[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [microsound] digital audio genius Bob Katz
------=_NextPart_000_0066_01C2B8A0.F5665E00
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I like your atitude Bill, but I have to agree with Kim. Despite my =
utmost dislike of handing out my masters to some jerk to mess with =
them , everytime I finish a record I have to recognize that I would be =
completely unable to have the objectivity to master it, better leave =
it to the professionals then.
Mastering engineers become reliable professionals simply because ,as =
you mention ,they spend countless hours withs their fat asses glued to a =
swivel chair listening to all sorts of different music.=20
Their job is to make your music sound good on any circunstance that is =
played , which unfortunately cannot be achieved practicaly by trying to =
play it on every possible listening enviroment. Given this hard fact =
,what mastering engineers do is try to make your record as similar to =
their standart of audio recording , as they possibly can.=20
This standartization of music is obviously awful as an artistic =
proposition , but it seems to be an inevitable technical necessity. As =
I have mentioned on a post that went unnoticed several months ago, never =
in the history of recorded music , music was used to in so many =
different listening conditions as it is today , so never good mastering =
was as needed as it is today.=20
Beni =20
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Bill Jarboe=20
To: microsound=20
Sent: Friday, January 10, 2003 5:39 AM
Subject: Re: [microsound] digital audio genius Bob Katz
hi Kim,=20
I almost didn't start this post since it might sound like arguing ,
bickering.=20
This is a list about aesthetics , and this discussion on mastering =
brings
to my mind several issues.
I've worked with some pretty impressive engineers , never a so =
called
'mastering engineer' , I don't know what they can do for the sound.My
immediate reaction is the question: "if they are so good , why don't =
more
commercial releases impress me?" I know that's hardly fair , since the
mastering engineers don't comprise the band , songwriters and so =
forth, yet
it is a starting point.
To approach making something that sounds like a 'nice sounding =
record'; I
could see how a mastering engineer could be extremely valuable. In the =
case
of audio which has no precedent , nothing to really compare it to , I =
can
imagine the situation of the only thing mattering in the sound is the =
way it
came off the speakers when the perpetrator , composer ,
whatever-you-want-to-call-the-person decided: Yes! it's a take.
In many cases it might be difficult to decide what actually makes it =
work
, what makes it music , whether it's the bass ,the lack thereof , the =
rough
parts ,the contrasts between good and bad digital audio.
It could be more difficult to determine such things when the =
listening
space is shared with a "professional"; meaning some overfed jerk who =
sits on
his ass in a swivel chair most of the day in his little mastering =
boudoir
and makes a comfortable living by telling people "what sounds good".
I mean , much electronic music is a really personal thing. It's =
conceived
in solitude and often listened in solitude.To listen in close =
proximity with
someone who has different professional interests can radically , =
physically
change the way one hears the music. Even if the mastering engineer is
extremely competent and doesn't change hardly anything, still one is =
left
with sorting out the subjective and the objective afterwards . =
Sometimes the
only thing that makes it bearable is knowing that the piece is =
unchanged.
I've known studio engineers who exuded cool . So much that it was =
like
standing in front of an open refrigerator. That's ok I guess , yet I =
don't
compose music to worship refrigerators.
I've read articles by mastering engineers and been really impressed =
by
what they've had to say..then I've listened to their records: oh, was =
that
the one I thought was a low budget home recording?I've also been =
involved in
successful recordings that didn't sound like anything else in way =
shape or
form , and that was part of the reason for the success.Somtimes even a =
'bad'
or uncoventional sound can be a plus, since it gives the release it's =
own
space , separates it from the pack , so to speak.One then has to =
change
something in oneself, adjust one's attitude in order to listen. That =
in
itself can make it less mundane , change the situation into a party.
I've never knowingly listened to anything engineered by Bob Katz. I =
did
work with a guy who raised cougars and sometimes he'd wake up in the =
morning
with tooth marks , claw marks.
( I wonder how many times he's heard that ,similar ,or even =
worst
jokes)
=20
Bill
on 1/9/03 2:24 PM, Kim Cascone at kim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> in my experience it is ALWAYS better to leave mastering to the pro's =
unless
> you have interned under a respected mastering engineer and have a =
lot of
> field experience...
> FWIW: I tried my hand at mastering a CD once and will never do it =
again! I
> now know why mastering is considered a 'black art' - good mastering
> engineers are worth every dollar you spend!
> in any case here is THE man for all things dealing with digital =
audio: Bob
> Katz...I've been reading his stuff for around 10 years now and have =
learned
> a lot from his papers online...
> http://www.digido.com/
> this guy is *the shit*
>=20
> =
---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> website: http://www.microsound.org
>=20
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
website: http://www.microsound.org
------=_NextPart_000_0066_01C2B8A0.F5665E00--
------------------------------