take that, non-believers
Posted: Thu Apr 22, 2004 10:00 pm
Below is a post that I found on an audio forum that I frequent. It was posted in response to a detractor of Har-Bal, and a pretty good read. Enjoy...I know I did
Igor
----------------------------------------------------------
I can't help but feel you're on a disroll fueled by fear and pride. The way you interpreted Har-Bal's "guidelines" seems very misunderstood to me. It's pretty clear they're marketing Har-Bal for all users, not primarily seasoned pros.
To ridicule the use of headphones for mastering is also pretty ignorant. To rely on nothing *but* headphones is bad news, but I've mastered a lot of highly exposed music using primarily headphones, and that's no compromise on my part. We use several pairs of Genelec's, Dynaudio BM6a's, KRK 6000's and Yamaha NS10M's monitoring in our studios, but there's nothing that makes me feel as much in control as I do when I slap on a pair of Sennheiser HD600's. Had it not been for the strain I tend to put on my ears when mixing or mastering in headphones, I'd probably be doing most of work in cans and use nearfields for reference. Not vice versa. The main problems with headphones are the highly exaggerated stereo-field and unrealistic (*not* inaccurate) bass response, but I have since long gotten a good feel of how much real-world bass there is in what I'm hearing in my HD600's before I switch to hearfields.
We have Mac and PC DAW's running ProTools|HD, Nuendo2 and Cubase SX2, and high-end outboard candy like an Aphex 320A and 250 at our disposal for mastering, and I've been using Har-Bal daily since we bought it. The genious of Har-Bal lies in its simplicity and efficiency. It doesn't wipe it's own ass, but it uses a hell of a lot less toilet paper.
Laugh away, Lorenz, but Har-Bal is a tool that's going to nuke some mastering engineer's business, just like the virtual world generally chews away on the real one. Could you do the same work you're doing now 25 years ago?
That said, no program or plug-in will ever replace a second pair of trained ears. That's what you are.
-kl3in
Igor
----------------------------------------------------------
I can't help but feel you're on a disroll fueled by fear and pride. The way you interpreted Har-Bal's "guidelines" seems very misunderstood to me. It's pretty clear they're marketing Har-Bal for all users, not primarily seasoned pros.
To ridicule the use of headphones for mastering is also pretty ignorant. To rely on nothing *but* headphones is bad news, but I've mastered a lot of highly exposed music using primarily headphones, and that's no compromise on my part. We use several pairs of Genelec's, Dynaudio BM6a's, KRK 6000's and Yamaha NS10M's monitoring in our studios, but there's nothing that makes me feel as much in control as I do when I slap on a pair of Sennheiser HD600's. Had it not been for the strain I tend to put on my ears when mixing or mastering in headphones, I'd probably be doing most of work in cans and use nearfields for reference. Not vice versa. The main problems with headphones are the highly exaggerated stereo-field and unrealistic (*not* inaccurate) bass response, but I have since long gotten a good feel of how much real-world bass there is in what I'm hearing in my HD600's before I switch to hearfields.
We have Mac and PC DAW's running ProTools|HD, Nuendo2 and Cubase SX2, and high-end outboard candy like an Aphex 320A and 250 at our disposal for mastering, and I've been using Har-Bal daily since we bought it. The genious of Har-Bal lies in its simplicity and efficiency. It doesn't wipe it's own ass, but it uses a hell of a lot less toilet paper.
Laugh away, Lorenz, but Har-Bal is a tool that's going to nuke some mastering engineer's business, just like the virtual world generally chews away on the real one. Could you do the same work you're doing now 25 years ago?
That said, no program or plug-in will ever replace a second pair of trained ears. That's what you are.
-kl3in