The Perennial Education Thread

PaulBrewer

How are lads (and lasses) doing in their Music Production related courses ?

I'm hearing good things about some and less good about others.

Is Dublin the place to go - or is there more 'eartime' to be had at regional colleges ?

PaulBrewer

No opinions ?

11811

Well I'm down in Tralee IT finishing a BA in Music Tech,and to be honest there ain't a whole pile of "eartime", seems to be a lot of filler and focus to mold us into more entrepreneur types rather than Music Technologists. Apparently this seems to be happening across quite a few of the degree courses in ITs.

Kinda wish there was more practical hands on stuff in the studio,(which is fairly limited) but that said I have been exposed to some rather interesting modules such as Sound for Film and Interactive Music Programming.

I know of a few pals who have completed courses in sound engineering in Dublin and have gotten lots of hands on stuff and recording experience, however it was all solely sound engineering stuff.

krd

11811 wrote: »

Well I'm down in Tralee IT finishing a BA in Music Tech,and to be honest there ain't a whole pile of "eartime", seems to be a lot of filler and focus to mold us into more entrepreneur types rather than Music Technologists. Apparently this seems to be happening across quite a few of the degree courses in ITs.

They want to be able to claim they got people jobs. The reality is that 99.999% of the people who do these courses, will never find employment in either sound or music.

People who go the cowboy route - like Cowboy Paul Brewer, can, and occasionally do.

Kinda wish there was more practical hands on stuff in the studio,(which is fairly limited) but that said I have been exposed to some rather interesting modules such as Sound for Film and Interactive Music Programming.

You don't become a gunslinger by talkin' about guns and shootin'

I know of a few pals who have completed courses in sound engineering in Dublin and have gotten lots of hands on stuff and recording experience, however it was all solely sound engineering stuff.

Why...what do you mean?...........if you're talking about production/arrangement etc....no one is going to teach them that. ........accept maybe Cowboy Paul ...but he's ornrey compadre, I hear tell. Lives on raccoon meat, and don't wash too much either. Shot a man in Rino, just to watch him die.

PaulBrewer

11811 wrote: »

Well I'm down in Tralee IT finishing a BA in Music Tech,and to be honest there ain't a whole pile of "eartime", seems to be a lot of filler and focus to mold us into more entrepreneur types rather than Music Technologists. Apparently this seems to be happening across quite a few of the degree courses in ITs.

What do you mean 'entrepreneur types' ?

The industry is full of the self-employed so isn't that sort of teaching worthwhile ?

Seziertisch

PaulBrewer wrote: »

What do you mean 'entrepreneur types' ?

The industry is full of the self-employed so isn't that sort of teaching worthwhile ?

I think though that to be a successful entrepreneur you need something to distinguish you from the herd, and in music production this would logically be production skills and experience.

Hustling and hard selling might get people to work with you once, but won't necessarily bring them back a second time.

11811

PaulBrewer wrote: »

What do you mean 'entrepreneur types' ?

The industry is full of the self-employed so isn't that sort of teaching worthwhile ?

I see what you mean, it is very worth while thing to focus on, but alas in my experience here it wasn't implemented very well, there was no provision to learn about business model relevant to the industry, in fact the music/sound industry was hardly ever mentioned in classes discussing business.

Also there was quite a leaning towards business studies at times, whereby actual contact with relevant sound/music subjects seemed to suffer. Believe it or not there are a few guys here so still struggle with basic things in the studio after 3+ years, mainly due to lack of time in there. I guess my point, is why teach us to be entrepreneurs when we can't deliver the goods.

BTW I didn't intend "entrepreneur types" to sound derogatory!

godfrey

11811 wrote: »

the music/sound industry was hardly ever mentioned in classes discussing business.

Possibly because neither the course authors nor the lecturers have any knowledge or experience of it? In my opinion, you've got to be in it to begin to understand it. If fact, I feel the same about doing sound of any type, studio or live.

g

PaulBrewer

When you say 'lack of time' what do you mean ?

Give us an example in terms of hours per week or whatever ?

11811 wrote: »

I see what you mean, it is very worth while thing to focus on, but alas in my experience here it wasn't implemented very well, there was no provision to learn about business model relevant to the industry, in fact the music/sound industry was hardly ever mentioned in classes discussing business.

Also there was quite a leaning towards business studies at times, whereby actual contact with relevant sound/music subjects seemed to suffer. Believe it or not there are a few guys here so still struggle with basic things in the studio after 3+ years, mainly due to lack of time in there. I guess my point, is why teach us to be entrepreneurs when we can't deliver the goods.

BTW I didn't intend "entrepreneur types" to sound derogatory!

studiorat

The problem is people see education exclusively as a means to getting a job. Quite a few of the students I meet at all levels are doing it simply to learn.

11811

PaulBrewer wrote: »

When you say 'lack of time' what do you mean ?

Give us an example in terms of hours per week or whatever ?

I guess it would average out about 5-6 hours a week maximum...(about 3 of this actual class time, the rest you'd work on your own) This year there has been no studio based classes, and only two dealing with audio last semester.

As a whole, the course has been OK, I've learned quite a bit and found my niche as such, but I have the feeling that all I learned music/sound wise could probably have been covered in a year long practical course.

PaulBrewer

6 hours is two sessions in Nashville !

To be honest - that doesn't sound too bad ?

11811 wrote: »

I guess it would average out about 5-6 hours a week maximum...(about 3 of this actual class time, the rest you'd work on your own) This year there has been no studio based classes, and only two dealing with audio last semester.

As a whole, the course has been OK, I've learned quite a bit and found my niche as such, but I have the feeling that all I learned music/sound wise could probably have been covered in a year long practical course.

PaulBrewer

studiorat wrote: »

The problem is people see education exclusively as a means to getting a job. Quite a few of the students I meet at all levels are doing it simply to learn.

Why is that a problem ?

Isn't that a reasonable expectation after education ?

11811

PaulBrewer wrote: »

6 hours is two sessions in Nashville !

To be honest - that doesn't sound too bad ?

Haha true enough, if that 5-6hours was consistent through the 4 years, or even 3 years of it, it would be great. The reality is that only really happens over 2nd year and half of 3rd year.

flyswatter

PaulBrewer wrote: »

6 hours is two sessions in Nashville !

To be honest - that doesn't sound too bad ?

In college terms 6 hours a week doesn't seem long at all. More so if it was 6 hours p/week from the beginning of first year. I know the final years, you might generally have less.

madtheory

PaulBrewer wrote: »

Why is that a problem ?

Isn't that a reasonable expectation after education ?

It's a bit like expecting to get a job as a "scientist" when you finish your science degree. There's a leetle bit more to it than that. Similarly, music tech is a lot more than sound engineering.

And if someone badly wants studio time- then they should go book it, or set up their own studio at home.

PaulBrewer

I guess the idea of flipping straight out of a course and being employed straight away is indeed an issue ok.

I know one lad in broadcast who after 25 years plus cannot fathom the concept of a TRS jack plug working as a stereo plug or as an insert I/O ....

if6was9

I finished up 4 years of a Video and Sound course in LIT 2 years ago in May. Gotta say I wasn't the happiest when I finished.

We pretty much started every year with the same basics. This is how the ear works, sound travels this way etc... and never really got beyond a certain point with it. It was pretty frustrating. We did very little in the way of proper audio work in the first 2 years. After first year they told us all the software we'd used was obsolete and had been for years and that they were now getting proper equipment but it'd be another year before it was built and anyone could use it.

They had the gear for the last 2 years but we weren't really taught much about it or how it was set up and worked. Never did a project that required the use of more than 1 channel recording at a time in the studios. The most taxing audio project we had was taking poetry from mini disc into protools and editing and arranging it in the order it was in a book, and that was only hard because there was so much of it to wade through.

Alot of the guys in my class got sick of the course during the years and stopped caring. Nearly all of us came from a music background and the course had been presented to us as a sound engineering course. They then introduced a music production course when we were in 2nd year- which is fair enough, but suddenly all we needed to know was how to do voice overs and that was it for the audio/sound part of our course.

I don't blame the lecturers as we saw new people come in to teach with enthusiasm and then have it crushed by the red tape and political bull**** that is all over colleges and uni's. It's probably better in there now but when I left you were allowed to use the gear in the studio for your 1st year of music tech, you had to do all the recording and mixing on all-in-1 hard drive recorders.


2 years on I record alot of bands and do 4+ gigs a week as a live sound engineer but I was doing that on my own through college anyway and I learned more about sound engineering at my first gig than I did in college.

Worst moment for me was when talking to my course head in 3rd year in front of the class a few months in about my FYP when I mentioned I'd be DI'ing a guitar with a Di box and he asked me " whats a Di box?" and wasn't joking

Radiosurfer

I did a course in Dublin in Sound Technology that was a huge waste of time. Waaaay too much theory and like the previous poster, a lot of time was spent dealing with equipment that was out of date already. That would be fine if the concepts were constant, but they weren't. They were specific to the equipment. Still look back now and shake my head at the weeks and months wasted listening to someone drone on about how to set up this or that piece of kit. It's only now that I work in training myself that I can see how poor these classes were and how ill suited the tutors were to teaching. Truth be told, teaching has NOTHING to do with knowing your subject, it's all about the ability to convey the subject material and get people to understand topics through challenges that engage them (anything but written tests!!). Teachers should be left to teach, experts should go and get a job or do something else. Too often guys see teaching as an easier way to make some money while they try and succeed at what they really want to do. This is the worst reason in the world to become a teacher and it's the students that suffer.

madtheory

if6was9 wrote: »

Nearly all of us came from a music background and the course had been presented to us as a sound engineering course.

Just to be clear- Video and Sound? You're complaining about the lack of music elements in a Video and Sound course? This is a terrible shame that you ended up on the wrong course. But you seem to be doing well now? Obviously you have a skill for sound if you're currently working successfully in the area. You say the course was "presented" as sound engineering- but that "presenting" must have happened before you enrolled right? Presented by whom?

I don't understand why this happens, but it appears that prospective students get the impression that the Video and Sound course is worth doing if you don't have the points for the Music Tech course, but you are into music/ sound. The course handbook is quite clear on the content (and always has been), but unfortunately people still make this mistake. It's mainly a video course with some sound (because you can't have one without the other). Thankfully this misinformation appears to be happening less often nowadays.

To sum up (and make it clear for prospective students using google): if someone wants to learn about sound and music: do the music technology course, not the video course! And if you feel you've chosen the wrong course- tell someone when you're in first year, don't let it go!

if6was9

Music tech wasn't a course when I started in LIT. Video and Sound was presented as a sound engineering course by the lecturer who visited my secondary school and the staff at the open day before I started college and when we started too we were told we'd be trained as sound engineers by the lecturers.
I specifically asked at several points if the course was suitable for someone like me who didn't have a major interest in Video but wanted to record music for a living and was told it was, that the video was only part of the course and the bulk of it would be audio based work.

I know you're a lecturer there so you'll be on the defensive but this is what happened and not just to me but to many of us. I vividly remember one class on one of the first days where we went around and asked what did people want out of the course. Out of 30ish students, 3 people said they were interested in the Video side and the rest were people with a music background

krd

if6was9 wrote: »

Worst moment for me was when talking to my course head in 3rd year in front of the class a few months in about my FYP when I mentioned I'd be DI'ing a guitar with a Di box and he asked me " whats a Di box?" and wasn't joking

Ouch!!!!

If you don't know that, not only do you not deserve to be teaching a class. You would not deserve to be in the third year of a course.

We pretty much started every year with the same basics. This is how the ear works, sound travels this way etc... and never really got beyond a certain point with it.

Everyone knows how an ear works. And teaching people who sound waves travel shouldn't take up more than 90 minutes.

I've seen the curriculum for some of these courses. And they are complete bolloxs. I'm only an amateur hobbiest, but I know bollox when I see it.

Acoustics, can be very complex. For the purpose of heavy duty engineering, there's tricky maths involved. There is a much greater depth to it - and if they're going to teach sound, they really have to do that stuff - not junior cert crap on how an ear works.

It was pretty frustrating. We did very little in the way of proper audio work in the first 2 years.

When I studied physics and electronics. I had a minimum of 6 to 8 hours of hands on labs every week. The whole point of an institute of technology is to get peoples hands on the stuff. There should have been a studio with people running sessions around the clock.

After first year they told us all the software we'd used was obsolete and had been for years and that they were now getting proper equipment but it'd be another year before it was built and anyone could use it.

Bollocky piss taking. The core skills do not become obsolete. And the new software just does what the old software did, maybe a little easier. All the techniques being used today, are the same as they were in the early 90s. When people had more limited sequencers, samplers etc.

They had the gear for the last 2 years but we weren't really taught much about it or how it was set up and worked.

Maybe they couldn't teach you much about it, because they didn't have a clue themselves. And knowing Institutes of Tech, the "teachers" can often be bollocky people, related to some country councillor etc. Who've been "sorted" for a job.

Never did a project that required the use of more than 1 channel recording at a time in the studios. The most taxing audio project we had was taking poetry from mini disc into protools and editing and arranging it in the order it was in a book, and that was only hard because there was so much of it to wade through.

This the kind of thing they have ickle school children doing in junior high school in some countries.

I've never worked in sound and media. Though I have sat in with proper professionals doing their work. Things like voice audio - done to a high standard are very involved. I'll just say, this was in the US. I knew actors, who very specially trained to do narration - what they did was far more complicated than ordinary speech. And similarly the sound engineers - there is a science to getting a narration sounding full, crisp, clear and nice. It's not just "talk intah dat microphone"

Alot of the guys in my class got sick of the course during the years and stopped caring. Nearly all of us came from a music background and the course had been presented to us as a sound engineering course. They then introduced a music production course when we were in 2nd year- which is fair enough, but suddenly all we needed to know was how to do voice overs and that was it for the audio/sound part of our course.

Listen all ye were doing was faffing around, doing f'all.

I don't blame the lecturers as we saw new people come in to teach with enthusiasm and then have it crushed by the red tape and political bull**** that is all over colleges and uni's.

I would blame the lecturers. If I was lecturing that course. I would have ye all doing as much practical work as possible. Even if all we had was a few laptops, an M-audio whatevers, and ableton.

2 years on I record alot of bands and do 4+ gigs a week as a live sound engineer but I was doing that on my own through college anyway and I learned more about sound engineering at my first gig than I did in college.

Yep.....You'd probably be better able to teach the course than the chancer who didn't know what a DI was.

Jesus,, 4 years is a long time. It's a period you could jam a lot into. If I was putting a course together. I would got to the audio professionals - and in Ireland there are some really great people. Find out from them what should be taught. Not some bluffer, who has a vague idea of how the ear works.

If you want the science, go to the scientists.

And for the Alchemy, the Alchemists.

if6was9

I wouldn't blame the lecturers as I saw them come in fresh and full of ideas and wanting to change things up and make the course better but after 6 months of dealing with red tape, politics and I assume an "old guard" they'd be jaded and sick of trying to get stuff done.
From what I've read on the LIT section the course's are better and more hands on than they used to be.

LiamMacC

if6was9 wrote: »

IWorst moment for me was when talking to my course head in 3rd year in front of the class a few months in about my FYP when I mentioned I'd be DI'ing a guitar with a Di box and he asked me " whats a Di box?" and wasn't joking

To introduce myself I am the head of the Video & Sound Technology programme at Limerick Institute of Technology. Those who are familiar with the course will recognise me from my username.

I am not a regular user of this forum but this thread has been brought to my attention and I feel compelled to reply. As course head I am quite concerned that my professional integrity is being damaged by if6was9's comments in the quote above. I wish to completely disassociate myself from the incident which he/she has referred to - I can assure you that I know full well what a DI box is!

I call on if6was9 to clarify his/her comments and I ask that he/she considers his/her remarks in future posts.

If anyone wishes to find out more about the Video & Sound Technology course here at LIT I'd be delighted to chat with you. My contact details can be found on the LIT website: http://www.lit.ie/Courses/LC276

mkegvn

I'm in second year of the LIT Music Tech course and I have to say, it's great. It's really well thought out, although it took me a while to realise it. And I believe there's a hefty overhaul on the way for next year too (More choice of modules etc)

I really think Audio Electronics and Digital Audio are the way forward for these courses. Audio Electronics is only available up to Year 2 here. I'd like to see that change. Learning to code on top of knowing your circuitry would have you set up, and a few Solid algorithms wouldn't hurt either.

mkegvn

By the way, Regarding the whole studio time thing - People in LIT seem to book the studios, then don't show up to their booked slot, and later complain about the lack of time available. Constantly this happens.

if6was9

LiamMacC wrote: »

To introduce myself I am the head of the Video & Sound Technology programme at Limerick Institute of Technology. Those who are familiar with the course will recognise me from my username.

I am not a regular user of this forum but this thread has been brought to my attention and I feel compelled to reply. As course head I am quite concerned that my professional integrity is being damaged by if6was9's comments in the quote above. I wish to completely disassociate myself from the incident which he/she has referred to - I can assure you that I know full well what a DI box is!

I call on if6was9 to clarify his/her comments and I ask that he/she considers his/her remarks in future posts.

If anyone wishes to find out more about the Video & Sound Technology course here at LIT I'd be delighted to chat with you. My contact details can be found on the LIT website: http://www.lit.ie/Courses/LC276

Wasn't you Liam, as it says in my original post I finished 2 years ago. Never had a problem with the video side either.

Mars Bar

mkegvn wrote: »

I really think Audio Electronics and Digital Audio are the way forward for these courses. Audio Electronics is only available up to Year 2 here. I'd like to see that change. Learning to code on top of knowing your circuitry would have you set up, and a few Solid algorithms wouldn't hurt either.

A 3rd year of Audio Electronics should be an elective.

I would have HATED if the course focused more on Electronics coz (no offence madtheory ) I just didn't get it!
I would have liked an introduction to Event Management in Year 2.

Radiosurfer

I was really surprised at how much work there is available in Event Management when looking at some job sites recently. Outside of IT and coding it was far and away the most popular area for vacancies all over the uk.

madtheory

None taken mars bar! The third year project would be the place to do more audio electronics/ coding if that is your thing. There's a student right now doing a hardware ring modulator with a so called wavetable as the carrier. Bit of coding involved, the thing can even do rudimentary sampling. Good post on the Massey plugins blog about what you need to learn to be able to do plugins- not much code, loads of EE.

We need to cater for a wide range of skills, and the job market. As I said here before, it's the networking/IT stuff that sets you apart from the crowd of "sound engineering" graduates. The new course has more event management also I think. That knowledge plus the sound stuff makes you a serious contender. This is why it's called music tech, not sound engineering.

krd

LiamMacC wrote: »

I am not a regular user of this forum but this thread has been brought to my attention and I feel compelled to reply. As course head I am quite concerned that my professional integrity is being damaged by if6was9's comments in the quote above. I wish to completely disassociate myself from the incident which he/she has referred to - I can assure you that I know full well what a DI box is!

The problem of integrity really comes from the courses themselves.

I'm not going to name names, because they'd all be wading in. Quite a few courses are a joke. I could name one IT that's not Limerick, where the quality of the course and the skills the graduates gained were absurdly bad. From someone who was teaching for a while in this IT - they blamed a mixture of poor students and poor teaching staff, and an overall poor course.

Some of the other courses around are an atrocious waste of money and time. I've seen the teaching materials and curriculum for some courses and the stuff is worthless. Stuff that should really be covered to completion in a single introductory week, is being stretched over a complete academic year.

Sonic Academy's Online Courses are head and shoulders above some of the courses that charge a lot more and deliver a helluva lot less.

And "ah but yes....We teach about how the ear works and Sonic Academy don't" is no defence.