We are under the constraints of real world business at RO and when ad dollars come our way, we usually take them. When we accepted the ad we hadn't previewed the DVD.

RO is now hooked up with the Google search syndication and some ads are appearing on RO that we are not booking ... so don't assume just because an ad appears on RO that it is in any way, an endorsement for the product from the Review Editor of RO.

RO has no oppinion on the DVD The Basics of Modern Recording & Mixing".

I was asked by Ken Walden to review it. When I viewed it I was disappointed on a few levels.

It is very Pro Tools-centric. I thought it was more suited as a quick start tutorial for PT, than anything else. If you work on any other type of DAW recording software, IMO, it may not be as useful as it is for a PT user..

I thought the audio was a bit problomatic, with very audible edit points where drop ins / outs were performed. Something in the CR where many of the scenes were shot, causes a very obvious comb filtering problem that bugged me .. on a tutorial on audio production, you would think they would get the audio right.

"The Big Secret", is a chapter on acoustics. It advocates a method that uses a lot of space for sometimes, less than optimal results. IMO it's value to the home studio recordist is questionable. I suppose it could act as a spark to get someone who might not have even considered it thinking about acoustics.

I usually go out of my way not to publish negative reviews. This is not a review, it is my comments in reply to a post on this bbs. Is RO endorsing this DVD? No. RO has no oppinion on the DVD.

It's just my take and I am in no way the last word on anything at RO but for me, I thought the DVD was as remarkable for what it didn't contain, as for what it does contain ...

I want to point out that there are good things in The Basics of Modern Recording & Mixing". It is well shot and if you are using PT, you might learn a trick or two ... I am sure the intentions were good .. I have exchanged several emails with the producer Ken Walden, offering my critique and he was very gracious discussing it. He is a very nice gentleman. It is a bit lengthy but in all fairness I feel I should include Mr. Waldens comments regarding my critiques ...

Hi Kurt,

Best wishes,
Ken Walden

I don't think the producers of "The Basics of Modern Recording & Mixing" were trying to pull one over the publics eyes. Perhaps the only mistake they made was not getting enough feedback from industry pros before releasing the product. With some amendments and added content, this could be a great tutorial. I feel it is an excellent first effort by Ken Walden. At $40, it's a bit hard to really get hurt by purchasing it ....

Hi, Siskel and Ebert here lol! What Kurt said exactly. We're selling audio related ads. Like Sebatron tube preamps... If we endorse something you will know. :wink:

I would like to add... IMO it's more of an introductory level, it could be better but if we look at everything like that who would ever try anything.
I found it to be okay and for new DAW users, I think it's useful.
I've only watched the first part so I can't give a full response to it. A different title would be better for sure. That being said... From a PT / and new DAW user's POV, you will benifit from seeing it.

Cedar - Firstly thank you for your honesty. I appreciate that running a web business is hard. I have been building ecommerce sites for the past 4 years, and can appreciate how much harder a site such as this is to keep going in a commercially viable manner.

Secondly, I did not mean to imply that RO was endorsing the product. I just wanted to put an "opt-out" clause in case there were advertising budgets to consider!

As for the DVD - it seems my scepticism was justified to a point. I may consider it for when I have more time, but for the moment I'll stick with Cubase SX and put the hours in to gain experience.

Thanks again.

G.

Hello all,

I have to jump in here as I feel most of the review on my product is completely unjustified. Understand that I don't want my tone here to be interpreted as 'shouting' as that is not my intent...just to make my point...onward!

First:
"It is very Pro Tools-centric. I thought it was more suited as a quick start tutorial for PT, than anything else. If you work on any other type of recording system, IMO, it will be essentially worthless. "

Ken writes:
Worthless is a very strong statement...if you think it is worthless to see how Santana, Metallica, John Lee Hooker, Booker T Jones, Mike Clink (producer, Guns, Puff, , Randy Staub (Metallica, Motely, etc...), etc...(I could go on for a long time) work, especially as a new recordist, then I wonder what is your basis for this opinion. Please site your experiences and how they differ from what I've communicated on the DVDs.

As I state in the intro of the DVD...just about everything on the 2 DVDs are techniques I saw used by the best of the best. I was lucky (and I worked like a dog for next to nothing : ) ) to work with lots of world-class musicians, engineers, and producers and this is what I learned from them. Digi allowed me to travel all over and meet even more top notch audio folks and confirm what I saw.
Sorry Kurt...to call this worthless unless you are using Pro Tools really is not at all fair or accurate.

The bay area doesn't have a huge audio community but we have a few jems (Skywalker, The Plant, Fantasy, Studio D, The Site). Plus through Digi I spent time in LA, New York, and Vancouver...all of what I put on the DVD were very common techniques. And more so...I would share notes with all the other Digi Product Specialists about what they saw in Nashville, London, etc...

As for Pro Tools...yes, I use Pro Tools to illustrate points such as input/output routing, busing, etc... are very common on every system (DAW and analog). Plus, I have no problems recommending the application because is is what you will find most pros using. Call every high-end studio and post house and see for yourself. Back to the techniques illustrated...there is a bit of difference in the way different applications set up their windows but these concepts are exactly the same...Pro Tools or not. Understand that I have attended AES, NAMM, and almost every NAB show for the last 7 years and at each show I would watch demos from all the main DAW manufactures. They all work in very similar ways...when I worked at Digi they were my competition so understanding the other DAWs was very important.

Plus, MOST of the DVD is about setting up your studio and acoustics (2 sections: over 1 hour of material), recording drums, bass, guitar, vocals, MIDI/Keyboards (48 minutes with showing some plug-ins that are available on several systems), and though the mixing section uses PT to illustrate points they all transfer over to other DAWs and analog mixers. Even the section on looping shows concepts of cutting, time compression/expansion, etc...that I first learned on an Ensoniq Mirage and Akai S1000.
To say that this info is 'worthless' in it's application to other system is incorrect. The tools in most of these applications are very similar and usually imitations of what you find in Pro Tools (which, also, were borrowed from concepts like 'using a razor blade', slipping and edit, Dyaxis, New England Digital, etc...). None of this is new my friends.

"I thought the audio was a bit problematic, with very audible edit points where drop ins / outs were performed. The acoustics in the CR where many of the scenes were shot, exhibits a very obvious comb filtering problem that bugged the crap out of me .. for a tutorial on audio production, you would think they would at least get the audio right. Sheesh!"

Ken Writes:
I had a Skywalker Mixer/Sound Designer (listed above) and a guy who has worked on 5-6 Metallica albums (just to name a few) who checked it out. Not only that Mike Clink (Guns, Puff, Motley, etc...) said he thought the audio sounded very pro and endorses the DVD (check my website for the quote). If the VO isn't the best VO you've ever heard I would agree and, frankly, really don't care...it is good and very intelligible... maybe there are a clicks and bumps here and there...it is totally unimportant. This is not a motion picture, it is a tutorial. The dialog is understandable and gets the point across. Occasionally you hear noise reduction artifacts but again...who cares! This is decades of how pros record...go read "Behind the Glass" and compare the techniques with what I show. Can we PLEASE drop this issue as it is totally unimportant in regards to recording techniques. It's like commenting on George Bush's shoes....

"The Big Secret", is a chapter on acoustics. I suspect if Wes or Rod or Ethan or Eric or Knightfly were to watch this chapter, they would have a lot to say regarding it's content... "

Ken writes:
Have them watch it. The rooms Manny Lacarrubba (my guest speaker and technical adviser for this section) designed and built at the Plant are aurguably the best on the planet...even the mastering lab. The theories in psychoacoustics that he, Dave Moulton, and Dr. Toole of Harmon (all on the same page in regards to acoustics) have pioneered are leading the field. I did my homework on this and Kurt, you haven't quoted a single person in the field of acoustics of psychoacoutics that counter the theories put forth in my DVD. I have had the luck and privaledge of befriending a world-class acoustician (and engineer for that matter) who helped me build a very inexpensive room that delivers accurate mixes from my studio out into the field. For most novice or mid-level engineers this is a huge problem. I've posted my frequency response graphs in the DVD to show my room vs. what people hope to acheive by spending a whole lot more. What I acheived in this section is to share with the viewer a simplified, and very good intro into how your speakers and room interact to create what you hear. This is widely misunderstood and most people don't know at all how inaccurate their monitoring is. This section clearly illuminates that issue.

I think it is of utmost importance to give new users the best info out there so they don't have to go through years of work and spend all their money trying to learn techniques that have been common for decades. That is exactly what is on the DVD.

"...for me, I thought the DVD was as remarkable for what it didn't contain, as for what it does contain ... "

Ken writes:
I'd love to hear any comments for ideas for future products. My content was based on what I was constantly asked after 9 years of talking with those interested in recording 5 days a week. Also, from going through the process of learning myself and seeing many friends go through the process. For those who are interested here are the chapters I covered:

Sec. 1 - Intro
Sec. 2 – General Studio Layout
Sec. 3 – Pre Amps
Sec. 4 – Signal Routing
Sec. 5 – Click
Sec. 6 – Loops (editing concepts)
Sec. 7 – Recording Set-up (general info on recording)
Sec. 8 – Recording Drums
Sec. 9 – Recording Bass
Sec. 10 – Recording Guitar
Sec. 11 – Keyboards and MIDI
Sec. 12 – Recording Vocals
Sec. 13 – Mixing
Sec. 14 – The Big Secret (acoustics and setting up a studio)

Again...I don't intend this to sound harsh, or at least not nearly as harsh as the unsubstantiated criticism of my DVD, but I felt it necessary to put forth the points of why the DVD is, not only valid, but extremely helpful for new recordists. Please refer to my references on my website and put them against any critics you may find. My goal was to put out a product that will accelorate a new recordist through years, if not decades of trial and error. Every other review I've had of the product has reflected this.

Regards,
Ken Walden

Hi, well... after listening to the whole DVD I'm going to put my two cents in here and say I think this is excellent and deserves a better mark than what Kurt says.
I think Ken put together something that wouldn't be easy in the first place. I see it as face value.
This could very easily be broken into many volumes and I suspect that might happen some time down the road. IMO this DVD is right on. I'm not critiquing this as a "world class" mastered A/V DVD, what for I say, that would make it too expensive or difficult to pay for. I see this as a good introductory to modern recording.

I'm going to say that with my 18 years of solid digital experience in mixing, sequencing, editing and performing ( over 20,000 hours) Ken was exactly on the same page as me. I do everything basically the same way lol. He started out in the Commodore 64 era and so did I. Actually I go a bit further back eeek so we do things similar.

So there you have it! Funny how things can vary from one person to the next.

I recommend this for anyone that wants to get a good idea on how to record. There is a bit on preamps, eq's, compressors, plugins, mixing, HD noise issues, standing waves, room treatments etc.
I think this is especially useful for DAW users and people that record in project studios.

The conclusion says it all and I especially liked his message.

I would actually like to sell this DVD on RO and think this or something like it... should be included with every DAW purchase made. Damn I say, I have been hoping to make something like this and Ken beat me to it. Kurt, let's do one up (smile) Now.... hit me with a hammer, I'm going back to work!

For $39.95 it's a bargain. Here's the link to it: http://www.recording.org/banners.php?op=click&bid=10

Well done Ken!

Cheers! 8-)

I did not intend to create any anomosisty It's fair to mention that I sent Ken an email and asked him to look at the thread and perhaps respond.

From: Kurt Foster
Organization: Kurt Foster Recording Services
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2004 17:09:21 -0700
To: ken@secretsofthepros.com
Subject: Re: RO review / banners

Re: RO review / banners Hi Ken,
In response to your ad on RO a member posted a question. I usually don't write negative reviews but because the post implied that RO might be endorsing "Secrets of The Pros" I felt a response was in order.

In an attempt to be fair to you, I placed some of your comments from the communications you and I had in response to my critiques in my reply to the post .. but it occurs to me you might have something more to add. Here is the location of the thread.

http://recording.org/postp173550.html#173550

I welcome your input ... Kurt

Hi Kurt,

I really appreciate you contacting me regarding the posts and though we differ on the approach of the DVD I think you have maintained a very pro discourse on all of this.

I’ll make a post on the site...

Best wishes,
Ken

--
Ken Walden
SECRETS OF THE PROS, Inc.

e: ken@secretsofthepros.com
web: http://www.secretsofthepros.com

The RO poll on what DAWs we are using is indicating that PT is not the most used platform and is leaning more towards Cubase / Nuendo ... More users at RO use other programs than PT and most of us use PCs too! According to the latest results, RO members who have responded to the poll are using:

PT on a Mac 14%
PT on a PC 11%
Nuendo / Cubase on Mac 0%
Nuendo / Cubase on PC 37%
Cool Edit (please specify your platform) 0%
Reason (please specify your platform) 0%
Other (please specify your platform) 37%

It is plain to see that PT users are in the minority here at 25%. It is only fair to point out that 3 out of 4 of our members who responded to the poll will not get as much from "Secrets of the Pros" as users of PT will.

There was no information on compressor types and their applications or any real discussion of mic types, applications and techniques other than a cursory mentions in the guitar and drums chapters

The part on recording guitar was comprised of 30 seconds with a mic on a Jazz Chorus, 30 seconds on mic chioces. The next five minutes is spent plugging a guitar direct into a Focusrite Pre DI to PT and pulling up plugs for eq, distortion and compression. Little on micing cabs, mic selections and placment hints.. no room mic placments or re-amping tips.

The information in the acoustics section is for the most part inapplicable in most home studios. Ken advocates the use of loose pink fiberglass hung with an air space behind it and covered with a curtian is an effective treatment in lieu of bass trapping and absorption. There is no mention diffusion.

Again, as I said, The Basics of Modern Recording & Mixing" is excellent as a quick start course on the use of PT. Users of Pro Tools will get more from it than others. The video quality was very good in my opinion. The production design was top notch. But the audio is sub standard for a DVD (especially one on recording). In this context, I expect the better..

" The Basics of Modern Recording & Mixing" is not a comprehensive tutorial on audio recording. I would recommend Eddie Kramers video, "Adventures in Recording" over The Basics of Modern Recording & Mixing" and it's ten years old. There's still much more information in it despite it's age.

Hi Kurt,

Most of what you just wrote was technically inaccurate and not at all a matter of opinion.

I will list the specifics:

Kurt wrote:
"I watched the whole thing and there was nothing that I, a user of Cubase could use."

>>>So you don't mic drums, record bass or guitar or vocals, never use midi. Maybe you understand what a pre-amp is and why it is so important but a lot of people don't. And as for setting up a studio, you don't think learning inexpensive ways to improve a room using inexpensive techniques from a guy who built some of the best control rooms, studios, and arguably the best mastering suite around is of use.... Most people out there have no room treatment and always wonder why their mixes sound different in the outside world than in there studios. Also most of what was presented in the acoustics section is basic info laid out in the 1960's. I will bet all of whom you listed (acousticians) would agree...send them your copy and have them post here. If they want a copy for themselves tell them to send an e-mail.

Kurt wrote:
"Ken seems to be saying we should all just throw away what we use and get PT."

>>> I never said that...in fact I stated the oposite several times throughout the DVD. I intentionally added (constantly) that the tools I use are very common in pro recording situation but what is important are the concepts. This statement is everywhere because I am well aware that professional productions can be made with a variety of products...the DVD is about concepts. The specific gear I use are definitely industry standards but again, unimportant in light of learning recording concepts.

Kurt wrote;
"There was no information on compressor types and their applications or any real discussion of mic types, applications and techniques other than a cursory mention. This cannot be questioned."

Correct on the compressor types...I would have liked to added more on compressors. As for the mic comment...I don't think you watched the DVD. I gave common mic positions, showed them up close and then said over and over that if it sounds bad move the mic. This is how mic useage is addressed by all the people I worked with. When we spent 2 days getting tones for Carlos we would listen, then move the mic, listen the try something else. Same with a long list of top producers. Yes there are a zillion theories as to mic placement and I've had discussions in studios with (you know the list - check the website for my references) a bunch of top notch guys. When Mike Clink and I put an SM57 on a cab for Sammy Hagar he moved it a bit and it sounded fantastic. I asked him how he did it and he said move the mic until it sounds right. Also I gave a list of alternate mics or 'very popular choices' for every section where I talked about mic useage or. As for mic types...often the theory of how a mic is constructed isn't important...it is if it sounds good. That is why some producers will mic a vocal with a 57 over a U47. I was shocked to see GGGGarth Richardson (he did Rage Against the Machine's first record...oh my does that record sound fantastic) do this with a lead vocal. This was also used on a Van Morrison record.

Kurt wrote:
"The part on recording guitar was comprised of plugging a guitar direct into PT and pulling up a plug for distortion. No micing cabs, mic selections and placment hints.. no room mic placments or re-amping tips. Is that what you want from a Recording Tutorial? "

>>> I miced up a Roland JC 120 cabinet, did a close up on the mic, and said the basic technique here is the same if you are using a Marshal, Fender, Soldano, Mesa, etc.... Then I put up a list of alternate mics. Kurt this is so inaccurate I really wonder if you watched the DVD!

Kurt wrote:
"The information in the acoustics section does not concure with any of the things we have all learned from Rod, Wes, Knightfly, Jeff S. (lovecow) of Auralex, Ethan or Eric"

I'd be happy to have any of them review it. You should try reading F Alton Everest, Dave Moulton or Dr. Floyd Toole. Plus this is definitely inacurrate on several fronts. Auralex recommend side wall and ceiling absorbtion as does Ethan. Anyone who doesn't absorb on the ceiling is...well, alone. This is very common as are using bass traps and I say in the DVD...bass traps or panel membrane absorbers are ideal.

Kurt wrote:
"Ken says that loose pink fiberglass hung with an air space behind it and covered with a curtian is an effective treatment in lieu of bass trapping and absorption."

>>>This will work as a bass trap. I confirmed this with Manny (the guy who built the Plant rooms) and he has tried this and measured it with MLLSA analysis software...to say this doesn't work is wrong. As for the last part of your statement (in lieu of bass trapping..) I said the exact opposite on the DVD. The quote is along the lines that though insulation will work, bass traps are idea and recommended panel membrane absorbers which work like typanic absorbers...same, same.

Kurt wrote:
" Ken says we don't need to use ridged fiberglass like 701, 705 ..that pink glass is better, especially in the deep bass!"

>>> As I wrote you before I mentioned that Manny talked about 701 and 705...very brief mention but he did. Also I never said "we don't need to use ridged fibreglass". There are other ways to do this (Auralex, pink insulation, etc...) but I never said that. Ridged fiberglass is a great way to absorb down to around 500Hz (I think...there are rating for all this and I don't know this one off the top of my head).

Kurt wrote:
"I have never seen a professionally produced video before that was that bad in regards to the audio quality / consistency"

>>>It's you against a Skywalker Sound Designer/Mixer and a guy who edited and engineered 5 Metallica records to name a few. I'll go with the Skywalker/Metallica guys. Do you have any record credits of mention by the way? Also, are you commenting on the audio examples like the tones of the recordings?

Please note that I worked for a manufacturer for years and had several clients spend a lot of money based on the accuracy of my statements. If they caught me in a lie or an inaccuracy it would cost both parties and credibility would be sacrificied. I respect opinion but don't respect inaccuracies and Kurt, most of what you wrote was inaccurate. This DVD is meant for those new to recording and I would understand if you were to say I didn't get anything out of it because I know this info...but instead you go on about the Pro Tools part which is used to illustrate common recording concepts. Also, less than 25% of the content is the PT screen. Your comments also seemed very focused on the VO quality...who cares?! If you want high quality VO go see Lord of the Rings or watch a Toyota ad. My VO gets information across as it was intended to do.

As for my music tones...well they were (say it like Cartman, now) sweeeeet.

Sincerely,
Ken Walden

Ken,
Thanks for the reply ... With all respect, I hope you will remember that it was you that contacted me to do the review. I'm sorry you didn't get the response you were hoping for but I gotta call them as I see them. You remark that my observations are "technically inaccurate and not at all a matter of opinion" which in some of the fine points you are right. I have gone back through my previous comments and corrected them. I apologise for the innaccuracies and misspoken thoughts.

Readers ...
These are my critiques of The Basics of Modern Recording & Mixing". This is my opinion.

PT centric ...

Not enough info on mics, techniques, placements. Nothing new that everyone here doesn't already know.

Poor audio quality on some of the VOs and comb filter effects on the audio with the "on camera" parts.

For the most part, inapplicable acoustics tips.

Video quality is excellent.

Production design is excellent.

Great start up for new PT users. A great promo for Digidesign.

Nice musicianship .. both Ken and the drummer he hired.

I did watch The Basics of Modern Recording & Mixing", more than once incidentally. I would not make such strong comments about it if I hadn't. Ken asked of me, "Do you have any record credits of mention by the way?'

OK, ... I do have real record credits ... all you need to do is conduct a allmusic.com search on my name to see them ...

[[url=http://[/URL]="http://www.allmusic…"]Kurt Foster credits @ all music.come[/]="http://www.allmusic…"]Kurt Foster credits @ all music.come[/]

A search at all music .com for "Ken Walden" showed no results.

My listed credits are all as a first engineer and in many cases, as with Brownie McGhee, a producer. Sure it's great to be the "fly on the wall" but it's not as good as some one on one instruction or hands on experience. Let's talk about the DVD, not the past.

The guitar section ... (nice Les Paul btw) After Ken burns (ah ha ha ha ha Ken Burns, get it?) a minute up talking about his experience with a "big time producer" that took 4 days to dial up a guitar tone he spends about 30 seconds on the Jazz Chorus, showing a basic mic placement that almost any one knows about .... He spends another 30 seconds on suitable mics .. he mentions the SM57, SM7, the Sennheiser 409 (out of production, the current version is the 609) and the Sennheiser 421. All that is free information any one can get here at RO or off the web.

Ken spent five minutes demonstrating amp farm and amplitude and the effects .. again all in PT and he advocates recording the guitar dry and then adding plug ins to dial in the tone later.

Methodology aside, the whole thing appears to be a demo of how cool PT is and what you can do with it. It is very good if you look at it that way. I would have prefered to see five minutes of micing secrets, approaches, mic types etc. and one minute of how cool PT is.

It's apparent that having worked for Digidesign, Ken's biased towards Pro Tools. I don't fault him for that but lots of people use other approaches. "SOTP" is a great quick start primer for PT but may no be so great for users of other apps..

The critique of the audio is only in regards to the VO. Audible comb filtering and differences in VO quality within the same phrases, where it is plain to hear that Ken performed punches. I don't object to the differences in the audio when Ken's "on camara" as opposed to doing a VO but when I hear a change in the middle of a VO I have to say "This type of product should be an example of what to do, not what not to do".

The tones Ken dialed up are very nice and the song he put together for the demo is very well done ... I was impressd with his bass playing BTW.

On another note;
It appears that everyone loves a train wreck! This thread has had 225 views in 2 days!

hehe, I like the fact that for all the members out there that thought Kurt and I will always agree... da da!

I finially disagree hehe with my buddy! (wink)

I think Kurt may be looking at this from a very professional POV, one that I don't know as much about. I'm more of a player and DAW guy...

So, from a "less than ideal world" I think this DVD has the basics pretty much covered.

If you want to know what a preamp is about, how some people setup a mixer, some plugins and standard reverb, echo tap thoughts, a bit on micing, room setups and standing waves, a bit on HD noise etc... then I would say... This is a very good place to start,

I recommend it.

Cheers!

Secrets of the Pros wrote:

Kurt wrote:
"Ken says that loose pink fiberglass hung with an air space behind it and covered with a curtian is an effective treatment in lieu of bass trapping and absorption."

>>>This will work as a bass trap. I confirmed this with Manny (the guy who built the Plant rooms) and he has tried this and measured it with MLLSA analysis software...to say this doesn't work is wrong.

Ken,

Actually I suppose it depends on your definition of bass........

But if your definition is anything like mine (picture here frequencies specifically below 250hz) then the real answer is "no it won't work" - at least not from any perspective of "cost efective".

As for the last part of your statement (in lieu of bass trapping..) I said the exact opposite on the DVD. The quote is along the lines that though insulation will work, bass traps are idea and recommended panel membrane absorbers which work like typanic absorbers...same, same.

Again - think about this for a moment....... if you could solve this problem (cheaply) with fluffy insulation and a curtain in front - why would anyone bother to spend the money to build/buy bass traps?

The reason bass traps are (are you noted above) "ideal" is because they work - and that's the bottom line...........

You can acheive some help by taking a bag full of fluffy insulation and leaving it in a corner - but just hanging it on a wall with a curtain in front of it is not going to get the job done.

Sorry I can't buy into this one - but that comment I had to respond to.

I haven't seen the DVD so I have no other comment relating to it - just this one comment.

Sincerely,

Rod

I have no problem when friends of mine don't agree with everything I think ... or say. I even have some friends that are Republicans! :shock:

So I hope that Chris and Ken won't hold this against me. Chris your comment,

audiokid wrote: So, from a "less than ideal world" I think this DVD has the basics pretty much covered.

If you want to know what a preamp is about, how some people setup a mixer, some plugins and standard reverb, echo tap thoughts, a bit on micing, room setups and standing waves, a bit on HD noise etc... then I would say... This is a very good place to start,

I recommend it.

Cheers!

I can understand you feeling that way, because you are running PT on a Mac ... just like Ken. Actually I think it only reinforces my argument that the DVD is PT - centric.

A comment on the loose fiberglass thing in addition to what Rod said ... as absorption it is fine for upper frequencies. As bass trapping is reasonable for room bass modes when used as discribed. It takes a lot of space though But COMB FILTERING (what I hear most in the DVD audio) is not remedied by absorption. Bass trapping helps the problem in some instances but it usually takes diffusion to completely cure the problem. That is why many acousticians advocate 3 elements to treat rooms. Bass trapping, absorption and diffusion (and that's the truth fphhhhhht!).

Hi Rod,
Thanks for adding in on this.

I checked this fact with my friend an acoustics guru Manny Lacarruba (check out sawonline.com). We did this in my studio and found, through measurement with MLLSA software, that when you hang thick insulation and form a pocket (mine measure 3' + deep) that it will effectively treat down to at least 100hz. My room measured a dip around 62Hz of roughly 3-4 db which we used an EQ to treat - if it were a steaper dip we would have used more 'trapping'. Also, Manny has tried this in other spaces and measured it and it seems very effective. Bass traps are better, I totally agree, and they take up far less space but can be pricey for many musician's budget. This is why we listed this in the DVD as a inexpensive alternative.

To my understanding this is how many older studios were designed in regards to controlling low frequency issues like standing waves. This was before companies has 'bass traps' for sale.

Thoughts?
Again...thanks for posting!
Ken

Secrets of the Pros wrote: Hi Rod,
Thanks for adding in on this.

I checked this fact with my friend an acoustics guru Manny Lacarruba (check out sawonline.com). We did this in my studio and found, through measurement with MLLSA software, that when you hang thick insulation and form a pocket (mine measure 3' + deep) that it will effectively treat down to at least 100hz.

Ken,

1st off - forming a pocket and filling it with insulation paints a different picture than "loose pink fiberglass hung with an air space behind it and covered with a curtian" does.....

2nd....... you don't mention the width of your pocket........ but at 2' wide - if I'm doing new construction - in addition to the cost of your materials..... you need to add in the (roughly) $600 (US) that the real estate you sit this pocket on cost you (That's at $100 US per square foot of cost for construction) ...........

they will each cost you (at least) that much......... and the cheap bass trap just got more expensive then the best you can buy.........

(BY the way - the last studio I constructed was more like 130 PSF and that included tech rooms and lobby without any low voltage wiring or gear - and did NOT include the cost of the building it was housed in. If I added that in then the cost was about 240 PSF...... )

Yup......... pretty expensive bass traps for sure.........

We're now up to roughly 1440 each....... hhhmmmmmmm...... :? :? :?

Sincerely,

Rod

Secrets of the Pros wrote: Hi Rod,
Thanks for adding in on this.

I checked this fact with my friend an acoustics guru Manny Lacarruba (check out sawonline.com). We did this in my studio and found, through measurement with MLLSA software, that when you hang thick insulation and form a pocket (mine measure 3' + deep) that it will effectively treat down to at least 100hz. My room measured a dip around 62Hz of roughly 3-4 db which we used an EQ to treat - if it were a steaper dip we would have used more 'trapping'. Also, Manny has tried this in other spaces and measured it and it seems very effective. Bass traps are better, I totally agree, and they take up far less space but can be pricey for many musician's budget. This is why we listed this in the DVD as a inexpensive alternative.

To my understanding this is how many older studios were designed in regards to controlling low frequency issues like standing waves. This was before companies has 'bass traps' for sale.

Thoughts?
Again...thanks for posting!
Ken

Hi, if I recall, Ken does mention bass traps as well as a curtain and states that this is what they did in Ken's studio. Ken also states that you can spend thousand of dollars in accoustic treatment or try what worked pretty good for them.

READ OUR Disclaimer below this forum: These or any other topic on the forum are only opinions of the writer. Buy the DVD and make your own opinion. :wink:

Ken,

1. I have not seen your DVD.
2. I have gleaned from this thread that the DVD endorses the control room design concepts of David Moulton and Manny Lacarrubba.
3. You have said thus:

Ken wrote: The rooms Manny Lacarrubba (my guest speaker and technical adviser for this section) designed and built at the Plant are aurguably the best on the planet...even the mastering lab. The theories in psychoacoustics that he, Dave Moulton, and Dr. Toole of Harmon (all on the same page in regards to acoustics) have pioneered are leading the field.

and

You should try reading F Alton Everest, Dave Moulton or Dr. Floyd Toole.

First, I do not doubt at all the excellence of the rooms you mentioned.
Second, I have much respect for all the individuals you mentioned. Now that we're clear on that:

I have read articles and papers by both David Moulton and Manny Lacarrubba. To my recollection, they developed a theory that involves control rooms with "strong lateral reflections" (meaning bare side walls) in a control room environment. Indeed, your references to Everest and Toole lead me to believe you are referring to the psychoacoustical material covered in Chapter 16 of the Master Handbook of Acoustics, 4th ed. (In particular, see Figure 16.4.) For the benefit of people here who might be looking into these theories/techniques, keep in mind that there is a dependence on room size for the "strong lateral reflections" design. Typically, it is not a good way to go for a small, bedroom-type control room. In other words, like any design, it is not universally applicable.

Also, Moulton's application of, in this case, the effects of the graph mentioned above assume there is a desire for "spaciousness" in the control room. Now, I will refrain from opining on this. However, I'm sure you'd agree that, while the theories and techniques certainly are "pioneering," there are quite a few people that would question them—particularly with regards to their universal applicability when it comes to the increasingly common home studio. A market you are presumably trying to target with your DVD?

I don't know if this helps or hinders the discussion. But I thought I'd at least throw it out there.

Hi Jeff,

Thanks for chiming in...I agree with everything you wrote and let me explain why Manny and I decided to illustrate some basic room designs tips as we did. Yes, the theories of Dave, Manny, and Dr Toole incorporate lateral reflections to create very cohesive imaging. The reason I only touched on this at the end of the acoustics section is that this application requires speakers that have accurate on-axis and off-axis response. Most manufactures speakers have pretty dreadful and 'colored' off axis response so if that response bounces off a lateral wall, then combines with the on-axis signal a few milliseconds later it damages the integrity of the overall signal...you get diffusion and poor stereo phantom images. Plus the reflected signal will combine with direct sound and change the timber of what you are hearing from your speakers. This is really bad, mkay (ref: Mr Mackey - S. Park).

In the case of speakers with poor off-axis response it is better to absorb or reflect that signal behind the mix position. Thus the angled side walls that we have seen in so many studio today.

You are also correct (as I'm sure you're aware) in saying this is not a good suggestion for a smaller room or home studio with space restrictions.

The Moulton/Manny room with the acoustic lens technology that SAW developed is amazing and allow me to point out my references. At the Plant they have a fantastic mastering room with B&W 801's and this huge Krell amp...sounds great. Similar equipment can be found on Skywalker's scoring stage (Leslie Ann Jones' room). I've heard both room and then was able to go to the Garden at the Plant and hear the Lens technology in a Moulton/Manny room. Forget about it! This was not a slight difference. The speakers completely disapear and one is constantly confused as to where the singer or instruments are as your ears tell you they are there but your eyes don't see them. Before you state an opinion on it you have to hear it...I've gone to a lot of expensive rooms with the best tweakers doing the design and the Garden was far and above the best sounding.

Now Jeff...here is my main point. The MAIN intention of putting a part on acoustics in my DVD was to make people aware that the interaction between a speaker and a room (especially your common square or rectangular room for home studios) have a dramatic effect in regards to coloring the signal coming out of your source (mixer, cd, etc...).

Most young recordists are unaware of this. Most mid-level engineers are unaware of this...and lots of 'pros' aren't clear about it but have a better understanding of acoustics in general terms. Thus the 'speakers on the meter bridge' trick. Not that great records haven't been made using these practices...it is just so much easier to get your mixes to 'travel' out of a studio and into the rest of the world if your monitoring is accurate (with a little extra bass for fun - usually around 2-4db at 60db with a Q of 2 to be geeky).

I think that covered your comment and again...thanks for bringing more light to this topic.

Ken,

Secrets of the Pros wrote: You are also correct (as I'm sure you're aware) in saying this is not a good suggestion for a smaller room or home studio with space restrictions.

Not having seen the DVD, this is good to hear from you. And getting people thinking about acoustics will never be discouraged by me! :D

Thank you for your response.

Back to Rod's post...

The DVD contains the "loose pink fiberglass hung with an air space behind it and covered with a curtian" example. I don't know where the other example came from....

Yes, in the case of new construction you would be more than correct about the PSF and smaller bass trapping would be desireable. The target of the DVD (thus the word 'basic' in the title) is more home and small studio people getting into recording. This also assumes they are converting an existing space or renting something inexpensive...not ground up work as you mentioned.

Plus, I'll add that the end of the acoustics section includes a statement saying that every room has unique characteristics and to guarantee a good design it is best to hire an acoustician to come in and do a custom design...blah, blah, blah. This is, of course, the best route.

Regards,
Ken

A Recap
" The Basics of Modern Recording & Mixing" would be good for the person who has no idea at all about how DAW recording works. As a quick start for PT it's even better. It very basically covers a few set ups and topics but there's much missing.

Patch bays are very important part of a studio. How they are routed is a big mystery to many home recordists. "Secrets of the Pros" should have covered the basics of patch bays and how they work. There is no content regarding interconnecting your gear, a big part of setting a studio up correctly. A missed opportunity too really do something that is difficult to convey on the internet.

There is no information on compressor types and their applications even in PT or any real discussion of mic types, applications and techniques other than cursory mentions in the guitar and drum recording chapters. These topics deserve a whole chapter for each. All the pre amp and mic info is here on RO as well and in much more depth ... for no charge.

The fourth through seventh chapter is content that is in the owners manuals that come with all DAW software. What "Secrets of the Pros" shows us is PT ... and all of this content has no meaning to a user of other software apps. These users still have to look up in their manuals how to do the things demonstrated in PT.

The chapter on drums does not have any information on it that is not on RO for free. All the information contained has been posted a hundreds perhaps thousands of times in the past years all over the internet.

The drum sounds turned out very nice. It's too bad "Secrets of the Pros" doesn't share how tones were dialed up. It is stated they spent a whole day doing the drum set up / dial in but doesn't elaborate on anything else from that point. Another missed opportunity.

Nothing on recording bass that Treena and Tommy (and many others across the Internet) haven't been saying in their Guitar/ Bass forum for years! Use new strings and a good pre amp! :?

The chapter on recording guitar begins with a story about an experience recording guitars with a "big time producer". After a minute of the "big time producer" story, there's about 30 seconds showing a very basic mic placement that almost everyone knows, then another 30 seconds on suitable mics.

The rest of the chapter was comprised of plugging a guitar direct into PT through a Focusrite pre DI and pulling up plugs for distortion, eq and compression. Not much on micing cabs, mic selections and placement hints, no what types of comps to use on guitar .. no room mic placements or re-amping tips. Another lost chance to really add some content.

The acoustics chapter is based on an acoustic approach (as disscussed here) that is at best, questionable and often inapplicable in a home studio setting.

The audio was problematic, with very audible edit points where drop ins / outs were performed. Something in many of the scenes shot in the C/R, is causing a very obvious comb filtering effect.

Steinberg - Cubase / Nuendo, Logic, Cool Edit, Reason and others comprise the overwhelming share of the market place. Not having versions in Cubase / Nuendo and others ignores that. I suggested to Ken that he call this the PT version and do another as a Logic, Cool Edit, Reason, Cubase or Nuendo version. If there were other editions of it it would apply to a broader section of users and I could retract my comments about it being PT-centric.

Most of the information " The Basics of Modern Recording & Mixing" supplies, aside from the PT tips, is all over the internet. Some people might be disappointed with " The Basics of Modern Recording & Mixing". Those with PT might like it better but users of Logic, Cool Edit, Reason, Cubase / Nuendo (and other DAW software) may not get as much from it.

" The Basics of Modern Recording & Mixing" is a good first effort but in some important ways it drops the ball. All the elements were there but there was a failure to implement them. It gets a thumbs down from me.

There, much better! Just what I said in the beginning lol. Maybe a title change and, add some clarification that it is being demonstrated using PT would help. I think the company name is suggestive (which is a good thing) however, it may suggest deeper information than what is present. Is that what your saying Kurt?

Ken deserves credit for stepping up to the plate and making this. I would love to see more and more DVD's covering recording techniques. I think a whole pile of us are A/V learners. Give it to me that way and I'm eating popcorn with a smile! A market I'm sure is on it's way.

Secrets of the Pros wrote: Back to Rod's post...

The DVD contains the "loose pink fiberglass hung with an air space behind it and covered with a curtian" example. I don't know where the other example came from....

Yes, in the case of new construction you would be more than correct about the PSF and smaller bass trapping would be desireable. The target of the DVD (thus the word 'basic' in the title) is more home and small studio people getting into recording. This also assumes they are converting an existing space or renting something inexpensive...not ground up work as you mentioned.

Ken,

If by "the other example" you mean the reference to "We did this in my studio and found, through measurement with MLLSA software, that when you hang thick insulation and form a pocket (mine measure 3' + deep) that it will effectively treat down to at least 100hz. "......... then I got it from you -

If you wish to refer to the quote in your DVD - please (then)clarify exactly the parameters you refer to in that statement...... is R11 hung in front of the wall with a curtain going to act as a bass trap? or does it have to be 12" spaced 16" from the wall to work?

I have a problem with blanket statements that simply tend to confuse more than they educate.

FWIW........ one last comment and then I will shut up and leave this alone.

I have been moderating here for over a year now - and in my field for over 30.

Real estate is a premium no matter what.

the vast majority of the people here in the DIY home market have issues with justifying losing the space required for a "room within a room" design concept (roughly 4 1/2" per wall in depth).......

They kick and scream because they have little room to begin with and our reccomendations are going to deprive them of an additional couple of sf of space.

There is no way they can afford to lose 6sf of space for every bass trap they require in a room.

They work in spaces with 7' to 8' ceiling heights (at best) and don't have 3 or 4 feet above those ceilings for piling up fluffy insulations.

In the vast majority of the home market - this is not a viable solutions.

You would have been much better suited to explain in detail the wide variety of options available - and then allow an educated public to determine which of those option would best suit them. That or avoid the discussion from a design point of view altogether.

Remember that the best we can do as teachers is to open up the universe for all to see........... if we get them staring at the sun alone they'll only go blind.........

Sincerely,

Rod

Hi Rod,

The DVD show a top view (graphic) and front view (video) of R-19 that is hung from the ceiling (take 2 - 1x2" and make a clamp with I-bolt to hold the two boards together clamping the insulation...after about 3-5 inches it puffs back out to it's regular width). The hanging wall of insulation runs along the wall (front wall of the studio) until it reaches about 4' from the corner. Then it cuts away from the wall to form a rough triangle in the corners. From the corner to the outside of the insulation is around 3-4' deep and there is a big trangular pocket formed. These go a little below 100Hz in regards to what frequencies they tame.

By todays standards this is not the best way to go...I agree with you and I clearly state this in the DVD. It is very inexpensive (as an initial investment it requires 2 bags of R-19 and a little hardware...around $75) and it works. Manny and I both make a strong recommendations for panel membrane absorbers. The statement about the insulation is this is a really good fix for upper bass problems if you have space and not alot of money. We also mention angling a wall along the legnth of the room (axial mode) if possible.

Let's move on to the space issue.

For one...when you talk about 'room within a room'...that is a whole different deal. This is moving beyond simple home studio improvements and in this price point they will buy or have you construct real-deal membrane traps or something like that.

I agree that real estate is at a premium but let's take an example that I see to be very typical. Now, everything you said about really small rooms is on(10 x12' and 7-8' at the ceiling)...the bass issues change obviously and this is where someone looking for solutions would look into companies such as Auralex and their different room packages and off they go. They wouldn't go for the insulation thing because it would be like sleeping with a bear all the time...no fun and furry.

But in a lot of cases where someone moves into inexpensive industrial space you are talking the space being worth $1.36 per foot a month (I rent a 12x22' space for $350/month - $350 ÷ 264 square feet of floor space = $1.36)...this is the case in my studio and with LOTS of people I talked with over years in the field for Digi. I got a lot of exposure to common scenarios through 3-4 days a week in music stores talking to people about their studios. Now I didn't mind losing the space (roughly 48 sq ft )at all though yes, I would have liked to have kept it. The alternate with bass traps (let's say Modex traps) would be a $2000 investment. My loss of space in rent is $65.28/month which I would have recouped in 30 months but again...the extra space wasn't a big deal. Putting out $2000...well that is the price of a DAW or 4 for a lot of folks. The initial investment would have hurt. Lots of people who use a garage or something like that would pay the rent regardless so they move that stinky old chevy motor outside and convert the space.

I might be wrong on some of my estimates and definitely would like your feedback on this. The space vs cost issue is a very interesting one for sure.

In the cases where people are looking to lose 4 feet for room in room construction the cost of membrane traps are not significant.

Plus...the vast majority of the home market has no idea about acoustics at all. I talked to 50 Pro Audio dealers this week alone and that is unanimous. If most people get some treatment on a couple walls I would be shocked.

In regards to opening up the universe...well said.

If I show some of these people (and they get it) that acoustics exist and make a big difference they will know to start asking questons and with some drive they will be on their way. They will go to a music store and be directed towards the different manufactures of acoustic treatment products and off they go!

Regards,
Ken

You guys sure have a lot of time on your hands to write all this stuff. glad I took speed reading in high school.

he he :lol:

Yeah it definitely turning into a "novel".

I went through the thread and shortened / corrected some of my comments.

After reading some of Rod and Jeff's replies, I have to concede that as bass trapping what Ken is doing is a valid approach. Sorry Ken, I have corrected this through out the thread and in my appraisal of " The Basics of Modern Recording & Mixing" I had never heard of this before.

Hello All,

Again...I will only reply here to issues regarding technical accuracy. Yes, I had asked Kurt to do a review of my product and when he stated why he didn't think the product was of value I asked why in an attempt to find out if there actually were technical inaccuracies or real areas of recording that would have been of value to explore in a 'basic' overview of recording. Several of the criticisms of my product have been inaccurate and my attempt here is to let readers know the actual content of the DVD and my references for this content.

Please note that I think doing this on a public forum is damaging to all parties, confusing to readers, and in general a very bad practice. I also feel forced to reply when things said about my companie's product are incorrect. Any manufacturer would do the same. I'm sure if someone did a review of a song you wrote and said "I hated the sax solo" you would respond with "...excuse me but that song did not have a sax solo" if that were the case.

When I submitted my product for review to Mix, EQ, EM and others they would send back their reviews to me for accuracy checks and to discuss their review. This is an industry standard method of operation done so a reviewer, who doesn't know the detail of the product as well as the creator (for instance, I must have seen my DVD 1000 times at this point...also, think about any song you've written/engineered/produced) will be acurately represented. If a magazine were to list inacurate information about a product it would damage their credibility and articles are not published (in general) until these points are weeded out.

Lastly (before I list my points) I would like readers to know that the purpose of Secrets of the Pros is not to show you what I, Ken Walden, know about recording. The intent is to show you what I learned from years of working around some of the best folks in the audio industry. If it were about me I would have named the company "Secrets of the Ken." In chapter 1 of my DVD it states the following:

"Also, almost all of what you’ll learn here are not my ideas, but tricks I’ve learned from world class Producers, Engineers, and studio designers over the years.
As an engineer I am amazed at how many of the best Producers and Engineers, from all over the Industry and all over the world, use a lot of the same basic techniques. Another really interesting thing about these Producers and Engineers I worked with is that if you trace the history of these people…and look at who they worked for when they were learning their techniques…you’ll see a history that goes back to great producers of a previous generation. "

When I said "...almost all" I meant around 98%.

Yes, a person could learn all of this info from other sources such as the internet, books, cds, and the like. That would take a long time and there is as much misinformation on the internet as there is credible info... my question would be...how much is your time worth. Do you want to know how Carlos records guitar or 500 people on internet forums? Not to say at all there isn't great info all over the internet it just takes far more time to weed through. It took me 23 years to get to know this info and I can't count the number of times I learned something and said "I wish someone taught me that 20 years ago." That is the basis of the DVD. My perspective is of benefit to a new recordist because I spent 9 years with Digidesign talking to new and veteran engineers every day. Not to mention that when I worked at the Plant all my friends would constantly ask me how different artists worked. With Digi, one day I would be at Neil Young's studio talking with John Nowland about his experiences and listening to his work while discussing the technology and techniques he uses. The next I would be at a small music store with 8 people who are new to mid-level engineers. So...on to the fact checking. Again, I do not intend to discredit or insult anyone, but I do want the facts of what is on the DVD to be clear.

One last thing...understand that the reason I 'name drop' is not to pump me up but to give the viewer a reference for where my information came from. I don't think you should give a purple poop about my opinion because there are a lot of people in this industry who know a whole lot more...

So...moving forward;

On this forum the reviewer had stated several parts about the section on acoustics title "The Big Secret"...for starters the reason I named it this is because most in recording have a very faint view of what acoustics are about.

Comments from the reviewer include:
"For the most part, inapplicable acoustics tips." and...
"The acoustics chapter is based on an acoustic approach (as disscussed here) that is at best, questionable and often inapplicable in a home studio setting."
"The information in the acoustics section is for the most part inapplicable in most home studios"

Understand that for this section I consulted, and had as a guest, Manny Lacarrubba who is a noted acoustician, fantastic engineer with lots of 'big' credits, a well respected loudspeaker designer, and a partner of Dave Moulton who taught for years at Berkelee and has written around 30 AES papers on the topic. Dave has also won a grammy. Manny most noted acoustics work was done when he designed the last 3 rooms at the Plant in Sausalito, the first was Studio A and the ROOM alone(no gear) cost around $700,000. Metallica did their last 5-6 records there, Dave Mathews worked in that room, and many other world class folks (check out http://www.theplantstudios.com). It is a top notch mixing and tracking room. Next he did the Mastering room for John Cunniberti which is arguably the best mastering room on the planet. The last room he did at the Plant (because of the great success of the other rooms) was The Garden which was featured on the cover of Mix Magazine at the request of the publisher of Mix, George Peterson. It features ground breaking theories in acoustics and has been used by top name artists, engineers, and producers. Manny has also designed many 'home/project' studios and clearly states in the DVD that the theories of acoustics applied in expensive rooms are the same as in smaller home studios. I got excited about getting this work out after he helped me build my room (a single room studio for tracking and mixing which included about $1000 worth of insulation and 3/4" particle board) and it referenced as well as the older rooms at the Plant. My mixes translated to the outside world with incredible accuracy and I got to test this on several Digi product tours. According to Manny you can get world-class referencing in simple studios with little money if you know what you are doing. Note that Manny's and Dave's ideas on acoustics also are on track with that of Dr. Floyde Tool of Harmon International. A guy with big budget who has published a variety of white papers as well and done fantastic research into acoustics and psychoacoustics. Note that Dave Moulton also published a white paper on small studio design and what is presented in the DVD is along the lines of his work. To make the preceding comments is to discredit the work and knowledge of the individuals I named...not me. To make those comments is to say that the individuals I listed don't know about home/project studio design. I list this point first because I find it most difficult to understand the basis for such a comment, and so far have not received any substantiated complaints about the content of this section of the DVD.

The reviewer also stated:
"There is a complete failure to mention diffusion."

Manny draws and mentions a cylindrical diffusor placed at the rear of the room in Chapter 14 at 42:00 and it's listed in text and recommended againverbally in the overview at 48:59 in the same chapter.

Another comment was:
"Ken seems to be saying we should all just throw away what we use and get PT. "

In Chapter 1, at 3:21 I say the following:
"Now, even though I use some very common products that you can find at almost any music store, understand that the most important aspect of this video are the concepts; these apply to any piece of recording equipment so if your using different gear than what I do it’s o.k.; you’ll still learn a lot of important information about recording."

I never 'seem' to say, or insinuate in any way that other gear is unusable for professioinal production work

Another comment from the reviewer was:

"Patch bays are very important part of a studio."

This was a concious decision. With most DAW's you can crosspatch any input to any track via software and most home studios have limited budgets, so instead of spending $75 for a (cheap) patch bay and then the extra $100+ for the extra cables why not just plug directly into the DAW interface and crosspatch. Use that money for another mic or cool plug-in. Many home/project studios are only recording 1-2 tracks at a time so going through a patch bay will only lower the quality of the signal. For those recording a band they can plug up to 16 channels in to many common DAW interfaces and again, not have to use a patch bay. The moment I got a DAW I was able to pull all 4 of my patch bays for this exact reason. I don't miss them a bit.... Patch bays are more of need for those using larger studios with lots of outboard gear from my experiences.

The reviewer posted:

"The drum sounds turned out very nice. It's too bad "Secrets of the Pros" doesn't share how tones were dialed up."

Refer to the mixing section (Chapter 13) for the soloed versions of most of the drums tones. Plus there are countess times in the drums sections where Kevin hits only his snare or plays without the music. The main reason I didn't spend a lot of time on playing 'my tones' for the viewer is because I want the viewer to see the techniques for recording a kit and make his or her own decision on the sound. If I were to play my tones that would be like saying you should use my tones. I want people to explore and create the 'new' killer drum tone like Bernard Edwards and Phil Collins did in the 80's. Big gated reverbs ahoy!

The reviewer disagrees with several comments about how a cubase user would gain nothing from the DVD.

The work flow is exactly the same and I have listed this several times. None of the companies that make current DAW's (Digi included) really invented anything new except for the editing paradigm in Pro Tools...that is the major reason Digi has won a Technical Grammy and Oscar for Pro Tools. That was inventive and most other applications have mimiced this approach to editing. Even many of these concepts go back to razor blade across tape, Dyaxis, and NED (New England Digital). Most of all of the features of these applications are just a software emulation of the big time analog gear with some new or slightly modified terminology to try and individualize their products. SSL named the reassignment of a faders output to the routing matrix 'float' on the 4000's. Later they more properly named it 'bus.' Ug...more stuff to learn before you can get the job done!

Next the reviewer states:

"Nothing on recording bass that Treena and Tommy (and many others across the Internet) haven't been saying in their Guitar/ Bass forum for years! Use new strings and a good pre amp!"

Kurt, I totally agree these are important points to recording bass.
Please refer to Chapter 9 at 0:35 where I plug the bass into a Focusrite ISA 430 (that's a darn nice pre), and Chapter 9 at 2:06 where I state, "A big part of getting a really good bass tone is a good mic pre...huge in terms of bass." Next at 2:22 in the same chapter I state, "Good strings on the bass is important as well...keep your strings clean..." Then I also mention using a good quality cable. Note that I ran this section by my friend Benny (who currently plays for Santana, and has also played for Miles Davis, John Lee Hooker, and Sheila E.). I thought the section was short but couldn't think of any other cool 'basic' points to mention. Now the reason I asked Benny is because he has been to dozens of the best studios over the last 3-4 years because 'Supernatural sold over 33 (say it like Dr Evil) million records so every producer, engineer, and song writer wanted to get a piece of the next record. When I ran the section by him he said yeah it seems short but he agreed that this is how it is done almost all the time. Benny and all the others I have worked with are my references for this technique. Please remember...its, Secrets of the Pros...not, Secrets of the Ken. : )

Lastly...the reviewer states:
"The chapter on recording guitar begins with a story about an experience recording guitars with a "big time producer". After a minute of the "big time producer" story, there's about 30 seconds showing a very basic mic placement that almost everyone knows, then another 30 seconds on suitable mics.

The rest of the chapter was comprised of plugging a guitar direct into PT through a Focusrite pre DI and pulling up plugs for distortion, eq and compression. Not much on micing cabs, mic selections and placement hints, no what types of comps to use on guitar .. no room mic placements or re-amping tips. Another lost chance to really add some content."

Allow me to state who I learned (again...these aren't my techniques...) about guitar recording from. Mike Clink who is know as a guitar tone guru and this is mentioned in the book "Behind the Glass" that interviews 37 of the greatest engineer/producers of all times. Mike also endorses the DVD and I asked him what he thought about the guitar section...he gave it a thumbs up. Mike also doesn't use room mics much because of the quality of reverbs. Nile Rodgers is a huge fan of plug-ins and has stated in 2 articles I read that this is what he used for 80% of his guitar recording. His engineer, Rich Hilton, and I have talked about these techniques and others on several occasions. Carlos Santana...for whom I did second and first engineer work...one mic most of the time...maybe a room mic but in a good room. There is no use in recording a bad sounding room and most newer engineers don't have well designed recording spaces. GGGGarth Richardson who did Rage's first record...another reference. We spent 2 weeks getting one guitar tone (yes, this is what I talk about on the DVD because most people I tell the story to like these over the top rock-n-roll stories...a bit of entertainment factor that I think the reviewer did not enjoy...oh well, can't win em' all). We had around 15 of the best guitar heads made going into a custom switcher so we could quickly go from head to head and head to cab, etc.... This was, in my mind, a PhD education in guitar tone...even after having worked with Mike and Carlos. In the end we used 4 heads, 4 cabinets, and 6 mics all in a gobo with no room mics. Room mics are fine but for a basics DVD I think its a bit over the top like this last technique very obviously is. Also, there are no 'standard' compressors that I have seen for electric guitar. It depends on the tone so I didn't list anything. Distorted guitar is often compressed to hell as is from the tubes. For Acoustic guitar I show a very common 1176 trick in the mixing section. Look it up...I promise it's there.

My last statement here will be in regards to my decision to use Pro Tools to show very common concepts of recording. Note that 10 years ago I would have shown an SSL 4000 with a Studer, and a Mackie with an ADAT to give people comparisons about very common pro recording techniques and how it works with gear that is more affordable. These days the major, high-end studios will commonly use SSL, Neve, Studer, and Pro Tools. If you buy a copy of the Recording Industry Sourcebook you will see these items to be very common in the listing of gear along with 1176 and LA-2A compressors, Putltec EQ's, Lexicon reverb, etc. Is this the only way to produce pro results...no way. There are many great recording systems out there as I state in the Intro (Chapter 1) of the DVD. My choice is based on my references being The Warehouse, Peter Gabriel, Stevy Wonder, Cherokee studios, the Plant, the Record Plant, Hit Factory, Herbie Hancock, Warner, Disney, Todd AO, Ocean Way, Sting, etc...this is a mega-long list. Note that some of these artists will use Logic SW with PT hardware and then finish productions using PT, SSL and Neve. Film composers often use MOTU as well because of the cool tempo editing capabilities. I'm also sure that lots of great music is made on a variety of equipment but I went with what I see most 'Pros' use. Yes, the mass (non-pro) majority of people use other applications. The last reason I used this is because if a new user wants to someday leave his garage, or spare bedroom studio and work with larger facilities and 'big' artists it would be in his best interest to learn Pro Tools and to understand how a SSL works. Mackie did a great job of including the essential elements of a larger console into their smaller consoles...but now an inexpensive DAW will have all the features, and more than what use to cost several hundreds of thousands of $$$$ just 6-7+ years ago.

If you read all of this...thanks. Please post any comments you may have as I would very much like to hear what the readers think of this post.

Best wishes,
Ken Walden
Secrets of the Pros, Inc.

I have stated this is not a review. Ken repeatedly refers to me as "the reviewer". I am replying to a post on a bbs.. not reviewing a product. I have written enough on the subject here to assemble a quite lengthy review to run in the E Mag, if Ken wishes. I have two things I will respond to (trying to keep it short).

The reviewer also stated:
"There is a complete failure to mention diffusion."

Manny draws and mentions a cylindrical diffuser placed at the rear of the room in Chapter 14 at 42:00 and it's listed in text and recommended againverbally in the overview at 48:59 in the same chapter.

I have doubts to the effectiveness of poly's as diffusion. I like qrd types like these available from RPG.

"Ken seems to be saying we should all just throw away what we use and get PT. "

Let's clear this up ... this quote was a reply to a post you made ... not to something in "The Basics of Modern Recording & Mixing". I have nothing more to add.

Ken makes some assumptions what most home recordists need or want from a DVD like this. I have a different set of assumptions. I know what questions people ask here. I've been here almost every day for over 3 years. The issues I raise, patch bays, how do you eq the drums, mic placements, and the others are the things everyone asks about all the time. I think my mentioning them is relevant.

Ken has answers for all of my questions and in many cases the answers are no. I can accept that if Ken can accept that by his response, I still pose the questions. I stand by my impressions as written in my Recap.

Secrets of the Pros wrote: On this forum the reviewer had stated several parts about the section on acoustics title "The Big Secret"...for starters the reason I named it this is because most in recording have a very faint view of what acoustics are about.

Well that is the 1st mistake......... assuming that what has been presented here is accurate (once again understand that I have not witnessed the DVD) then you have fallen short in this regards.

The reason most in the field don't understand acoustics is because it isn't all that simple.

It is a complex area - cannot be understood using linear thinking (because it is not linear in nature) and thus cannot be explained simply.

To even suggest that you can explain "The Big Secret" ((which tells your client (the purchaser of the DVD) that they are going to finally hear that which acousticians have been hiding from them all these years)) is ludicrious at best - deceitfull at worst.

It doesn't appear that you have gone into any depth at explaining how to process the data required to even begin an acoustical analysis on the needs of individual rooms - never mind discuss in depth exactly how one would go about solving those problems.

Your revealing the "Big Secret" suggests that someone will walk away from your DVD knowing what to do.......... yet I could write a trilogy on the subject - putting everthing in layman's terms - and would not even BEGIN to scratch the surface of this subject.

There is no "Big Secret"......... it doesn't exist - but I will give you credit for creating a catchy title for one chapter in your video book that suggest something of real value exists within...........

I (however) am not convinced that this is the case........

The fact that you have had conversations with some bright people in the field does not convince me that you personally have any deep understanding yourself in the field....... and the simplistic manner in which you've attempted to explain this all suggests to me, even more, that you have no more rudimentary understanding than 99% of the laymen who visit this site........... and a lot less than many non-acousticians that I am familiar with........

Again - i am not commenting based on direct knowledge of the DVD - only on what you have presented here...... I doubt (however) that the acoustic section of the DVD would impress me in the least.

One last thing......... although I will buy that the buildup at the corners will help tame the bass.......... you haven't convinced me in any manner that the R19 installed at your wall (in that thickness alone) does anything at all in that frequency range. I can see it effecting highs and mids........ but not bass.

Sincerely,

Rod

Ok, i've read most of the posts and even though they are boring as hell, I think i'm getting an understanding of what's going on. Kurt saw the DVD and didn't get anything from it. OK, fine. So YOU didn't get anything from it. I probably wouldn't either having engineered for the last 15 years. Generally an experienced engineer That know's his stuff isn't going out looking for a DVD on the secrets of the pros. Why because he most likely know's enough about them to know that they are just understanding certain things and doing it for a long time. I think Ken has more than backed up his point on why, who, and how. I haven't seen the DVD either, but I feel I know more about it than I should from these posts. Daw recording is NO different than studio recording. Besides a couple of name changes and terms, they follow the same guidelines. Just like good ole' consoles. If you learn one, you can apply that to all of them and guess what, it's going to work and your going to get through the session. I personally don't give a rats ass what system someone uses if it's technique i'm looking for. A computer is an interface to the technique so it doesn't really matter what graphics are being displayed. Now if i'm looking for a manual on how to run protools, then i'm going to go buy that. But if you look past the graphics and look at the technique, then you'll learn something. So it's protools heavy, good. I think everyone should be at least familiar with that platform. He covered acoustics, good. I think everyone should know at least a tiny bit but most working engineers don't. He covered how to get things into a system and different ways to do it demonstrating professionals doing it the way they do it, point of the DVD.
Picking on the Sound of the DVD is a little off the subject. This isn't the guide to the best sounding DVD. If you've ever worked with a film, you know that you come to a line of, it's good enough for what it is. Sure he could have spend thousands more to make it perfect but I don't think he's in the business of loosing money. If a band comes to me and says "look, we're an indie band and we think we can sell 1000 CD's. we would like you to master the project". I'm going to do the best job I can within their budget. Am I going to do the best job in the world, no. I can't afford to and neither can they. This is a small nitchy item that's not going to make him rich. I hope he makes enough to do another one. If you look at the title of the DVD, you know the market he's going after. He's not going after people like me. He's going after the majority of the people on this forum though and I think they will gain something from this. So you should review it as such. Taking something like what these people are here looking for and packaging it and putting pictures to it are a valuable tool for these people. I learned the same way, I just did it by sitting in a room and seeing how others worked instead of watching it on a DVD. This is the wave of the FUTURE. We are in a time when this is the only way new comers are going to learn. There aren't any intern slots at studios, they don't have the fortune of watching someone work. I don't know if this DVD is good or bad, I don't really care either. I learned just as much from watching bad engineers as I did good ones.

Well said Michael.. What I've been saying all along and even better than I.

NOTE:

All readers... please be clear that this topic is NOT A REVIEW! It is a topic on a forum. We don't review things here, never have, never will. I wish the folks that keep referring this as a review would kindly stop that. :wink:
Also, some like one product, some like another, etc etc etc... There are thousands of threads here and on many other online forums where people share their opinions. I never take one opinion as gospel.

I think Michael said it very clear and .

This is my opinion: I have seen it and liked it a lot. I feel this is beneficial for anyone interested in the basics of recording.

I hope we see more and more of these kinds of products and I hope we haven't seen the last of Ken's Volumes!

Now, how can I get my hands on a few dozen. Let's put them into our store!

Cheers! 8-)

ONCE MORE ..... my comments were not a review. I have an opinion just like everyone else and this was it.

I like Michaels comments. He made some good points to address.

"So it's protools heavy, good. I think everyone should be at least familiar with that platform"

... and I suppose I have to agree. I hate it but even tough it may only make up a small share of the market, PT is in all the major rooms. I could go on about hopeing someday it won't be so but even I doubt that will happen. That is a good point I hadn't considered.

Another thing I didn't think about is, I do already know most of the information in the DVD and perhaps I may not be giving it enough credit as to it's usefulness to novice recording engineers. I did say it was good for the newbie, especially if they want to learn PT. But I think (& hope) a lot of RO members know this info already ... I do question it's overall value to most RO readers / members. I still can't say I would recommend it to RO'ers based on that.

I watched the whole DVD again today and there is some good stuff from Manney in the acoustics section ... but there's also the part about hanging the loose fluffy glass across the front of the room .... and a number of smaller things not really worth going into... A lot of what Manney offers is pretty goood stuff.. but I couldn't say if it, in its self, is worth $40.

If there had been more on dialing up tones for the drums in the studio and a few less other "nit-picky" things, I probably would give the DVD a passing grade. Others may feel quite differently.

Based on this, I do not feel confident enough to reccomend "The Basics of Modern Recording & Mixing", due to (my perception) a few shortfalls in production and content. On the other hand I admt it it may not be as bad as my first somewhat harsh assesment of it would lead one to think it is. If you are very curious and can afford to take a chance with $40, you might like it. Otherwise, wait until a friend gets it to view and make your mind up yourself.

Folks,

More good comments. Personally, I don't find any of it "boring." :D

A few things I would note:
• A while ago, John Volanski asked me to (privately) review his book Sound Recording Advice. Primarily because he had mentioned Auralex in it, but he was also looking for feedback on the book as a whole. What I found was (a) the book covered the basics very well and (b) even though I would probably "argue" with some of the advice he gives, it was still good in the context of a beginner's primer. And perhaps that is the point of Ken's DVD? If the information, overall, is good information in the context of a basic primer for beginners (and perhaps a bit of a refresher for the more seasoned) then it serves its purpose. Personally, I tend not to nitpick things as much as Kurt (no offense). Instead, it is most important to make sure the content itself is not wrong. The conclusion people are coming to here is that, even wrt acoustics, the information in the DVD is not wrong. Pink fluffy insulation absorbs sound. Can it absorb bass? Yes. Does it when it's used as instructed on the DVD? Maybe. (But not "no.") Take it in context. If someone has doubts about that sort of application, there are a multitude of good places, such as RO, to get a second opinion. Just like John Volanski's suggestion of using an old VHS deck to do mastering is not wrong. You can do it and get decent results. Just like you can place pink fluffy insulation in a small room and get decent acoustics.

• Ken: Now I'm going to be a little bit nit-picky! :) You mentioned dialing in great drums a la Phil Collins. It is worth noting that many of Mr. Collins' more exceptional drum sounds (In the Air Tonight comes to mind) were achieved, not with electronics, but with amazing room acoustics, well-miked. FWIW.

• Please do not misinterpret my postings about the questionable nature of the Moulton/Lacarrubba approach to control room design. In no way should my comments be interpreted as "they're wrong." They are not wrong. There is rarely a "wrong" way to approach acoustics. (That people do anything is often a blessing in its own right.) My point was only to be sure the fact that their approach has not been universally accepted was stated clearly. The best way to approach acoustical control in any small room is going to be unique to that small room.

• I think my conclusion in all of this is the same conclusion I tend to come to about many things in life: Question everything. Just because Ken got great results using the techniques he highlighted doesn't mean you will. I'm sure Ken would be the first to admit that. (It sounds like there are ample disclaimers in place to that effect on the DVD?)
In short: I don't play an open G-chord the "right way" on my guitar. That doesn't mean it doesn't sound like a G-chord. :):):)

Hello all...

First, for clarication regarding the contents of the acoustics section...all the info in the DVD is backed by the works of Dr. Floyde Tools of Harmon, Dave Moulton, and Manny Lacarrubba (at very least). Also the entire section was fact-checked by Manny and even guest stars Manny. We agreed to have him fact check this section as it is a reflection of his work and knowledge. He stands by this peice of work and wouldn't have been involved or referenced if he didn't. My personal understanding of acoustics has nothing to do with the validity of this section. The company is called 'Secrets of the Pros' not 'Secrets of the Ken.' Manny is a pro when it comes to acoustics. Again, almost all of what anyone knows in the area of acoustics or recording comes from others. It is the 'generations of great people' issue I previously posted.

The parts of this section I was in talked about noise floors (pretty easy topic...get the fans out of the room, sealing noise leaks, simple solutions for beefing up a wall, etc....), then Manny took the rest (Low freq. problems, hi freq problems, and solutions) and I cut in parts to clarify, reiterate, and show diagrams of what Manny talked about.

I agree the area of acoustics is not simple but there have many great articles that do a fantastic job of introducing a person to the world of acoustics and why it is so importatnt. Dave Moulton and Dr. Toole have published works along these lines. Bob Hodis has a great one in the June issue of Mix. In fact the structure of what I present is somewhat modeled after a paper by Dave Moulton titled "Making Your Home Control Room The Best That It Can Be."

I guarantee you two things...I have more content in my acoustics section than this 11 page article (by volume only...many of the same priciples are talked about), and less content than the whole of what exists in the field of acoustics...by a big, fat, long shot. I don't touch on how humidity or atmosheric pressure effect sound waves or even go into the research that has been done to show that most with undamaged hearing prefer an accurate and broad frequency response playback system.

Rod...I very politely and respecfully ask you to see the DVD before you make any more assertions about it. If I made statements about a room you designed without ever hearing it, or measuring it, or asking the clients and owner about it's fuctionality I'm sure you would feel that to be unjust. We are both professionals here and I very much respect your point of view and again, thank you for taking the time to chime in. Plus I choose to use simple terminology (similar to Dr. Toole) because I want the new guys and gals out there to benefit from this info. I'm not an expert...Manny is...my DVD is not for experts either... thus the word 'basics' in the title.

As for the title the Big Secret, I think it's catchy...but is it a 'Secret'?
This next part is for fun so please don't get upset about this if you are reading this novel.
The word SEcret is from the middle english, old French and Latin word secretus which sounds pretty gross. I chose to use the 7th definition from the American Heritage dictionary which is "Beyond ordinary understanding; mysterious"...I think this is very descriptive of the common understanding of acoustics.

Now guys like Jeff from Auralex want people to know this info and I would bet Auralex has some marketing data as to how many out there have any general idea about acoustics. Jeff...please chime in. I would love to hear what you know. I can tell you from my years of heavily traveling the industry there is a serious lack of understanding and knowledge of this topic. I personally know 2 Grammy award winning engineers who couldn't tell you how to calculate a standing wave or what it really is...or how it smells (well, they can now because they've seen the DVD and both of them endorse it).

As for the word 'Big'...well, when you spend thousands of hours and dollars trying to make professional sounding music that constantly sounds different and 'bad' when you take it out of your studio, I think this falls into the 'Big' category for most.

Hey, it's way better title than 'Patriot Act' ... you've got to agree with that!

Now if anyone out there thinks that the average guitar/bass/drummer/singer guy or gal who needs to learn about recording has even a basic understanding about acoustics I would love to hear your input and please include your reference for this opinion. This is great marketing info and I would very much appreciate the input.

Lastly, let's keep this friendly...I don't think any of us got into audio or music to have a bad time.

Cheers,
Ken

Secrets of the Pros wrote: Rod...I very politely and respecfully ask you to see the DVD before you make any more assertions about it. If I made statements about a room you designed without ever hearing it, or measuring it, or asking the clients and owner about it's fuctionality I'm sure you would feel that to be unjust.

Ken,

Point made.......... and I apologize for acting in the manner I did without having seen the DVD. You reacted as a gentleman - and that gives me cause to pause. If I can lay my hands on a copy I promise to give it an honest look.

Lastly, let's keep this friendly...I don't think any of us got into audio or music to have a bad time.

Agreed........... 8-)

Rod

An interesting development;

It seems I am no longer alone. Ahhh, sweet vindication!

This morning (09/13/04) I was in "the library", thumbing through the September '04 issue of EQ magazine when I spotted an "overview" column on "Secrets Of The Pros".. on page 6 in the "PUNCH IN" department, written by Craig Anderton.

While a bit "gentler" than my observations in terms of how it was worded, Anderton voices the same concerns as to overall content, and as I read it, seems to agree with much of my previously expressed observations.

I suggest you all look at the article yourselves. A few of of Mr. Andertons comments were as follows;

" Most of the focus for the basics and background sections is on DAWs --- specifically referencing Pro Tools for commands and techniques. There's little discussion of hardware or other DAWs. The concepts are universal, but beginners may have trouble transferring them from Pro Tools to their DAW of choice --- and it may be difficult if you're not using a DAW."

"There's not a lot of depth, and it's skewed towards Pro Tools, .... "

The mixing section is more conceptual than specific --- you're told to find an engineering book to learn about compression and effects, for example."

Mr. Anderton also mentions that Ken Walden worked as a product support specialist for Digidesign for almost nine years. I see this as support for my contention that it is completely feasible that "Secrets Of The Pros" is intentionally biased towards ProTools. This spurs me to ask once again the yet unanswered question I have posed to Mr. Walden, "What (if any) was Digidesigns involvement in the financing and production of "Secrets Of The Pros"?

I believe "Secrets Of The Pros" primarily serves Digidesigns interests in that the target audience, the novice viewer, will most likely be influenced to go with PT over other choices, based on what is (and isn't) shown. I do not believe this is merely a coincidence, but rather more by design. I think as a PT promo, "Secrets Of The Pros" is excellent! I do question what anyone would (or should) have to pay $39.95 for it. Digidesign should provide it at no charge. IMO it's more an ad for PT, than a real tutorial with any substance. Once again, I suggest the outdated but still relevant "Adventures In Modern Recording" by Eddie Kramer ...

I also am curious if Mr. Walden will respond to the more well known and "reputable" Mr. Andertons comments, as vigorously as he did to mine. I doubt it ... we shall see.