The only real difference between a good engineer and a hack is...

[UstadKhanAli]

Definitely. I'm just kinda kidding around about that other post anyway...but it's amazing how many people with not much skill have done quite well in the past, eventually gaining those skills, but initially getting the foot in the door because people wanted him/her to be around.

[Lee Flier]

 

interesting topic, never thought about that, but since it came up: I would think the main differences between a sausage and the best is in the music they record and mix

 

 

Well, it's certainly true that great music and musicians make any engineer sound better! But that's not really a measure of the engineer's skill. What I'm talking about is, if you take the same artist (and let's just say for the sake of argument that they're really talented and it's great music) and have several different people record and/or mix them, what will distinguish the results?

[Rudolf von Hagenwil]

well, actually you only get overcharged by a mixer when the material is for a already well known artist, then a mix of an album costs 20'000 to 50'000 USD

similar relations as in the producer/distributor PPD sharing, as more known the artist as more percentage for the producer in the PPD

[UstadKhanAli]

What I'm talking about is, if you take the same artist (and let's just say for the sake of argument that they're really talented and it's great music) and have several different people record and/or mix them, what will distinguish the results?

 

 

Tight pants and a good supplier.

[Lee Flier]

Definitely. I'm just kinda kidding around about that other post anyway...but it's amazing how many people with not much skill have done quite well in the past, eventually gaining those skills, but initially getting the foot in the door because people wanted him/her to be around.

Oh, for sure. Someone who has unflagging enthusiasm for their work, no matter how many hours a session drags on and even when things aren't going very well, is certainly going to have a better chance of success than somebody who's easily disgruntled, even if they're not as good as the next person.

So if you're a curmudgeon, you'd better be damned good!

[Rudolf von Hagenwil]

"Go take some singing lessons before you bother setting foot in my studio, punk!"

I have to say that several times a week,

but I leave out the word asshole,

because I don't know the femal form of that word,

I am a real softie with ladies

[WRGKMC]

I'm just throwing some thoughts in there from a different perspective.

 

The main one being is an actual engineer, who has his diploma, will likely be employed by those who will utilize all his "engineering" skills, not his mixing ability. I realize what the original post and subsiquent posts are about, but in my book, if you dont have a degree, you aint no engineer. I realize this may bruise some egos, but it is a fact.

 

You may be a master mixer, you may be the best in the business having produced great recordings and are world renouned. But you're not an "engineer" because you have alot of experience or accomplishments or produce the best work.

 

Its like someone calling themselves a veteran having never served or saying you're doctor because you've healed alot of people through faith healing. Experience like that may make you the best faith healer ever but its not cummulative and doesnt automatically earns you a diploma like many in the audio business think it does.

 

You can consider yourself to be whatever you want. You can prove it with your work, thats fine too. I realize many will still consider themselves engineers even so, and its commonly understood in the business. But shouldnt we call out those who label themselves like others do in nearly every other profession?

 

Having a degree and also being a great mixer is also rare, and not usually found in smaller studio enviornments as I mentioned. Getting a diploma opens up new doors to bigger money. To pay off that 4 year degree (not the lame trade school 6 month programs) requires decent income so you'll usually find actual engineers working for major companies at least for a number of years to pay off loans, and get their careers going till they can afford to start their own business.

 

I missed getting my degree by one year and had planned on making music my employment. It just wasnt in the cards at the time, I choose major manufacturers, and educational video production instead and have been well paid in the process. The audio recording thing has always been there part time and I actually prefer it that way now. If I worked a studio full time, I'd probibly hate it by now.

 

By the way, these posts arent meant to rub anyone negatively by the way, its just a different perspective. I've worked with electronics and audio engineers of all kinds professionaly all my life in my day job.

 

I have major respect for guys who do all the grunt work and get none of the glory too having done that working for engineers for many years too. I just dont agree you can give yourself an engineering label because you feel you earned it. If that was the case, I'd have my doctorate in about 10 different fields including audio and video. And again those who do label themselves engineers without earning the diploma, I consider hacks, no matter how good their work is.

 

If you consider the Artistic part of recording, its a whole different subject. I dont want to confuse the two. It takes major artistic talent with the audio tools that work and complement the actual music to get great recordings. For that there is no one label that can cover all those talents. The word engineer really doesnt cover all of those areas.

[UstadKhanAli]

Okay, this took a bit of a turn!

 

I'm actually a bit uncomfortable calling myself a recording engineer because this is a title that was given to someone who had finished specific coursework...so on my Blueberry Buddha website, I refer to myself as an Audio Monk!

 

I totally realize that other people use the term to mean anyone who is mixing or sticking mics in front of someone regardless of whether they have that degree/title or not, and while I'm okay with that, just for my own personal thing, I try not to refer to myself as an "audio engineer" or "recording engineer".

[Jeff da Weasel]

Ken, you've done a lot more engineering than I have (especially in the last decade), despite the fact that I have a degree in the field. I'm less qualified these days to call myself by that title than you. I wouldn't feel any qualms about calling yourself an engineer. The grand majority of engineers, like you, don't have a piece of paper saying that they're qualified as such.

[UstadKhanAli]

Ken, you've done a lot more engineering than I have (especially in the last decade), despite the fact that I have a degree in the field. I'm less qualified these days to call myself by that title than you. I wouldn't feel any qualms about calling yourself an engineer. The grand majority of engineers, like you, don't have a piece of paper saying that they're qualified as such.

 

Thanks! I appreciate the vote of confidence. I think it's just that it's a title, and to be fair, someone who completes that title knows a lot about electronics and acoustics that I don't know. So while I am really good at mixing and tracking and making something sound really good, I try not to refer to myself as that.

 

'Sides, Audio Monk is a fun name!!!

[Jeff da Weasel]

I like audio monk.

 

And to be frank, while I was trained in the science aspects of audio electronics, audio physics, acoustics, and so on, all of the theory in the world didn't teach me as much practical information as the first time I sat down and tried to record and mix a band.

[Rudolf von Hagenwil]

Well, it's certainly true that great music and musicians make any engineer sound better! But that's not really a measure of the engineer's skill. What I'm talking about is, if you take the same artist (and let's just say for the sake of argument that they're really talented and it's great music) and have several different people record and/or mix them, what will distinguish the results?

 

 

the one which get released would distinguish that

[MrKnobs]

The main one being is an actual engineer, who has his diploma, .

 

Well, if we're gonna argue semantics, is a person who mixes audio even an engineer of any sort? I mean, typically engineers are licensed professionals who sit for a test and then intern as "engineer in training" before going on to get their PE license. More importantly, engineers design and build things like bridges, roads, buildings, airplanes, electrical circuitry, robots, all actual physical things.

 

Then again, guys who drive trains are also called engineers so who knows.

 

On a not unrelated note, Julie entered our band in some dumb contest to play in the upcoming Lillith Fair. We're doing really well, but we're not quite winning and I have to ask myself if she had waited to enter the final mixed/mastered version of the song she chose, would we be a couple of slots closer to the #1 position?

 

Or should we just have made more fanatical friends who would sit at their computers mindlessly clicking our entry 24/7?

 

Beats me, I think I'll just go write and record a song and not worry so much about details or semantics.

 

Terry D.

[Rudolf von Hagenwil]

Well, if we're gonna argue semantics, is a person who mixes audio even an engineer of any sort?

 

 

 

someone who mixes music is definitely not an engineer !!!

[Jeff da Weasel]

 

Well, if we're gonna argue semantics, is a person who mixes audio even an engineer of any sort?

 

 

Yes. In common terminology, that's what the person is.

 

A guy I knew had a doctorate in English Literature, and went to a symposium on Chaucer in a small town in the UK. At 3am, he was awakened by a banging on his hotel room door. There had been a car accident, and someone had mangled their leg, and they were hoping that Dr. Price could come help treat the injury.

 

That was the last time he registered at a hotel as "Dr. Price".

 

Point being, it's still legitimate to call him a doctor in academic circles. But let's not get hung up on semantics. We all understand that an electrical engineer or a mechanical engineer have different jobs than that of the audio engineer or the person who wears the little striped hat and drives the train. Context is key.

[Ernest Buckley]

I'm just throwing some thoughts in there from a different perspective. The main one being is an actual engineer, who has his diploma, will likely be employed by those who will utilize all his "engineering" skills, not his mixing ability. I realize what the original post and subsiquent posts are about, but in my book, if you dont have a degree, you aint no engineer. I realize this may bruise some egos, but it is a fact. You may be a master mixer, you may be the best in the business having produced great recordings and are world renouned. But you're not an "engineer" because you have alot of experience or accomplishments or produce the best work. Its like someone calling themselves a veteran having never served or saying you're doctor because you've healed alot of people through faith healing. Experience like that may make you the best faith healer ever but its not cummulative and doesnt automatically earns you a diploma like many in the audio business think it does. You can consider yourself to be whatever you want. You can prove it with your work, thats fine too. I realize many will still consider themselves engineers even so, and its commonly understood in the business. But shouldnt we call out those who label themselves like others do in nearly every other profession? Having a degree and also being a great mixer is also rare, and not usually found in smaller studio enviornments as I mentioned. Getting a diploma opens up new doors to bigger money. To pay off that 4 year degree (not the lame trade school 6 month programs) requires decent income so you'll usually find actual engineers working for major companies at least for a number of years to pay off loans, and get their careers going till they can afford to start their own business. I missed getting my degree by one year and had planned on making music my employment. It just wasnt in the cards at the time, I choose major manufacturers, and educational video production instead and have been well paid in the process. The audio recording thing has always been there part time and I actually prefer it that way now. If I worked a studio full time, I'd probibly hate it by now. By the way, these posts arent meant to rub anyone negatively by the way, its just a different perspective. I've worked with electronics and audio engineers of all kinds professionaly all my life in my day job. I have major respect for guys who do all the grunt work and get none of the glory too having done that working for engineers for many years too. I just dont agree you can give yourself an engineering label because you feel you earned it. If that was the case, I'd have my doctorate in about 10 different fields including audio and video. And again those who do label themselves engineers without earning the diploma, I consider hacks, no matter how good their work is. If you consider the Artistic part of recording, its a whole different subject. I dont want to confuse the two. It takes major artistic talent with the audio tools that work and complement the actual music to get great recordings. For that there is no one label that can cover all those talents. The word engineer really doesnt cover all of those areas.

I know you`re serious but I have to ask, are you serious?

[Lee Flier]

Yes. In common terminology, that's what the person is. A guy I knew had a doctorate in English Literature, and went to a symposium on Chaucer in a small town in the UK. At 3am, he was awakened by a banging on his hotel room door. There had been a car accident, and someone had mangled their leg, and they were hoping that Dr. Price could come help treat the injury. That was the last time he registered at a hotel as "Dr. Price". Point being, it's still legitimate to call him a doctor in academic circles. But let's not get hung up on semantics. We all understand that an electrical engineer or a mechanical engineer have different jobs than that of the audio engineer or the person who wears the little striped hat and drives the train.

 

This. Geesh. When I was starting out, and I did so in a lot of the bigger studios in L.A., everyone was called a recording engineer. It's just a job description, there's no presumption of a degree or anything. There are also assistant engineer and second engineers, who might well be snot nosed 18 year olds like I was. Nobody ever cared or asked whether the most renowned audio engineers had an actual engineering degree.

 

To this day if you buy a recording, the credits are in all likelihood going to say "Engineer". Whether it's a little indie record or a major label release, and without regard to whether the person has a degree in anything.

 

It's just an industry term. Y'all need to quit freaking out about it.

[Beck]

Yes I agree it

[Anderton]

This is an interesting thread. I've never thought of myself as a recording engineer, but as a musician who knows how to record, mix, and master. Maybe some of that is because I was doing session work and production before I started doing engineering, which was more like a means to an end than something I loved on its own merits.

 

I try to get the engineering part over with as fast as possible

[Rudolf von Hagenwil]

well forumites, don't overdo it

the recording engineer is part of a production team, and responsible for recording the music in the envisioned manner. I expect from a recording engineer that he understands the envisioned final sound, and accordingly records the music so the mixer can finalizes the mixes, all that of course in liaison with the producer and all other people present.

[Rudolf von Hagenwil]

about the diploma thingy... for example a broadcast company will not employ any audio or video engineers who didn't finished academic studies and have a Master Degree; a MA is not enough for such jobs, but requires a ongoing further education. This jobs are highly payed.

This kind of audio engineers are hardly found in pop music production, I do not know one. In the earnest music recording scene, this cats are all studied engineers.

To me a mixmaster is an aural three dimensional artist. This mixing work is certainly not the job of the musicians or the producer, they have other thing to do in the mean while.

[WRGKMC]

 

about the diploma thingy... for example a broadcast company will not employ any audio or video engineers who didn't finished academic studies and have a Master Degree; a MA is not enough for such jobs, but requires a ongoing further education. This jobs are highly payed. This kind of audio engineers are hardly found in pop music production, I do not know one. In the earnest music recording scene, this cats are all studied engineers. To me a mixmaster is an aural three dimensional artist. This mixing work is certainly not the job of the musicians or the producer, they have other thing to do in the mean while.

 

 

You understand what I was eluding to. I think if you take it from a historical point of view, Many early Engineers were the best in the business from the electronics and audio end. Hell they had to build the consoles and nearly all the equipment themselves just to record. There wasnt a whole lot of prefab stuff. When something went wrong, they were the guys crawling under the thing to fix it. That would be like a guy writing all his software for recording, Doing the recording, and getting a hit record from it today. Quite an amazing feat we should all revere.

 

I consider an audio engineer being able to wear all those hats. They may have gotten their degree in electronics which is a branch of physics but applied it to a new and specific industry. I'm sure alot may have been involved in early broadcasting, radio TV, Film etc as well where they honed their trade. Especially for the larger studios who were already giants.

 

I do suppose alot of companies classify their employees with titles. I've had many including engineer, Vice President, Manager, Technician, Customer Service Rep, Curriculum Specialist, Producer, Director, Plus maybe a dozen more I dont remember. At the time I considered it pretty novel when someone asked my work title and see their eyebrows go up with the answer. But you always know the titles is often just a companies way of structuring their pay structure and had nothing to do with your actual credentials, other than the actual work you might have done.

 

I suppose Audio recording is a bit more susceptable to bending the truth in view of the publics perception. When someone asks you what you do for a living, you size them up and the reply to a novice may be different to a reply to a pro in the industry. Telling a novice you're an audio engineer, its like, OK I understand what you do for a living and all the mystique thats glorified by the general public gets heaped upon you. I dont begrudge anyone that. The glory in the audio business isnt nearly the same as the performing arts.

 

The same goes for Musicians though. There was a time where you couldnt get decent work playing unless you could read music. Those who couldnt were stuck with playing dives and clubs on the other side of the tracks, and never really obtaning the stature of say a major classical composer. I suppose the class system of the time also influenced what was considered upper and lower job titles as well. Still I think we all set goals in our careers that we work to obtain, even if those goals to others have become gray or distorted by the masses. A title at one time was one of those goal posts. The question really is where do you go from there once its obtained?

[Rudolf von Hagenwil]

Well, we can not expect from people to know that.

If you plan a career as recording engineer being employed by a broadcast station, or by a concert hall, or by a record company...

you have to show your certificate and further proof that you have practical experience in the required field.

[Lee Flier]

This is an interesting thread. I've never thought of myself as a recording engineer, but as a musician who knows how to record, mix, and master.

 

Well, me too, but I USE THE TERM BECAUSE IT'S WHAT PEOPLE CALL THAT PERSON.

 

Seriously, I can't believe this thread has actually devolved into an argument over semantics because I used the term "engineer" - never mind that it's what people who record and mix music have called each other and what they are called on album credits for the entire 30-odd years I've been doing this.

 

Is there some other generally accepted term that has come into favor now that I just don't know about? Does it now say on CD credits "Person who knows how to record and mix"? If you go into a commercial studio does the "assistant person who knows how to record" set up your mics? This has not been my experience. It's cool that Ken calls himself an Audio Buddha, but only for Ken. It doesn't exactly work as a generic term for what we do here, and THERE ALREADY IS A GENERIC TERM FOR IT.

 

And yet apparently anyone who uses the term "engineer" is now just trying to deceive the public into thinking they have some formal "title" that they haven't earned, just for the "mystique" and the "glory."

 

Good Lord. It didn't take me long to remember why I felt like I was wasting my time here!

[Lee Flier]

I know you`re serious but I have to ask, are you serious?

I think he's actually serious.