Lets talk about HARSHNESS

[karbomusic]

But for all I know an anonymous person can be a raving loon

And so can someone you've known for years, its irrelevant. They are trusted/valid based on how they handle themselves and really nothing more.

[chip mcdonald]

Originally Posted by Susan G

Hi chip-

I have to echo g_punk, et. al. What possible difference does it make?

Thanks-

-Susan

It makes a difference because nothing can be attributed to you. You can claim to be an expert on Jamstix. Do you work for the company? Do you work for XLN or Slate? I don't know, and *can't* know. In turn, I'm not going to give what you say about something as a person who stands behind their actual name.

"Wow, this Obik guy REALLY likes Amplitube! Man, it must be something to have!

[chip mcdonald]

Originally Posted by Jason Brian Merrill

Don't get it either. Not sure what precipitated that comment.,

Because you've got an anonymous person in this thread giving a non-anonymous person a hard time about a claim regarding gear. While I know the non-anonymous person's rep, I find it funny how the anonymous person challenges the bona fides of the non-anonymous person. I think this sort of thing might not happen as much if more people used their actual names.

Just a sociological observation from being on the net for a lonnnng time. Also of interest in that I've watched a whole lot of non-anonymous people get fed up with such things, who otherwise would be an asset to an online community.

[chip mcdonald]

Originally Posted by Lawrence

The only time it semi-annoys me is when the proverbial "guitarboy99" claims

Yeah, but how is "Lawrence" less anonymous than "guitarboy99"?

[chip mcdonald]

Originally Posted by karbomusic

And so can someone you've known for years, its irrelevant. They are trusted/valid based on how they handle themselves and really nothing more.

Online personages are not equivalent to "people I actually have met".

Back to the original concept: speaking for myself, I'm not so interested in what anonymous people have to say about a subject. It is not pragmatic to invest the same amount of attention and consideration as what they say, as opposed to someone using a real name that I know. This should be common sense, maybe it isn't - again, I'm a loon.

AnonymousGuy314876: "I always boost 3.2k on my snare drums".
Chris Lord Alge: "I always boost 3.2k on my snare drums".

One is not like the other.

[karbomusic]

I'm not so interested in what anonymous people have to say about a subject

^This I support you on because it's just you. Someone else might think the same thing without an address and phone number which is just as valid.. For me I'd feel handicapped following either because I'm pretty comfortable that I don't need a name to set of my BS detector. I can evaluate that from the words and actions alone.

[Lawrence]

Originally Posted by chip mcdonald

Yeah, but how is "Lawrence" less anonymous than "guitarboy99"?

Don't drag me back into this mess.

[carbon]

Some rascals might even have an user name that sounds like a real name.
We don't really know for sure

All the best wishes,

Jonathan Smith Sr.

[RobertP]

Originally Posted by karbomusic

And so can someone you've known for years, its irrelevant. They are trusted/valid based on how they handle themselves and really nothing more.

'Better the loon you know than the loon you don't know'
not sure who said that but treat it as a fatuous comment do.

But Krbomusic is right, it is irrelevant in my opinion.

I'm not so interested in what anonymous people have to say about a subject

Is this an issue for all those well known authors, both fiction and non-fiction, classics and contemporary, who write under pseudonyms (whatever the reason)?

[Sound asleep]

Originally Posted by chip mcdonald

Online personages are not equivalent to "people I actually have met".

Back to the original concept: speaking for myself, I'm not so interested in what anonymous people have to say about a subject. It is not pragmatic to invest the same amount of attention and consideration as what they say, as opposed to someone using a real name that I know. This should be common sense, maybe it isn't - again, I'm a loon.

AnonymousGuy314876: "I always boost 3.2k on my snare drums".
Chris Lord Alge: "I always boost 3.2k on my snare drums".

One is not like the other.

There is no difference in a real name or an alias though. I can know people from here, and know that I will trust their opinion on certain things, and others that I don't know, I can't trust.

It is true, if someone that is anonymous to me, just says some statement, all other things being equal, I can't decide if it is of value or not. If it is something I don't know about, I can't trust some random person.

But if logic can play a part, then it doesn't matter what your name is, and if I have come to know you, whether it is with text only, and with an alias rather than a real name, that doesn't matter, I can still tell whether the source is dependable.

What name someone has, has no bearing on how valid their statements are, neither does seeing their face.

A statement is either valid or it isn't. Faces and real names don't help me discern the difference. Observation of a track record, and use of logic and reasoning do.

[Jae.Thomas]

Originally Posted by chip mcdonald

AnonymousGuy314876: "I always boost 3.2k on my snare drums".
Chris Lord Alge: "I always boost 3.2k on my snare drums".

One is not like the other.

neither is:

Jason Brian Merrill: "I always boost 3.2k on my snare drums".


what separates CLA from the above 3 examples is his REPUTATION for getting "good" snare sounds. Not his real name. If his name were skrillex would you feel different?

[Timothy Lawler]

When I get harshness it's usually from the source, not the gear. So I work on the source sound.

Originally Posted by chip mcdonald

Clarity is what's missing on cheap gear, and I think people tend to want to make up for it with high eq...

I agree. I also agree with what you said about "window/ease of use".

[karbomusic]

'Better the loon you know than the loon you don't know'

Fair enough, If I know you as you toss me the bottle and say "It puts the lotion on its skin" maybe I can use what I know about you already to talk you out of making me into a lampshade.

[msore]

Originally Posted by Sound asleep

There is no difference in a real name or an alias though. I can know people from here, and know that I will trust their opinion on certain things, and others that I don't know, I can't trust.

It is true, if someone that is anonymous to me, just says some statement, all other things being equal, I can't decide if it is of value or not. If it is something I don't know about, I can't trust some random person.

But if logic can play a part, then it doesn't matter what your name is, and if I have come to know you, whether it is with text only, and with an alias rather than a real name, that doesn't matter, I can still tell whether the source is dependable.

What name someone has, has no bearing on how valid their statements are, neither does seeing their face.

A statement is either valid or it isn't. Faces and real names don't help me discern the difference. Observation of a track record, and use of logic and reasoning do.

Huh?

Did you just say that knowing someone does matter, because you can decide if you trust them, but then at the same time, did you say that knowing who is behind an alias does NOT matter?

Matter? Not? Huh?

In a field where expertise is important, statements CAN and always are judged by who has expertise. In this thread, I have learned some things, by paying attention to WHO said them, not just paying attention to what was said.

[chip mcdonald]

Originally Posted by Sound asleep

What name someone has, has no bearing on how valid their statements are, neither does seeing their face.

Hmm.

I'm a loon. Because I feel that there is one name in this thread that does represent more validity on certain matters. If this is not a clear concept - I don't know, sorry, YMMV but it makes plenty of sense to me.

[chip mcdonald]

Originally Posted by karbomusic

^This I support you on because it's just you. Someone else might think the same thing without an address and phone number which is just as valid..

That's fine, but *my* perception of reality is, if an anonymous person starts talking about using a Neve and what he thinks about NS-10's and their relevance - I'm not interested in knowing why. Maybe I should be, but *probably* I'm fine.

On the other hand, if I know a non-anonymous person absolutely has experience with Neves, and NS-10s in an actual legitimate, pro circumstance - *a very successful pro circumstance* - that is potentially more interesting (and beneficial).

The noise level online is too high to operate any other way IMO.

[chip mcdonald]

Originally Posted by Jason Brian Merrill

neither is:

Jason Brian Merrill: "I always boost 3.2k on my snare drums".


what separates CLA from the above 3 examples is his REPUTATION for getting "good" snare sounds. Not his real name. If his name were skrillex would you feel different?

That is a different context, we're talking about "here". If someone is posting about getting snare sounds in these forums, CheesyPoofter5487 says something about it - you're saying you care as much about what he says, as much as if CLA posted the same thing?

I'm a loon.

[Jae.Thomas]

Originally Posted by chip mcdonald

That is a different context, we're talking about "here". If someone is posting about getting snare sounds in these forums, CheesyPoofter5487 says something about it - you're saying you care as much about what he says, as much as if CLA posted the same thing?

I'm a loon.

Jason Brian Merrill or CheesyPoofter5487 would mean the same exact thing to me, is all I'm saying

In relation to CLA, we are both about the same "level" with reputation

[karbomusic]

Originally Posted by chip mcdonald

The noise level online is too high to operate any other way IMO.

Its just a difference in how each of us survive on the net. I'd never take anyone's advice at face value the first time I speak to them, name, face or even reputation. I'm a fact checker and anyone I ask is simply one of many resources I'd use to get my answer.

I do get what you mean entirely, its just semantics by now, so all good.

[chip mcdonald]

Originally Posted by Timothy Lawler

When I get harshness it's usually from the source, not the gear. So I work on the source sound.

It helps to have some distance, too. I also think people are addicted to fast rise times, to the extent that a clipped signal pushing through a cheap system, tickling the ear, is preferred over "natural".

[Sound asleep]

Originally Posted by chip mcdonald

Hmm.

I'm a loon. Because I feel that there is one name in this thread that does represent more validity on certain matters. If this is not a clear concept - I don't know, sorry, YMMV but it makes plenty of sense to me.

Really? is it the name that does that?

What is the name? It is merely the label associated to the thing.

"A rose by any other name"

The name of a thing has nothing to do with what it is.

So, wait, if your favourite producer showed up here, and you got to know them a little after a while, and their name was "bubbles5668", the things they say would be less valid?

Surely, you cannot be saying that.

I don't see what difference someone's name makes, whether it is a birth name, or whether it is a handle.

What matters is the validity of what they say.

If a world top producer was in this forum, I don't care what their name is, it wouldn't take me too long to figure out that they are somebody I should be listening to.

Maybe you're stuck needing magazines and TV shows, and whatever authorities declaring a name an authority, but I don't care what their name is, I just hunt for the validity of what they are saying, no matter who they are.

Idk, I don't get it, is there some sort of mystical force of the universe that makes everybody that knows what they're talking about have to use their real name in a forum? Or, if you don't use your real name, does that mean that everything you write automatically must be bullshit, not matter who you are?

I don't understand your point of view i think. But this seems like an obviously flawed piece of reasoning.

I don't know what name you're talking about either.


Wait, I think I might understand. You might be saying that someone needs to be famous before their opinion matters? Like a well known name, not just some "nobody"?

This at least would be more sensible, but I also don't think that's true.

[chip mcdonald]

Originally Posted by Jason Brian Merrill

Jason Brian Merrill or CheesyPoofter5487 would mean the same exact thing to me, is all I'm saying

In relation to CLA, we are both about the same "level" with reputation

The thing is, you're less likely to make wild and ridiculous claims as your actual persona, than behind an alias. Look at Harmony Central, the Mos Eisley of the online world: a miasma of random anonymous people shouting at each other and being aggressively anti-reasonable.

Doe it make sense to try to ask such people why they have their opinions, or how they've come to their conclusion that a Peavey Mace is the best amp for mehtul?

I know you are a real person, or at least someone making an attempt to be perceived as one <g>, so I put more wait in acknowledging you've perhaps thought about what you're posting. The randomly vagrant drive-by poster that says "Pro Tools sounds better!" - I don't care about that, do you?

This thread feature someone who - at least in this thread - is a verifiable authority on making professional recordings, debating someone who is anonymous. It would be ridiculous for me, or anyone else to put as much weight in what the anonymous person writes as the other.

[Sound asleep]

Originally Posted by chip mcdonald

That is a different context, we're talking about "here". If someone is posting about getting snare sounds in these forums, CheesyPoofter5487 says something about it - you're saying you care as much about what he says, as much as if CLA posted the same thing?

I'm a loon.

As far as you know, CheesyPoofter5487 is CLA.

[chip mcdonald]

Originally Posted by Sound asleep

Really? is it the name that does that?

The name tells me who the person is, which then if I recognize who it is, yes, I absolutely then put a whole lot more weight in it.

Why wouldn't I?

What is the name? It is merely the label associated to the thing.

No, in the case of an online forum, in this thread, it is a link to a person's credibility.

Note that I'm not speaking in absolute terms, that is some new 21st century syntactical debate trick. If you weight an anonymous person's words as much as someone you know, whatever, that's fine, *I don't*.

The name of a thing has nothing to do with what it is.

That's a syntactical logical fallacy. The name of a person obviously identifies who that person is and what they do and have done. An anonymous person has no context at all.

So, wait, if your favourite producer showed up here, and you got to know them a little after a while, and their name was "bubbles5668", the things they say would be less valid?

Surely, you cannot be saying that.

That is what is called a "straw horse". I obviously didn't say that. And now I'm doing the same thing I was pointing out. <g>

What matters is the validity of what they say.

You have an anonymous person, and a non-anonymous person. You know who the non-anonymous person is and their credentials. If you don't think this changes the validity of what they say, then again - YMMV. It changes it for me, and I would think everyone. But it's the 21st century so that may not be the case anymore.

If a world top producer was in this forum, I don't care what their name is, it wouldn't take me too long to figure out that they are somebody I should be listening to.

.. as opposed to instantly, if you recognize their name?

Maybe you're stuck needing magazines and TV shows, and whatever authorities declaring a name an authority, but I don't care what their name is, I just hunt for the validity of what they are saying, no matter who they are.

There is too much information to wade through online IMO, YMMV.

[chip mcdonald]

Originally Posted by Sound asleep

As far as you know, CheesyPoofter5487 is CLA.

As far as I know. *I wouldn't know*, right? 10 anonymous people can come on here and make 10 different wacky claims, why should I pay attention to any of them to the same degree as someone claiming to be CLA? Sure, they *might* be 10 Known and Established Successful Engineers, but *I can't know that* with an alias!

WTF?

[Sound asleep]

Originally Posted by chip mcdonald

As far as I know. *I wouldn't know*, right? 10 anonymous people can come on here and make 10 different wacky claims, why should I pay attention to any of them to the same degree as someone claiming to be CLA? Sure, they *might* be 10 Known and Established Successful Engineers, but *I can't know that* with an alias!

WTF?

Right. You can't judge something by its name. Exactly.

I don't find I have look someone up and sift through credentials in order to know whether not they are full of shit or not. I don't think someone has to be a top producer in order to have useful information for me either.

Yes, there are famous people I respect, and yes, a track record that shows someone's credibility in a certain field, is something that will make you pay attention to what they have to say about that thing, certainly.

But just because people aren't linked to their credibility, it doesn't mean they are not sharing constructive information, or good ideas.

I mean, using your logic, someone like Einstein could never become popular, because the patent clerk would have this idea, and people would say "wait, who are you again? a patent clerk? oh, you must be full of shit then, I only listen to reputable scientists."

But sure, if somebody renown for mixing is talking about mixing, that is someone you should probably pay attention to.

But they are also in a whole different place from you, with access to a bunch of equipment you don't have. It can be more useful sometimes to listen to people without world renown reputations.

Lots of people have much to teach about many things.

But, it is true, online, I mean someone can be speaking about how one should play guitar, what makes a great guitarist, and what makes great mixing, and all this, and talking out of their ass, but they won't show any music they've made, or what have you.

I mean, you shouldn't just trust what everybody says on the internet, obviously. But you can get to know people, and figure out who you can trust, and who you can't, and for what, and often time logic can show you if someone is full of shit or not.

I think you might be confusing someone having an alias, rather than a real name, with someone that has no reference to anything that could support their claim, and no personal reputation with you.

I can't believe that you walk around through life only listening to any advice that the best of the best can offer.

Why would you even join a forum like this in that case. There are probably no world class top engineers on the reaper forum.

But I agree, anybody can say anything on a forum or on the internet. Just because it is on the internet, that doesn't make it worthy advice. But people can still have a reputation without a real name, or without being famous.

Sometimes that can be just hearing their work, but sometimes also, in what they have to say, and how they speak. There are many clues.

But ya, any single statement of opinion, with no logic, made by some random user on a forum can't be trusted. There is no basis for trusting it.

But that is not to say, that nobody that has only an alias must be untrustworthy, and that's what your statement looked like you were saying.

[Jae.Thomas]

Originally Posted by chip mcdonald

The thing is, you're less likely to make wild and ridiculous claims as your actual persona, than behind an alias. Look at Harmony Central, the Mos Eisley of the online world: a miasma of random anonymous people shouting at each other and being aggressively anti-reasonable.

Doe it make sense to try to ask such people why they have their opinions, or how they've come to their conclusion that a Peavey Mace is the best amp for mehtul?

I know you are a real person, or at least someone making an attempt to be perceived as one <g>, so I put more wait in acknowledging you've perhaps thought about what you're posting. The randomly vagrant drive-by poster that says "Pro Tools sounds better!" - I don't care about that, do you?

This thread feature someone who - at least in this thread - is a verifiable authority on making professional recordings, debating someone who is anonymous. It would be ridiculous for me, or anyone else to put as much weight in what the anonymous person writes as the other.

actually I agree with this... it makes sense.

I realize that everything I say online, for better or worse, is connected to my real name. It does make a difference in my communications.

[gavriloP]

Prosoundweb's REP forums used to have a rule that members had to tell who they are somewhere in their profile. That ensured the civilized manners and good discussion, but then again I never joined out of inferiority I was just lurking in the shadows reading the wisdoms of others. So it is a double-edged sword.

One thing is certain, good advice is good advice. And when it comes to practical mixing or recording, it is pretty easy to check the tips yourself. But with stuff like which mic or pre to buy is way more complexif you can't try them yourself.

EDIT: oh and about harshness: I find that my sound got way better and less harsh with good old vintage mikes and some cheaper real tube pres. Stuff like Peavey VMP2, Groove Tubes the Brick and even EH 12ay7 pre are much easer on ear than those starved-plate pre's and such I was using before. And they only cost few hundred euros per channel 2nd hand. But of course mic placement, instrument, room and player's techniques are first.

[Panic]

I thought post count was what gave you forum cred.

[Sound asleep]

Originally Posted by aste

I thought post count was what gave you forum cred.

Ok then,...

[Sound asleep]

Originally Posted by aste

I thought post count was what gave you forum cred.

Well in....

[Sound asleep]

Originally Posted by aste

I thought post count was what gave you forum cred.

that case...

[Sound asleep]

Originally Posted by aste

I thought post count was what gave you forum cred.

..Here's to building credibility.

[Panic]

Originally Posted by Sound asleep

..Here's to building credibility.

thought everyone knew it

[GregHolmes]

Not just post count, but quality as well. Post count is not a short cut to credibility.

When I joined here, I deliberately made the choice to use my name, fully aware that the quantity and quality of my posts combine to be part of my online identity across the entire web.

So now, since I think we've established that different people have different thresholds for credibility, let's get back to the original question.

I'm still wondering what is "harshness"?

And, to put into real world terms:

If a good mic through a good preamp is "harsh" in a certain physical configuration (as heard live in the control room, before it even goes into the DAW), and we can simply move the mic to correct the "harshness", then what was the "harshness"?

[Panic]

Originally Posted by GregHolmes

Not just post count, but quality as well. Post count is not a short cut to credibility.

I just said it tongue in cheek. I'm sure nobody uses post count as a metric.

[Timothy Lawler]

Originally Posted by GregHolmes

If a good mic through a good preamp is "harsh" in a certain physical configuration (as heard live in the control room, before it even goes into the DAW), and we can simply move the mic to correct the "harshness", then what was the "harshness"?

If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, could it have sounded harsh? haha.

[Lawrence]

Originally Posted by Jason Brian Merrill

Jason Brian Merrill or CheesyPoofter5487 would mean the same exact thing to me, is all I'm saying

Point taken, but the above really doesn't mean the same to me. Why? Probably because I feel I kinda know JBM, I've viewed his YT adventures and followed some of his musical adventures and I know that most stuff he talks about doesn't just come out of thin air.

I know he teaches guitar. I know he plays live. So... (contextually speaking to certain subject matter) I might give your view on some things a little more weight, in context, where it's relevant, where it fits.

That doesn't mean the anonymous person is wrong, far from it. More likely means (in "some" cases) they're just regurgitating something they heard from somewhere else... which still might actually be good advice.

[Lawrence]

Originally Posted by chip mcdonald

The thing is, you're less likely to make wild and ridiculous claims as your actual persona, than behind an alias.

That's really all I was saying earlier.

[Jae.Thomas]

Originally Posted by Lawrence

Point taken, but the above really doesn't mean the same to me. Why? Probably because I feel I kinda know JBM, I've viewed his YT adventures and followed some of his musical adventures and I know that most stuff he talks about doesn't just come out of thin air.

I know he teaches guitar. I know he plays live. So... (contextually speaking to certain subject matter) I might give your view on some things a little more weight, in context, where it's relevant, where it fits.

That doesn't mean the anonymous person is wrong, far from it. More likely means (in "some" cases) they're just regurgitating something they heard from somewhere else... which still might actually be good advice.

yeah - you know, I think I was looking at the argument from a different angle.... i think we are all making sense to each other now