Thread Rating:
  • 4 Vote(s) - 2.5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Qupe-Eurovision challengers
#12
(15-09-2016, 04:55 PM)The_Metallurgist Wrote: garbage in, garbage out. that sounds critical, not very complementary, but that's what we have here - it's hypercompressed stock.

<snip>

i will also add, that i wouldn't mind betting the compression they deployed had completely the wrong parameters - nothing sounded good to me despite being 24bit? you don't upload songs for others to mix that is over compressed like this, or contains automation for that matter, unless you're ignorant of the mixing process, or simply bone idle and can't be arsed to switch it off before the print.

<snip>

there's a post you should read which goes to show how much ignorance actually exists here, and how loudness impresses, especially when it has a name to it (suckers!):

Whoa -- time out! I'm sorry, but I feel I have to make it clear that I find the tone of your post unacceptable. I'm happy for you to have strong views about mixing issues such as dynamic range, and I fully defend your right to express them, whether I agree with them or not. What I take exception to is your choice of language, because it risks undermining two things fundamental to the Discussion Zone.

1) We are all blessed to be allowed, free of charge (free of email registration, even!), to download and work with multitracks from many talented musicians. If I were a member of Qupe, the negativity of your comments would certainly make me think twice about contributing to the multitrack library. Whatever you think about the 'quality' of any multitrack in the library, each one offers something that we can all learn from, so there's no sense in any of us antagonising those musicians who kindly agree to support this educational resource. If you feel strongly that less processed tracks would help you mix this production more successfully, then try addressing a polite request directly to the band via their web site.

2) Being personally disparaging and dismissive of other DZ members is totally contrary to the spirit of this forum, and I have very little patience for it. I don't care how misguided you think they are. As far as I'm concerned, every user in this forum should be entitled to a basic level of civility from other users that precludes their being labelled ignorant suckers. It's tough opening up one's own mixing work to feedback, and I created this forum to provide a supportive environment for that. There is plenty of room on the Internet for the 'school of hard knocks' -- just not here.

I have said to you on a number of other occasions that I respect your opinions (and your right to them), but I also ask that you respect the intended spirit of this learning environment and maintain a positive and supportive tone.

Many thanks in advance for your understanding,

Mike Senior
(Discussion Zone Admin)
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Qupe-Eurovision challengers - by The_Metallurgist - 12-09-2016, 09:54 PM
RE: Qupe-Eurovision challengers - by Rufete - 13-09-2016, 12:33 PM
RE: Qupe-Eurovision challengers - by thedon - 14-09-2016, 10:44 AM
RE: Qupe-Eurovision challengers - by Cudjoe - 14-09-2016, 06:45 PM
RE: Qupe-Eurovision challengers - by Dangerous - 15-09-2016, 01:18 PM
RE: Qupe-Eurovision challengers - by kapu - 16-09-2016, 06:16 AM
RE: Qupe-Eurovision challengers - by jeffd42 - 16-09-2016, 06:28 PM
RE: Qupe-Eurovision challengers - by Olli H - 17-09-2016, 08:02 AM
RE: Qupe-Eurovision challengers - by Mike Senior - 16-09-2016, 08:12 AM
RE: Qupe-Eurovision challengers - by MrGroove - 27-09-2016, 06:21 PM
RE: Qupe-Eurovision challengers - by Dangerous - 17-09-2016, 08:54 AM
RE: Qupe-Eurovision challengers - by kapu - 17-09-2016, 12:41 PM
RE: Qupe-Eurovision challengers - by Mike Senior - 17-09-2016, 02:29 PM
RE: Qupe-Eurovision challengers - by jpdrums1 - 21-09-2016, 07:53 AM
RE: Qupe-Eurovision challengers - by dcp10200 - 21-09-2016, 02:01 PM