| Author |
 Topic  |
scottmix
Posts: 2
|
 Posted - Mon Jun 03, 2002 4:33 pm |
|
|
I'm just starting to use CEP 2.0 (actually today was my first time to play with it, not knowing what I was doing yet.)
I want to know if CEP has enough onboard effects to put out a close to "off the shelf" mastered product, or do I need to go third party, and if I do need to go outside, what will give me the big sound without the garbage?
|
|
Syntrillium M.D.
Location: USA
Posts: 5124
|
| Posted - Mon Jun 03, 2002 4:44 pm |
|
|
Hello Scott. The short and simple answer is...you can do it all in CEP2, without having to look towards third-party DX effects. It really all comes down to your ears and your chops.
That being said, if you're looking for a dedicated DirectX multiband compressor/limiter with an analog-modeled kind of sound, IzoTope's OZONE is the current one of choice. Do a search in this (or the main) forum, and you'll find lots of posts related to it. It's a nice compliment to CEP2's internal DSP effects.
But again, everything you need is 2.0, and if you've got the goods, you can make the magic.
Happy Recording!
---Syntrillium, M.D.
_________________
|
|
|
|
VoodooRadio
Location: USA
Posts: 3971
|
| Posted - Mon Jun 03, 2002 5:58 pm |
|
|
Check out IK Multimedia's T-Racks! Good Luck Voodoo
_________________
I said Good Day!
Voodoo
|
|
|
|
Craig Jackman
Location: Canada
Posts: 909
|
| Posted - Tue Jun 04, 2002 5:40 am |
|
|
CEP's built in effects continue to surprise me ... so much so that I can't think of any external plug ins I use other than Ozone. Even then I don't use Ozone that much. Over the past 18 months, I've found that I've stopped using all my Waves plugins, and over the past couple of weeks I've built some parametric EQ presets that mean that I don't need the Steinberg TL Audio EQ-1 plug in I was addicted to for years. I don't even know what's in my Direct X plugin list anymore. Given time and opportunity, I thinkk that almost all users will be quite satified with the results they get just using what's already available within CEP.
_________________
Craig Jackman
Production Supervisor
CHEZ/CKBY/CIOX/CJET/CIWW
Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
|
|
|
|
VoodooRadio
Location: USA
Posts: 3971
|
| Posted - Tue Jun 04, 2002 11:20 am |
|
|
_________________
I said Good Day!
Voodoo
|
|
|
|
Rabban
Posts: 24
|
| Posted - Wed Jun 05, 2002 1:59 am |
|
|
While I still use Izotope's Ozone for some of my limiting/exciter needs my current poison of choice is PSP Audioware's VintageWarmer at www.pspaudioware.com . As a limiter/exciter/enhancer, I think it does a slightly better job than Izotope and VintageWarmer has useful presets, unlike Izotope which, unfortunately, does not have great presets (until you actually spend time going through all the controls manually to create the desired effect you want which can be daunting for beginners). Also check out PSPAudioware's other products: they have one called PSP MixBass which I find as good as, if not better than, Wave's MaxxBass for enhancing bass frequencies.
Edited by - Rabban on 06/05/2002 02:00:13 AM
|
|
Despised7
Member
Posts: 85
|
| Posted - Wed Jun 05, 2002 12:14 pm |
|
|
Thanks for posting Rabban. I will check out Vintage warmer. But so far I've been extremely pleased with Ozone so far. And the price made it even better! The presets on ozone didn't really bother me, since i don't use them. But, i have seen others write this on the board, if you want a plug-in where you can just click a preset and be happy, then Ozone is not for you.
The biggest problem I've had with ozone is...."which modules should i use? and when? why?". But, that has only forced me to learn more about audio and mastering.....which in my mind is a good thing. :-)
-Chris-
|
|
SteveG
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 6695
|
| Posted - Wed Jun 05, 2002 1:38 pm |
|
|
I think that anybody who even attempts to use presets when mastering is completely missing the point, especially with Ozone. You cannot possibly comment upon how good or bad Ozone is or isn't on the basis of just 'applying it' to whatever sound you are mastering. Despised7's approach is a much healthier one. As far as knowing which modules to use, and the order of them goes, then yes, it's not always the easiest thing in the world to decide.
Quite often, an approach that works is to find a record that sounds similar to the sort of sound that you want to achieve, and listen carefully to it in direct comparison to the sound that you're trying to master. But don't expect to get an instant result - often you have to build up the sound you are after in sections. But when you have decided what sort of sound you finally want, at least you can do it in one go with Ozone...
Steve
_________________
|
|
|
|
Rabban
Posts: 24
|
| Posted - Wed Jun 05, 2002 10:11 pm |
|
|
Oh, I agree SteveG. I do not use presets but I meant that for people who are beginner's, then a useful preset would be a good starting point. I always tweak every parameter I can to get the sound I want. I was able to produce a *better* sound with VintageWarmer (at least to my aged ears) as an exciter/limiter/compressor than Ozone. But Ozone has alot more options available. When I am just comparing Ozone's harmonic exciter and loudness maximizer with VintageWarmer's compressor/limiter/exciter (after tweaking the hell out of both apps and not using presets), I just find VintageWarmer to give slightly better results and less artifacting.
Edited by - Rabban on 06/05/2002 10:12:37 PM
|
|
SteveG
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 6695
|
| Posted - Thu Jun 06, 2002 2:15 am |
|
|
| Quote: | | ...but I meant that for people who are beginner's, then a useful preset would be a good starting point... |
Sorry, but this is just not possible, unless you have a preset that is basically 'zero effect'. Since no two sounds or mixes that you want to treat are the same, and accordingly no two results can be the same, then there is no possibility of a universal starting point. Any other approach is not really taking it seroiusly, and there certainly can't be a good starting point.
I've mastered a lot of stuff with Ozone, and the only real use that I've ever had for presets was to store the particular settings that I used for a particular track, in case the owner of it wanted to make changes. And recently, I've even stopped doing this, because quite frankly, it isn't worth it. If people really want to make changes, then the best starting point is invariably the raw material, without anything added at all - and when you make changes, they inevitably interact. So you end up building from scratch again - it really is the only way to get an acceptable individual result.
And as far as beginners are concerned, you have to recognise that there is a learning curve with any of this stuff. You start with the individual processes, and explore the effect that they can have on a mix. Then you move on to pairs of effects, noting particularly the way in which dynamic and excitation effects interact ( this really can be quite significant), and the way that these are affected by overall EQ. Unfortunately the otherwise excellent Mastering manual that Ozone supply does not really get into the 'interaction' territory, but it is rather inevitable that this will make a significant impact on the sound you end up with.
It is an unfortunate fact of life that most of the stuff people want to achieve with mastering should actually have been achieved in the mix. With a good mix, the effect of any mastering processes will only need to be minimal - just a little bit of 'cohesion' sometimes, and that bit of magic fairy dust. If you can hear the effects of mastering, then there is inevitably something seriously wrong with the mix, or the mastering effects have been overused.
The basic definition of an excellent mix is one that leaves the mastering engineer with nothing to do. And you work your way back from there in stages. I've heard a few that come close, but they are extremely rare.
Steve
_________________
|
|
|
|
Rabban
Posts: 24
|
| Posted - Thu Jun 06, 2002 5:01 am |
|
|
You are correct that there is no universal starting point with a preset for any track, but presets have their uses if a person is lucky enough to find something that helps a track. I do not contend that a beginner will use a single preset on every track. But if a beginner does not have the intricate knowledge of the relationship between the controls and knobs of a particular app (and how those controls influence one another), then he may luck out and find some preset that did enhance a certain aspect of the particular track (with the knowledge that this preset may not enhance a different track in the same way).
A beginner may stare at all the controls and knobs set at zero and may not have the time nor inclination (even though it would be beneficial to learn) to take every knob and turn it up or down, and then compare that knob to a second knob and then to a third knob... (especially if the app allows dozens and dozens and dozens of knobs and controls to be tweaked). The combinations would be mind-numbing. Maybe a preset, if there are a plethora of choices, may help...?
As a sidenote, when I was starting with Native Instrument's Reaktor, I foolishly thought I could create an instrument from scratch with all the complex tools in that app. I thought my knowledge of acoustic design would allow me to create the new instrument but I was not achieving the sound I wanted as I was lost in the program so the complexity was staggering. So I used a preset that was vaguely similar to the sound I wanted (but I had a general idea of the sound I wanted in the first place), then I had a starting point for that particular sound. From there I tweaked the preset until I got the instrument I was looking for. I was lucky I found a preset that gave me a rough ballpark of what I was looking for before tweaking it and I saved time starting from scratch.
Someone who is time-constrained (or may even be too afraid to try to learn from scratch, as some of my friends are, unfortunately) MAY flip through presets and MIGHT come across something that helps a particular aspect in a SINGLE track if he is lucky but I in no way intended that a single preset is a universal starting point for ALL tracks (I will be more careful how I word things in the future since you are right that it sounded like I was wrongly advocating using a single preset as a universal starting point when I really meant that for a single track, there might be a preset that helps it and from there tweak away but that preset may be pitiful in another track). You're absolutely right that starting from all zero settings would be a better choice as the *universal preset*.
Edited by - Rabban on 06/06/2002 05:04:08 AM
|
|
|
|
|
VoodooRadio
Location: USA
Posts: 3971
|
| Posted - Thu Jun 06, 2002 7:28 am |
|
|
_________________
I said Good Day!
Voodoo
|
|
|
|
Graeme
Member
Location: Spain
Posts: 4663
|
| Posted - Thu Jun 06, 2002 10:13 am |
|
|
| Quote: | It is an unfortunate fact of life that most of the stuff people want to achieve with mastering should actually have been achieved in the mix.
Steve |
Hear, hear! I couldn't agree with SteveG more.
It's about time this was said. There's far too much nonsense talked about 'mastering' in this forum when what the user should really be doing is learning how to lay and mix tracks properly in the first place. If the same time and effort was devoted to learning how to do this job correctly, then there would be no need to try and make silk purses out of sow's ears and a lot less discussion about mastering.
Mastering used to be a process of minor tweaks, primarily to accommodate the shortcomings of whatever the final medium was to be - record, cassette, or whatever. It was certainly not intended to change the whole mix from one 'sound' to another. Now, there are some people who are trying to turn it into an artform in its own right - and this is patently not the way it is supposed to be.
As SteveG has said, the best mixes don't need 'mastering' - the engineer did the job properly in the first place.
As for the preset argument - they are totally unnecessary (not to say useless) for most things. I don't have any time for the "it gives the learner somewhere to start from" argument. The best and only place for a learner to start from is zero!
If they are not prepared to devote the time and effort into learning what it is they are really doing (something which can not be done by hitting preset buttons) then, as far as I am concerned, they have chosen the wrong business to be in.
|
|
Graeme
Member
Location: Spain
Posts: 4663
|
| Posted - Thu Jun 06, 2002 10:14 am |
|
|
Yeah - I think we've got the message. You've certainly said it enough times.
Are you on a retainer from this mob, or what? 
|
|
SteveG
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 6695
|
| Posted - Thu Jun 06, 2002 11:27 am |
|
|
Rabban's beginner deserves what he gets, quite frankly. But the situation with creating instruments from scratch is not the same. You get to hear exactly what you've created, and everybody who uses the same settings will get identical results. This is patently not the case when mastering audio, so, Rabban, you are not comparing like with like.
And what on earth is somebody who's too afraid to try things for themselves doing playing with mastering tools??? If they're going to muck about on the basis that they 'might find something useful' then heaven help them, because I don't think anybody else is going to be able to... and the chances of them learning anything of any value this way will be approaching zero - from the minus side.
Really, there is no justification for this approach at all!
Steve
_________________
|
|
|
|
Syntrillium M.D.
Location: USA
Posts: 5124
|
| Posted - Thu Jun 06, 2002 11:48 am |
|
|
Just chiming in...I just wanted to say that I wholeheartedly agree with Graeme and SteveG.
Much like other buzz words of the day, Mastering has become the hip thing to do, and more importantly, something which (on the surface, thanks to all those great Ad Campaigns..blah!) everyone thinks they can do easily, quickly and efficiently. Talk about false advertising.
Having studied/apprenticed for many years under a very knowledgeable and somewhat famed engineer, I can tell you that the first lesson learned was how to Hear. This begins at mic placement and getting the right position for all sounds, to subtle tweaks on a preamp (if any), control room balances, cue mixes and then in the mixdown, long before it ever becomes the master. Getting it right (beforehand) makes all the difference. As said, it used to be about making a good track great; a little louder, perhaps a little brighter and livelier, and a bit 'tighter' all around.
Fix it in the Mix used to be the term of choice, albeit a laughable one, when it came to working with shoddy material. Clearly, that's switched over to Fix it in the mastering process, because it's really just that easy...
Sigh.
---Syntrillium, M.D.
_________________
|
|
|
|
Rabban
Posts: 24
|
| Posted - Thu Jun 06, 2002 1:40 pm |
|
|
Some beginner's I know (three of them) are just hobbyists who have no desire to master for a professional level. They want to master their own music for themselves to make the music they created sound respectable to themselves. They are amateurs and, of course, the current mastering methods they use are... quaint. Two of my amatuer friends grew up playing instruments and having to edit and master on PCs was a big step for them (I get embarrassed when I watch them at work on the PC). They are patently slow on computers and software editors and other software audio apps frustrate them. I have seen them come a long way but I know they are still unsure of themselves when it comes to mastering from scratch and they ask for help all the time.
I agree with all of you that you should take care with mic placement and recording the sounds clear in the first place so as to minimize mastering corrections. My third friend, though, also a hobbyist, only uses sample CDS (AKAI, Giga...) and does not record live instruments so cannot control mic placements... He tweaks each instrument in an editor and sequencer and then tries to master (again for his own listening enjoyment).
I try to get a mastering house to do it for me sometimes but my amateurish friends are not trying to produce a commercial CD and they don't seem to want the engineering skills found in a mastering house, so they learn what bits they can here and there. But, SteveG, you are correct that they deserve the results they get.
I only mentioned my example of instrument creation in Reaktor as an example that a preset (I know a preset in Reaktor preset and an Ozone preset are not the same) can be helpful if a person is lucky enough. Presets may help in certain situations, no matter what the app, if a person is not willing to invest the time to learn acoustic design and engineering from scratch (such as my friends who I classify as just hobbyists and home studio enthusiasts who just produce and *master* music for themselves and not for a larger market).
|
|
|
|
|
Graeme
Member
Location: Spain
Posts: 4663
|
| Posted - Thu Jun 06, 2002 3:57 pm |
|
|
| Quote: | | Some beginner's I know (three of them) are just hobbyists who have no desire to master for a professional level. They want to master their own music for themselves to make the music they created sound respectable to themselves. |
Then lets not talk about 'mastering' - that's not what they want to do anyway.
What we are talking about here is simple track laying and mixing. In my spare (!) time, I'm a 'hobby' musician (who also happens to have worked in the recording industry and therefore has the advantage in terms of experience) but I have no need to 'master' my stuff - and neither do they. They should be able to achieve respectable sounds without anything other than some care, patience and practice.
Todays technology is light years away from what I had to learn with - perhaps that's the problem. Not having to worry, or work around, so many potential problems has really made decent sound production a lot easier than it used to be, but at the expense of the engineers not understanding a lot of the principles.
| Quote: | | My third friend, though, also a hobbyist, only uses sample CDS (AKAI, Giga...) and does not record live instruments so cannot control mic placements... He tweaks each instrument in an editor and sequencer and then tries to master (again for his own listening enjoyment). |
No - he doesn't. He mixes - a totally different thing.
It seems to me that 'mastering' is just another example of a technical word which defines a specific process that has been hi-jacked by people who then use it incorrectly, for the simple reason they don't know what it really means - but it sounds as though they do. Like sheep, everyone else follows. Net result - you have hobby musicians talking about 'mastering' their product, when nothing is further from the truth.
| Quote: | | ......my amateurish friends are not trying to produce a commercial CD and they don't seem to want the engineering skills found in a mastering house, so they learn what bits they can here and there. But, SteveG, you are correct that they deserve the results they get. |
If they gave up on 'mastering' and applied themselves, instead, to the basic fundamentals of recording and mixing properly, they would get great results. It's the simple application of effort that is required, not a rack full of fancy boxes.
As a professional yourself, you would be doing them a favour - and saving yourself a lot of questions - by putting them straight on this subject.
|
|
Rabban
Posts: 24
|
| Posted - Thu Jun 06, 2002 10:12 pm |
|
|
Oh, I have tried to *set them straight* before. I even allowed one of them to accompany me to a mastering house when I was in Toronto. He was interested in seeing what a mastering house was. Afterwards, he still bombards me with questions on how to *master* his own music. I am no expert at mastering but I understand the acoustic fundamentals (that is why I hire professionals to do it for me) but my friends are fairly well off and can easily afford new toys and even the friend of mine who uses sample CDs, he forked over $15000 on them last year alone -- all for a hobbyist who does not want to let me listen to most of his compositions because he does not really like constructive criticism.
Owning great software and hardware does not mean that it guarantees great work, especially if the operator is naive and/or incompetent. It is difficult to get through to some of my friends about mixing vs. mastering and so I kind of tune them out. Hell, I almost lost a friendship when I was trying to explain to him the benefits of knowing the frequency ranges and safe frequency rolloff points for specific instruments so you do not have a mix muddied with all the instruments sharing the same frequency range (my only revenge was, while watching him upgrade his hard drives and mobo, watching his computer crash severely every time since he had both Antares AutoTune and the Waves Gold Bundle installed on his computer with the PACE copy protection screwing everything up -- now that was funny  ). When they say they are *mastering* I assume they are actually mastering since I am applying the definition of mastering that I learned but you are probably correct that when they define what they are doing as mastering they are, in fact, really mixing. It all comes down to semantics. They say mastering, when it is really mixing/editting. I say mastering when it is really something they cannot grasp. That is why I let them do their own thing and so if one of them is lucky enough to find a preset in an app that might help them with a particular track, I tell them to go for it (anything to stop them asking me more questions). Those whipper-snappers can sure get annoying!
|
|
|
|
|
Graeme
Member
Location: Spain
Posts: 4663
|
| Posted - Fri Jun 07, 2002 9:50 am |
|
|
| Quote: | | It all comes down to semantics. |
Yes - it is.
As the regulars here know, this is a bit of a soap-box for me. I am truly fed up with the jargon of my trade being diluted and turned into meaningless garbage by amateurs who are too stupid or lazy (maybe both) to make any attempt to understand the business they have chosen to work in.
The result is that these users ask questions (using the wrong terms) and nobody really knows what it is they mean. We end up going down all sorts of dead-end paths, for the simple reason the question was incorrect.
|
|
Syntrillium M.D.
Location: USA
Posts: 5124
|
| Posted - Fri Jun 07, 2002 10:13 am |
|
|
And the phrase of the day is...
Use Proper Nomenclature.
---Syntrillium, M.D.
_________________
|
|
|
|
jonrose
Location: USA
Posts: 2901
|
| Posted - Fri Jun 07, 2002 10:39 pm |
|
|
...unfortunately, some will even have to look that word up...
;)
<ducking...>
_________________
|
|
|
|
Mark T
Location: Norway
Posts: 890
|
| Posted - Sun Jun 09, 2002 12:08 pm |
|
|
OK guys,
I'm just going to try and step back from this one and try and see what the fuss is really about as (as always) a lot heat comes up when amateurs and pro's start rubbing shoulders.
The technology today is "freely" available (comparatively). Anyone with the small (fairy)amount of necessary money can set up as a home studio and start producing music to a "technical" (not necessarily musical) quality that has never been possible before without being a pro.
We all have Internet access and we have found our various ways to this forum. And the memebership is made up of a huge variety of experts, semi pros, beginners, hobbyist etc etc. and everyone has a different expectation and need from the forum.
I agree (hear that, I agree) with Graeme and Steve G and Synt that the right way and the best way to use the software and hardware is to learn what all the stuff is for and how it affects what you are doing. I have made the same mistake as a lot of other amatuers, I used every effect all the time cranked way up and then tried to "master" it into a perfect track - some chance! :)
But I learned mostly by reading Steve's rants and raves (joking guy!) and I started using the less-is-more approach and things started sounding better. I expect in a few years I may even be happy with what I produce!
BUT... I see that there is a need for a place for hobby musicians who don't have the time to commit years to learning how every little bit works, but who still have something valid to say in music, and let us not forget creativity is not reserved for anyone or any group. In order to ever be heard, these people need to be able to use the tools that are so freely available. And in order to use these tools they need a way to approach them which will give a "good" result without costing thousands or requiring an apprenticeship to a music studio.
Presets may be anathema to some people, but for others they are a Godsend. I use them all the time; on my PC I have a profile, on my guitar effects box I have hundreds of preset sounds, I use presets on all my music software because over the years I have developed my "sound" and I tend to write music in one of a few styles and I know generally what effects I am going to use so it is very time saving to have a preset which quickly gets me in the "ballpark".
Yes I tweak all the presets every time, and yes I will often clear everything and start from scratch, but a lot of times my presets are very close to what I want and that saves me a lot of time.
I do not want to start a war here. I have immense respect for all the pros who write here. Graeme and Steve (and of course our revered Synt MD) have levels of knowledge and experience that I will never develop as I am a hobby musician (I know Graeme but you do have the experience from studios). I just feel that it is important that we recognise a middle ground here between complete newbies and the real pros, who have something valid to say, but need a little help rather than put-downs and elitism.
OK guys blast away
Mark T  (Yeah, and I know what nomenlature means as well, but not everyone has a glossary of all professional music terminology to hand when they come up against a problem they haven't seen before)
Edited by - mark t on 06/09/2002 12:16:28 PM
_________________
Mark 
nil desperandum - nunc est bibendum
|
|
|
|
Mark T
Location: Norway
Posts: 890
|
| Posted - Sun Jun 09, 2002 12:12 pm |
|
|
And before anyone jumps on it n-o-m-e-n-c-l-a-t-u-r-e, it was a slip of the finger in the heat of the moment OK?
Mark
_________________
Mark
nil desperandum - nunc est bibendum
|
|
|
|
VoodooRadio
Location: USA
Posts: 3971
|
| Posted - Sun Jun 09, 2002 12:34 pm |
|
|
Hey Mark,
You don't have to worry about getting "blasted" from me. I personally don't care how people arrive at "their" music solutions. If they are happy with the end result and they are the ones that paid for their kit, then more power to them. I definitely agree with you on the folks here being invaluable sources to draw from. Myself, I've been doing music for as many years as anyone here, but have only recently gotten into the whole computer nightmare. I just wish I had the same amount of time invested into music software as I do on stage and standing in front of a board. Rome wasn't built in a day! I think the thing for people to do is.... read the different individuals advice/suggestions and try the ones that they want to try. If it works and you learned something then great. If you have a thinking process that works for you, who cares if someone else can accomplish the same thing in a few less moves. Let them! Good Luck Voodoo
_________________
I said Good Day!
Voodoo
|
|
|
|
Graeme
Member
Location: Spain
Posts: 4663
|
| Posted - Sun Jun 09, 2002 2:39 pm |
|
|
| Quote: | | I just feel that it is important that we recognise a middle ground here between complete newbies and the real pros, who have something valid to say, but need a little help rather than put-downs and elitism. |
Unfortunately, what you see as 'put downs and elitism' is not that at all. What it really is, is an attempt to guide users towards an understanding of what it is they are playing around with.
It's quite simple really. If these guys want to pick up pointers from the 'professionals', then they have to learn to explain their problems in a way the professionals understand.
The 'professionals' hold that place within our society by dint of experience and learning their trade the hard way. Generally speaking (in my experience) most are willing to pass on the knowledge they have acquired but, in return, they expect the 'beginner' to at least do some of the groundwork for his/herself. At the very least - in terms of this thread - the 'professional' would like to see an understanding of the jargon which we use.
Professional jargon is not something which is generated to confuse the outsider, although it is often seen as that. It is something which develops, over a period of time, to describe exactly, a process or product within the industry concerned. This is not something which is solely the province of audio engineers, every trade and profession you can think of has its own jargon - and for good reason.
Jargon is a precise way of relating something to someone else in the same business. If people start to use jargon incorrectly, then no one knows what it is that is being discussed. This thread is a prime example of what I am talking about. Users are bandying around the term 'mastering' when what they really mean is 'mixing'.
With respect to the preset argument, there is nothing wrong with the principle of presets, provided the input into them is a known and repeatable quantity - presets then provide a known and repeatable solution. Unfortunately, as those who work in this business know only too well, this is just not the case in audio. Each project has a unique set of variables, which can not be catered for with presets. Hence, as the 'professionals' here already know, the only preset worth a light is "everything at zero".
Just because some users don't find the answer acceptable, doesn't mean to say it is wrong. It is this attitude that 'I asked the question but I don't accept the answer' which is most likely to alienate the very people who can help the best.
|
|
jonrose
Location: USA
Posts: 2901
|
| Posted - Sun Jun 09, 2002 3:36 pm |
|
|
I couldn't have said it better myself, Graeme.
Okay, I guess my attempt (above) at a little levity (which obviously offended some people here) was simply a truncated response to this very issue;
No one can help explain away a problem if we're not all on the same page to begin with.
It wasn't really meant as a jab to anyone. It was simply meant to point in the direction of the issue that Graeme expounded on.
Very often, however, there are folks who aren't interested in learning how to successfully communicate their problems in written form, which is all we have to go on during the process of trying to assist them!
So, I feel there is a bit of responsibility incumbent (on the part of the questioner) to convey meaning the best way we can. If we must read/study a bit, so much the better, as we will inherently produce a better product for the gaining of that knowledge...
:)
All the best... -Jon
_________________
|
|
|
|
Mark T
Location: Norway
Posts: 890
|
| Posted - Sun Jun 09, 2002 11:47 pm |
|
|
Well Voodoo, Graeme and Jonrose
Thanks for answering me in the spirit I intended - It is sometimes hard to write in disagreement without offending someone.
I do understand and appreciate (and respect) your opinions about presets - maybe part of the problem is that they are provided by all the different types of music software (CEP included) - and thus we all believe they must be useful for something, otherwise why are they there? I shall follow your advice and make a concerted effort to start from zero each time and see how I get on (never too old to learn!)
On the jargon/terminology/nomenclature front: I have been working in IT for 28 years now and we all know it is one of the worst places for jargon. The problem is so bad that the same three letter abbreviation can mean 15 different things and have become application or supplier specific!
At the start of IT we were technocrats and had our secret language that kept our knowledge out of the hands of the common people. As IT became more available to everyone it was clear that people were constantly going to be coming up against jargon and terminology they wouldn't understand.
I worked, many, many years ago (thank God) in what would now be called a Help Desk and the wrong use of jargon has delayed correcting faults a lot of times. However, we learned to ask clarifying questions that would verify that the user was correctly describing the problem (have you switched on the screen, the screen is the thing that looks like a TV.........).
So yes, people should learn the right terminology, however what do you do when someone thinks they ARE using the right terminology? On this forum we can get annoyed, tell them to go back and learn it properly etc. If I had done that I would have been fired.
My suggestion is Synt could have a glossary on-line or have a link to a glossary so that if anyone asks a wrong question you can simply paste the url, or even better we could suggest that everyone checks it out before they post questions.
Mark
_________________
Mark
nil desperandum - nunc est bibendum
|
|
|
|
Syntrillium M.D.
Location: USA
Posts: 5124
|
| Posted - Mon Jun 10, 2002 11:05 am |
|
|
Well, very nicely done gentlemen! Gee, does anyone need a hug? ;)
Now that we've settled that (lol!) I did just want to post this glossary link for Mark T...
http://support.syntrillium.com/glossary/index.html
It's been on the site for a long time and definitely needs some updating, but it's available, at least for people to reference. Pass the link along or simply type GLOSSARY in the search bar.
Cheers, and again, well done.
---Syntrillium, M.D.
_________________
|
|
|
|
SteveG
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 6695
|
| Posted - Mon Jun 10, 2002 11:17 am |
|
|
On the subject of glossaries, the CEP2.0 manual has a glossary which has been recently updated as well:
http://ftp.syntrillium.com/pub/cep/cep2man.pdf
I haven't compared the two, but I'd guess that there may well be useful bits in both...
Steve
_________________
|
|
|
|
Graeme
Member
Location: Spain
Posts: 4663
|
| Posted - Mon Jun 10, 2002 5:29 pm |
|
|
Nice - but it doesn't work for me - am I alone in this? I click on letters but nothing happens and I stay on the same page.
|
|
jonrose
Location: USA
Posts: 2901
|
| Posted - Mon Jun 10, 2002 10:02 pm |
|
|
"G", "J", "K", "O", "Q", "U", "V", "X" and"Y" on that page have no entries (maybe your browser shows this, maybe not).
All the other letters will bring up clickable topic links in the left column (of the underlying box)... and they seem to all work fine.
This might be just a browser issue - what are you currently using to view HTML pages, anyway?
Best.... -Jon
_________________
|
|
|
|
Graeme
Member
Location: Spain
Posts: 4663
|
| Posted - Tue Jun 11, 2002 11:43 am |
|
|
| Quote: | "G", "J", "K", "O", "Q", "U", "V", "X" and"Y" on that page have no entries (maybe your browser shows this, maybe not).
All the other letters will bring up clickable topic links in the left column (of the underlying box)... and they seem to all work fine.
This might be just a browser issue - what are you currently using to view HTML pages, anyway?
Best.... -Jon |
I use Opera - exclusively for viewing the forum - and IE6.something or other for everything else. Opera does show the unavailable links but won't bring up the available ones. IE is fine, so it's purely another Opera problem. Not the first one I have found and I should have checked out IE first, sorry guys.
|
|
jonrose
Location: USA
Posts: 2901
|
| Posted - Tue Jun 11, 2002 12:27 pm |
|
|
No problem at all.
Being a part-time webmaster myself, I know how [t:834f7753d4]difficult[/t:834f7753d4] impossible it is to write for all browsers...
...and so, I don't even try, anymore.
;)
_________________
|
|
|
|
Graeme
Member
Location: Spain
Posts: 4663
|
| Posted - Tue Jun 11, 2002 2:44 pm |
|
|
| Quote: | Being a part-time webmaster myself, I know how [t:bf55ca5600]difficult[/t:bf55ca5600] impossible it is to write for all browsers...
...and so, I don't even try, anymore.
;) |
Although I would not even consider calling myself a 'webmaster' (more of a webwimp) I do have a site of my own and I know exactly what you mean. I know from my stats counter that by far the majority of visitors to my site are using IE, mainly v5 upwards, and I content myself with making it work on that. The minority users will just have to take their chances.
Not a good situation, I agree, but it's really the only practical solution for someone whose not really in the business of putting together websites.
|
|
| |
Topic
|
All Forums
Mastering