An Introduction to Equalization - A Free Guide from Audio Masterclass

An Introduction to Compression: Basic Compression - A Free Guide from Audio Masterclass

Equipping Your Home Recording Studio - A Free Guide from Audio Masterclass

Readers' Letters: Why does Pro Tools turn conventional mixing on its head?, and more...

A post by David Mellor
Thursday November 30, 2006
"It took years of development to bring the analog mixing console to its current state of perfection. So why does Pro Tools throw all of this in the trash?"
Readers' Letters: Why does Pro Tools turn conventional mixing on its head?, and more...

In response to Why does Pro Tools turn conventional mixing on its head?, Jonas writes...

In my opinion it wasn't left out. It is simply up to the user to deside wether to set up protools to work like an analog mixer, cuz you can if you want to, though the LE version has a limited number of busses and inputs limiting the size of the setup you can create. I have seen engineers using protools with input processing and without, but both things are perfectly practical and doable though most people don't use input processing at all.


In response to What happens when you don't get a credit on a recording you have worked on?, Rick Marcil writes...

Christopher Lee didn't get credit for being on the album cover either!


In response to Could THIS be your next recording studio?, True Media Productions writes...

The building also has an A frame structure which is good acoustics as well. It looks as if the roof is missing and would have to have one replaced. I'm sure with a little remodeling and sectioning off that this could make a pretty decent studio.

RP response: Yes, the roof is noticeable by its absence, which of course offers the opportunity of building a new one that is exactly right for soundproofing, acoustics and ventilation.


In response to Do your acoustic guitar recordings sound as good as this one? (With AUDIO!), True Media Productions writes...

This sounds raw and I mean that in a good way. It has a good feel even though it's not overly produced or over done. The simple factor goes a long way in this example.

Strings are very important as well in getting a great acoustic recording. I know many people have their own preference, but using freshly new strings seem to make notes ring out a little more.

RP response: The great thing about recording is that there are so many ways of doing it right! You are correct about the strings. Strings change sound quality as they age and can often make much more of a difference than a mere change of microphone.


In response to Are your college tutors assessing you according to real-world criteria?, Steve Du Cane writes...

Here at Perth college we do also work in the real world, I'm a co owner of Clearwater Studios in Perth and regularly work on albums etc.

My Colleague Dave Patterson was nominated for A Mercury award for Isobel Campbell and Mark Lanigan.

Another Colleague Nick Green owns Cabin Fever studio.

Best get your facts right

RP response: Oh dear, another case of didn't-read-the-article-itis. However we do congratulate you for bringing the real world into education, where in some cases it is so badly needed.


In response to How do I achieve real reverse recording effects like they did in the 1960's?, M. Procyshyn writes...

re: "In an era of digital technology and plug-ins, amazingly neither of these effects can be achieved directly."

What about reversing the track, applying reverb, and then re-reversing (putting track in proper direction) to easily accomplish the pre-delay effect.

RP response: That's not what we would call directly. However it wouldn't require an Einstein to develop a macro that would make this a one-button process.


In response to The MP3 player is dead - here's what is about to replace it, Neil Martin writes...

I don't understand why this article would upset anyone, that's ridiculous. I found it to be rather entertaining. Lighten up people!

RP response: Yes, Record-Producer,com aims to simplicate and add lightness.


In response to When your equipment breaks down, should you be able to get it repaired?, Alexander Balfour writes...

If something breaks there is usually a reason and for a lot of mainstream audio products this is usually relative to manufacturers insisting to use parts that will only JUST satisfy the job in hand. When pushed or put through real world usage they can break because the spec of some of the circuits or resistors or power modules are designed for pretty tame test conditions . Even some higher end gear have elements and components where the company has tried to shave a little off their costs and still keep the unit running. My advice is to buy your gear from someone who knows what is going on inside like Funky Junk (London) and so when the inevitable happens you can actually pay to fix the unit rather than have it just reset to "waiting to break again" mode. In terms of Behringer, Gemini, DigiTech etc these are companies that make low quality products that are usually best avoided if you need dependance in a pro environment.


In response to Background vocals made easy. Really!, Dan writes...

That is about the most over-simplified explanation of background-vocal recording I have ever heard. If your advice were followed literally, the result would be an inhuman, unmusical track of crap.

RP response: Take deep breaths and you'll feel better soon.


In response to Could THIS be your next recording studio?, Trevor @ Sunfightermusic@aol.com writes...

Very good article David, as usual, the only thing I would disagree on is that, the building would make a very good house, a speculator could make that ruin into a very des res in no time, and these people usually have the funds and the contacts to get the job done quickly and cheaply. The housing shortage in this country would, more than likely, be enough to persude the planning people to turn the use from agricutural to residential. But, if a Mr Branson type person would like to help develop new talent by donating some of his vast fortune to help fund an affordable, professional recording studio, then perhaps it could happen, and being in a rural area, I will be watching for flying pigs.


In response to It's official - Apple is moving to Windows! (actually, it's not official, yet), Paul Van Jaarsveld writes...

OSX is a good operating system because it is Unix based. No virus, no spyware and it just works. The most idiotic thing for Mac en users would be to move to Windows. They should rather make them available with Linux and support open source development. There are hundreds of flavors of linux that kick Window's butt. The only good reason to make such a move would be more sales, but that would mess up the end user experience. Then the true motive is revealed. It is not about the user experience or usefulness of the product, but it is all about chaining the end user down with license fees and compulsory hardware upgrades due to software upgrades.

Why would Sony, Pixar, Dreamworks and Lucas Films all use Linux based machines? (If you don't believe me, just look at the desktops on the making off features on the movies they produce. All Linux!) Do those companies know something the average user out there does not know? Studios that run on Windows spend many hours to make sure Windows is happy and many more to fix issues that pop up mid production because of a lacking operating system. What a disaster. Distros like 64studio and Ubunti studio have already stepped up and their revelopment and release cycles are much faster due to community involvement.


In response to Shock news - Digidesign's Mbox 2 is lacking in bass punch!, Sam De Lore writes...

I think your article on wether the mbox 2 lacked bass punch or not was great, the audio sample that was provided in no way "lacked" bass punch, I wouldv'e liked a little more low end boomy type sound in there but as far as punch goes the mbox sounded great, perhaps the person claiming it has none had ignorantly placed the microphone in the wrong position or is just an anti - pro tools person, shocking i know but they do exist. With a bit of EQ and compression you could work that into a great kick sound.

Sam De Lore


In response to Question - by how many decibels is a 1000 watt amplifier louder than a 10 watt amplifier?, Mike writes...

You're missing a huge component in your evaluations. I recommend reading, and understanding what ohm's law is. Perhaps then you could write a competent article.

RP response: Thanks Mike, but we stand by the article fully. A 1000 watt amplifier, all else being equal, is 20 dB louder than a 10 watt amplifier.


In response to AKG D112 review - a kick drum microphone that you point backwards! (With audio samples), Dan Phillips writes...

"However, when I placed the AKG D112 pointing directly away from the drum (as I said, I wasn't sure which side was the front), I got something I didn't expect. The level was lower, but the sound quality was something else entirely:

Now this is what I call a kick drum sound - not only can you hear the bass, you can hear the impact of the beater, and almost feel the rush of air coming from the drum. This is an excellent kick drum sound with all the elements well in place - anything you don't want can be EQ'd out. Perhaps there is some element of reflection involved, but nevertheless this is excellent sonic material to work with."

What you're hearing is the snares resonating with the kick.

RP response: Hmm.. that will be the snares that were not resonating when the mic was the other way round then. We'll stick with reflection as the most likely cause, for now.

A post by David Mellor
Thursday November 30, 2006 ARCHIVE
David Mellor has been creating music and recording in professional and home studios for more than 30 years. This website is all about learning how to improve and have more fun with music and recording. If you enjoy creating music and recording it, then you're definitely in the right place :-)
Come on the FREE COURSE TOUR