Topic: Post Processing - technique and ethics

[wbrisette]

I may just suck at it, but it takes me a couple hours of experimentation between different compressors, EQ settings, etc. before I find what I think works best.

The biggest issue I have here is just make sure you have a system that lets you really hear what it is you are altering. Performing EQ, compression, limiting, etc. on a file that you are monitoring through a cheap set of headphones or computer speakers will sound drastically different on a different system.

My opinion is you can (and should) do some EQ, but do it lightly and do it on a system that lets you really hear what it is you are doing. Otherwise you might find that you're great sounding show now sounds very poor on another system.

Wayne

[twatts (pants are so over-rated...)]

I may just suck at it, but it takes me a couple hours of experimentation between different compressors, EQ settings, etc. before I find what I think works best.

The biggest issue I have here is just make sure you have a system that lets you really hear what it is you are altering. Performing EQ, compression, limiting, etc. on a file that you are monitoring through a cheap set of headphones or computer speakers will sound drastically different on a different system.

My opinion is you can (and should) do some EQ, but do it lightly and do it on a system that lets you really hear what it is you are doing. Otherwise you might find that you're great sounding show now sounds very poor on another system.

Wayne

Nothing against you Sharky, I'm sure you know what you are doing.

But Wayne makes a good point.  Early on, I rolled the bass-off on a recording based on what I heard through my playback system (JVC and Pioneer speakers).  I thought it sounded great.  Later, when I updated my playback (Sony ES and Paradigm), the very same rolled-off recording sounded very thin - no bass.  I went back to my master and redid the show.  Now it sounds like its supposed to sound.

This is one of those issues that isn't going to have a clear-cut answer, I suppose.  Someone like Charlie Miller certainly knows what he's doing post-process, so there is no issue having him re-do seeds.  But some newbie with a brand new LogiTech computer PC speaker system and the latest version of Audacity might not produce favorable results.

As parts of the "no peeing in the pool" ideal at ETREE, we generally try to discourage people from tinkering with recordings because most ETREE users do NOT know what they are doing.  I really don't want to have to wade through 50 poorly processed seeds of the same show before finding the good one. 

Kind of the same idea when we talk about people 're-mastering' a tapers seeds.  There have been several discussion about tapers releasing seeds only to find their seeds "remastered" by whomever.  This has caused controversy as some tapers feel others shouldn't change their seeds without their consent. 

ETREE can't stop you from doing whatever you want with your seeds.  They are your seeds and it is your archive, so do with it as you want.  The only thing ETREE can do is regulate the trading of non-friendly acts on its Forums and remove lossy/non-friendly seeds from the BT.ETREE.  At least thats all we are going to do.

If you want to post-process your recording, go for it.  Personally, I would rather you didn't for my own sake, but like I've said already - they are your seeds, do with them what you want. 

Terry

[mattb]

Early on, I rolled the bass-off on a recording based on what I heard through my playback system (JVC and Pioneer speakers).  I thought it sounded great.  Later, when I updated my playback (Sony ES and Paradigm), the very same rolled-off recording sounded very thin - no bass.  I went back to my master and redid the show.  Now it sounds like its supposed to sound.

When my brother's band recorded some tracks in a "real" studio many years ago I joined them for the session and learned a lot.
One thing I found pretty interesting was in the control room they had a few sets of monitors. One were a really nice set of something high end (I forget what), another were Pioneer 5x9 car speakers, and the other were a set of detachable boombox speakers you might get from K-Mart (this was the 80's, today it would be iPod speakers from WalMart ).

I don't know if this still hold true, but the aim at the time was to tweak the eq, compression and whatever else to find a happy medium that sounded acceptable on all the  speakers. If they made the recording so it sounded great on the high end gear, it would distort horribly on the crappy gear. So they had to remove fidelity to make it compatible with what people were likely to be listening on. It really opened my eyes at the time.

[landshark]

I may just suck at it, but it takes me a couple hours of experimentation between different compressors, EQ settings, etc. before I find what I think works best.

The biggest issue I have here is just make sure you have a system that lets you really hear what it is you are altering. Performing EQ, compression, limiting, etc. on a file that you are monitoring through a cheap set of headphones or computer speakers will sound drastically different on a different system.

My opinion is you can (and should) do some EQ, but do it lightly and do it on a system that lets you really hear what it is you are doing. Otherwise you might find that you're great sounding show now sounds very poor on another system.

Wayne

Nothing against you Sharky, I'm sure you know what you are doing.

But Wayne makes a good point.  Early on, I rolled the bass-off on a recording based on what I heard through my playback system (JVC and Pioneer speakers).  I thought it sounded great.  Later, when I updated my playback (Sony ES and Paradigm), the very same rolled-off recording sounded very thin - no bass.  I went back to my master and redid the show.  Now it sounds like its supposed to sound.

This is one of those issues that isn't going to have a clear-cut answer, I suppose.  Someone like Charlie Miller certainly knows what he's doing post-process, so there is no issue having him re-do seeds.  But some newbie with a brand new LogiTech computer PC speaker system and the latest version of Audacity might not produce favorable results.

As parts of the "no peeing in the pool" ideal at ETREE, we generally try to discourage people from tinkering with recordings because most ETREE users do NOT know what they are doing.  I really don't want to have to wade through 50 poorly processed seeds of the same show before finding the good one. 

Kind of the same idea when we talk about people 're-mastering' a tapers seeds.  There have been several discussion about tapers releasing seeds only to find their seeds "remastered" by whomever.  This has caused controversy as some tapers feel others shouldn't change their seeds without their consent. 

ETREE can't stop you from doing whatever you want with your seeds.  They are your seeds and it is your archive, so do with it as you want.  The only thing ETREE can do is regulate the trading of non-friendly acts on its Forums and remove lossy/non-friendly seeds from the BT.ETREE.  At least thats all we are going to do.

If you want to post-process your recording, go for it.  Personally, I would rather you didn't for my own sake, but like I've said already - they are your seeds, do with them what you want. 

Terry

Heh, there's no way I know what I'm doing, Terry, but I thank you for giving me the benefit of the doubt!! 

And I think you make a great point about "peeing in the pool."  I'm especially in agreement with you concerning re-masters:  Etree is there for people to share tapes that they made, not some mixmaster's resampled and remixed version of the original tracks.  I'm just speaking for the original poster, that they should have license to upload a recording they have made with any post-production they feel is warranted.

My post- skills are very much a work in progress, and I'm limited in what I can reasonably justify to spend.  I understand your and Wayne's point about sound quality, and appreciate the nuances, particularly when it comes to EQ.  I can't afford a crazy set of high end cans or a true pro soundboard, but so far my Sennheisers, Soundforge 8 and SB X-Fi Platinum (I know, I know, ASIO issues and that damn crackling) let me create stuff that actually sounds better once I try it on my CD player, in my car, and on my Sansa portable/WAV player as compared to my computer.  And I don't really know why.  Of course, I still find myself double-checking back to the raw source (which I always keep somewhere) and more often than not find I prefer it to the mucked up version I've just created and have to start from scratch.  As I said, though, I may just suck at it <grin>...

Thank you for the feedback, I appreciate it!

Mike