Pro Audio Folklore

[tengiz]

Surely there’s a rich trove of legends and myths from the late Ice Age of audio—some embellished, others stripped down to their base essence. If you’ve got one, please share it. It’d make for a great read, especially for those of us outside the full-time pro audio trenches.

Let me start with one I heard long ago from my younger brother. He was doing recording and live sound at the time, already well into the digital correction era. An old-school engineer he worked with shared a story that had clearly been circulating for years:

Back in the day, engineers would crawl around the control room with test tones, hunting for the one spot where the bass response actually worked. When they found it, they’d drive a large nail into the floor to mark the listening position—the bigger and shinier the nail head, the better. Everything else—speakers, console, treatment—was built around that.

Folklore or not, the physical acoustics absolutely justifies it.

And if it’s not a standard tale from the Pro Audio Folklore, I’m sure we’ve got plenty of veterans on this forum who’ll be more than happy to tear it to shreds.

P.S. For a bit of extra flavor, I asked the robot overlord to generate some deliberately artificial visuals to go along with the story.

 

[Curvature]

AD converters (this is how they are discussed, as "converters", not ADCs) have significant effects on the final product.

All compressors sound different. All limiters sound different. All true peak limiters sound different. Mixing consoles sound different.

44.1kHz<48kHz<96kHz<analog. Same thing with bits. More bits, more better. Analog=infinite bits.

Cables. Oxygen free copper, etc.

ATCs are endlessly amazing. That midrange.

NS10s sound really bad. If you can make something sound good on them, it will sound good anywhere on anything. Same thing with Auratones and other grot boxes.

Put a regular small two-way speaker on its side on your console, tilt it a bit, and you can linearize the phase response. Bring out hidden timing details. When you're done, tilt them back, and you get that even frequency response again.

Some mastering engineer built his own speakers and deliberately made the enclosure loose and resonant. Helped narrow down problem frequencies for EQ.

 

[Philbo King]

Guitar cords make a huge difference in the sound.

Solid state guitar amps always suck.

 

[tengiz]

AD converters (this is how they are discussed, as "converters", not ADCs) have significant effects on the final product.
...
44.1kHz<48kHz<96kHz<analog. Same thing with bits. More bits, more better. Analog=infinite bits.

...and also: Analog = infinite sampling frequency. At least until you run into quantum effects - specifically, the uncertainty relationship between time and energy resolution. It’s a balancing act: if you want more bits, you can live with a lower sampling rate. If you want higher sampling rate, you reduce the bit depth. That’s the hidden quantum origin of DSD, the most “analog” of the digital encodings: one bit at a time, but lots of them per second.

NS10s sound really bad. If you can make something sound good on them, it will sound good anywhere on anything. Same thing with Auratones and other grot boxes.

I remember this one! My brother brought it up too. Every serious recording studio has a pair - for faithfully reproducing that kind of generalized average mediocrity.

I used to have a pair of Yamaha NS-555 floorstanders - piano black finish, the look that meant business. But my brother never let up. He gave me endless grief about them, always going on about how they were just dressed-up consumer speakers. In 2005, he nearly convinced me to switch to Genelec 1032As. I held out, though - no matter the sound, they looked like lab equipment.

 

[Curvature]

There's so much more that I've forgotten over the years.

Yamaha NS-555 floorstanders

These?

 

[kemmler3D]

All compressors sound different. All limiters sound different. All true peak limiters sound different. Mixing consoles sound different.

I think there's a good meaty kernel of truth here though, because they're often built to sound different on purpose, no? My experience is only with software, but different compressor / limiter plugins definitely sound a bit different with comparable settings, and the intended difference is often not subtle.

 

[Curvature]

I think there's a good meaty kernel of truth here though, because they're often built to sound different on purpose, no? My experience is only with software, but different compressor / limiter plugins definitely sound a bit different with comparable settings, but the intended difference is often not subtle.

Whether or not the settings are really the same is hard to say. These aren't easy devices to test. If the sound is different, the transfer function will be different.

What happens on the pro side is that they end up idolizing certain brands and convincing some that you can't produce good music without having that equipment. It's a sad thing, more sad than an audiophile thinking that good sound is not reachable without big spend.

 

[DVDdoug]

There does seem to be some mythology and nonsense in the pro world but I've never heard of a studio (or engineer) using crazy-expensive audio cables. I believe ruggedness and reliability are their biggest concern. There is a lot of mythology around microphones & preamps and if Frank Sinatra won a Grammy with a certain mic, they think it's the best ever.

I'd put them a notch below audiophiles on the crazy scale.

I think that part of the problem is that most audio engineers don't have engineering degrees so they don't have the science & engineering background of "real" engineers. Not that it stops them from making great recordings! And there ARE lots of audiophools who are engineers, doctors, and lawyers... It can be an expensive hobby...

NS10s sound really bad.

True, I believe! I think it was Floyd Tool who said their famously "tight bass" is simply a lack of bass.

If you can make something sound good on them, it will sound good anywhere on anything.

Probably not true but most mixing/mastering engineers check their production on a variety of setups and there's nothing wrong with including the NS10.
Floyd Toole also says:

"Bad" sound cannot be standardized, as was attempted with the Auratone and continued in the NS10M and others.

 

[kemmler3D]

What happens on the pro side is that they end up idolizing certain brands and convincing some that you can't produce good music without having that equipment. It's a sad thing, more sad than an audiophile thinking that good sound is not reachable without big spend.

Well, this is true, but I think I've seen just as many producers (maybe more) pushing the idea you can make a good record with whatever trash equipment you happen to have on hand, almost fetishizing an anti-professional setup. It's an interesting dichotomy. Supposedly Daft Punk mixed Homework and Discovery on a boombox with a graphic EQ.

People are more impressed if you tell them you produced a hit album using earbuds you found on the floor in the bathroom and your iPhone microphone. Like the musical equivalent of Kenyans winning marathons while running barefoot.

 

[Curvature]

Probably not true but most mixing/mastering engineers check their production on a variety of setups and there's nothing wrong with including the NS10.

Translation is an ever-present problem, unfortunately.

 

[Curvature]

Well, this is true, but I think I've seen just as many producers (maybe more) pushing the idea you can make a good record with whatever trash equipment you happen to have on hand, almost fetishizing an anti-professional setup. It's an interesting dichotomy. Supposedly Daft Punk mixed Homework and Discovery on a boombox with a graphic EQ. People are more impressed if you tell them you produced a hit album using earbuds you found on the floor in the bathroom and your iPhone microphone.

I don't know. These are definitely the competing camps. The gear fetishism ends up winning a lot, especially for producers who started poor and gained success. Their studios end up being crazy collections of gear.

 

[kemmler3D]

I'd put them a notch below audiophiles on the crazy scale.

I think the same craziness exists in the pro world, but it's less common and more limited by the reality of actually having to produce a difference in the work product. If nobody, like nobody can hear the difference your magic cables make, you just can't afford to spend too much time or energy on that crap. You actually have to ship a record at some point. Fast switching A/B testing is almost built into the process of mixing a record, so snake oil is exposed more easily and harder to justify.

 

[Curvature]

People are more impressed if you tell them you produced a hit album using earbuds you found on the floor in the bathroom and your iPhone microphone. Like the musical equivalent of Kenyans winning marathons while running barefoot.

Whole music genres have emerged this way historically, in the poorer countries of this earth.

 

[kemmler3D]

The gear fetishism ends up winning a lot, especially for producers who started poor and gained success. Their studios end up being crazy collections of gear.

Deadmau5 is an example of this. Started out with a copy of Fruityloops and ended up with a rack system that looks like the cockpit of a 747. Musicians like their instruments, who can blame them?

 

[Curvature]

Deadmau5 is an example of this. Started out with a copy of Fruityloops and ended up with a rack system that looks like the cockpit of a 747. Musicians like their instruments, who can blame them?

Actually had him in mind. Once I tuned into one of his livestreams. I couldn't see the walls beyond electronics or synths.

 

[Palmer]

There does seem to be some mythology and nonsense in the pro world but I've never heard of a studio (or engineer) using crazy-expensive audio cables. I believe ruggedness and reliability are their biggest concern. There is a lot of mythology around microphones & preamps and if Frank Sinatra won a Grammy with a certain mic, they think it's the best ever.

I'd put them a notch below audiophiles on the crazy scale.

I think that part of the problem is that most audio engineers don't have engineering degrees so they don't have the science & engineering background of "real" engineers. Not that it stops them from making great recordings! And there ARE lots of audiophools who are engineers, doctors, and lawyers... It can be an expensive hobby...


True, I believe! I think it was Floyd Tool who said their famously "tight bass" is simply a lack of bass.


Probably not true but most mixing/mastering engineers check their production on a variety of setups and there's nothing wrong with including the NS10.

 

[Speedskater]

There does seem to be some mythology and nonsense in the pro world but I've never heard of a studio (or engineer) using crazy-expensive audio cables.

Some did. The cables were gifted, with rights to use them in ads and recording labels.

 

[tengiz]

These?

Yes! With the black grills on, they really looked musical. The curved side panels and glossy finish gave them a kind of “epic cello solo in a tux” elegance. They came off way pricier than they were - audiophile-ish flair on a budget . And hey, what’s wrong with that?

 

[EERecordist]

From my experience, there is a lot of herd mentality. I was fortunate the studio I worked in had an exceptional network of other engineers and studios to form our herd. We also had access to some genius custom systems. A huge grant brought some exceptional rooms and equipment.

I agree with many of the observations from able ASR participants.

XYZ made a hit on ABC equipment / in DEF studio, so that translates to you, is nonsense.

I would say that I find higher sampling frequencies and bit depths suspicious unless you are doing a lot of processing in the digital domain. No idea what the objective limit should be or how to measure it.

I'm not a believer in the fetish of tube microphones, or antique microphones. My 2 closest currently working recording friends built their careers on lo-fi and antique gear and they are very successful at it.

I'm OK with transformers and capacitors in the signal path, IMO there was a misplaced rebellion against that without the measurements we can do with an Audio Precision, Klippel, Listen and other equipment today. If I had a serious studio, I would bring that in house, including microphone testing ability. In fact, someone should do that in a truck that travels around.

The big antique microphone guru is Klaus Heine. He patiently moderates one of the microphone forums. I have a lot of respect for him even though he is by-ear. Microphone repair is becoming an endangered field, with continued retirements and an avalanche of China-made capsules. Microphone repair can't be replaced by DAW plugins.

An interesting and highly respected low cost and high quality microphone maker is Line Audio in Sweden. They import large numbers of Japanese or Chinese condenser microphone capsules. Then they test each individually. They use the good ones and do something to dispose of the bad ones.

I would say the biggest advantage in recording and pro audio is ear training. Sadly many professionals have damaged their ears, or do not know their individual ear response due to aging.

 

[Curvature]

I would say the biggest advantage in recording and pro audio is ear training. Sadly many professionals have damaged their ears, or do not know their individual ear response due to aging.

Highly agree.