|
Post by ragan on Jan 24, 2017 11:29:26 GMT -6
When Steven says he doesn't care, I understand that he cares deeply about what worked for that artist/engineer/producer, but doesn't care whether it is ITB or OTB: use the tools that work for you ? He'll keep making tools that blow his socks off and keep telling us all about them, again and again and again cus , you know he's SS, as an educator/communicator, he believes even more strongly in re-inforcement as a Canadian, I love his " the medium is the message mantra, eh ! I hadn't realized McLuhan was Canadian, you just made me go look that up.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Jan 24, 2017 11:35:57 GMT -6
I don't actually disagree with swurveman's statement, but I don't think it applies in quite that way to ITB vs. OTB, analogue, vs. digital, Slate Digital vs. Old School. It eventually comes down to perception. Do Slate's products really sound as good as the gear they're emulating.
Steven's done many tests where people couldn't identify the difference between mics, or they've preferred the plug to the hardware. But in my experience, there's a huge error in common test methods, and therefore, conclusions are skewed. We've had similar discussions regarding cabling. I really don't want to spark the debate regarding test methods, so I'll say, try it for yourself, and see how you feel.
That's why I suggested to Steven that Slate events at studios or big stores could be a great way for larger groups of people to try it. Risking ordering a product with as many variables as the VMS might be too much for some people, but if they can give it a go in a nice place, I bet it would help sales and create a more balanced opinion of it all.
|
|
|
Post by donr on Jan 24, 2017 11:40:23 GMT -6
When Steven says he doesn't care, I understand that he cares deeply about what worked for that artist/engineer/producer, but doesn't care whether it is ITB or OTB: use the tools that work for you ? He'll keep making tools that blow his socks off and keep telling us all about them, again and again and again cus , you know he's SS, as an educator/communicator, he believes even more strongly in re-inforcement as a Canadian, I love his " the medium is the message mantra, eh ! The mental image of Steven blowing his own socks off with his products is great.
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Jan 24, 2017 11:48:10 GMT -6
Steven's done many tests where people couldn't identify the difference between mics, Eh,,,,,you're headed down a slippery slope. Given enough distance and a need for glasses, I can't tell the difference between a genuine 59 Les Paul, and Chinese Relic'd clone. Put em in my hands and that's a different story. Youtube and the like places a LOT of distance between the tester and the end user. Slates tests or anyone else's on a random youtube can't give you the information you need to make an informed decision. They are easily skewed one direction or another. Or botched. Or misdirected. Or misunderstood. Or misinterpreted. The best way is to get in front of the gear (or in his case plugin) and try it for yourself. That's where I think a subscription can work really fantastic for a potential buyer. They can jump fully on board for a few months and make a completely informed decision under real world situations. Not a snap decision based on someone else's "test". I'm a hard sell. I've been down the console, tape, digital tape, DAW, plugin, console, hybrid paths and I know EXACTLY what I want. And what I want doesn't have the word "VIRTUAL" anywhere near it. My preference. My art.
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Jan 24, 2017 11:53:48 GMT -6
That's exactly my point drbill, if you had continued and included the next line in my post, I completely agree about the testing issues you mentioned. That's why I suggested Slate have events where you can try his VMS out. Even if people can't identify differences between one source or another, that still is limited to the person's skills at listening.
I don't think Steven's doing anyone a disservice by offering these products, they just may not be suitable for all of us. He clearly stands behind what he believes about his system, and that's a good thing. But It's not my first rodeo either, and while I find the whole system he's developed impressive, it's most likely not for me, but I'd like to try it and see for myself one day. That doesn't mean it shouldn't be right for someone else though. To each their own.
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Jan 24, 2017 12:32:55 GMT -6
When Steven says he doesn't care, I understand that he cares deeply about what worked for that artist/engineer/producer, but doesn't care whether it is ITB or OTB: use the tools that work for you ? He'll keep making tools that blow his socks off and keep telling us all about them, again and again and again cus , you know he's SS, as an educator/communicator, he believes even more strongly in re-inforcement as a Canadian, I love his " the medium is the message mantra, eh ! Yeah, but if I buy UAD's Sphere plugin, he has no right to tell me his product is better than UAD's product and that I was wrong to buy it. There is no right or wrong when buying plug ins. I'm just using a different medium than Slate in this "it's all good" relativism. @swerve Not to argue but I don't think SS is arguing with you or anybody about using what works for us or that anybody is wrong to do so ? I think he is just telling us about his gear and his spin on what is good about it, of course form his perspective which we can debate
|
|
|
Post by swurveman on Jan 24, 2017 13:01:47 GMT -6
Yeah, but if I buy UAD's Sphere plugin, he has no right to tell me his product is better than UAD's product and that I was wrong to buy it. There is no right or wrong when buying plug ins. I'm just using a different medium than Slate in this "it's all good" relativism. @swerve Not to argue but I don't think SS is arguing with you or anybody about using what works for us or that anybody is wrong to do so ? I think he is just telling us about his gear and his spin on what is good about it, of course form his perspective which we can debate Sorry if I came off argumentative. I just saw his statement, which I thought was a part of a relativism trend, and called attention to it. Then, I elaborated on it, as qualitative relativism can be used in the comparative plugin world as well. It can be used everywhere. Now, back to my "Zen And The Art of Motorcycle Maintenance" reading. LOL Sorry if I sidetracked the discussion.
|
|
|
Post by stevenslate on Jan 24, 2017 14:10:06 GMT -6
I'm not trying to start a debate about relativism, I'm just saying that if you make a killer tune, then what else matters? Is this a realistic scenario: Guy listens to a song. He thinks it sounds great and the song is absolutely stellar. The hairs on the back of the guy's neck stand up. He looks at his friend who is an audio engineer and says "This song is INCREDIBLE!". And then the audio engineer friend goes "Well, it was made on a laptop with plugins. So therefore, it's shit!".
So my point again is that whether you get there with a bunch of plugins using virtual mic models all over the drum kit and on the vox, or you get there with a fifty year old U47 and a J37 tape machine... as long as the outcome is a great sounding piece of music, then job well done. Neither way is wrong.
What we do is try to offer a distinct avenue to get to the finish line. Many people seem to dig what we do, but there are plenty of other routes to get there and we're happy about that too. It's a really fun business as long as you remember that what matters most is doing things with integrity, passion, and respect for your customers.
Cheers, Steven
|
|
|
Post by stevenslate on Jan 24, 2017 14:11:23 GMT -6
Martin, since NAMM my computer has become a bit disorganized (the machine did it, has nothing to do with the stupid human using it!) and I can't find the song you wanted me to help master with FG-X. Can you resend the link via PM?
Steven
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Jan 24, 2017 14:35:32 GMT -6
No prob Steven. I'm outside now, will do when I get home this evening.
|
|
|
Post by wiz on Jan 24, 2017 14:45:23 GMT -6
The reason music is where it is, IMHO is not because the gear is cheap... its that distribution is free!
It cost, nothing, zero , nada , bupkis... to put music before a gazillion people.
People have always been making really bad recordings of poorly written and performed tunes.... its just you never got to hear them before as much.
I tire of the "get off my lawn" attitude of people towards gear. Especially if they have never seen, touched, heard or used it.
Its like its a sport now, pre emptive negativity.
Those who do it, must have been fun back in the primordial days when in the control room and someone made a suggestion bout a piece of gear they hadn't used....8)
I know what works for me, out of the gear I have used. I don't know how something will function for me if I havent used it... I can make an educated guess... but I can't make an ABSOLUTE statement.
I find often, here is my pearl of wisdom for you, and you can stay on my lawn, all day every day, ... just clean up on your way out... often a lot of gear is for all intents and purposes, in the same ball park sonically. Its the ergonomics of it that make it work for me or not.
cheers
Wiz
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Jan 24, 2017 15:11:11 GMT -6
Hi John, thanks for the post and feedback. You bring up an important topic with "off axis sound". Off axis microphone response has been one of the most misconceived aspects of our VMS system... so much that we'll be doing a dedicated video demonstrating and explaining it better. To sum it up, the off axis tone of a cardioid microphone has a more severely limited frequency response mainly in the lows and highs. Therefore, there is far less information, and the most crucial identifying factors of the information that the human auditory system can most easily perceive are specifically reduced. Therefore, it is easier to recreate the tone of off axis response because there is simply less information for our ears to discern differences. Now, the exception comes when you have a microphone with a unique polar pattern that deviates based on frequency, but in this case the difference can only be heard when there are multiple sources coming into both sides of the microphone. But ultimately, we were able to achieve nearly indistinguishable off axis response between our models and the real mics well before we could do the same with the much fuller bandwidth on axis response. You can hear a lot of off axis response during the drum portion of our NRG comparison video (the video link goes right to the drum section): Well, you're making a generalization here that isn't entirely true. Not all cardioid mics have severely limited off axis response (The Neumann KM-84 has off axis response that compares favorably to it on-axis response, for one famous example), and the limitations of those that do vary greatly. Are you generalizing a degradation factor or are you actually modeling the off axis response for each mic? Some mics (MD-421, SM57, etc.) have off axis response that is quite horrible and uneven. " Now, the exception comes when you have a microphone with a unique polar pattern that deviates based on frequency, but in this case the difference can only be heard when there are multiple sources coming into both sides of the microphone." You mean like when you're recording a bluegrass group or small jazz combo in the traditional way with a single mic? People do still do that sometimes. ******************************* The other question I have about this - which I asked before on "that Facebook page" but never received a satisfactory answer - is this: How do you differentiate between on axis signal and off-axis signal? I could see it if you were using a multi capsule mic with an active matrix like the Soundfield system, but I can't for the life of me see how it's possible with a conventional single capsule cardiod mic like the one you use. The problem is this - when sound waves hit the diaphragm the mic collapses the signal into a single voltage stream, mono. This single fluctuating voltage hits the mic preamp, then the a/d converter where it becomes a single stream of ones and zeroes, after which it is processed by your modeling software. So how the heck does the software determine what part of that stream of ones and zeroes represents sound hitting the diaphragm on axis and what part is off axis? Is the software psychic? By the time the signal leaves the microphone the mutidirectional information in the original atmospheric signal is gone. How can you differerentiate and process off-axis information differently, and since off axis response is something of a moving target (on most cardiod mics) depending on angle, how could it possibly do so accurately? It gives me visions of a Terry Pratchett Diskworld situation, where there's a very busy miniature demon inside the box, busily shuttling ones and zeroes into different processing modules based on what he hears when he sticks his head out the window into the room. Well, on one level I'm totally in agreement with this - if the result to the end listener is the same, the tools don't matter. I'm not convinced that the tools don't really matter to the end result, as they definitely affect the emotional responses of those using them, but I'm not going to argue the point. I understand totally what you mean about "levelling the playing field" and from one viewpoint it's a highly laudable goal. I'm not certain that I agree with that viewpoint any more, although at one point I definitely did. I'm not sure if a total democritization of tools is necessarily a good thing. Maybe there SHOULD be gatekeepers. (Should everyone be allowed open carry? Some people think so....) I'm not going to say more about this here, as I don't think it's appropriate. I do enjoy discussing it with you and if you'd want to explore it further in private message I'd welcome that. I do find your work fascinating and if I could afford it I'd want to set up a system just to be able to explore it but sadly I can't right now, as my frorced relocation from SF has destroyed my finances for the foreseeable future. Cheers, -John-
|
|
|
Post by gouge on Jan 24, 2017 15:38:16 GMT -6
It's ironic when the people telling us the tools don't matter in the final outcome are also trying to sell us tools.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2017 16:10:16 GMT -6
People have always been making really bad recordings of poorly written and performed tunes.... * blows on fingernails, whistles innocently * Anyway, someone sent me a load of bitcoins (whatever they are), so we can all earn virtual money too.... huzzah .....
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Jan 24, 2017 16:40:49 GMT -6
The tools DO matter though. Anyone who says they don't is either trying to sell something, or just trying to delude themselves into thinking that there's a cheaper, easier way to make art.
The difference between virtual tools that do the same thing (or close enough) as hardware tools is HUGE from an esthetic point of view. You can SAY the results will be the same if they sound the same, but the results - the performance - will absolutely NOT be the same I'm afraid. At least not for me or those I work with. The esthetics is essential in creating art. To deny that is to deny truth.
What I can get out of a musician when I hand them a vintage Tele that used to belong to Lowell George and plug them into a blackface fender deluxe that Paul Rivera modded is far different than what I can get from them when I had them a modded, top notch Chinese or Korean Tele plugged into Guitar Rig or even a Kemper. The keyboard part I get off a guy playing my 1980 prophet 5 on it's $**** keys is FAR different than the part I can pull out of him playing a virtual prophet 5 on a nice controller keyboard. The mind trips out when confronted with QUALITY HArDWARE - and people step up to the plate and perform. Same with a vintage mic like a real 47 or RCA44 compared to a chinese remake or virtual mic. Same thing with a tape sim vs a tape machine. The real deal makes people perform differently. The "tools" may SOUND identical (I'm being extremely generous about this in an effort to focus on esthetics), but the performance is almost always wildly different due to the interface (mic, instrument, console, outboard gear, etc.) between the soul and the resultant audio file.
TOOLS affect performances. And performances are art. And art is what we listen to.
TOOLS MATTER!!
To claim the road to art, and the tools that build the road don't matter is missing the mark entirely.
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Jan 24, 2017 17:18:50 GMT -6
Great tools get you to the end result faster. All of the subjectivity is in the end result, not the tools. I think Eric Clapton could sound just fine on an Epiphone. Marvin Gaye would be ok through a Blue bluebird. And then ultimately... i1.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/facebook/001/089/171/5b5.jpg
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Jan 24, 2017 17:22:26 GMT -6
But alas...we are journeying into philosophical differences that border on religion...and don't really have to do with the new Slate interface...
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Jan 24, 2017 17:34:55 GMT -6
Now I have to go and see what Sphere is.. thanks Swurveman ;-)
I think Steven's comment about the tools was meant in the way that if the result is what you want it doesn't matter WHICH tools you used to get there. I don't think he means the tools themselves don't matter, because that would be preposterous for a guy selling a new set of tools.
That said, my personal experience aligns closely to drbills.
|
|
|
Post by drbill on Jan 24, 2017 18:03:54 GMT -6
Again, tools are tools. If they get you there and sound good "it doesn't matter". Or does it.
My point - you won't end up at the exact same destination with toolset A as you will with toolset B.
If I want destination A, then using virtual tools is not going to get you there, or if it does, it will be painful and hard. If I want to go to destination B, then virtual is fairly cheap and easy and a quick way to get there.
Personally, I've found the art, drama and intimacy better @ destination A.
As for everything ending up mp3 John, yeah, it's sad, but honestly, I think we all do this for ourselves, and in that case, the tool you chooses matters. For the populous? Not so much as long as the destination you end up at resonates with them..
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Jan 24, 2017 18:05:21 GMT -6
My first professional studio experience was at Bell Sound, and I was well aware I was standing right where Buddy Holly did. My second studio experience was at Electric Ladyland in studio B, and I was playing through Jimi's Marshall 100. My third experience was at Plaza Sound, at the top floor of Radio City Music Hall, in the huge room built for Toscanini to house the NBC Orchestra. You bet I was on my game then. After that, I came down to earth a bit and recorded at slightly smaller studios, but my favorite one had a lovely Trident board.
As time passed, I bought a Teac 4 track and recorded demos at home. At first, without a preamp or board, just a Shure mic. At that time, I'd been asked to submit music for a TV commercial, and mine was chosen. That proved the content was more important than the quality in that one situation, but then the quality can also become as important as anything, especially if you want to achieve something in the vein of some great classic recordings. So, I've experienced both the most bare bones possible gear choices, and the finest in the world.
My home recording gear expanded to where I had a full studio, complete with things that are considered classic vintage now, tape recorders, Neumann mics, Yamaha soundboard, lexicon reverb and delays, DBX compressors, etc. I had to sell all my gear due to serious illness, and only started again more than a decade later, so hear I am, and it's much more digital than it was back then.
So, my ears have analogue in their DNA. I've struggled to find a great mic that suits my voice. It turned out I'm most compatible with a vintage U67. If Slate's VMS made me feel the same as I did when using the real thing, I'd grab it in a minute. VMS is an interesting idea, and no doubt, not easily achieved. But sonically, I may just be too experienced and refined, and only satisfied with the real thing. Still, I'll keep my mind open and hope I'm pleasantly surprised when I finally get a chance to try Slate's VMS.
*just a footnote, I'm not Methuselah, I just started young. I began singing at 5 and was the subject of a PBS style show and did a recording in a beautiful huge studio with my school's Glee Club when I was 9 years old. I was making a living gigging at 15 years old., and my first label album was recorded when I was 16.
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Jan 24, 2017 19:11:37 GMT -6
It's ironic when the people telling us the tools don't matter in the final outcome are also trying to sell us tools. Ah,, no offense, but I feel that is a misrepresentation. It seems to me Steven is not saying tools don't matter, but that they only matter to the extent to which they help the artist create their vision and he doesn't care which you use. Of course, he can share what it is about his products that he believes adds that value,but give the guy some credit, you can try 100% of his plugs ins any month for the price of 5 coffees , 2 beers, 1 bottle of wine or less then when I take my kids to mcdics: how much more opportunity can he give you to prove him wrong ?
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Jan 24, 2017 19:25:20 GMT -6
See my Susan Rogers TapeOp thread quote....
|
|
|
Post by gouge on Jan 24, 2017 20:38:20 GMT -6
It's ironic when the people telling us the tools don't matter in the final outcome are also trying to sell us tools. Ah,, no offense, but I feel that is a misrepresentation. It seems to me Steven is not saying tools don't matter, but that they only matter to the extent to which they help the artist create their vision and he doesn't care which you use. Of course, he can share what it is about his products that he believes adds that value,but give the guy some credit, you can try 100% of his plugs ins any month for the price of 5 coffees , 2 beers, 1 bottle of wine or less then when I take my kids to mcdics: how much more opportunity can he give you to prove him wrong ? no offence taken.
but that is exactly what was said. That is Stevens mantra, hi philosophy. I don't have any issues that he feels that way. for me its great he openly talks about these things because it helps me to understand what drives his products.
|
|
|
Post by stevenslate on Jan 24, 2017 22:52:03 GMT -6
When Steven says he doesn't care, I understand that he cares deeply about what worked for that artist/engineer/producer, but doesn't care whether it is ITB or OTB: use the tools that work for you ? He'll keep making tools that blow his socks off and keep telling us all about them, again and again and again cus , you know he's SS, as an educator/communicator, he believes even more strongly in re-inforcement as a Canadian, I love his " the medium is the message mantra, eh ! Yeah, but if I buy UAD's Sphere plugin, he has no right to tell me his product is better than UAD's product and that I was wrong to buy it. There is no right or wrong when buying plug ins. I'm just using a different medium than Slate in this "it's all good" relativism. I think the Sphere looks fantastic and I applaud the innovation of the variable pattern algorithms. I've got one on order myself and look forward to putting it to use on some new songs. If you make great music with a Sphere then I will be mighty happy for you. I will never tell someone they are wrong for choosing their tools to make music. I can only make the best tools that I can and hope people like them. Cheers, Steven
|
|
|
Post by stevenslate on Jan 24, 2017 22:55:44 GMT -6
It's ironic when the people telling us the tools don't matter in the final outcome are also trying to sell us tools. Ah,, no offense, but I feel that is a misrepresentation. It seems to me Steven is not saying tools don't matter, but that they only matter to the extent to which they help the artist create their vision and he doesn't care which you use. Of course, he can share what it is about his products that he believes adds that value,but give the guy some credit, you can try 100% of his plugs ins any month for the price of 5 coffees , 2 beers, 1 bottle of wine or less then when I take my kids to mcdics: how much more opportunity can he give you to prove him wrong ? Exactly kcatthedog. Of course tools matter.. I don't think Jimi Hendrix would have been as legendary had someone replaced his Strat with a tree branch. But the point is that if someone is making great stuff and are happy with their tools, then that is all that matters. Cheers, Steven
|
|