Zensō
Major Contributor
Or make it a requirement to have their work placed on Apple Music’s featured playlists.I would imagine a company like Apple would pay producers to create such versions for them.
Or make it a requirement to have their work placed on Apple Music’s featured playlists.I would imagine a company like Apple would pay producers to create such versions for them.
Please explain.
Jim
What a defeatist attitude. You can't solve the problem 100% so you are going to shy away from solving 80%? We are sitting here with no target whatsoever for playback. Folks then resort to voodoo of using random failed consumer speaker as to make their mixes "translate" better. Is this what you are defending as your secret sauce? You are going to claim that is better than having standards end to end so you know what to target for, and we know how to build systems to comply with it?Because it's predicated on the idea that unless you're in the same space, same speakers, same head and ear shape, headspace, etc... you're missing out on something. Listen to music, hear all that stuff? Great you're basically hearing the same thing. It's not something people who haven't written and mixed music are going to fully understand, which is the big problem with all the ASR threads related to this sort of topic.
Because it's predicated on the idea that unless you're in the same space, same speakers, same head and ear shape, headspace, etc... you're missing out on something. Listen to music, hear all that stuff? Great you're basically hearing the same thing. It's not something people who haven't written and mixed music are going to fully understand, which is the big problem with all the ASR threads related to this sort of topic.
In my experience the quality of audio production nowadays far outweighs the quality of the content.What a defeatist attitude. You can't solve the problem 100% so you are going to shy away from solving 80%? We are sitting here with no target whatsoever for playback. Folks then resort to voodoo of using random failed consumer speaker as to make their mixes "translate" better. Is this what you are defending as your secret sauce? You are going to claim that is better than having standards end to end so you know what to target for, and we know how to build systems to comply with it?
As I keep referencing, video has standards to get colors right. This doesn't mean we get teleported to the set itself. It means we are a major step closer to that reality.
And once again, you are talking to your customers here. You are producing music for us, not you. So don't tell me what you know and do. It is immaterial. You have a broken architecture that doesn't yield itself remotely to an experience you can predict. Yet you sit there for hours screwing around with a mix. I don't know why I have to tell you that standards are needed and great. You should be saying that.
What a defeatist attitude. You can't solve the problem 100% so you are going to shy away from solving 80%? We are sitting here with no target whatsoever for playback. Folks then resort to voodoo of using random failed consumer speaker as to make their mixes "translate" better. Is this what you are defending as your secret sauce? You are going to claim that is better than having standards end to end so you know what to target for, and we know how to build systems to comply with it?
As I keep referencing, video has standards to get colors right. This doesn't mean we get teleported to the set itself. It means we are a major step closer to that reality.
And once again, you are talking to your customers here. You are producing music for us, not you. So don't tell me what you know and do. It is immaterial. You have a broken architecture that doesn't yield itself remotely to an experience you can predict. Yet you sit there for hours screwing around with a mix. I don't know why I have to tell you that standards are needed and great. You should be saying that.
Ideally not. We would have a handful of profiles that are device independent and that would be that. Bonus and optional would be per device profiles that are also offered on top of the baseline. I would imagine a company like Apple would pay producers to create such versions for them.
Please share the music you've written and mixed, I'm sure that's not the first time someone has asked and rightfully so.
This is a prime example of an irrelevant conclusion, or Ignoratio elenchi. It's a fallacy frequently used as an emotional defense.
Let's say I'm walking along and see a sawyer at a mill, producing crooked boards. I could note this to him, and he might reply, "How many boards have you sawed? None, huh? You're just out of your element!" That's an irrelevant conclusion. I don't need to be a sawyer to see that boards are crooked.
A faulty product is evidence of a faulty process. And that is true whether the fault is a major fault or a minor fault.
A car with defects is a faulty (and possibly dangerous) product. I don't need to be an automotive engineer to note that.
Medicine that has a 1% fatality rate is faulty medicine. I don't need to be a pharmacologist to see that.
Planes that crash repeatedly are defective. I don't need to be an aeronautical engineer to understand that they are faulty.
If cloth has an errant pattern, there's something amiss in the production cycle. It's not necessary that I be a weaver (or mechanic for the production equipment) to see that something is wrong.
In all these cases, there is a great portion of the product that is NOT faulty. But that is not the focus of end users. The focus of end users is to eliminate the portion that has fault. If the portion that has fault cannot be eliminated, then the focus of the end user is to reduce the fault to the smallest degree possible. That's not physics, it's just human nature. It's how we go about improving things in general.
I lived in Japan long ago. There is a Zen (Chan) principle of the singer and the hearer. It states that the music needs two elements, the singer to sing the song and the hearer to listen to it and appreciate it. Being a young smartass, I told the Zen master that this was not true, that I had an uncle who constantly hummed music to himself as he worked, even when there was no one around. The Zen master replied, "And where did he get those melodies?"
Sometimes the singer is actually the listener. So yes, in principle you are producing music for "us guys", even if most of it doesn't make it out of your room.
Jim
you are talking to your customers here. You are producing music for us, not you. So don't tell me what you know and do. It is immaterial. .
A car with defects is a faulty (and possibly dangerous) product. I don't need to be an automotive engineer to note that.
Medicine that has a 1% fatality rate is faulty medicine. I don't need to be a pharmacologist to see that.
Planes that crash repeatedly are defective. I don't need to be an aeronautical engineer to understand that they are faulty.
If cloth has an errant pattern, there's something amiss in the production cycle. It's not necessary that I be a weaver (or mechanic for the production equipment) to see that something is wrong.
I have already asked how do we define | measure a good mix? Surely until we know that how can we create a standard? A very much different thing to a differing audience.
Most of the industry .. if it sells it's a great mix full stop.
It's a theoretical discussion, and the points Amir is making do make sense. What is less clear is how best it would be implemented in practice & how easy or likely that it could be done successfully with enough uptake & made a commercial success. I don't see any argument with the theory, but I'm not sure if in practice the various hurdles can be overcome.With all do respect, you are just out of your element on this one Amir. Please share the music you've written and mixed, I'm sure that's not the first time someone has asked and rightfully so. Generally the response to these sort of criticisms is of a "put up or shutup" nature. Your work will speak for itself. I will gladly share mine, and you'd be surprised at what some of the mixes were done on and yielded successful results. I'm not aware of any music you've worked on, so I'd wager you simply lack the creative aspect of the process to make a clear judgement on the matter. I never claimed any sort of secret sauce, just that making good music is far more than just having good monitoring, and many of the things people chase as far as reproducing audio are misguided. Good monitoring certainly helps but my most successful song was written on some crappy gaming headphones on the go. Lots of people are writing hit songs on less than ideal monitoring.
Oh my, I'm producing music for you guys? Not myself? Well that's news to me. I'm pretty sure I do it for myself as a form of self expression and most of it doesn't make it outside of my rooms. I have a broken architecture? My friend you have no architecture. You are speaking of things of which as far as I'm aware, you have no experience with. I think the problem with your assessment here is you're attempting to make a judgement about the entire process, while ignoring basically 70% of it.
"Man who has not made a song tells other musicians how to make a song"
I have already asked how do we define | measure a good mix? Surely until we know that how can we create a standard? A very much different thing to a differing audience.
Most of the industry .. if it sells it's a great mix full stop.
It's a theoretical discussion, and the points Amir is making do make sense. What is less clear is how best it would be implemented in practice & how easy or likely that it could be done successfully with enough uptake & made a commercial success. I don't see any argument with the theory, but I'm not sure if in practice the various hurdles can be overcome.
Well I do indeed hope that the industry can move forward along the lines of the standards we've been talking about in this thread! As you say, we'll see, hopefully while I've still got good enough hearing to appreciate it!I was around for pre-digital recording, albeit only as an observer. When digital was implemented, the reaction of several people I knew is mirrored in the comments you have just made. Everyone was wondering about implementation. Everyone was wondering whether it would be successful. Everyone said that there were so many hurdles to be overcome, and they weren't sure it was all possible. There was a great deal of trepidation.
But look around you; time has given us the answers. People in the recording industry today use digital equipment that is so far removed from what their forefathers used, that the difference is difficult to fathom ..... and they do it easily.
Ultimately, time will tell.
Jim
..... we'll see, hopefully while I've still got good enough hearing to appreciate it!