Members Meriphew Posted October 21, 2007 Members Share Posted October 21, 2007 Wow, that's one of the things I like about it!! Ditto that. I love the whole layout/design. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Meriphew Posted October 21, 2007 Members Share Posted October 21, 2007 One complaint I have about most recording mags that i have (and I posted this at Tape op's forum as well) would be to have more photos of the gear and work spaces in the interviews, and less pics of the people themselves. I don't really need multiple glamor/tortured artist shots, or pics of the artist with their dog or sitting in their backyard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members alphajerk Posted October 21, 2007 Members Share Posted October 21, 2007 I'm liking what EQ is doing lately, but Tape Op still has everyone's number IMO. not everyones... i count as at least one, which negates EVERYone. i mean its fine for a free rag, but i wouldnt pay for it. typically in an issue, i like one interview. the gear reviews kinda blow. the letters in the front are just stupid. i dunno. like i said, i cant put my finger on the pretention there but i notice it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMS Author MikeRivers Posted October 21, 2007 CMS Author Share Posted October 21, 2007 One complaint I have about most recording mags that i have (and I posted this at Tape op's forum as well) would be to have more photos of the gear and work spaces in the interviews, and less pics of the people themselves. I remember reading one of Larry Crane's editorials in Tape Op in which he addressed this. He wrote that photos of gear are passe unless it's really an unusual piece. His point is that the people are more important than the gear. Everyone knows what a mixer or a rack of compressors looks like. He said to send him a picture of yourself with your cat for an article. I think that historic photos are interesting - a picture of a session from 30 years ago that shows what someone we know today looked like back then, or the mic setup that they used. But who needs another photo of an engineer in front of a ProTools system? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Geoff Grace Posted October 21, 2007 Members Share Posted October 21, 2007 who needs another photo of an engineer in front of a ProTools system? Digidesign? Best, Geoff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ernest Buckley Posted October 22, 2007 Members Share Posted October 22, 2007 Yeah I like the look of Tape Op. Something about the home made feel of it that appeals to me. They though occassionally need to have some graphics tweaked just to make for easier reading but that may just be my eyes. EB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members amplayer Posted October 22, 2007 Members Share Posted October 22, 2007 Turns out that what they really wanted for the web was like footnotes or sidebars to the article (kind of like mini articles in themselves), with statements in the article like "for further details, see www.****" wherever there was a further explanation on the web page. I don't think I'd enjoy reading a magazine article that way. I'd be sittin' on the can reading the magazine, then have to go to the computer to read the details. I'd rather read the print article all the way through, then, if that got my interest up, I could read the detailed version on the web. If the print article told me all I wanted to know about the product, I'd skip the web site. Fully agreed! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members amplayer Posted October 22, 2007 Members Share Posted October 22, 2007 In the Oct. '07 issue of EQ, craig introduced the idea of phrase by phrase normalization. That's a very great idea, and I was thankful to read it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jeff da Weasel Posted October 22, 2007 Members Share Posted October 22, 2007 It looks like it's produced at home on an old 286 computer. That's how it's supposed to look. Fun-kay. Dig? And, I may add, Tape Op is indeed laid out by hand by the publisher himself. His computer is not a 286. In between laying out the magazine, he goes on surf trips and records bands in his studio. He's a cool guy. You'd like him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members alphajerk Posted October 22, 2007 Members Share Posted October 22, 2007 its teh david carson school of design layout... snaked right from old transworld rags. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Anderton Posted October 22, 2007 Members Share Posted October 22, 2007 In the Oct. '07 issue of EQ, craig introduced the idea of phrase by phrase normalization. That's a very great idea, and I was thankful to read it. If you want to see an opposing viewpoint by some professional engineers about how stupid I am and how I am personally responsible for the decline of Western civilization, here's a link: http://recforums.prosoundweb.com/index.php/m/273556/0/?srch=normalization#msg_273556 It all started because the guy complaining about the article didn't know what normalization is, and didn't know the musical meaning of "phrase." I do think that in a perfect world, people would read articles before commenting on them...EQ had a cover a couple years back called "The Mastering Myth" and the mastering engineers on Glenn Meadows' forum went absolutely ballistic. If they'd read the article, they would have realized that I was talking about TWO myths: The one that you need a professional mastering engineer, and the one that you can master your own stuff at home. The article then went on to explain when one or the other was appropriate, and the pitfalls involved. All in a day's work BTW I like Tape Op too, reminds me of my days doing Polyphony. I know Larry and John and always enjoy running into them at trade shows. Lots of people tell me they subscribed to EQ and Tape Op and dropped the other recording mags, so we don't really feel "competitive"...more "complementary." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jeff da Weasel Posted October 22, 2007 Members Share Posted October 22, 2007 Lots of people tell me they subscribed to EQ and Tape Op and dropped the other recording mags, so we don't really feel "competitive"...more "complementary." Yup, i hear the same thing from lots of folks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Meriphew Posted October 22, 2007 Members Share Posted October 22, 2007 Lots of people tell me they subscribed to EQ and Tape Op and dropped the other recording mags, so we don't really feel "competitive"...more "complementary." Mix magazine is pretty crappy now. If Tape Op was NBC, and EQ was CBS, Mix would be the WB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.