"Kurt Albershardt" wrote in message ...

David Morgan (MAMS) wrote:

I took his word for that.


This is where the sinking feeling started for me...


I have here with, formally Crashed and Burned.

DM

"Kurt Albershardt" wrote in message ...

David Morgan (MAMS) wrote:

I took his word for that.


This is where the sinking feeling started for me...


I have here with, formally Crashed and Burned.

DM

David Morgan wrote:

I think I'm gonna' be sick. This is probably the worst mistake I have
made in years. I'm beating myself silly over not being able to hear
this on-site.

You were impaired by someone who didn't allow you to remove from the
chain that which you didn't need. In addition, a different monitoring
environment is not always, maybe not even often, reliable in the same
way your own scene is; you know there is lots more to it than one's own
speakers and amps and the biggest part of it is the room.

I'll try to hear the stuff tomorrow when I visit Kurt in Reno (did I say
"haul it in over a T1 line instead of dialup?" g), but no matter how
it sounds I think the biggest lesson here, and not just for you but for
all of us when facing work in a strange room (which might also be a
weird room), is a contract clause giving you the authority to place into
or remove from the signal chain any piece of kit you wish to use/not
use. I'm willing to think the studio guy has more money than experience
and that his tech is just what such a person would think qualified. The
upshot is that they can offer less than no useful support and their
ignorance and desire for control insist on maintaining their image as
the big guys on the scene, at the same time as it ****s over the person
trying to get quality work done.

I feel for you; I recently finished my most grueling and worst-sounding
project since maybe 1969. **** happens, and sometimes it's a floodgate
burst of ****. I'd say I ought to be grateful because it can't get
worse, but I know better. Floodgate, hell; what if the levee breaks?

--
ha

David Morgan wrote:

I think I'm gonna' be sick. This is probably the worst mistake I have
made in years. I'm beating myself silly over not being able to hear
this on-site.

You were impaired by someone who didn't allow you to remove from the
chain that which you didn't need. In addition, a different monitoring
environment is not always, maybe not even often, reliable in the same
way your own scene is; you know there is lots more to it than one's own
speakers and amps and the biggest part of it is the room.

I'll try to hear the stuff tomorrow when I visit Kurt in Reno (did I say
"haul it in over a T1 line instead of dialup?" g), but no matter how
it sounds I think the biggest lesson here, and not just for you but for
all of us when facing work in a strange room (which might also be a
weird room), is a contract clause giving you the authority to place into
or remove from the signal chain any piece of kit you wish to use/not
use. I'm willing to think the studio guy has more money than experience
and that his tech is just what such a person would think qualified. The
upshot is that they can offer less than no useful support and their
ignorance and desire for control insist on maintaining their image as
the big guys on the scene, at the same time as it ****s over the person
trying to get quality work done.

I feel for you; I recently finished my most grueling and worst-sounding
project since maybe 1969. **** happens, and sometimes it's a floodgate
burst of ****. I'd say I ought to be grateful because it can't get
worse, but I know better. Floodgate, hell; what if the levee breaks?

--
ha

Being able to 'pitch' the HD-24 down with the BRC, I'm not overly
concerned about what went on with the sample rate conversion.
Should I be? I see this as staying constant from the original ADAT
source tapes.

Probably not. Do you have the source files on ADAT? Why not just tranfer
them to a computer and mix it in the peecee?

There was no other software or hardware two-tracker or editor on site
and the Masterlink wasn't on a GUI, so I really didn't know exactly what
it could do, couldn't do, or could have been doing... either in the
burning
path or the monitor path. (I was already 'parametered' to death making
the rest of the system talk peacefully).

I made a big mistake here in taking these two pieces of gear and thier
owner's word for granted - - and of course for not already knowing more
about either of them (and the studio).

Sounds like a bad choice of rooms to me. I wouldn't beat myself up over it.
Just fix it and move on...

Being able to 'pitch' the HD-24 down with the BRC, I'm not overly
concerned about what went on with the sample rate conversion.
Should I be? I see this as staying constant from the original ADAT
source tapes.

Probably not. Do you have the source files on ADAT? Why not just tranfer
them to a computer and mix it in the peecee?

There was no other software or hardware two-tracker or editor on site
and the Masterlink wasn't on a GUI, so I really didn't know exactly what
it could do, couldn't do, or could have been doing... either in the
burning
path or the monitor path. (I was already 'parametered' to death making
the rest of the system talk peacefully).

I made a big mistake here in taking these two pieces of gear and thier
owner's word for granted - - and of course for not already knowing more
about either of them (and the studio).

Sounds like a bad choice of rooms to me. I wouldn't beat myself up over it.
Just fix it and move on...

David Morgan wrote:

I had already established a good hourly charge in Dallas should we have
been forced to 'fold' on the spot, but the producer half of the client could
not come to Dallas for the mixes.

I told the last client who presented me with that situation that they
could get it mixed elsewhere, or they could forego being at the mixing
and I'd mix it here. They took brief umbrage, until I told them I work
where I know I can do my best and that if I couldn't do that for them I
shouldn't be mixing. I mixed it here.

--
ha

David Morgan wrote:

I had already established a good hourly charge in Dallas should we have
been forced to 'fold' on the spot, but the producer half of the client could
not come to Dallas for the mixes.

I told the last client who presented me with that situation that they
could get it mixed elsewhere, or they could forego being at the mixing
and I'd mix it here. They took brief umbrage, until I told them I work
where I know I can do my best and that if I couldn't do that for them I
shouldn't be mixing. I mixed it here.

--
ha

On Sat, 10 Jul 2004 22:11:47 GMT, "David Morgan \(MAMS\)"
wrote:

"Kurt Albershardt" wrote in message ...

This is where the sinking feeling started for me...

I have here with, formally Crashed and Burned.

I don't do this kind of work, and really can only follow
the highlights, but I'm sure I speak for everyone who
ever might, or even hope to, by saying thanks for
posting a good solid lesson in real world dynamics.

How can anybody deal with such a complicated problem set?
Hats off, guy.

And all good fortune,

Chris Hornbeck

On Sat, 10 Jul 2004 22:11:47 GMT, "David Morgan \(MAMS\)"
wrote:

"Kurt Albershardt" wrote in message ...

This is where the sinking feeling started for me...

I have here with, formally Crashed and Burned.

I don't do this kind of work, and really can only follow
the highlights, but I'm sure I speak for everyone who
ever might, or even hope to, by saying thanks for
posting a good solid lesson in real world dynamics.

How can anybody deal with such a complicated problem set?
Hats off, guy.

And all good fortune,

Chris Hornbeck

In article writes:

Quite honestly Mike, I could never get behind the console to really see
what the physical routing actually was. I could only experiment with routing
paths within the console and assumed that if I heard something on what
was supposedly an analog input, then it was likely analog. In the control
room cue system however, I ran across no ability to select the sources
for the 2-track monitor returns. So, I really don't know if they were analogue
or digital... I just pushed the button for the playback source and listened.

Hmmmm . . . well there must have been a button or a menu on there
somewhere to select the monitoring source. But what's fishy is that if
you could play the Masterlink and hear what you just recorded, you had
to have been listening to what you took home. Maybe he had the
Masterlink output connected to a couple of channels on another layer
of the console that were always up, so that's how you heard the
Masterlink.

If you were actually monitoring the console's mix bus when you were
mixing, then I could see that what you heard could be different from
what went to the Masterlink through the Finalizer. But when you played
back the Masterlink recording through the monitor system (however it
got there) there's no question that you'd hear what was recorded.

I dunno. But I've gotta admit that if I was in your place, other than
trying to bypass the Finalizer and make sure that the Masterlink
wasn't putting anything in the recording path, I would have taken it
on faith that the studio basically worked. That's what you did, and
you didn't have any reason to believe otherwise (until you got home).


--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

In article writes:

Quite honestly Mike, I could never get behind the console to really see
what the physical routing actually was. I could only experiment with routing
paths within the console and assumed that if I heard something on what
was supposedly an analog input, then it was likely analog. In the control
room cue system however, I ran across no ability to select the sources
for the 2-track monitor returns. So, I really don't know if they were analogue
or digital... I just pushed the button for the playback source and listened.

Hmmmm . . . well there must have been a button or a menu on there
somewhere to select the monitoring source. But what's fishy is that if
you could play the Masterlink and hear what you just recorded, you had
to have been listening to what you took home. Maybe he had the
Masterlink output connected to a couple of channels on another layer
of the console that were always up, so that's how you heard the
Masterlink.

If you were actually monitoring the console's mix bus when you were
mixing, then I could see that what you heard could be different from
what went to the Masterlink through the Finalizer. But when you played
back the Masterlink recording through the monitor system (however it
got there) there's no question that you'd hear what was recorded.

I dunno. But I've gotta admit that if I was in your place, other than
trying to bypass the Finalizer and make sure that the Masterlink
wasn't putting anything in the recording path, I would have taken it
on faith that the studio basically worked. That's what you did, and
you didn't have any reason to believe otherwise (until you got home).


--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

Mike Rivers wrote:

Still, unless the monitors were connected to the analog output of the
console (I think you said they came off the Masterlink) you should
have been monitoring whatever the Finalizer was doing. So that points
to the monitoring system.

This was my first thought, but then I thought "Dave knows damn well (and probably better than I) how monitors affect the mix process."

One of the (few) good points about the whole '80s NS-10 thing: Mix in a strange room but at least keep your monitors (which are close to you and have no LF output so they don't interact much with the room) familiar...

Mike Rivers wrote:

Still, unless the monitors were connected to the analog output of the
console (I think you said they came off the Masterlink) you should
have been monitoring whatever the Finalizer was doing. So that points
to the monitoring system.

This was my first thought, but then I thought "Dave knows damn well (and probably better than I) how monitors affect the mix process."

One of the (few) good points about the whole '80s NS-10 thing: Mix in a strange room but at least keep your monitors (which are close to you and have no LF output so they don't interact much with the room) familiar...

David Morgan (MAMS) wrote:

This seems to be the concensus of opinion from anyone here locally or
anyone who's responded that has heard the tracks. This was a hard-
wired line from the 2-track outputs of the Sony desk, to the Finalizer,
and then to the Masterlink.... Which I also didn't discover until today,
has it's own share of DSP capabilities. I was told on site to simply
treat the Masterlink as I would a standard hard disc recorder.

This has made me think--I should plan to carry my Sound Devices hard disk recorder with me to any kind of gig, no matter what the alleged scope of work.

David Morgan (MAMS) wrote:

This seems to be the concensus of opinion from anyone here locally or
anyone who's responded that has heard the tracks. This was a hard-
wired line from the 2-track outputs of the Sony desk, to the Finalizer,
and then to the Masterlink.... Which I also didn't discover until today,
has it's own share of DSP capabilities. I was told on site to simply
treat the Masterlink as I would a standard hard disc recorder.

This has made me think--I should plan to carry my Sound Devices hard disk recorder with me to any kind of gig, no matter what the alleged scope of work.

David Morgan (MAMS) wrote:

"Mike Rivers" wrote in message news:znr1089372732k@trad...

I guess I'm headed for a music store to play with a Finalizer. I would
have thought not, but the 'soft limit' indicator was definitely flashing
with some transients.


"Soft limit" is just a euphamism for compression with a fairly high
threshold and fairly high ratio, so it indeed starts working before
reaching full scale.


I think I'm gonna' be sick. This is probably the worst mistake I have
made in years. I'm beating myself silly over not being able to hear
this on-site.

Sure, I may have been impaired by altitude, but I had two days prior to
the mix dates to acclimate. Or by the mix environment? Maybe, but
I can't easily blame this... I had his Dynaudios, my Tannoys, my head-
phones, and I've mixed plenty of decent stuff in bedrooms and patios.
Even though you could hear some reflections in the control room as
you spoke, it's still tough to want to lay the blame there.

What I'm hearing in those tracks is not any kind of 'soft limiting' I've ever driven. More like a diode clipper (on the affected frequency range.)

David Morgan (MAMS) wrote:

"Mike Rivers" wrote in message news:znr1089372732k@trad...

I guess I'm headed for a music store to play with a Finalizer. I would
have thought not, but the 'soft limit' indicator was definitely flashing
with some transients.


"Soft limit" is just a euphamism for compression with a fairly high
threshold and fairly high ratio, so it indeed starts working before
reaching full scale.


I think I'm gonna' be sick. This is probably the worst mistake I have
made in years. I'm beating myself silly over not being able to hear
this on-site.

Sure, I may have been impaired by altitude, but I had two days prior to
the mix dates to acclimate. Or by the mix environment? Maybe, but
I can't easily blame this... I had his Dynaudios, my Tannoys, my head-
phones, and I've mixed plenty of decent stuff in bedrooms and patios.
Even though you could hear some reflections in the control room as
you spoke, it's still tough to want to lay the blame there.

What I'm hearing in those tracks is not any kind of 'soft limiting' I've ever driven. More like a diode clipper (on the affected frequency range.)

hank alrich wrote:

I think the biggest lesson here, and not just for you but for
all of us when facing work in a strange room (which might also be a
weird room), is a contract clause giving you the authority to place into
or remove from the signal chain any piece of kit you wish to use/not
use.

Damn, never thought to ask for that--but I guess it now needs to go into the mental 'rider.'





I feel for you; I recently finished my most grueling and worst-sounding
project since maybe 1969. **** happens

Yeah, and I was part of making it happen ;

hank alrich wrote:

I think the biggest lesson here, and not just for you but for
all of us when facing work in a strange room (which might also be a
weird room), is a contract clause giving you the authority to place into
or remove from the signal chain any piece of kit you wish to use/not
use.

Damn, never thought to ask for that--but I guess it now needs to go into the mental 'rider.'





I feel for you; I recently finished my most grueling and worst-sounding
project since maybe 1969. **** happens

Yeah, and I was part of making it happen ;

In article writes:

I think the biggest lesson here, and not just for you but for
all of us when facing work in a strange room (which might also be a
weird room), is a contract clause giving you the authority to place into
or remove from the signal chain any piece of kit you wish to use/not
use.

"I don't think that wall is doing us any good. Let's take it out."


--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

In article writes:

I think the biggest lesson here, and not just for you but for
all of us when facing work in a strange room (which might also be a
weird room), is a contract clause giving you the authority to place into
or remove from the signal chain any piece of kit you wish to use/not
use.

"I don't think that wall is doing us any good. Let's take it out."


--
I'm really Mike Rivers )
However, until the spam goes away or Hell freezes over,
lots of IP addresses are blocked from this system. If
you e-mail me and it bounces, use your secret decoder ring
and reach me he double-m-eleven-double-zero at yahoo

"Kurt Albershardt" wrote in message ...
David Morgan (MAMS) wrote:

This seems to be the concensus of opinion from anyone here locally or
anyone who's responded that has heard the tracks. This was a hard-
wired line from the 2-track outputs of the Sony desk, to the Finalizer,
and then to the Masterlink.... Which I also didn't discover until today,
has it's own share of DSP capabilities. I was told on site to simply
treat the Masterlink as I would a standard hard disc recorder.

This has made me think--I should plan to carry my Sound Devices hard
disk recorder with me to any kind of gig, no matter what the alleged scope
of work.

The studio's web site actually contains very little information regarding the
studio itself. I had to obtain input for my recommendation to the client from
his personal research done locally in Montana. I leaned toward the studio with
the equipment that I thought could help us get the job done with the greatest
ease and most efficiency. I never gave consideration to the fact that this type
of gear could be placed in such a substandard room, nor did I think for a single
moment, that I wouldn't have the ability to be mixing to a more standard,
graphically interfaced, 2-track editor. I also expected that an experienced
operator would be part of the package. Not that *any* of this is an excuse
for my oversights....

--
David Morgan (MAMS)
http://www.m-a-m-s DOT com

"Kurt Albershardt" wrote in message ...
David Morgan (MAMS) wrote:

This seems to be the concensus of opinion from anyone here locally or
anyone who's responded that has heard the tracks. This was a hard-
wired line from the 2-track outputs of the Sony desk, to the Finalizer,
and then to the Masterlink.... Which I also didn't discover until today,
has it's own share of DSP capabilities. I was told on site to simply
treat the Masterlink as I would a standard hard disc recorder.

This has made me think--I should plan to carry my Sound Devices hard
disk recorder with me to any kind of gig, no matter what the alleged scope
of work.

The studio's web site actually contains very little information regarding the
studio itself. I had to obtain input for my recommendation to the client from
his personal research done locally in Montana. I leaned toward the studio with
the equipment that I thought could help us get the job done with the greatest
ease and most efficiency. I never gave consideration to the fact that this type
of gear could be placed in such a substandard room, nor did I think for a single
moment, that I wouldn't have the ability to be mixing to a more standard,
graphically interfaced, 2-track editor. I also expected that an experienced
operator would be part of the package. Not that *any* of this is an excuse
for my oversights....

--
David Morgan (MAMS)
http://www.m-a-m-s DOT com

"Kurt Albershardt" wrote in message ...
hank alrich wrote:

I think the biggest lesson here, and not just for you but for
all of us when facing work in a strange room (which might also be a
weird room), is a contract clause giving you the authority to place into
or remove from the signal chain any piece of kit you wish to use/not
use.

Damn, never thought to ask for that--but I guess it now needs to go into
the mental 'rider.'


I feel for you; I recently finished my most grueling and worst-sounding
project since maybe 1969. **** happens

Yeah, and I was part of making it happen ;


So, Hank will be there this afternoon... expect an ass-kicking. :-\

DM

"Kurt Albershardt" wrote in message ...
hank alrich wrote:

I think the biggest lesson here, and not just for you but for
all of us when facing work in a strange room (which might also be a
weird room), is a contract clause giving you the authority to place into
or remove from the signal chain any piece of kit you wish to use/not
use.

Damn, never thought to ask for that--but I guess it now needs to go into
the mental 'rider.'


I feel for you; I recently finished my most grueling and worst-sounding
project since maybe 1969. **** happens

Yeah, and I was part of making it happen ;


So, Hank will be there this afternoon... expect an ass-kicking. :-\

DM

"hank alrich" wrote in message . ..
David Morgan wrote:

I think I'm gonna' be sick. This is probably the worst mistake I have
made in years. I'm beating myself silly over not being able to hear
this on-site.

You were impaired by someone who didn't allow you to remove from the
chain that which you didn't need.

It was hardwired into the path... custom cut cables and the whole 9 yards.
This was another reason that I assumed (terrible word) the device would
be 90% passive.... everyone who works there - including a few honest to
goodness "names" - have apparently had to deal with this.

I'll try to hear the stuff tomorrow when I visit Kurt in Reno (did I say
"haul it in over a T1 line instead of dialup?" g),

I think Kurt already has it in cache, if not in audio files. I'd appreciate
any input, since I obviously can't 'go back' on this one to determine
the exact cause. (Other than what is understood to be weaknesses
in product knowledge and oversights on my part).

but no matter how
it sounds I think the biggest lesson here, and not just for you but for
all of us when facing work in a strange room (which might also be a
weird room), is a contract clause giving you the authority to place into
or remove from the signal chain any piece of kit you wish to use/not
use.

Hear - hear.

I'm willing to think the studio guy has more money than experience
and that his tech is just what such a person would think qualified. The
upshot is that they can offer less than no useful support and their
ignorance and desire for control insist on maintaining their image as
the big guys on the scene, at the same time as it ****s over the person
trying to get quality work done.

I quite honestly cannot believe he was that ignorant of the internal
workings of his own gear. I could never truly determine if he was
simply holding back information in order to make the statement,
"If you don't know the gear, you shouldn't be here." I can't tell you
how many times he became irate that we were "bothering" him
over technical issues and let fly with innuendo to the effect of expecting
extra money for 'technical fees' for having to deal with configuration
issues given how little cough-cough he was charging for the room.

There aren't a boatload of studios in that part of Montana, and I thought
that I was recommending the best of what was made available by the
client's research.

Floodgate, hell; what if the levee breaks?

I only have a finger for the dyke. My fist is all used up. g

--
David Morgan (MAMS)
http://www.m-a-m-s DOT com

"hank alrich" wrote in message . ..
David Morgan wrote:

I think I'm gonna' be sick. This is probably the worst mistake I have
made in years. I'm beating myself silly over not being able to hear
this on-site.

You were impaired by someone who didn't allow you to remove from the
chain that which you didn't need.

It was hardwired into the path... custom cut cables and the whole 9 yards.
This was another reason that I assumed (terrible word) the device would
be 90% passive.... everyone who works there - including a few honest to
goodness "names" - have apparently had to deal with this.

I'll try to hear the stuff tomorrow when I visit Kurt in Reno (did I say
"haul it in over a T1 line instead of dialup?" g),

I think Kurt already has it in cache, if not in audio files. I'd appreciate
any input, since I obviously can't 'go back' on this one to determine
the exact cause. (Other than what is understood to be weaknesses
in product knowledge and oversights on my part).

but no matter how
it sounds I think the biggest lesson here, and not just for you but for
all of us when facing work in a strange room (which might also be a
weird room), is a contract clause giving you the authority to place into
or remove from the signal chain any piece of kit you wish to use/not
use.

Hear - hear.

I'm willing to think the studio guy has more money than experience
and that his tech is just what such a person would think qualified. The
upshot is that they can offer less than no useful support and their
ignorance and desire for control insist on maintaining their image as
the big guys on the scene, at the same time as it ****s over the person
trying to get quality work done.

I quite honestly cannot believe he was that ignorant of the internal
workings of his own gear. I could never truly determine if he was
simply holding back information in order to make the statement,
"If you don't know the gear, you shouldn't be here." I can't tell you
how many times he became irate that we were "bothering" him
over technical issues and let fly with innuendo to the effect of expecting
extra money for 'technical fees' for having to deal with configuration
issues given how little cough-cough he was charging for the room.

There aren't a boatload of studios in that part of Montana, and I thought
that I was recommending the best of what was made available by the
client's research.

Floodgate, hell; what if the levee breaks?

I only have a finger for the dyke. My fist is all used up. g

--
David Morgan (MAMS)
http://www.m-a-m-s DOT com

"Kurt Albershardt" wrote in message ...

David Morgan (MAMS) wrote:

"Mike Rivers" wrote in message news:znr1089372732k@trad...

"Soft limit" is just a euphamism for compression with a fairly high
threshold and fairly high ratio, so it indeed starts working before
reaching full scale.

I think I'm gonna' be sick. This is probably the worst mistake I have
made in years. I'm beating myself silly over not being able to hear
this on-site.

What I'm hearing in those tracks is not any kind of 'soft limiting' I've ever
driven. More like a diode clipper (on the affected frequency range.)

It would appear to me that everything between around 1.6K up to 5K+ is
squashed. If I crank the level, it's not too bad... but there's no way that
the average listener of swing will do that.

Any other input is appreciated.

I'd say the tracks were a bit mangled, but I've received two EQ'd versions
of the sample that aren't too bad... so mastering may have to sprinkle the
pixie dust.

DM

"Kurt Albershardt" wrote in message ...

David Morgan (MAMS) wrote:

"Mike Rivers" wrote in message news:znr1089372732k@trad...

"Soft limit" is just a euphamism for compression with a fairly high
threshold and fairly high ratio, so it indeed starts working before
reaching full scale.

I think I'm gonna' be sick. This is probably the worst mistake I have
made in years. I'm beating myself silly over not being able to hear
this on-site.

What I'm hearing in those tracks is not any kind of 'soft limiting' I've ever
driven. More like a diode clipper (on the affected frequency range.)

It would appear to me that everything between around 1.6K up to 5K+ is
squashed. If I crank the level, it's not too bad... but there's no way that
the average listener of swing will do that.

Any other input is appreciated.

I'd say the tracks were a bit mangled, but I've received two EQ'd versions
of the sample that aren't too bad... so mastering may have to sprinkle the
pixie dust.

DM

On Sat, 10 Jul 2004 20:55:04 -0400, Chris Hornbeck wrote
(in article ):

On Sat, 10 Jul 2004 22:11:47 GMT, "David Morgan \(MAMS\)"
wrote:

"Kurt Albershardt" wrote in message ...

This is where the sinking feeling started for me...

I have here with, formally Crashed and Burned.

I don't do this kind of work, and really can only follow
the highlights, but I'm sure I speak for everyone who
ever might, or even hope to, by saying thanks for
posting a good solid lesson in real world dynamics.

How can anybody deal with such a complicated problem set?
Hats off, guy.

And all good fortune,

Chris Hornbeck

Right on Chris. David I feel your pain. I'm still haunted by a few recording
or mixing situations. On the upside, we learn a lot more from our mistakes
than we do our successes.

Regards,

Ty Ford


-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at http://home.comcast.net/~tyreeford

On Sat, 10 Jul 2004 20:55:04 -0400, Chris Hornbeck wrote
(in article ):

On Sat, 10 Jul 2004 22:11:47 GMT, "David Morgan \(MAMS\)"
wrote:

"Kurt Albershardt" wrote in message ...

This is where the sinking feeling started for me...

I have here with, formally Crashed and Burned.

I don't do this kind of work, and really can only follow
the highlights, but I'm sure I speak for everyone who
ever might, or even hope to, by saying thanks for
posting a good solid lesson in real world dynamics.

How can anybody deal with such a complicated problem set?
Hats off, guy.

And all good fortune,

Chris Hornbeck

Right on Chris. David I feel your pain. I'm still haunted by a few recording
or mixing situations. On the upside, we learn a lot more from our mistakes
than we do our successes.

Regards,

Ty Ford


-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at http://home.comcast.net/~tyreeford

"Ty Ford" wrote in message ...
On Sat, 10 Jul 2004 20:55:04 -0400, Chris Hornbeck wrote
(in article ):

On Sat, 10 Jul 2004 22:11:47 GMT, "David Morgan \(MAMS\)"
wrote:

"Kurt Albershardt" wrote in message ...

David Morgan (MAMS) wrote:

I took his word for that.

This is where the sinking feeling started for me...

I have here with, formally Crashed and Burned.

I don't do this kind of work, and really can only follow
the highlights, but I'm sure I speak for everyone who
ever might, or even hope to, by saying thanks for
posting a good solid lesson in real world dynamics.

More often, in my experience anyway, there really *is* a house tech
available to answer equipment specific questions and to aid with a
preferred configuration. Had I owned the place, I wouldn't have even
*considered* leaving the room until the visiting engineer was totally at
ease. There were way too many $$$ in equipment there to sluff of the
possiblity of damage or misuse. Being handed the manuals by the
owner of a well paid studio at the end of a cross-country flight was
waaay more of a shocker than the bad transfer. I suppose that
'feces occurs' now and then.


How can anybody deal with such a complicated problem set?

I really never gave this much thought. I had a job to do, so it was either
do it or look like a wimp. Once I had a grip on what the situation had
become, I tried to keep my questions to a minimum. We essentially
never saw the owner after the end of day one. The place was basically
OK, there was just a serious customer service issue

The thought of exactly what I was dealing with really only crossed my
mind during the couple of meetings wherein we were deciding whether
or not to stay or to leave. In many ways, I felt like caving in more than
once but managed to keep that inside... allowing the client to continue
with an open mind. Needless to say, the client was also quite a champ
in dealing with the situation, since this affected him, his schedule and
his pocketbook far more than anyone else.

Hats off, guy.

And all good fortune,

Chris Hornbeck

Right on Chris. David I feel your pain. I'm still haunted by a few recording
or mixing situations. On the upside, we learn a lot more from our mistakes
than we do our successes.

Indeed. I am now more than just a little familiar with the Sony DMX desk and
I've successfully used the lasis HD-24 and the Masterlink for the first time.

And without reservation, I can definitely say that my (political) communication
and social skills were given a work out that will not soon be forgotten.

Regards,

Ty Ford

--
David Morgan (MAMS)
http://www.m-a-m-s DOT com
Morgan Audio Media Service
Dallas, Texas (214) 662-9901
_______________________________________
http://www.artisan-recordingstudio.com

"Ty Ford" wrote in message ...
On Sat, 10 Jul 2004 20:55:04 -0400, Chris Hornbeck wrote
(in article ):

On Sat, 10 Jul 2004 22:11:47 GMT, "David Morgan \(MAMS\)"
wrote:

"Kurt Albershardt" wrote in message ...

David Morgan (MAMS) wrote:

I took his word for that.

This is where the sinking feeling started for me...

I have here with, formally Crashed and Burned.

I don't do this kind of work, and really can only follow
the highlights, but I'm sure I speak for everyone who
ever might, or even hope to, by saying thanks for
posting a good solid lesson in real world dynamics.

More often, in my experience anyway, there really *is* a house tech
available to answer equipment specific questions and to aid with a
preferred configuration. Had I owned the place, I wouldn't have even
*considered* leaving the room until the visiting engineer was totally at
ease. There were way too many $$$ in equipment there to sluff of the
possiblity of damage or misuse. Being handed the manuals by the
owner of a well paid studio at the end of a cross-country flight was
waaay more of a shocker than the bad transfer. I suppose that
'feces occurs' now and then.


How can anybody deal with such a complicated problem set?

I really never gave this much thought. I had a job to do, so it was either
do it or look like a wimp. Once I had a grip on what the situation had
become, I tried to keep my questions to a minimum. We essentially
never saw the owner after the end of day one. The place was basically
OK, there was just a serious customer service issue

The thought of exactly what I was dealing with really only crossed my
mind during the couple of meetings wherein we were deciding whether
or not to stay or to leave. In many ways, I felt like caving in more than
once but managed to keep that inside... allowing the client to continue
with an open mind. Needless to say, the client was also quite a champ
in dealing with the situation, since this affected him, his schedule and
his pocketbook far more than anyone else.

Hats off, guy.

And all good fortune,

Chris Hornbeck

Right on Chris. David I feel your pain. I'm still haunted by a few recording
or mixing situations. On the upside, we learn a lot more from our mistakes
than we do our successes.

Indeed. I am now more than just a little familiar with the Sony DMX desk and
I've successfully used the lasis HD-24 and the Masterlink for the first time.

And without reservation, I can definitely say that my (political) communication
and social skills were given a work out that will not soon be forgotten.

Regards,

Ty Ford

--
David Morgan (MAMS)
http://www.m-a-m-s DOT com
Morgan Audio Media Service
Dallas, Texas (214) 662-9901
_______________________________________
http://www.artisan-recordingstudio.com

"Mike Rivers" wrote in message news:znr1089500073k@trad...

In article writes:

Quite honestly Mike, I could never get behind the console to really see
what the physical routing actually was. I could only experiment with routing
paths within the console and assumed that if I heard something on what
was supposedly an analog input, then it was likely analog. In the control
room cue system however, I ran across no ability to select the sources
for the 2-track monitor returns. So, I really don't know if they were analogue
or digital... I just pushed the button for the playback source and listened.

Hmmmm . . . well there must have been a button or a menu on there
somewhere to select the monitoring source. But what's fishy is that if
you could play the Masterlink and hear what you just recorded, you had
to have been listening to what you took home. Maybe he had the
Masterlink output connected to a couple of channels on another layer
of the console that were always up, so that's how you heard the
Masterlink.

It was hard wired to one of the 2-track returns. The gain of the return
did not even come close to the average mix level of the desk, so for
playback, we had to crank it up a notch or two.

Two things come to mind now... 1). I should have spent more time
monitoring from the Masterlink, but since it's a read before write device
I didn't go there too often. 2). Since the playback gain was 5 or 6 dB
down from the average mix level, it could have contributed to my inability
to detect the differences.

If you were actually monitoring the console's mix bus when you were
mixing, then I could see that what you heard could be different from
what went to the Masterlink through the Finalizer. But when you played
back the Masterlink recording through the monitor system (however it
got there) there's no question that you'd hear what was recorded.

I dunno. But I've gotta admit that if I was in your place, other than
trying to bypass the Finalizer and make sure that the Masterlink
wasn't putting anything in the recording path, I would have taken it
on faith that the studio basically worked. That's what you did, and
you didn't have any reason to believe otherwise (until you got home).

I have about decided that overlooking the fine details of the Finalizer by
assuming the owner's statement of "peak limiting only" was accurate,
is the crux of my oddball results. We did burn several CDs of mixes
during the process to play in their vehicles, but there were really no
anomalies that could easily be picked out there.

Chalk one up for experience as applies to me, but I still need to do the
best thing I can for the client to make this better for him. My guess is
that mastering will have to do because of the time and budget constraints.


Thanks...
--
David Morgan (MAMS)
http://www.m-a-m-s DOT com

"Mike Rivers" wrote in message news:znr1089500073k@trad...

In article writes:

Quite honestly Mike, I could never get behind the console to really see
what the physical routing actually was. I could only experiment with routing
paths within the console and assumed that if I heard something on what
was supposedly an analog input, then it was likely analog. In the control
room cue system however, I ran across no ability to select the sources
for the 2-track monitor returns. So, I really don't know if they were analogue
or digital... I just pushed the button for the playback source and listened.

Hmmmm . . . well there must have been a button or a menu on there
somewhere to select the monitoring source. But what's fishy is that if
you could play the Masterlink and hear what you just recorded, you had
to have been listening to what you took home. Maybe he had the
Masterlink output connected to a couple of channels on another layer
of the console that were always up, so that's how you heard the
Masterlink.

It was hard wired to one of the 2-track returns. The gain of the return
did not even come close to the average mix level of the desk, so for
playback, we had to crank it up a notch or two.

Two things come to mind now... 1). I should have spent more time
monitoring from the Masterlink, but since it's a read before write device
I didn't go there too often. 2). Since the playback gain was 5 or 6 dB
down from the average mix level, it could have contributed to my inability
to detect the differences.

If you were actually monitoring the console's mix bus when you were
mixing, then I could see that what you heard could be different from
what went to the Masterlink through the Finalizer. But when you played
back the Masterlink recording through the monitor system (however it
got there) there's no question that you'd hear what was recorded.

I dunno. But I've gotta admit that if I was in your place, other than
trying to bypass the Finalizer and make sure that the Masterlink
wasn't putting anything in the recording path, I would have taken it
on faith that the studio basically worked. That's what you did, and
you didn't have any reason to believe otherwise (until you got home).

I have about decided that overlooking the fine details of the Finalizer by
assuming the owner's statement of "peak limiting only" was accurate,
is the crux of my oddball results. We did burn several CDs of mixes
during the process to play in their vehicles, but there were really no
anomalies that could easily be picked out there.

Chalk one up for experience as applies to me, but I still need to do the
best thing I can for the client to make this better for him. My guess is
that mastering will have to do because of the time and budget constraints.


Thanks...
--
David Morgan (MAMS)
http://www.m-a-m-s DOT com

David Morgan (MAMS) wrote:

"Kurt Albershardt" wrote in message ...

What I'm hearing in those tracks is not any kind of 'soft limiting' I've ever
driven. More like a diode clipper (on the affected frequency range.)

It would appear to me that everything between around 1.6K up to 5K+ is
squashed. If I crank the level, it's not too bad... but there's no way that
the average listener of swing will do that.

Any other input is appreciated.

Have you tried using multiband dynamics set to expand the afflicted range?

Is there overt clipping on that range? I'm wondering if something like Samplitude's declipper might help...

David Morgan (MAMS) wrote:

"Kurt Albershardt" wrote in message ...

What I'm hearing in those tracks is not any kind of 'soft limiting' I've ever
driven. More like a diode clipper (on the affected frequency range.)

It would appear to me that everything between around 1.6K up to 5K+ is
squashed. If I crank the level, it's not too bad... but there's no way that
the average listener of swing will do that.

Any other input is appreciated.

Have you tried using multiband dynamics set to expand the afflicted range?

Is there overt clipping on that range? I'm wondering if something like Samplitude's declipper might help...

David Morgan wrote:

"Kurt Albershardt" wrote:
hank alrich wrote:

I feel for you; I recently finished my most grueling and worst-sounding
project since maybe 1969. **** happens

Yeah, and I was part of making it happen ;

So, Hank will be there this afternoon... expect an ass-kicking. :-\

I take full responsibility for the way this particular project did and
did not turn out; Kurt was wonderfully helpful and I assign none of the
blame to him. As for ass kickings, the project itself did that to me.
g

--
ha

David Morgan wrote:

"Kurt Albershardt" wrote:
hank alrich wrote:

I feel for you; I recently finished my most grueling and worst-sounding
project since maybe 1969. **** happens

Yeah, and I was part of making it happen ;

So, Hank will be there this afternoon... expect an ass-kicking. :-\

I take full responsibility for the way this particular project did and
did not turn out; Kurt was wonderfully helpful and I assign none of the
blame to him. As for ass kickings, the project itself did that to me.
g

--
ha