More Is Less? Plug-In Marketing vs. Reality
Vložit
- čas přidán 25. 08. 2024
- Independent 'til I die.
I have no affiliation with any company, manufacturer, retailer... NOBODY. I make videos about stuff that interests me, and invite you to comment and engage in discussion about the topic. It's fun.
Thanks for watching.
-Marty
"get it right at the source" is the motto I carry in my production mindset for years now and it works wonders. No need to do crazy EQ moves with 55 bands to fix a bad recording if you have a good sounding recording as it is.
I love fiddling around with free plugins from time to time to find a new gem in the rubble but I'd never spend money to have XYZ plugin because of a negligible difference in sound.
I love mixing in the Box, but I get caught myself sometimes using multiple plugins on individual channels, and I always have to go back and remember how it was when I only had a couple 1176s and a couple DBX 160s. Other than that I had some Behringer stuff, and the Composer Compressor is really not a bad compressor, but the stigma associated with it I get, but mainly it's from Audi Snobs. I always seem to like my mixes to where the Mix Busses get the compression and very few individual channels get anything. I will get caught up in experimenting, but it normally is a waste of time unless it is something Heavy, but most music that needs to be dynamic will sound much better without all that compression on the individual tracks, with the exception to adding noise for character. Great video
You nailed my feelings exactly! Thanks for watching and commenting!
-Marty
A bunch of free/cheap plugs that are great. Analog Obsessions! Melda Productions Free package, The Free Plugins (VST and JS) that come with Reaper (do almost everything you ever need), Dead Duck, Tokyo Dawn Slick EQ, Nova EQ, and Kotelnikov compressor , Hornet Audio, and if you really want interfaces that look like a spreadsheet but sound fantastic, Air Windows plugins. I use these 90% of the time, choose them over most "High End" plugs I paid good money for.
Analogue Obsession stuff is outstanding.
I did mixed seven songs all in different ways this weekend, when listening back one song stood out. Mostly the simple and fast mixes are the best. For me the key is mixing fast with less. Only use necessary stuff. Once it takes too long and you need to much processing, you’ll get too deep into the rabbit hole. Every engineer has found themselves working on a mix for over 12 hours only to find that the ruff mix sounds better.
Totally! The coolest, most fun to make record I ever made got done on a all-in-one porta studio style digital box that nobody has ever called “cool”. But the simplicity made us focus on the stuff that makes the biggest differences… and to get it right going in…
Thanks so much for sharing that! (And watching the video!).
Much appreciated! Great to hear I’m not the only one who has learned this lesson the hard way!
-Marty
Yes! Stock plugins are pretty good. Too many excellent freebies and stuff at great prices from little guys to want to throw money at companies who're gonna make me use an ilok and subscribe to their crap and have to keep updating my software.
So many great records were made on 16 and 24 track machines, records with tons of polish and studio multitrack trickery. Unlimited tracks don't force you to learn or invent techniques.
The thing is, what you are discussing here is what I'd call "legacy genres" and "legacy thinking". Look at the truly young people (people that didn't experience the last millennium at all) and see what they do. It's amazing! They have a completely different mindset. Many of them have finally embraced the "if it sounds good, it's good" and don't give a rats ass about Neve, SSL etc.. and some of them have literally hundreds of plugins per project.. ten to twenty plugins per track. So yeah, while I do agree with what you are trying to say, I recognize that the way you are talking and the way "your hero" was talking, it's all legacy thinking and legacy working. We are dinosaurs. We grew up on genres that are now ancient history. This doesn't mean there aren't lessons to be learned from the past but just take a moment and look at some of the young guns creating the new records in completely new genres. The workflow and the way they work is completely different.
In short: You are "wrong".. sort of. But you have some valid points and good lessons to be learned but those lessons do not apply for a large portion of the new genres of music that have been made since the olden days. The same arguments keep going around. People recording in the 60s would have been horrified by Micheal Jackson's mega productions in the late 80's / early 90's where they had literally 4 or 5 people riding the console faders, EQs, dynamics etc and using over 100 tracks and multiple 24 track tape machines. Simplicity is not always king. It's completely dependent on the genre and what you want to accomplish. You would never question a massive symphony orchestra with esoteric instruments just to be able to play some complex music by Shostakovich, Tchaikovsky or Prokofiev and try to argue that things were better in the olden days with much fewer instruments and strict rules of which notes were appropriate to play at any given time.
@@niklassilen4313 thanks for the comment and thoughts. Many fine points…
But… I have to wholeheartedly disagree on a thing or two…
The idea that people from the past would be “horrified” at a Michael Jackson mix, is I think… just not correct. If the technology was there, they would have used it. We got these crazy amazing expansion of art BECAUSE the people were embracing new tech and mindsets.
To a “kid” who has NEVER known 4 tracks and one microphone, this Way of working IS NEW territory.
Now, this is purely my opinion based on my experiences… and I don’t mean to sound argumentative or hostile… I LOVE the convo and discussion here. ..
But looking at visual art as an example of legacy upon legacy upon legacy of thinking… there is no “old way” of thinking… there is no “new way” of thinking. There is only creativity, and exploration.
A young artist who has never journeyed honestly down a path of simplicity or restraint, of limitations is never the equal of an old fuck who has been both there, and legitimately attempting to integrate new technology and methods into the art/workflow.
I’m not seeking to express a (subjective) opinion about art or the state of the art of making music here… I’m just saying: I feel sorry for people who don’t know WHY the new methods are so awesome.
If that makes sense.
You won’t see me going back to my 8 track cassette machine nope!
Thanks for watching and commenting. Truly appreciated and inspiring.
-Marty
@@SHUTUPANDRECORD I see what you are trying to convey but I simply do not agree. Simplicity is not an objective thing, it is entirely subjective. How do I know this? I have 3 kids of my own, all of them in their teens now, and what I would consider "complex" becomes automatically "simplicity" for them. What we consider "limitations that would be healthy" is already a world where they live in.. it's just that their perspective of "simplicity and constraint" is on a completely different level. For instance, my son dreams of the day he has access to massive data centers to finally be able to realize his programming and AI visions.. yet he is severely constrained and limited by his simplistic laptop.
A kid who buys a copy of Logic or FL Studio has immediate access to hundreds of plugins and instruments included in the package.. yet because this is their starting point, it IS their constraint and will feel "simplistic" at some point if they explore it further. They simply do not know anything else.
Would there be something to be learned from truly going back to "zero" with almost nothing available? Sure. I do think there would be.. but only as a thought experiment and as a curiosity.
My main point still holds and I do not agree with your original point in the video.. which is also why my point about 60s artists being horrified by Michael Jackson's productions was there in my first comment as an example. By YOUR argument, in the video, that is exactly what would happen. See the fallacy of your argument?
Limitations... yes! great point!
audioscape ftw!!
Not wrong at all, but it ain't never going back. So where do we go from here?
@@user-je1kn8xi6s yep.
Just have to remind ourselves and especially reinforce to the youngsters that pay attention… that less is more except when more is more.
Or something!
Thanks for the view and the comment!
Marty