IT'S REALLY INTENDED FOR MASTERING PURPOSES BUT THE THING IS TRULY A JOKE I DON'T EVEN SEE HOW THEY ALLOW THAT THING TO BE SOLD YOU CAN'T LEARN SOMEONE'S HARDWORK WITH A DUMB PLUGIN I SWEAR THEY ARE ALWAYS TRYING TO MAKE AN ARTFORM EASIER AREN'T THEY. I HATE THAT YOU CAN'T EVEN CALL IT AN ARTFORM ANYMORE AHH THIS SUCKS IT MAKES ME WONDER WHY I AM SPENDING ALL THIS MONEY ON SCHOOL AT SAE
WHEN SOME PUNKASS OUT OF HIS HOUSE CAN "COPY" MY MIX SOUND ANYWAYS OR AT LEAST THINK HE CAN
DEATH TO COMPUTER PROGRAMMERS STUPID BILL GATES WANNABES MAN THEY ARE MORE OF A THREAT TO MY WELL BEING THEN SADDAM HUSSEIN ANYWAYS SORRY FOR VENTING BUT HEY THAT'S ME I WOULDN'T PUT ANY KIND OF STOCK INTO LEARNING ABOUT IT REALLY WHY WOULD ANYONE WANT TO COPY SOMEONE ELSE IN RECORDING?

PEACE AND LOVE IN THE MIDDLE EAST AND PRAY FOR MY SOON TO BE WIFE WHO IS FIGHTING FOR THE FREEDOM OF OTHER PEOPLE SO THEY CAN ENJOY THE FREEDOM TO BITCH ABOUT STUPID PROGRAMS IN FRONT OF THE COMPUTER EACH EVENING ALSO SOMEDAY

THANKS GOD

Oooops! That was a hot one...hmmm.
Well I think that software is just a tool... and it's how you use it that makes it an artform.
In the 70's they said that the sythesizer tried to steal all the musicians jobs...
But do you really think that programs that makes it easier for any user to reach his vision for a song is BAD?
More people than ever can make pretty good sounding music today because of all these wonderful toys. You don't have to spend a fortune to record a few songs in a studio. You can do it in your "living-room-studio". Songs are like paintings, I like to do them as good as I can... and reproduce the things I hear in my head.
Without a record company to back you up, this would be an impossible thing to do back in the good old days.
But as you say:THEY ARE ALWAYS TRYING TO MAKE AN ARTFORM EASIER
So you always do your work with your ears only?
You never use a frequence-analyser?
You can hear every little "phase-problem"?

I really can't understand why this toy upset you so much. I think it could be a creative thing to use... and a really good learning device.
Maybe copy the sound of a bag-pipe and apply that on a piano or bg-vocals. :D even if I really enjoy the recording and mixing process.

Good reply and I agree I did kinda blow and go off the deep end anyways I understand your side of things so until next time peace!!!

ASSimilator ... that about says it all doesn't it? :D

1) Can it be said that synth sounds are better than real ones? IMO, no!

2) Are the pit musicians in New York in danger of losing their jobs to synths? Yes (not an opinion, a fact).

3) Can it be said that computer based recordings sound as good as or better that old school 2” 24 track? Again, IMO, no.

4) Are there way more uneducated, unmentored and untrained people out there making uneducated, unmentored and untrained sounding recordings using uneducated, unmentored and untrained techniques on computer based recording systems? IMO, yes.

5) Do most records /CDs being released sound like crap in spite of the fact that the recording artists are very good (Nora Jones for example)? IMO, yes, see the previous questions and answers (#3 & #4) for the reason .... I think Chris Hatfield/Engineer has a very good point. Kurt

This is just a knockoff of Freefilter from Steinberg

What a tool it is for those learning.
You dont ever have to use it on a mix--only to see if your mix is balanced.

When I first started mixing I would check my mix against another mix of the same type--and there was a huge difference.

Now when I mix there is virtually no difference when I click the match button to match the eq curve of a song similiar to mine. I havent used it in a long time--cause I dont need it anymore

Its also good for individual sounds :w:

Master-Kurt, I do agree with you... but I also disagree.
1. Synth sounds are what they are... and sometimes they DO work better than real instruments. Sometimes a crappy Solina string-machine is exactly what the song needs, not a real string section. It's not about sounding "better", it's about getting the right sound. But too often they use synthsounds for budget reasons... when the right sound would have been the real instruments. Blame the producers and record companies.
3. Well... I think that it's just a matter of time before we can get there.
4.I'm glad that there are more uneducated people out there making music.... it can't be bad that more people than ever are recording music? You don't have to be educated to make music... but the more you get into it, you want to learn more.
RO is a great resource for all uneducated musicmakers. I find it such a great place for seeking knowledge and wisdom.
And again I think that you should blame uneducated producers and record companies if they release recordings that sounds too bad.
But people in general don't listen to music that way... They don't need a "Donald Fagen-Nightfly-sound" to like the music.

I think that you should mix uneducated artists with master like you... and you will probably get a great result. (like the uneducated Beatles with Master-George Martin )
But I think that many educated producers has missed that train... they've been so much into that polished Steely Dan-sound and really don't understand the music new artists want to do.
Don't look back... look forward... have visions!
A producer must have visions... and be prepared to try out new things and explore new sounds.
Otherwise the artists will try to do it on their own... or let the local DJ do it.
Don't blame the uneducated for doing it... blame the educaded for not "being there".

5. I do agree.
Very little about the real topic here :D

Tore,
I did say IMO.. and that's all it is.. my opinion. I wouldn't ever say any of those ideas were facts. I agree with you about The Beatles and George Martin. But that sort of makes the point I was talking about. That whole way of recording and engineering at Abby Road/ EMI was based on the mentoring system. An engineer started up the ladder running the tape machines, then was graduated to the mastering department to learn what the vinyl would be capable of taking and only after they went through those two steps were they allowed to become what was termed a “balance engineer”. They all wore ties and white lab jackets and there were hard fast rules regarding what they could and couldn't do. This is where the term "Breaking the Rules" originates. I lament the loss of the mentoring system and I truly believe it 's loss is the reason much of today’s recordings are sub standard.

As far as synths, I myself have never experienced a situation where I felt a synth was a better choice over a real organic instrument. But that is all subjective opinion. I personally have a distaste for electronic music but I say to each his own. Different strokes. It’s not a case of right or wrong it just comes down to what we all like. … Kurt

Well Kurt, it's a matter of taste... But to me I want to try new flavours too, even if I prefer the real thing most of the time.
But do you really think that:
Beatles "Strawberry Fields" would have been better with real flutes?
What real organic instrument should have replace the Thermine (?) on Beach Boys "Good vibrations"?
Can you imagine any other instrument than the Minimoog on "My Spanish Heart" by Chick Corea?
I think that nowadays the real artists with visions have the taste to get the best from both worlds of sounds and create something new. Like Björk (Bjork), Radiohead, Peter Gabriel, Beck, Daniel Lanois...

Tore said;

But do you really think that:
Beatles "Strawberry Fields" would have been better with real flutes? What real organic instrument should have replace the Thermine (?) on Beach Boys "Good vibrations"?

No Tore, I don't think either one of those examples would have been better. Point taken...I am sure the Beatles could have used real flutes if they wanted.. the Mellotron was just sooo psychedelic. And Good Vibrations, well it’s a masterpiece. There really aren’t any acoustic counterparts to the Moog or the Therimine. I was thinking more of things like fake horns and strings.. but as you pointed out the Mellotron sounded pretty good on Strawberry Fields.

To me, one of the things I get a kick out of when recording is to put up a mic through a mic pre, maybe add a little EQ and compression.. move the mic around a little, perhaps change selection of the mic, until I get something that really sounds good … I just don’t get off on plugging a cable from a keyboard to a di like I do when I use mics and real instruments. Maybe that’s why I dig real instruments so much… it gives me a chance to put a little of me in there too. Kurt

I agree with you on that part... but I want it all... I'm a sucker for "real" sounds like Ron Sexsmith, EmmyLou Harris... but also the mix that Björk does with real strings and sample based rythm lines.
It would be nice to hear what music you think has got the "Real"-taste?

Tore,
So much new stuff just is or sounds like crap.. it can be depressing. But one bright spot for me has been the CDs that Alison Krauss and Union Station have been putting out. "New Favorite" is a great album. My favorite cuts from that are "Lucky One" and "Let Me Touch You For Awhile". Those recordings are so beautiful it brings tears of joy to my eyes when I listen (really). Both songs are penned by Robert Lee Castleman. …. Merle Haggard put out a CD about 16 months ago called "If I Could Only Fly" that is a great record.. wonderful musicianship. Redd Volkaert plays some amazing guitar on this CD. I think these are some of the best songs Haggard has ever written. I'm not just a fan of the country genre' I also like No Doubt and Nora Jones just to mention a couple.. but their CDs are very poorly recorded or mastered.. something that makes them sound bad, hard to listen to. The content is good but the recordings are distorted and over compressed. Kurt