was unfortunate enough to have an uncalibrated consumer system.

So either he expects all consumers to have professionally calibrated
systems, or he simply doesn't care about his ultimate customers.
He made sure to point out the letters after his name.

A sure sign of a ******.
I did ask him why he didn't check his mixes in his car (metaphorically.)
:-)
I'm not sure that is even the problem. It's simply a choice of what is
important in the mix, and sadly the dialog is often considered
secondary, and completely unintelligible for anyone the slightest bit
hard of hearing. However if it's a usual 5.1 mix with dialog directed to
the centre, at home you can at least turn up the centre. If you dont
have a centre speaker then the simple answer is to get one.

_______

But are we possibly falling into an old trap here - one of blaming the mixer/engineer for largely fulfilling the studio/director/producer's wishes?


  #26   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
None None is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 106
Default Anything you think was consistently done better in the past in the pro/commercial recording world than how it's done today?

"Theckmah the Dumb-**** Retard" wrote in message
...
But are we sneck


"We"? Do you have a mouse in your pocket, li'l buddy?

  #27   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Mike Rivers[_2_] Mike Rivers[_2_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,190
Default Anything you think was consistently done better in the past inthe pro/commercial recording world than how it's done today?

Today's music production depends greatly on the engineer and tools to
create sounds and fix problems.

In the olde days, the musicians played well, they had a good
arrangement, maybe did a couple of takes leaving room for some editing,
and the job was acceptable.

The perfect snare sample doesn't make a hit record, it's the perfect
drummer.


--
For a good time, call http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com
  #28   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Chris K-Man Chris K-Man is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 42
Default Anything you think was consistently done better in the past inthe pro/commercial recording world than how it's done today?

On Wednesday, August 26, 2020 at 12:48:08 AM UTC-4, ye.com wrote:
I'm talking about what one would label as the pro world of recording of material for mass consumption.

Is there anything about a particular arena of recording - pop, classical, opera, TV news, film, etc. - whatever - that you find lacking compared to an earlier era despite all the technology? Or do you think audio recording is at its zenith now?

______
I think our cultural 'zenith' was the years 1965 - 1985. The best movies, the best TV shows, some of the best books, and definitely, the best misic and best sound quality thereof. While digital audio is the most transparent format for capturing and playing back music, it has been abused terribly, by both engineers and their cloents, especially from the late 1990s to mid-last decade. And of course this led to the format being blamed, resulting in the renaissance of tried and true analog formats such as the vinyl LP.
  #29   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Les Cargill[_5_] Les Cargill[_5_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 44
Default Anything you think was consistently done better in the past inthe pro/commercial recording world than how it's done today?

Chris K-Man wrote:
On Wednesday, August 26, 2020 at 12:48:08 AM UTC-4, ye.com wrote:
I'm talking about what one would label as the pro world of
recording of material for mass consumption.

Is there anything about a particular arena of recording - pop,
classical, opera, TV news, film, etc. - whatever - that you find
lacking compared to an earlier era despite all the technology? Or
do you think audio recording is at its zenith now?

______ I think our cultural 'zenith' was the years 1965 - 1985.


"Pulp Fiction" was in 1994.

The best movies, the best TV shows,


"Twin Peaks: The Return" was 2017. "The best" now comes from cable
channels or premium cable channels; we're generally considered to be
in a "golden age".

Are we? I dunno. Probably.

some of the best books, and
definitely, the best misic and best sound quality thereof. While
digital audio is the most transparent format for capturing and
playing back music, it has been abused terribly, by both engineers
and their cloents, especially from the late 1990s to mid-last
decade. And of course this led to the format being blamed,
resulting in the renaissance of tried and true analog formats such
as the vinyl LP.


Things like Beat Detective and Melodyne have apparently been abused.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AFaRIW-wZlw

--
Les Cargill
  #30   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Chris K-Man Chris K-Man is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 42
Default Anything you think was consistently done better in the past inthe pro/commercial recording world than how it's done today?

On Sunday, August 30, 2020 at 1:44:32 PM UTC-4, Les Cargill wrote:
Chris K-Man wrote:
On Wednesday, August 26, 2020 at 12:48:08 AM UTC-4, ye.com wrote:
I'm talking about what one would label as the pro world of
recording of material for mass consumption.

Is there anything about a particular arena of recording - pop,
classical, opera, TV news, film, etc. - whatever - that you find
lacking compared to an earlier era despite all the technology? Or
do you think audio recording is at its zenith now?

______ I think our cultural 'zenith' was the years 1965 - 1985.

"Pulp Fiction" was in 1994.
The best movies, the best TV shows,

"Twin Peaks: The Return" was 2017. "The best" now comes from cable
channels or premium cable channels; we're generally considered to be
in a "golden age".

Are we? I dunno. Probably.
some of the best books, and
definitely, the best misic and best sound quality thereof. While
digital audio is the most transparent format for capturing and
playing back music, it has been abused terribly, by both engineers
and their cloents, especially from the late 1990s to mid-last
decade. And of course this led to the format being blamed,
resulting in the renaissance of tried and true analog formats such
as the vinyl LP.

Things like Beat Detective and Melodyne have apparently been abused.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AFaRIW-wZlw

--
Les Cargill

_______
Fer sure, there have been standouts before and since the period I referenced, just not at the same Gatlin gun rapid fire rate. Now is more like fire, load. lock. repeat. Single bolt action compared to then.


  #31   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
geoff geoff is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,812
Default Anything you think was consistently done better in the past inthe pro/commercial recording world than how it's done today?

On 31/08/2020 5:44 am, Les Cargill wrote:
Chris K-Man wrote:
On Wednesday, August 26, 2020 at 12:48:08 AM UTC-4, ye.com wrote:
I'm talking about what one would label as the pro world of
recording of material for mass consumption.

Is there anything about a particular arena of recording - pop,
classical, opera, TV news, film, etc. - whatever - that you find
lacking compared to an earlier era despite all the technology? Or
do you think audio recording is at its zenith now?

______ I think ourÂ* cultural 'zenith'Â* was the years 1965 -Â* 1985.


"Pulp Fiction" was in 1994.


... and Six Feet Under 2001 to 2005.

geoff
  #32   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Chris K-Man Chris K-Man is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 42
Default Anything you think was consistently done better in the past inthe pro/commercial recording world than how it's done today?

On Wednesday, August 26, 2020 at 12:48:08 AM UTC-4, yewyahoo.com wrote:
I'm talking about what one would label as the pro world of recording of material for mass consumption.

Is there anything about a particular arena of recording - pop, classical, opera, TV news, film, etc. - whatever - that you find lacking compared to an earlier era despite all the technology? Or do you think audio recording is at its zenith now?

______
I think our cultural 'zenith' was the years 1965 - 1985.
The best movies, the best TV shows, some of the best
books, and definitely, the best music and best sound
quality thereof. While digital audio is the most transparent
format for capturing and playing back music, it has been
abused terribly, by both engineers and their cloents,
especially from the late 1990s to mid-last decade.

And of
course this led to the format being blamed, resulting in the
renaissance of tried and true analog formats such as the
vinyl LP.
  #33   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Neil[_9_] Neil[_9_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 196
Default Anything you think was consistently done better in the past in the pro/commercial recording world than how it's done today?

On 8/30/2020 9:37 AM, Chris K-Man wrote:
On Wednesday, August 26, 2020 at 12:48:08 AM UTC-4, yewyahoo.com wrote:
I'm talking about what one would label as the pro world of recording of material for mass consumption.

Is there anything about a particular arena of recording - pop, classical, opera, TV news, film, etc. - whatever - that you find lacking compared to an earlier era despite all the technology? Or do you think audio recording is at its zenith now?

______
I think our cultural 'zenith' was the years 1965 - 1985.
The best movies, the best TV shows, some of the best
books, and definitely, the best music and best sound
quality thereof. While digital audio is the most transparent
format for capturing and playing back music, it has been
abused terribly, by both engineers and their cloents,
especially from the late 1990s to mid-last decade.

And of
course this led to the format being blamed, resulting in the
renaissance of tried and true analog formats such as the
vinyl LP.

It seems that, according to the comments in this topic, "the best years"
depends on one's age, cultural involvement, and exposure to the breadth
of material. So, from my perspective, movies went from being an art
form, with some of the best examples going back to the early 1900s to a
product marketing scheme.

Pop music was all over the board. Rock and Roll's popularity began
around 1950, and because it constituted a blending of the ethnic
diversity of this country, it was considered a threat to the "American
culture." The "British Invasion" of the '60s was an attempt to "purify"
and divide the country, ironically by having bands do covers of mid-50s
rock. Since Pat Boone couldn't do it with his covers of Little Richard
tunes, SOMEBODY had to! ;-)

There is no question that today's technology is far superior from the
microphones to the delivery material. But, the artistic connection to
real life experience is pretty rare. Heads seem to be fully tucked in
the sand these days.

--
best regards,

Neil
  #34   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Chris K-Man Chris K-Man is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 42
Default Anything you think was consistently done better in the past inthe pro/commercial recording world than how it's done today?

On Monday, August 31, 2020 at 7:14:15 AM UTC-4, Neil wrote:
On 8/30/2020 9:37 AM, Chris K-Man wrote:
On Wednesday, August 26, 2020 at 12:48:08 AM UTC-4, yewyahoo.com wrote:
I'm talking about what one would label as the pro world of recording of material for mass consumption.

Is there anything about a particular arena of recording - pop, classical, opera, TV news, film, etc. - whatever - that you find lacking compared to an earlier era despite all the technology? Or do you think audio recording is at its zenith now?

______
I think our cultural 'zenith' was the years 1965 - 1985.
The best movies, the best TV shows, some of the best
books, and definitely, the best music and best sound
quality thereof. While digital audio is the most transparent
format for capturing and playing back music, it has been
abused terribly, by both engineers and their cloents,
especially from the late 1990s to mid-last decade.

And of
course this led to the format being blamed, resulting in the
renaissance of tried and true analog formats such as the
vinyl LP.

It seems that, according to the comments in this topic, "the best years"
depends on one's age, cultural involvement, and exposure to the breadth
of material. So, from my perspective, movies went from being an art
form, with some of the best examples going back to the early 1900s to a
product marketing scheme.

Pop music was all over the board. Rock and Roll's popularity began
around 1950, and because it constituted a blending of the ethnic
diversity of this country, it was considered a threat to the "American
culture." The "British Invasion" of the '60s was an attempt to "purify"
and divide the country, ironically by having bands do covers of mid-50s
rock. Since Pat Boone couldn't do it with his covers of Little Richard
tunes, SOMEBODY had to! ;-)

There is no question that today's technology is far superior from the
microphones to the delivery material. But, the artistic connection to
real life experience is pretty rare. Heads seem to be fully tucked in
the sand these days.

--
best regards,

Neil

_______
Millennials can embrace their tech - but I embrace good writing, good acting, good composition, instrumental arrangement, and good technique at the recording, filming, mixing, mastering, whatever, stages.

Sure, today's mics, formats, and delivery might be better, but all that's being delivered is super hot slammed-to-**** music, and 'reboots of movies and TV from, again, the GREATEST AGE... the mid-60s to mid-80s. All in glorious 7.1 digital barfospheric surround. So... what!
  #35   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
geoff geoff is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,812
Default Anything you think was consistently done better in the past inthe pro/commercial recording world than how it's done today?

On 31/08/2020 11:41 pm, Chris K-Man wrote:
On Monday, August 31, 2020 at 7:14:15 AM UTC-4, Neil wrote:
On 8/30/2020 9:37 AM, Chris K-Man wrote:
On Wednesday, August 26, 2020 at 12:48:08 AM UTC-4, yewyahoo.com wrote:
I'm talking about what one would label as the pro world of recording of material for mass consumption.

Is there anything about a particular arena of recording - pop, classical, opera, TV news, film, etc. - whatever - that you find lacking compared to an earlier era despite all the technology? Or do you think audio recording is at its zenith now?
______
I think our cultural 'zenith' was the years 1965 - 1985.
The best movies, the best TV shows, some of the best
books, and definitely, the best music and best sound
quality thereof. While digital audio is the most transparent
format for capturing and playing back music, it has been
abused terribly, by both engineers and their cloents,
especially from the late 1990s to mid-last decade.

And of
course this led to the format being blamed, resulting in the
renaissance of tried and true analog formats such as the
vinyl LP.

It seems that, according to the comments in this topic, "the best years"
depends on one's age, cultural involvement, and exposure to the breadth
of material. So, from my perspective, movies went from being an art
form, with some of the best examples going back to the early 1900s to a
product marketing scheme.

Pop music was all over the board. Rock and Roll's popularity began
around 1950, and because it constituted a blending of the ethnic
diversity of this country, it was considered a threat to the "American
culture." The "British Invasion" of the '60s was an attempt to "purify"
and divide the country, ironically by having bands do covers of mid-50s
rock. Since Pat Boone couldn't do it with his covers of Little Richard
tunes, SOMEBODY had to! ;-)

There is no question that today's technology is far superior from the
microphones to the delivery material. But, the artistic connection to
real life experience is pretty rare. Heads seem to be fully tucked in
the sand these days.

--
best regards,

Neil

_______
Millennials can embrace their tech - but I embrace good writing, good acting, good composition, instrumental arrangement, and good technique at the recording, filming, mixing, mastering, whatever, stages.

Sure, today's mics, formats, and delivery might be better, but all that's being delivered is super hot slammed-to-**** music, and 'reboots of movies and TV from, again, the GREATEST AGE... the mid-60s to mid-80s. All in glorious 7.1 digital barfospheric surround. So... what!


The art is the thing. The technology, if not abused, is a bonus !

geoff


  #36   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
polymod polymod is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 584
Default Anything you think was consistently done better in the past in the pro/commercial recording world than how it's done today?



"geoff" wrote in message
...

major snippage


The art is the thing. The technology, if not abused, is a bonus !


+1. Great line Geoff.


Poly


--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

  #37   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Ralph Barone[_3_] Ralph Barone[_3_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 60
Default Anything you think was consistently done better in thepast in the pro/commercial recording world than how it's done today?

Neil wrote:
On 8/30/2020 9:37 AM, Chris K-Man wrote:
On Wednesday, August 26, 2020 at 12:48:08 AM UTC-4, yewyahoo.com wrote:
I'm talking about what one would label as the pro world of recording of
material for mass consumption.

Is there anything about a particular arena of recording - pop,
classical, opera, TV news, film, etc. - whatever - that you find
lacking compared to an earlier era despite all the technology? Or do
you think audio recording is at its zenith now?

______
I think our cultural 'zenith' was the years 1965 - 1985.
The best movies, the best TV shows, some of the best
books, and definitely, the best music and best sound
quality thereof. While digital audio is the most transparent
format for capturing and playing back music, it has been
abused terribly, by both engineers and their cloents,
especially from the late 1990s to mid-last decade.

And of
course this led to the format being blamed, resulting in the
renaissance of tried and true analog formats such as the
vinyl LP.

It seems that, according to the comments in this topic, "the best years"
depends on one's age, cultural involvement, and exposure to the breadth
of material. So, from my perspective, movies went from being an art
form, with some of the best examples going back to the early 1900s to a
product marketing scheme.

Pop music was all over the board. Rock and Roll's popularity began
around 1950, and because it constituted a blending of the ethnic
diversity of this country, it was considered a threat to the "American
culture." The "British Invasion" of the '60s was an attempt to "purify"
and divide the country, ironically by having bands do covers of mid-50s
rock. Since Pat Boone couldn't do it with his covers of Little Richard
tunes, SOMEBODY had to! ;-)

There is no question that today's technology is far superior from the
microphones to the delivery material. But, the artistic connection to
real life experience is pretty rare. Heads seem to be fully tucked in
the sand these days.


In my opinion, the €śbest music€ť always seems to have been produced when
ones hormonal production was also at its peak. Weird coincidence...

  #38   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Neil[_9_] Neil[_9_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 196
Default Anything you think was consistently done better in the past inthe pro/commercial recording world than how it's done today?

On 8/31/2020 10:32 AM, Ralph Barone wrote:
Neil wrote:
On 8/30/2020 9:37 AM, Chris K-Man wrote:
On Wednesday, August 26, 2020 at 12:48:08 AM UTC-4, yewyahoo.com wrote:
I'm talking about what one would label as the pro world of recording of
material for mass consumption.

Is there anything about a particular arena of recording - pop,
classical, opera, TV news, film, etc. - whatever - that you find
lacking compared to an earlier era despite all the technology? Or do
you think audio recording is at its zenith now?
______
I think our cultural 'zenith' was the years 1965 - 1985.
The best movies, the best TV shows, some of the best
books, and definitely, the best music and best sound
quality thereof. While digital audio is the most transparent
format for capturing and playing back music, it has been
abused terribly, by both engineers and their cloents,
especially from the late 1990s to mid-last decade.

And of
course this led to the format being blamed, resulting in the
renaissance of tried and true analog formats such as the
vinyl LP.

It seems that, according to the comments in this topic, "the best years"
depends on one's age, cultural involvement, and exposure to the breadth
of material. So, from my perspective, movies went from being an art
form, with some of the best examples going back to the early 1900s to a
product marketing scheme.

Pop music was all over the board. Rock and Roll's popularity began
around 1950, and because it constituted a blending of the ethnic
diversity of this country, it was considered a threat to the "American
culture." The "British Invasion" of the '60s was an attempt to "purify"
and divide the country, ironically by having bands do covers of mid-50s
rock. Since Pat Boone couldn't do it with his covers of Little Richard
tunes, SOMEBODY had to! ;-)

There is no question that today's technology is far superior from the
microphones to the delivery material. But, the artistic connection to
real life experience is pretty rare. Heads seem to be fully tucked in
the sand these days.


In my opinion, the €śbest music€ť always seems to have been produced when
ones hormonal production was also at its peak. Weird coincidence...

Interesting observation! Certainly true for "mindless music", but there
are other genres that aren't driven by impulse. I miss the explorative
nature of classical electronic music, such as used for the soundtrack of
"Forbidden Planet" and the social criticisms of Pete Seeger, Buffy St.
Marie and others.

--
best regards,

Neil
  #39   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Scott Dorsey Scott Dorsey is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,853
Default Anything you think was consistently done better in thepast in the pro/commercial recording world than how it's done today?

Neil wrote:

There is no question that today's technology is far superior from the
microphones to the delivery material. But, the artistic connection to
real life experience is pretty rare. Heads seem to be fully tucked in
the sand these days.


Sure, but it has -always- been pretty rare. It's bad, but don't let anyone
tell you that it was ever any better.

There are a million Salieris for every Mozart.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
  #40   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Neil[_9_] Neil[_9_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 196
Default Anything you think was consistently done better in the past inthe pro/commercial recording world than how it's done today?

On 8/31/2020 11:52 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Neil wrote:

There is no question that today's technology is far superior from the
microphones to the delivery material. But, the artistic connection to
real life experience is pretty rare. Heads seem to be fully tucked in
the sand these days.


Sure, but it has -always- been pretty rare. It's bad, but don't let anyone
tell you that it was ever any better.

There are a million Salieris for every Mozart.
--scott

True, but the differences are pretty similar between the Salieris and
the Mozarts. The Salieris were trying to emulate while the Mozarts were
creating (at least as they've been presented in the media). However, I
don't think the instant marketing success of art is an accurate measure,
as many of the best art pieces didn't achieve that status until long
after the artists' demise.

Today, there isn't much effort, and even less "value" in being creative.
Movies have become a variant of Kabuki theater. Music concerts are more
about the audience than the performers, because the audiences stopped
listening in the early '70s and now spend more time on their phones than
paying attention to what's going on... not that what's going on requires
a lot of attention.

--
best regards,

Neil


Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Commercial Recording Quality Audio Empire High End Audio 6 May 16th 10 12:45 AM
LOOKING For A DEAL On A World Class POWER CORD? | ENDS TODAY WENW Marketplace 0 April 18th 05 08:56 AM
LOOKING For A DEAL On World Class BALANCED INTERCONNECTS? | ENDS TODAY WENW Marketplace 0 April 18th 05 08:56 AM
LOOKING For A DEAL On World Class INTERCONNECTS? | ENDS TODAY WENW Marketplace 0 April 18th 05 08:56 AM
Buying a commercial recording studio? wintersky Pro Audio 6 May 10th 04 05:44 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:20 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AudioBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Audio and hi-fi"