As I recall, Spector was one of those who used a car system as his
final test of a mix so it makes sense. All that work to ensure the
music sounds good in a car -- which has to be one of the worst
acoustic environments available. Apparently that's where we make our
music buying decisions.
ScottGee1
On 8/30/06, Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Joel Wilcox wrote:
> > On 8/28/06, AG Schnozz <agschnozz@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >> I get a kick out of high-end hifi gear. The professional studio
> >> stuff is usually less expensive and more accurate. However, I
> >> can say on good authority that you don't necessarily want that
> >> in your own system. Why? Mastering. When a song is "Mastered",
> >> it is polished and glossed up to sound right for the following
> >> purposes: Radio, Album, On-Line, TV/Video, Dance. Each of these
> >> receives different types of processing and eq'ing. The music is
> >> mastered not for the "ideal" audio system, but for the normal
> >> system in normal listening environments.
> >>
> >
> > A friend who sold me a digital recording mixer and microphone for some
> > work I do told me that most guys take the CD down to their car when
> > they've recorded something to see how it sounds. I have to admit to
> > ripping a master down to MP3 to see how it comes over computer
> > speakers.
> >
> Nothing new. I acquired an LP of the great old Phil Spector "Wall of
> Sound" productions. Remember how great they sounded on the car radio,
> especially loud? On a good system, they sound like c***, loud or soft.
>
> Moose
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|