From: someone@anywheret.net   
      
   "JimD"  wrote in message news:2018041700242155374-email@nowherecom...   
      
   > I probably haven't mentioned this .... or maybe I have ... but I've been   
   > catching a lot of grief recently over volume ... and ....   
      
   > the basic mix of our sound.   
      
   They should all take the Cooperation 101 course ;)   
      
   > This is all related. Once " someone " gets it in their head that the sound   
   > is off, well, it's easy to find fault. Especially when you're sure it's   
   > there and then you go hunting it.  This issue, the one I'm thinking of,   
   > started after one particular trio gig.  Relatives in the audience, they   
   > ( I assume ) didn't like our sound. This is some conjecture, I can't put   
   > the whole thing together, only have fragments. But basically we don't   
   > sound like whomever their favorite ultra loud local bar band is, and so   
   > ....   
      
   My question to such would be something like: "Do you want to LISTEN to the   
   sound or be ASSAULTED by it? Because Dangerous volume  levels do precisely   
   that, they Assault the ability to hear!   
      
   > the vocals are too loud.  the drums aren't loud enough.  the backings   
   > aren't loud enough ( sometimes ).  my guitar was almost loud enough   
   > generally, but then sometimes too loud, or not loud enough.  The drums   
   > weren't loud enough ... oh wait, I said that already :-)   
      
   Sounds like all they're interested in is making trouble.   
      
   > So how to fix that we don't sound like a drunken bar band ?   
      
   Better venues, without alcohol ;)   
      
   > Did I mention the management loved us, we got rebooked, they specifically   
   > said they like that we weren't trying to blow the windows out of the place   
   > ?   
      
   I'm not sure how relevant that is, unless they already know that a few   
   sourpuss would-be troublemakers are insignificant.   
      
   > My natural reaction is to think of the critics " what a bunch of dumbasses   
   > ".   
      
   Critics are Lazy, Inept, Useless Parasites. If they Really cared, they'd be   
   Playing, Singing, and Writing songs, if for no other reason, to show us how   
   it should be done, because ANY IDIOT can complain and do NOTHING else, and   
   many, if not most of them do!   
      
   > Followed up with, well if you like poorly played Skynard and bro country   
   > that much, go listen that.   
      
   They won't 'go' anywhere, because they're Terminally Lazy, and of course,   
   it's much easier to complain than to DO SOMETHING!   
      
   > We're musicians, not posers.   
      
   I'm sure they don't even have the slightest idea, much less care, what that   
   means.   
      
   >  Oh, and my ears still sorta work.  Then I think, what's the point.   
      
   For sure...NOTHING is worth Losing what's still working!   
      
   > Some people expect live bands to sound like shit rolled up in shit with   
   > the treble  - and bass -  maxed out.  And if the drummer isn't trying to   
   > fill every 1/16 note with something, he's not doing enough.   
      
   If that's what they're into, they can have it - not me though!!!   
      
   ---   
      
   > so, anyway ...   
      
   > I was working on some classic country solo material today.  Then later in   
   > the evening ( now ) I went back to those songs, but on my nightime, wife   
   > is sleeping, setup. That means band gear in the daytime, headphones at   
   > night.  Odd thing, the bass sounds louder in the mix on the phones, and   
   > the drums ( that I played on the tracks ) are quieter.  This would be   
   > easiest explained by my pa cabs having less low end than my headphones.   
   > Probably do.   
      
   I don't know if you set everything up while monitoring it all on headphones   
   i.e. to sound right using headphones, but that's how I demo record my   
   Originals, and the  bass is awesomely powerful without being overpowering,   
   and everything else sounds clear too.   
      
   But headphones will always give better sound because of the near field   
   proximity and the practical absence of reflections, absorptions, and various   
   other aberrations that are so common in larger spaces i.e. venues, even   
   those that receive "acoustic treatment".   
   ----   
      
   > So, got to wondering, is there any way to measure these things, to find   
   > some magic tool that will let me balance the songs out so they sound   
   > somehow right ?  Mix engineers must deal with this all the time.   
      
   They wear headphones, a lot ;)   
      
   And that brings up IEMs too. Like headphones, using them to listen tends to   
   put one in one's own little world, which while often sounding nothing less   
   than great, is nonetheless a different environment i.e. not at all like the   
   world outside of that near field seclusion. In other words, the sound  is   
   quite different, and therefore so is the Vibe, and everything else related   
   to the psychoacoustics of this Different sonic Environment, which for   
   myself, along with ANY other differences, such as opening the cover of the   
   acoustic piano, reflections, apparent point sources of sounds perceptions,   
   and the like, Dramatically influence my Vibe and at very least, I need a   
   period of time for readjustment to it, which is probably yet another  reason   
   why IEMs can be a challenge to get used to - even if the physical comfort   
   issue can be resolved.   
      
   > I looked at some RTA things, and metering plugs that I don't have any idea   
   > in the world what they actually measure.   
      
   It's all software and the 'plugs' are in fact "plugins", software 'modules'   
   designed to be used with some other program, such as a software Spectrum   
   Analyzer i.e "RTA" (Real Time Analyzer - I wonder if that's anything like a   
   Real Time Oscilloscope ;)) and usually designed to measure very specific   
   details.   
      
   > Then it hit me, go find the original song on the net, and compare the   
   > overall tonal balance of my mix to that. That would at least get me in the   
   > ballpark as to bass levels and such.  Beatles Twist and Shout, and Charlie   
   > Rich's Behind Closed Doors were my tests.   
      
   Why even bother? Do you suppose The Beatles, Charlie Rich, or anyone else   
   bothered to check what they played against how someone else did it? WHY   
   would  ANYone ever need to? Because of some complaining IDIOTS???   
      
   > As expected, the bass is just barely hotter on my versions. Other than   
   > that, nothing.  My mixes sound essentually balanced the same as the   
   > originals.  Huh, whoda thunk it. There's really not much wrong with how   
   > I've been doing it.   
      
   No need to stop there, how about next checking the original artists' studio   
   recordings against their Live performances - bet there'll be some   
   differences There!   
      
   > Sure, you can pick this or that detail apart. Here's the thing tho, I'm   
   > not trying to make carbon copies of the rhythm tracks of songs. In fact I   
   > wouldn't want to. My goal is to do them close enough that I can play out,   
   > suck in the filthy lucre, then spend my time on things I care about. Like   
   > songs I like that no one will ever hear me play. Or doing something else   
   > entirely.   
      
   Songs no one will ever hear you play? Why?   
      
   ---   
      
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)