|
Recordists will develop sound quality preferences and working preferences for particular pieces of equipment, and/or technologies. Developing such preferences may or may not be artistically healthy. The recordist may become inclined to consider a certain technology to be "better" than another because it is the one they are most familiar with, not because it is the one that is most appropriate for the project. Often personal preferences (or personal experiences) are confused with the actual quality or usefulness of a device or a technology.
Personal preferences are not a measure of quality, in and of themselves. Audio devices have inherent sound qualities that are largely determined by technology. The recordist will be using these devices to shape the sound of the music recording. The recordist will do well to learn the inherent sound qualities of as many devices as possible. These are the tools (instruments) that will be used in THE ART OF RECORDING.
Similarly to the above, no recording device is inherently better than another similar device. While certain devices are more flexible than others, and certain devices are of higher technical quality than others, the true measure of the piece of equipment is its suitability to the particular needs of the project, at a given point in time.
The advantages of any particular device in one application, may be a disadvantage in another. The sound quality of one device may be appropriate to one musical context, and not to another. The measure of the device will be in how its inherent sound qualities compare to the desired sound qualities of the recording. Pieces of recording equipment will be evaluated, by the recordist, for their sound qualities, and their potential usefulness in communicating the artistic message in the piece of music. This evaluation is performed through a critical listening process similar to that used to evaluate microphone performance characteristics.
Pieces of recording equipment are tools. The tools may be applied to any task, with consistent results. The recordist needs to decide if the particular tool (piece of equipment) is the appropriate piece of equipment for the sound quality that is required of the particular project.
Musicians often carry with them a number of musical instruments. They will use a different model of the same instrument (perhaps made by a different manufacturer) to obtain a different sound quality of their performance, depending on what is required by the musical material. The recordist should recognize this is similar to their own circumstances.
In selecting recording equipment, the recordist is, in essence, selecting a musical instrument. The sound quality of sound sources, or of the entire recording may be markedly interpreted by the piece of equipment, while the sound is under the control of the recordist. This is the way a traditional musical instrument is applied by a traditional performer.
Among the most commonly applied audio devices are signal processors. They comprise a large portion of the recordist's instruments, or tools. These devices may play a significant role in shaping the individual project. Specific devices are chosen because their individual, inherent sound qualities lend themselves to the particular project.
The sound quality of many processing devices may be altered to sound similar to very different devices, merely by how they are applied to the sound source and how they are used in conjunction with other processors (stringing processes together on a single sound source). If the recordist is knowledgeable of how the devices operate on the signal, and the physical components of the sound source, s/he is able to achieve a remarkable number of different sound qualities out of a small number of processors.
The primary differences between models of equipment are the flexibility with which they can modify the signal, and the integrity or technical quality of the signal after the processor has been applied. Less expensive processors often distort or add noise to the signal; these devices may not be suitable for many professional applications. The device should allow the recordist very precise control in modifying the physical components of the signal; devices that store settings the recordist is tuning for applications in a project are very helpful, although these are almost exclusively found on digital devices.
The feature offered by a specific device, or a certain technology, may be a factor that comes into the decision of one piece of equipment over another. A piece of equipment that is capable of recalling settings that the recordist has established many weeks before, perhaps at a different studio, from a floppy disk or from a data cartridge may make one device more desirable than a similar, analog device. Conversely, the recordist's use of detailed documentation of processor settings and applications may be used as a very accurate and reliable substitute to data storage and recall. The selection of one device over another is not always a clear, sequential process.
Monitoring: Extraneous Sound Qualities and the Listening Experience
During the preliminary stages, the recordist must decide on how they will approach the perception (monitoring) of the recording process. The monitoring of the recording process, in the recording control room (whether it be a commercial facility or a closet used for a remote recording), will be the means through which the recording itself will be evaluated. All of the sounds and relationships of the recording project are presented to the listener through the monitoring system.
The monitor system is more than a pair of loudspeakers. In terms of hardware, the monitor system also includes power amplifiers, crossover networks, and (perhaps) the monitor mixer of the console. All hardware must function efficiently and effectively in relation to the other components, in a complementary manner in terms of sound qualities, to reproduce a waveform that has not been distorted. The monitor system also encompasses the listening room itself, the placement of the loudspeakers in the room, and the interactions of the room and the loudspeakers (especially reverberant energy and strong reflections).
The monitor system has the potential to distort all sound qualities and relationships in the recording; this must be avoided as much as possible, or at the very least the recordist must know how the sound is being distorted. The recordist must evaluate the project from many different perspectives, focusing on any artistic element. Each of these perspectives will require the monitoring system to accurately reproduce: sound quality on all hierarchical levels; the spatial relationships of sound sources; the frequency, amplitude and time information of the recording.
|
