Hey Rob, thanks for your complements.

The best measurements I got were the ones I talked about in the article Getting that Live Orchestra Sound. My measurements weren't all that through because I was somewhat at the whim of the orchestra's rehearsal. That paper was to get out of taking a final for Acoustics more than anything else.

After a few years of thought after writing that article, I've come to the conclusion that the real answer to your question is that it's all about the sound that you want, and there isn't really a formula. Think about it this way - you may listen to several different recordings of the same piece that have a different overall balance. There is not one, not two, but at least three different layers you need to consider if you're striving for that "real" recorded sound:

1. Each orchestra's seating arrangement is different
   
2. Each orchestra has a unique way of performing/balancing a piece of music
   
3. Each recording engineer has a unique way of recording and mixing the orchestra
   

Conversely, if you rely on strict acoustic imitation of the live orchestra you'll inevitably run into the long-argued debate with two sides:

Side 1 - Record the orchestra to "purely" capture its live performance. This you'll typically find in classical recordings. It might be recorded with perhaps just one stereo mic in front of the orchestra and no spot mics, and hardly any compression (if any at all) in the mastering process. The problem with this is that the softs are too soft and the louds are too loud - meaning you're always cranking the volume knob when the woodwinds are playing at pianissimo, and then dashing to turn it down when brass come in at mf.

Side 2 - Record the orchestra so that it's easier to listen to when it's being played through speakers. These are usually recorded in a studio and without an audience. In extreme cases, the sections are isolated with acoustic dividers, each section and soloist gets a spot mic, and the majority of the balance work is done in the mix. Virtually *all* production music (bands, film scores) are recorded this way because it maximizes the listener's experience behind the speakers.

I think the answer to the debate lies in this: The human ear listens to music differently in a live setting than it does in a recording. When listening to music recorded "side 1 style", these are typically the same decibel ranges that you get when listening to the music live, but by nature of acoustics it doesn't balance the same to the human ears when it's coming out of speakers. A well-recorded studio orchestra is mixed so that it sounds more like the real thing when it comes out of the speakers. A "pure" recording looses the clarity that the human ear gets when listening to it live, and the studio recording attempts to compensate for that discrepancy.

In our line of work Side 2 is really the way to go. Normalized samples and/or samples run through a compressor are both good and bad at the same time. You might think that ideally it would be best to have all of the instruments in their natural decibel ranges, but I believe it would be even more of a problem to balance that than balance pre-compressed samples.

So you can't just set flutes at 50db, trombones at mf at 60db, then trombones at ff to 80db, and bip-bam-done. What you're doing when you're balancing samples is mixing each acoustic situation to sound best when it comes out of the speakers. You're the recording engineer who's trying to find the best balance for each type of orchestration to, essentially, make it sound the way you want. Pre-compressed samples (the good kind at least) give you the full body of the instrument from the get go, at all ranges, giving you the widest flexibility to do what you want with them.

Read Comments (5)         Add a Comment

If I legitimately overdraft, then I am more than willing to pay the fee. I will be more than happy to admit my error.

However, the bank is presenting information in a way that is misleading. I keep an eye on my account and you might be able to see that I regularly log in several times a day. I use Mobile Banking on my Blackberry to check my account on the road. BUT, when the information given to me is organized in a way that provides me with misleading data, then there is little I can do to prevent overdrafts, and I learn not to trust my bank.

I understand that pending transactions will go through when they are cleared. The PROBLEM is that when transactions are pending, they are deducted off the top, not from the date when they are received.

When I have a PENDING transaction which is SHOWN TO BE DEDUCTED at a specific point on the balance sheet (from off the top) the result is an "Account Balance" that IS MISLEADING. Once the transactions have cleared, THEY ARE MOVED and then deducted on a different date, causing a different balance for the day, potentially causing overdrafts. I understand that you do "not known when" the transaction will go through, but the ACTUAL DATE OF THE TRANSACTION IS AVAILABLE IN THE DESCRIPTION and can be deducted in that place - a best case scenario.

This makes me believe that Bank of America is intentionally giving me misleading information to cause me to slip into overdrafts. This time around, it was $2.88 and $70 in fees. Last time this occurred, I was hit with $105 of cascading fees that could have been prevented with LESS THAN ONE FUCKING DOLLAR! I was watching my account that day, and I could not foresee the problem ONLY because of the way the Account Activity was presented to me.

It is hard enough to know correct information with the Account Activity's ignorant system, but it's COMPLETELY IMPOSSIBLE with the Mobile Banking.

This HAS to be changed.

Read Comments (1)         Add a Comment

If you don't know what the Amen Break is, watch this video. I looked around and couldn't find a good place to download it without having to sign up or register or whatever. If anything belongs on the internet for free, it's the Amen Break. Right Click here to download the Amen Break.

Read Comments (7)         Add a Comment

I remember in college studying under a Pulitzer-nominated composer Richard Prior (no not the comedian) , he and I had a meeting/lesson along with the other composition student of his. At some point within our meeting the other student mentioned that he was "saving" his good musical ideas for later compositions. It didn't really resonate with me but it always stuck with me and I've never forgotten it - because I completely disagree with it.

To me, "saving" your best material for later is like not always putting your best foot forward. I think that you should always put your best work in front of you - so that you can put it behind you. That way you will always be striving to achieve better than your best, instead of waiting for the right moment to shoot for your best.

The moral of all of this is don't wait. Always do your best and do it now. Push your compositional muscles to their limits.

Read Comments (6)         Add a Comment