Recording - January 2012 - 39

Historical period also weighs heavily in the sound of “good”. As music and technology evolved, so did sound, and the professional engineer is expected to be able to both mimic the past, and push the envelope toward the future. To reiterate, it is paramount that engineers listen critically to multiple music styles and time periods. Communication With so many aesthetic discrepancies present in the recording industry, it’s probably no surprise that communication between engineers, producers, and artists is sometimes difficult. To make matters worse, engineers must understand technical vernacular as well. Based in fact and not in subjectivity, engineering jargon speaks in dB, Hertz, phase, and transient response. Musicians, however, usually communicate in subjective euphemisms. “Louder”, “punchier”, and “brighter”, are all terms heard regularly in a recording studio, and an engineer must translate these desires into “tech” in order to facilitate client happiness. Of course, the problem with euphemisms is that they are commonly misunderstood. Take the word “warm”, a term used frequently by musicians. Translated to tech-speak, what does “warm” mean? Curiously, I’ve found that depending on the situation and client, “warm” can refer to a variety of conditions, some even contradictory. I’ve heard clients ask for warm when they wanted less treble and other clients request warm when they wanted more treble! I’ve also seen clients refer to warm as midrange, and others discuss warm in terms of the amount of tube-like distortion is present. So, what does warm actually sound like? At this point, I’m not exactly sure, as the term’s subjectivity has completely confused me. That said, when I use the word—and I try not to—I am usually discussing lower mids, such as the 200 Hz range. Engineering “good” Musicians and style aside, the audio engineering community has also established its own measurements of good. Attempting to rely more on facts than subjectivity, engineers frequently base their rubric on quantifiable phenomena such as frequency response, distortion, and phase. “Good” is used not just to describe the subjective quality of a sound source, but how the source is changed through the recording process. Does the microphone capture all of the frequencies present in a naturally balanced manner? Does the preamp add a measurable amount distortion? Does the eq induce audible noise? To the engineer who is asking these questions, factual answers are just a listen away. This is a good thing, because in many cases, decisions in a recording

session must be made quickly. Having a simple Yes or No approval system speeds things up. To most engineers, any amount of unwanted change is considered bad. If a source becomes degraded, the sound is no longer good, and some element in the signal path must get adjusted or swapped out. Everything has a sound This brings us to an important concept: everything has a sound. Every last component in a system, from microphone to speaker, contributes to the quality of the final product. Everything, even cables, volume pots, and the choice of power outlet affects sound quality. To those inclined towards obsessive-compulsive disorder, this notion can be troublesome. I’ve seen guitarists spend hundreds of dollars on a single cable, only to see the smallest subjective change in quality. To the practical, however, the knowledge that everything has a sound aids in both trouble-shooting and in the slow but steady improvement of their equipment arsenal. Is something killing your tone? Swap out everything in the chain, one item at a time. The answer might be something simple, like a cable or adapter. Are you hungry to buy a new piece of gear? The best buy might even be inexpensive, such as an acoustic panel or a pop filter. The Quest To most folks in this business, a passion for good music inspires and motivates. For audio engineers, the quest for good sound is equally stirring, and often triggers a lifelong obsession with equipment and technique. To the typical reader of this magazine, both these passions and obsessions are probably familiar, since you’re reading Recording— The Magazine For The Recording Musician. So—to sum up this first chapter of Recording Fundamentals: While we can agree that both music and sound are entirely subjective, we should also agree that facts (based in science) and expectations (based on established styles) can determine what is “good”. This makes experimentation in audio vital, because there are no clear-cut rules in the making of good. There are those expectations, however. Listening to a variety of music, from all styles and eras, is critical. Also important is continual audio education. Amassing new engineering skills, as well as regular review of audio theory, helps any engineer down the path toward better sound. Stick with Fundamentals for your monthly dose! Eric Ferguson (ferguson@recordingmag.com) recently escaped Los Angeles after a dozen years of freelance audio engineering. He is currently on the faculty of the New England School of Communications (NESCOM) in Bangor, ME.
RECORDING JANUARY 2012

http://www.mojaveaudio.com http://www.mojaveaudio.com

Recording - January 2012

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Recording - January 2012