Should Engineers Worry About Details They Can't Hear?

[Jeff da Weasel]

That was an analogy? :poke:

 

My point exactly.

[Phil O'Keefe]

Right. That's what we said. Your job (as an engineer) is to make it sound as good as you can with what you're given, be it the song, the arrangement, the talent of the performer, the gear at hand, and so on. No one said that your amazing engineering skills will make a shitty song great. That's the point.

 

I agree. You have to do your best with what you have, and what you're given to work with. But no matter what the circumstances, I always strive to NOT be the weak link on the project. I'd hate like hell for someone to say "great song and performances, but the engineer really screwed it up", or "nice song, but it's way over-produced / produced inappropriately for the song / genre". Of course, artistic considerations come into play here too, and people are not always going to "get" your artistic vision... but what I do try to do is make sure I am giving it my best efforts, and that the client walks out with a better sounding project than what they were expecting. You can't make a diamond out of a lump of coal, but you don't have to leave crumbly coal dust sitting all over it either.

 

Use what you have, but don't be satisfied. Just because you're not Bruce Swedien or Phil Ramone, don't let that stop you from recording - but don't be satisfied with your current skill level either. IMO, no matter who you are, or what "level" of skill and experience you have, you should always be striving for improvement and growth.

 

Use what you have gear-wise, and really focus on LEARNING that gear, and all of its strengths and quirks, and how to get around those or how to apply those tools to best effect... but don't assume for a moment that the gear doesn't matter either.

 

IMO, it ALL matters!