Live "performances" using DAWs

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • MrGongGong
    Full Member
    • Nov 2010
    • 18357

    #16
    Originally posted by Dave2002 View Post
    Why not?
    Because we used to be plagued by someone who was obsessed with the idea that the aim of recording was always to try and make something that he called "natural sound" (without telling us what he really meant)...and you don't want me banging on about Rene Magritte again

    Comment

    • Dave2002
      Full Member
      • Dec 2010
      • 18151

      #17
      Originally posted by MrGongGong View Post
      Because we used to be plagued by someone who was obsessed with the idea that the aim of recording was always to try and make something that he called "natural sound" (without telling us what he really meant)...and you don't want me banging on about Rene Magritte again
      OK - but some recordings are more realistic representations of "real" instruments playing in a room or hall - though the problems with that are that the "realistic" representations are first of all subjective (what is realistic to me , may not be to you), and secondly, depend on the playback systems. 2 channels are needed for binaural listening, but don't take into account head movements.

      Also, while we're thinking about "channels", even a single audio (mono) channel can be considered as a very large number of individual frequency channels - all combined into one whole entity. It is generally more helpful to think of audio that way - except when trying to do various engineering tasks.

      Certainly with headphones I am quite often unable to tell whether I'm hearing things coming from the headphones, or from the room outside, and often have to take them off in order to check.

      I'll try not to set off your irritation about "natural sound" again - though maybe you are over sensitive.

      Comment

      • MrGongGong
        Full Member
        • Nov 2010
        • 18357

        #18
        Originally posted by Dave2002 View Post
        OK - but some recordings are more realistic representations of "real" instruments playing in a room or hall - though the problems with that are that the "realistic" representations are first of all subjective (what is realistic to me , may not be to you), and secondly, depend on the playback systems. 2 channels are needed for binaural listening, but don't take into account head movements.

        Also, while we're thinking about "channels", even a single audio (mono) channel can be considered as a very large number of individual frequency channels - all combined into one whole entity. It is generally more helpful to think of audio that way - except when trying to do various engineering tasks.

        Certainly with headphones I am quite often unable to tell whether I'm hearing things coming from the headphones, or from the room outside, and often have to take them off in order to check.

        I'll try not to set off your irritation about "natural sound" again - though maybe you are over sensitive.
        The problem with "natural sound" is that it assumes that the intention of recording always is to imitate... it isn't
        and

        ALL recorded / broadcast music is a form of electronic music
        a synthesiser isn't less "natural" than a violin, neither of them exists in "nature"

        Simon has interesting things to say about much of this


        Have a play with http://klingbeil.com/spear/

        for messing about with audio in the way you talk about

        Comment

        Working...
        X