Emotion and gear

PaulBrewer

I'm regularly surprised by guys emotional reaction to gear.

We've seen here over the year the bombs that go off if a unit is criticized especially if the unit being criticized is owned by a poster!

It still confuses me that within something that's so well developed as analogue technology guys can fall for the 'twice as good for half the price' fable.

What is the line of thinking? That Company A has stumbled upon a circuit design/ cheaper build/ cheaper components than anyone else? That in an open very competitive market prices are somehow held high and company A are exposing that?

Isn't the most obvious thing that, no, it's not twice as good at all? Nor even as good? That has been my experience over 25 years.

This 'Emotion' factor is also what keeps some magazines going fed by manufacturers.

To evaluate gear effectively shouldn't emotion be stripped away entirely?

Savman

Not sure if I'd call it 'emotion' but there is some allegiance people have toward gear they've bought or own. Probably boils down to not wanting to second guess themselves.

Some of the stuff I've owned has been great, others has been crap, I wouldn't have a particular loyalty to anyone at this stage.

Welease

There is no mathematical formula which defines what sounds better, so therefore it will always be a matter of opinion. Once it's a matter of opinion, then you are going to have to deal with emotions, prejudice, beliefs etc. when discussions arise..

Funnily enough, given the discussions on here recently about mic pre's etc.. I was interested to read from Craig Potter (of Elbow) in the latest issue of Tape Op.. and I quote "the difference between good mic pres and cheap mic pres is absolutely nothing in the big picture" /discuss without emotion

PaulBrewer

Welease wrote: »

"the difference between good mic pres and cheap mic pres is absolutely nothing in the big picture" /discuss without emotion

I agree! My point has always been that if you take music as being top of the pile say 80%, and engineering/production etc being 20% the only argument for good gear is within that 20%.

Does one want to get the best results possible within that 20% or will 'that'll do' be good enough. The extension of the Emotion/Gear thing often extends into production. Re doing something that is technically inferior with something that is emotionally inferior (but technically superior!) is a bad but often made decision i.e. focusing on the 20% as opposed to the 80%.

I think we'd all agree that Engineering/Production does play a part, a midi ringtone of Nevermind or a similar powerful track won't have the same resonance as the original.

Regarding Mic Pres it's clear to me there is a substantial difference - and as always I offer to demonstrate that and let the end user decide. There are of course people who can't hear a difference, so to them there is, effectively, none! I've also found that the demonstration rarely fails to convince!

Taking the emotion out of gear does strip away some of the fun for some people - but I think looking at gear as a tool enables one to focus on what all music lovers are interested in - the music.

Jimbo808

Welease wrote: »

There is no mathematical formula which defines what sounds better.

I would imagine there is!!

jtsuited

PaulBrewer wrote: »

I'm regularly surprised by guys emotional reaction to gear.

We've seen here over the year the bombs that go off if a unit is criticized especially if the unit being criticized is owned by a poster!

It still confuses me that within something that's so well developed as analogue technology guys can fall for the 'twice as good for half the price' fable.

What is the line of thinking?

The line of thinking is that something is only worth what someone is willing to pay for it. That's a fundamental economic principle that is deliberately kept out of the conciousness of the consumer.

And maybe out of some retailers conciousness too?

The correlation between price and audio fidelity is not as linear as I think you're suggesting (although as a general rule it sometimes seems that way).

Also with variables such as mass production, patent royalties (and patent theft - which goes on a lot) and a myriad of other factors, the 'twice as nice at half the price' situation is definitely possible. In all areas of economics.

Now whether that situation exists in reality in music production is a different story and one in which I'm sure we find most examples prove your point.

However that is not because of any real fundamental principle that dictates that 'when it comes to analogue circuitry, the more expensive the better in all cases' (although many wouldn't go far wrong to adhere to such a principle).

As far as your thoughts on magazines being fed by industry.

I don't really read too much of those anymore, but through all the levels of those publications, the standard of journalism was pretty feckin shocking and impartiality and objectivity went out the window for the sake of music tech journalists getting free stuff in the future.

People gettin upset when someone bitches about a piece of gear is understandable. tis the internet. A fragile ego seems to be mandatory, and when people spend a lot of hard earned cash on something, they don't want to hear how bad it is from people who regard themselves as authorities.

Not that those people aren't authorities, but the fact that it is the internet means it's hard to prove how great you are and why people should listen to you.
Or something like that.



Maybe

jtsuited

Welease wrote: »

There is no mathematical formula which defines what sounds better, so therefore it will always be a matter of opinion.

hmmm... well there is. to an extent. surely we want most things to be linear(unless otherwise specified)? as in x=y?

Welease

jtsuited wrote: »

hmmm... well there is. to an extent. surely we want most things to be linear(unless otherwise specified)? as in x=y?

Well what I mean is.. there is no complete formula for "music" otherwise we could boil the equation to simple list of kit by brand which everyone would own, and within those we would have a set list of presets to use..

Although I'm sure someone with a big enough gov grant and enough time to do it, could put a formula to all this..

PaulBrewer

jtsuited wrote: »

hmmm... well there is. to an extent. surely we want most things to be linear(unless otherwise specified)? as in x=y?

So one would think .... but if that were the case there ole Rupert Neve would be down the dole office!

jtsuited

PaulBrewer wrote: »

So one would think .... but if that were the case there ole Rupert Neve would be down the dole office!

ah but to us seasoned pros the formula is x=y+z

where z=awesomeness.

PaulBrewer

The line of thinking is that something is only worth what someone is willing to pay for it.

I agree, I just question the thought process sometimes used in coming to that conclusion.

The correlation between price and audio fidelity is not as linear as I think you're suggesting (although as a general rule it sometimes seems that way)

I accept development is not over on the digital front but none of the manufacturers I've spoken to expect any great leaps in the analogue side. That's why I picked that as an example.

As far as your thoughts on magazines being fed by industry.

I think that is the case with some Magazines, however there are others, Resolution being my favourite that seems to call a spade a spade and not an Analogue Digging Apparatus. (ADA)

Not that those people aren't authorities, but the fact that it is the internet means it's hard to prove how great you are and why people should listen to you.
Or something like that.

Andrew Marr on the Beeb's Start of the Week program had a discussion on the value of 'information' on the internet on his podcast which might still be available ( I know I listened to it on a plane on Jan 9th so the one before that if one cares to look ) where the conclusion come to is one I agree with.

Their idea was that the internet is full of nonsense AND good stuff. So how does one differentiate?

If one was to read about something critical, like Aircraft Safety who would one listen to? The Experts, the guys who do it at the highest level professionally and the consensus that the majority comes too. That seems the obvious thing to do to me.(The critical point is the Majority here, there will always be opposing opinions)

It seems to be very difficult to apply that thinking to the Music Gear. Your point about ego is probably true but of no use to making good music. If one discovers one bought a Lemon deal with it! That's the mature thing to do.

Everything one needs to know IS on the internet (unlike when I were a boy, when it was trail and error only, with very few gear options!) but it will take a certain maturity and listening to stuff that one may not want to hear to get the most out of it.

jtsuited

PaulBrewer wrote: »

If one was to read about something critical, like Aircraft Safety who would one listen to? The Experts, the guys who do it at the highest level professionally and the consensus that the majority comes too. That seems the obvious thing to do to me.(The critical point is the Majority here, there will always be opposing opinions)

Ah but you see music production is not even 100th as complicated as Aircraft safety. Believe me, I know an Avionics engineer. I've tried to talk physics with him. I was feckin clueless.
You could learn acoustics and psychoacoustics to a fairly deep level just even doing a dodgy music technology MA. And you'd know more on the subject than many of the 'Authorities'.

So what makes the 'Authorities' special? Well most of the time in this business the only qualifications people really have as Authorities is their list of credits. Which doesn't fly with most people, because in a bygone age there were a lot of clueless engineers who got work with big clientele.

Also (and maybe it's a topic for a different day) but client lists are an absolutely inaccurate way of judging someone's experience. When I see 'has worked with x, y, and z' , it makes no difference whatsoever as I've seen with my own two eyes how a tiny amount of experience with a big name artist can suddenly become 'produced with some of the biggest names in the business'.

So with all the sh1t talk, name dropping, and just general bullsh1t out there in production land, the consumer quite rightly has rejected the appeal of big name endorsements, and who actually is an authority is unclear.

I know the gear I like, I know the gear I don't like. And I know the gear I think is over-rated. I really hate gear fetishism and snobbiness because I see that there are too many vested interests to ever believe anybody's take on something.

Whether you like it or not, you are a retailer. And unfortunately that does not make you an authority, regardless of whether you are one or not. Because you make your living selling things, your opinion of said things will be on the same level of credibility as a car dealer.

That's not to say that you won't be correct, it's just to say that even though your opinion may well be 'expert', it will not be taken as that a lot of the time.

And I think this situation applies all across the music production world.

PaulBrewer

Welease wrote: »

we could boil the equation to simple list of kit by brand which everyone would own,

Welease in jest may have hit the nail on the head!
Such a list more or less exists.

It was one of the things that was patently obvious on visiting many of London's top studios - they all basically use the same gear. The industry standards.

Anyone any ideas why that's the case?

The Recording Business is the same as the carpentry business, the aviation business or any other you might like to suggest, there are proper tools for jobs.

dav nagle

Many things are more expensive because they have more bells and whistles. A 99 Ford Fiesta will get you to the same place as a ferrari, it won't be as comfortable or smell as good or for that matter look as nice, you wont have girls looking at you and your car will shake when you go beyond 60 mph but they both do the same job (Kinda!)

My feelings are never hurt when it comes to equipment because I have gone to equipment therapy for the last 6 years and my equipment councillor was great. He taught me to except the fact that you get what you pay for which in most cases but not all seems to be very true.

I think what some people find offensive is when their equipment that they have bought with their savings is described as 'trash' or 'rubbish' especially when you consider that most of us are not born with a golden spoon up our bullets.

Peace out

jtsuited

dav nagle wrote: »

you wont have girls looking at you

bet ya i would.:P

dav nagle

jtsuited wrote: »

bet ya i would.:P

Okay you can have my fiesta and give it a try but I am coming with you to be sure that you are as handsome as you think you are! Even me, an x walkway Paris model won't get any attention in the golden bullet of love.

jtsuited

dav nagle wrote: »

Okay you can have my fiesta and give it a try but I am coming with you to be sure that you are as handsome as you think you are! Even me, an x walkway Paris model won't get any attention in the golden bullet of love.

i'm afraid i can't comfortably fit into a fiesta (damn pituitary gland). Actually i'd be like the guy in the simpsons driving the volkswagen. Actually girls would look at that come to think of it.

PaulBrewer

Ah but you see music production is not even 100th as complicated as Aircraft safety. Believe me, I know an Avionics engineer. I've tried to talk physics with him. I was feckin clueless.

I was only using that as an example. I see you've embraced my point about experts by quoting your Avionics friend;)

And you'd know more on the subject than many of the 'Authorities'

.
If that's the case they're not authorities!

So what makes the 'Authorities' special? Well most of the time in this business the only qualifications people really have as Authorities is their list of credits. Which doesn't fly with most people, because in a bygone age there were a lot of clueless engineers who got work with big clientel

My own definition is some one who has been working at the top level for a long time. Lots of people , as you describe, get lucky but it does take more than luck to maintain that position in the industry.

Also (and maybe it's a topic for a different day) but client lists are an absolutely inaccurate way of judging someone's experience. When I see 'has worked with x, y, and z' , it makes no difference whatsoever as I've seen with my own two eyes how a tiny amount of experience with a big name artist can suddenly become 'produced with some of the biggest names in the business'.

that's true

So with all the sh1t talk, name dropping, and just general bullsh1t out there in production land, the consumer quite rightly has rejected the appeal of big name endorsements, and who actually is an authority is unclear.

As I said above I'm inclined to listen to the guys who have been at it a long time at a high level. One often finds that there is a concensus at that level.
To use references of well respected guys in the business may raise hackles, but at all levels of arguments/discussions one uses references to strengthen ones arguments. Otherwise it's only a slaggin match.

I know the gear I like, I know the gear I don't like.

But how? My argument has always been comparing units under the conditions it will be used is the only true test. I and my customers are lucky enough to have access to that.

I really hate gear fetishism and snobbiness because I see that there are too many vested interests to ever believe anybody's take on something.

Anbody? Ever? That's unfortunate. I love pickin' guys brains who know more stuff than me! It's one of the things that makes the whole music scene so much fun.

And unfortunately that does not make you an authority, regardless of whether you are one or not. Because you make your living selling things, your opinion of said things will be on the same level of credibility as a car dealer.

Indeed, but I don't consider myself an authority - I don't have enough experience for that, but I'm not afraid to ask or express opinions within that context.
Also, as any of the regulars will acknowledge I'm ALWAYS prepared to back up my opinions with practical demonstrations. But enough about me!

To go back OT, I feel the emotional attachment to gear isn't beneficial to music.

dav nagle

PaulBrewer wrote: »

I was only using that as an example. I see you've embraced my point about experts by quoting your Avionics friend;)


.
If that's the case they're not authorities!

My own definition is some one who has been working at the top level for a long time. Lots of people , as you describe, get lucky but it does take more than luck to maintain that position in the industry.

that's true


As I said above I'm inclined to listen to the guys who have been at it a long time at a high level. One often finds that there is a concensus at that level.
To use references of well respected guys in the business may raise hackles, but at all levels of arguments/discussions one uses references to strengthen ones arguments. Otherwise it's only a slaggin match.



But how? My argument has always been comparing units under the conditions it will be used is the only true test. I and my customers are lucky enough to have access to that.


Anbody? Ever? That's unfortunate. I love pickin' guys brains who know more stuff than me! It's one of the things that makes the whole music scene so much fun.



Indeed, but I don't consider myself an authority - I don't have enough experience for that, but I'm not afraid to ask or express opinions within that context.
Also, as any of the regulars will acknowledge I'm ALWAYS prepared to back up my opinions with practical demonstrations. But enough about me!

To go back OT, I feel the emotional attachment to gear isn't beneficial to music.

It's the hormones ! Let's all just chill the bean and get real high and make love all day and night! Boyz 2 men style!

PaulBrewer

dav nagle wrote: »

It's the hormones ! Let's all just chill the bean and get real high and make love all day and night! Boyz 2 men style!

Actually Dav I appreciate your approach , namely "What's the job to be done, what the best way I can do it"

I think that's been an important part of your success and will be in the future.

dav nagle

PaulBrewer wrote: »

Actually Dav I appreciate your approach , namely "What's the job to be done, what the best way I can do it"

I think that's been an important part of your success and will be in the future.

Thanks Paul,

I have learnt much from you to amigo.

jtsuited

PaulBrewer wrote: »

I was only using that as an example. I see you've embraced my point about experts by quoting your Avionics friend;)


.
If that's the case they're not authorities!

My own definition is some one who has been working at the top level for a long time. Lots of people , as you describe, get lucky but it does take more than luck to maintain that position in the industry.

that's true


As I said above I'm inclined to listen to the guys who have been at it a long time at a high level. One often finds that there is a concensus at that level.
To use references of well respected guys in the business may raise hackles, but at all levels of arguments/discussions one uses references to strengthen ones arguments. Otherwise it's only a slaggin match.



But how? My argument has always been comparing units under the conditions it will be used is the only true test. I and my customers are lucky enough to have access to that.


Anbody? Ever? That's unfortunate. I love pickin' guys brains who know more stuff than me! It's one of the things that makes the whole music scene so much fun.



Indeed, but I don't consider myself an authority - I don't have enough experience for that, but I'm not afraid to ask or express opinions within that context.
Also, as any of the regulars will acknowledge I'm ALWAYS prepared to back up my opinions with practical demonstrations. But enough about me!

To go back OT, I feel the emotional attachment to gear isn't beneficial to music.

just to make the point - i do understand that you find the same gear in studios everywhere (the expensive ones) for a reason.

But it's sort of irrelevant to the vast majority of people (and definitely irrelevant to the vast majority of posters here).

I mean realistically, with good pre's and converters, and a decent monitoring setup, anyone should be able to produce something close to what is produced at Air, Olympic, Abbey Road.
Granted, many companies have gone a little overboard telling people they will be able to get the exact same quality at 1/500th the price but any engineer that can't get a great sound from a cheap setup (notice i say great not perfect) nowadays, is not a good engineer.

Gear is over-rated (says he, checkin ebay twice daily!).

PaulBrewer

jtsuited wrote: »

just to make the point - i do understand that you find the same gear in studios everywhere (the expensive ones) for a reason.

But it's sort of irrelevant to the vast majority of people (and definitely irrelevant to the vast majority of posters here).

I mean realistically, with good pre's and converters, and a decent monitoring setup, anyone should be able to produce something close to what is produced at Air, Olympic, Abbey Road.
Granted, many companies have gone a little overboard telling people they will be able to get the exact same quality at 1/500th the price but any engineer that can't get a great sound from a cheap setup (notice i say great not perfect) nowadays, is not a good engineer.

Gear is over-rated (says he, checkin ebay twice daily!).

Gear IS overated by some, but underated by others.
Adding Gearlust to the soup don't make it any clearer.

Like most things in life, balance is the secret.

studiorat

I'm emotional about gear! Fair enough a hammer is a hammer and all that, but there are certain pieces of kit I own which I'm attached too for various reasons.

I respect the design and craft that went into building certain pieces. Just as people are emotional about certain marques of car and musical instruments, bicycles, lots of stuff.

Check this guy out and see what I mean...
http://www.thermionicculture.com/company/article_sos.htm

PaulBrewer

studiorat wrote: »

I'm emotional about gear!

But does it do you any good? That console little console you bought was an emotional decision cos it certainly wasn't got for the sound!

dav nagle

I just really hope that AW don't give out higher purchase equipment on their own books, then we would all be in trouble! Looks like an appoinment with the bank manager in 09 is in order.

dav nagle

I am emotionally attached to my Portico 5012, we were going out for a few months and I taught I had no feelings for her but then things started becoming allot more transparent when she told me she loved me. My apogee is also my mistress but I can marry the 2 being half Iraqi and all.

studiorat

PaulBrewer wrote: »

But does it do you any good? That console little console you bought was an emotional decision cos it certainly wasn't got for the sound!

The CAD? price and the pre-amps. That console has proper Class A mic pre's sounds very good actually. One very cool thing is that the circuit design doesn't use any coupling capacitors in all signal paths (except for a single pair at the mic pre in). Helps with maintenance...

All circuits are DC coupled which is a very high end circuit design, and one which was involved in the decision for SSL to use a similar design on their desks.

So ha!!!

PaulBrewer

studiorat wrote: »

The CAD? price and the pre-amps. That console has proper Class A mic pre's sounds very good actually. One very cool thing is that the circuit design doesn't use any coupling capacitors in all signal paths (except for a single pair at the mic pre in). Helps with maintenance...

All circuits are DC coupled which is a very high end circuit design, and one which was involved in the decision for SSL to use a similar design on their desks.

So ha!!!

The lad who sold it to you was a Cad ok ...

Seziertisch

My one condition for gear is that it should have personality. There should be certain things it excels at, other things less so. It should show that whoever designed it had a plan of some sort i.e. they wanted to make something coloured or neutral or whatever. I can forgive stuff excelling in one situation and being completely unsuitable in another. If it fails to excel at at least one thing and then is completely unsuitable in (many) others, this is not a good sign.

As for every studio having the same gear, it boils down to 2 things. A certain amount of it is what is in fashion. Although strictly speaking this is not true, as a lot of the time the things that are in fashion are in fashion for a reason i.e. it delivers results. Also, a lot of professionals have seen popularity come full circle for a lot of gear i.e. some classic albums made on said gear in the 60's and 70's, in the 80's with the possiblilties of digital and blah etc. the baby got chucked with the bathwater, and in the 90's said gear was rediscovered and now commands collosal prices on the second hand market.

And the second thing is, if you know it delivers results you don't have to think about it. You can just get on with the job in hand. And if you are familiar with a piece of gear, and know what it is able to do and in what situations it works best (coming back to what I first said about personality), then it is a no-brainer as to why most places would have the same gear.

studiorat

PaulBrewer wrote: »

The lad who sold it to you was a Cad ok ...

Me Hoop!
It's just too quiet here for you right now Paul. You're just busting for a row aren't you? Is that ban-hammer getting rusty or something? ;)

PaulBrewer

studiorat wrote: »

Me Hoop!
Is that ban-hammer getting rusty or something? ;)

It's still in it's case behind the glass ....