The WORST recording take i've EVER seen.

[@legacyShredder1]

The microphone one always gets me. There's a ton of variables that make a mic good for a given situation or bad for the situation regardless of EQ. If you're getting a bunch of bleed, reflections or flutter it doesn't really matter how you EQ the damn thing.

[@AdamSliger]

Facts

[@rome8180]

Also, the components in mics have a huge effect on the sound beyond EQ. A condenser, ribbon, and dynamic mic are all radically different. And that's not even getting into polar patterns, diaphragm shape, tube vs. non-tube, etc.

[@pedrosilvaproductions]

Only way I can see the point for mics is that any mic sounds alright right on Axis. Put that mic off axis to reduce or Change the sound in some way and thats where you start listening to bad mics. Eqing can get you so far, like 90% there but there will be problems down the line for sure

[@WilDBeestMF]

I'm finding that no matter the application, an SM57 is just a gem. It might not get you all the way there, eg combining a SM57 and a U87 on acoustic guitar takes to get a stereo vibe. It's always there, though. No matter the genre or application.

[@JeremyAndersonBoise]

If my drummer or bandmates ever thought the kick drum was somehow bad or unnecessary, then I would quit, deny I was ever involved, and move to a different state.

[@fitusf9590]

This!

[@flickeringgreenflame8493]

Kick drum - Depends on whether you want to be snugly "within a genre", or whether you want to be quirky. Pretty sure the Velvet Underground drummer played standing up with a floor tom - no kick. Keith Moon eventually stopped using high hats. So - you can use whatever part of the kit you want. (Also - jazz mixes the kick pretty low.) But, yes -- the argument as presented is a little odd.

[@alrecks619]

lars ulrich notoriously omitted ride cymbal, even though it's kind of the staple of the genre he plays.

[@jukesjointOG]

And of course, you could tape up the bottom three strings on all of the guitarist’s guitars, and call it a “genius level noise reduction strategy.” After all, who needs noise 24/7??? Or, that guy could have quit that band a lot earlier rather than anguishing over the obvious.

[@JeremyAndersonBoise]

“I don’t really mix with my ears…” - destroyed my entire world, what are we even doing?

[@AdamSliger]

No idea lmao

[@mattandrews8502]

So... uninformed people on the internet with no real world experience have some erroneous opinions, THEN other people on the internet with no real world experience agree with them? Thanks for the hot take. Jesus. Good luck with it all kids.

[@Tallstreehouse]

HOT TAKE: Music isn't as subjective as we're led to believe, especially when its being made at a professional level. There's a reason that most extremely popular records sound fantastic to most people. There's also a reason we reference other mixes, adhere to specific songwriting structures, follow a standard EQ curve when mastering, and can generally agree upon which records are objectively well made. Amazing sounding music sounds amazing because it is objectively good BUT can be subjectively bad, while objectively bad music can STILL be subjectively good. Sorry guys, but there are right and wrong ways to make art professionally; as they say, you have to learn the rules to break them.

[@Ted_Swayinghill]

One of the best things I’ve learned over the years is if your electricity ain’t good, the more risk of interference getting into your recording. If you can’t afford to rewire your home for recording, invest into serious power conditioners from brands such as SurgeX for example. AND no matter how much you drop on mics, mic pres, etc. if you have a crap ton of flat surfaces in your room, the risk of acoustic issues will occur and the mics will respond accordingly lol. and lastly if you can’t afford that dream piece of gear and don’t wanna go into credit debt…always look to buy used!

[@jerrywemhoff]

I'd say if you mix in mono, any phase issues will be immediately apparent. This doesn't mean stereo mixing is riddled with phase issues, and we have some great mastering techniques employing delay and panning that will enforce monocompatibility (I don't hear a lot that has this these days, but I use them for my clients).

[@rome8180]

I don't think I've ever made a full release-ready production with fewer than 40 tracks. The thing is that 40 tracks does not mean 40 different parts. I often split things up into separate tracks for the purposes of processing and workflow. Like you said, you may have around 10 tracks just for drums. And then think about vocals. You'd have the lead, which I might split into separate tracks if the chorus vocals needed different processing than the verse vocals. Then you have doubles and harmonies. So that all may add up to 10 extra tracks. Then for guitars, I generally use different sounds in different parts. So those end up on different tracks. So I might have two verse guitars, two chorus guitars, two bridge guitars, a lead guitar, etc. Bass might be 2-3 tracks (because I sometimes process the low end and the high end of the bass separately). So we're up to like 30 tracks already. Then we have keyboard pads, ear candy, transition effects, etc. I would say I generally average around 60 tracks. But that doesn't mean I have dozens of parts happening at the same time. A typical chorus might have drums, bass, two wide-panned rhythm guitars, a lead vocal, a double, some harmonies, and a couple background textural elements. Standard stuff.

[@AdamKirbyMusic]

Yeah, same. 40 is usually at the low end for me. Anyone who thinks this is too many, it's like, tell me you don't know much about what goes into dense interesting arrangements without telling me.

[@Frank290578]

I do 10 or 15 tracks but without vocals. And i don.t use live instruments. Only keyboards and plugins. I use logic pro.

[@yonikessler1912]

I worked on a musical theater track that had 3 leads, an 8 piece choir, and a 20 piece jazz orchestra. Iirc 10 tracks for drums, 3 for bass (1 DI + 2 mics), 2 for guitar (DI + sm57 on the amp), stereo pair for piano, each horn was individually miked so that’s about 11 horn tracks, 1 mic for each singer so 3 lead vox mics, and then for the choir we had a stereo ambience pair and also threw a mic on each singer so 10 mics for the choir total tripled as we recorded them at 3 distances from the mics so 30 choir tracks total. For the big band I ALSO had a stereo pair of room mics and I threw up an ambisonic mic (4 channel microphone) as an experiment and cause the studio had the IO capabilities for it. If I can do math that’s somewhere around 67 tracks also not including the talkbacks we had set up for the conductor and I believe I also set up talkbacks for the rhythm section players. Session was absolutely gargantuan for what it is.

[@tommorton7211]

When I first got into production, I thought doing recreations would be the best way to hone my skills but since I was new, I checked that take and found the idea shit on on reddit with comments like you won't learn anything by copying. Turns out, recreations are an excellent way to learn and trying to take on writing, arranging, recording, and mixing all at the same time with a focus on originality is a fast path to being overwhelmed and quitting.

[@AdamSliger]

Big facts!!! I actually made a whole video about this a few months back!

[@GeoffBosco]

"You know who's into dragons, Morty?" "..." "Nerds who refuse to admit they're Christians."

[@AdamSliger]

I just miss Dueling Dragons :(

[@GeoffBosco]

I do top down mixing, but not until I am fully sure that the mix buss processing isn't covering up any mistakes in overall dynamics. Before I add any individual plugins, I'll find all the loudest parts of th song and make sure nothing is peaking where it shouldn't, and then I'll add buss processing.

[@chrismarcyy]

The most absurd (or misleading) claim I keep hearing, even from some professional mixing engineers, is that the attack on the compressor is how long the compressor wait to apply compression. This misconception drives me crazy, and I can’t really blame upcoming mixing engineers for being confused about it.

[@AdamSliger]

Oh yeah that’s a good one too. Compression is one of the most misunderstood things out there!

[@gianni1646]

Chris Marcyy with two “y”s. Professional mixing engineers are telling you what Attack is and you say it’s absurd? Then, what is Attack? I’m confused. Gianni❤ ✌🏼🤟🏼

[@adalundhe]

Okay, my spicy take is the Neumann U87AI is an absolutely staggeringly mediocre for its price. Some lovely alternatives I’ve gotten to work with and own: - Lewitt 1040 - Lauten Audio Eden or Atlantis - Used Neumann M149 (much better mic for the used price of 3-3.5k USD) - Soyuz 017FET - Chandler TG mic - Sontronics Mercury (this mic is stunningly good and really should be on more lists) - Used Blue Bottle (the big one with the B0, B6, and B7 capsules can be had for 3k-4k USD)

[@AdamSliger]

Lauten Audio has my ❤️

[@adalundhe]

The top down mixing approach is also interesting! I’ll need to try it!

[@1176hambone]

A recording take is a recording.

[@JohnnyAllan-vj7sj]

I sort of agree with the second one. I've personally been trying to cut down on the amount of tracks I have. Less is usually more, and the more tracks you have, the less room you have in the mix for each track. You'd better be one hell of a good engineer if you're using 40+ tracks. Otherwise you're gonna end up with a giant pile of crap and not even realize what's wrong

[@duncan.o-vic]

You should be skeptical when most viewers agree with you, because usually most people don't know what they're talking about.

[@conceptSde]

Totally agree to your take on "if you know your speakers, you will always have top results". Of course this is nonsense, room treatment and proper frequency response (at least no gaps or dramatic peaks and drops) always are a prerequisite. I guess that myths about famous records having been mixed only with NS-10s or even Auratones have contributed to this perspective. But even if the cheapo small cabs were mainly used (I generally doubt most of these stories) these were standing in perfectly sounding control rooms where the engineers also could easily switch to big monitors from time to time at least to balance the low end. Similar idea with eq-ing an SM58 to sound like a U47 or RCA ribbon: Lots of tutorials here on YT are contributing to this myth. And modeling mics might also have their share here: Just spend $800 and have the sound of all the legendary tube mics of the golden age. I had the chance to do at least a few 1:1 comparisons. The results were nice for the budget, but not even close what you could achieve with the real things.

[@jerrywemhoff]

I have access to the school I went to. They have EVERYTHING, so I can say with some perspective that yes: you can get a more inexpensive mic to sound pretty damned close to a 5000 dollar mic, IN THE MIX. SOLO? Absolutely not.

[@AdamSliger]

I think my hang up is cheap vs expensive compared to characteristics of styles. A ribbon mic might be the right mic for an application, even a cheap one, and it would be a total pain in the butt trying to get a Manley reference to sound the same way. And you’re def not just doing it with more and more EQ. The thought that EQ curve is the primary characteristic of a mic is a matter of opinion but it’s definitely not the only. That’s my whole point. Getting an SM58 to have a similar EQ to a U87 is doable, sure, but getting it to sound “the same” is just not worth it when you could instead focus on getting the SM58 to sound as good as possible.

[@asymmetrymedia9838]

Actual mixing engineers are hard to find online and honestly i don't think i've met many working engineers who like the online space for that reason. It's mostly hobbyists parroting KZbinrs with 0 credentials or basing an opinion on one skewed experience. They're busier debating ridiculous things online than actually working on music. People should take anything they find online with a grain of salt, absolutely everything.

[@AdamSliger]

They’re hard to find online *UNTIL they have a plugin dropping

[@markmendozavano]

You can't just eq ANY let's say dynamic mic and go "voila, it's a ribbon mic now." That's just insane. A thousand dollar mic CAN sound crappy, but it doesn't take much to make it sound great, that's why it costs a thousand dollars.

[@captain_relaxo]

I heard about one of the top audio engineers of the 20th Century starting his mixes using studio monitors, then switching to a shitty cheap speaker from the fifties and finish the final adjustments to the mix using that in mono. What works, works. I imagine he was just getting volume levels of the tracks just right, so it would work on any system, anywhere.

[@AdamSliger]

Yeah that’s a pretty common method! Lots of folks use Yamaha NS10s for this. They were a home stereo speaker from back in the day!

[@greganikin7003]

I recently for a session from an engineer from Tampa. He sent me a crappy recorded vocals recorded on Sony C-800. With a veeeery very low level oh artist’s voice and his excuse was - “he’a voice is so low level i had to crank up preamp that’s why there is so many artificial sounds”. He claims himself a big engineer. His response was - “i’m mixedbylex i got this. You will fix it in the mixx” i said no - it’s recorded badly i can’t do anything about it. He blocked me then. So obviously there is a lot of a-holes in our industry. Why do you even bother to respond to these comments? F them. You do your thing the way you do it.

[@AdamSliger]

your fault for trusting someone from Florida (I'm from Florida I can say this)

[@greganikin7003]

@@AdamSliger wasn't me who entrusted that guy. He's "big" there

[@audiomix1969]

Top-down mixing has been around forever. Any engineer mixing on an SSL 4000 had that famous bus compressor available to them right there. They may not have put 5 other pieces of outboard on the 2-mix insert right away, but you know that bus compressor was engaged from the get-go.

[@AdamSliger]

Oh for sure. I debated going into that vs “template mixing” vs the new top down style but I was tired of hearing myself talk by then haha

[@ToniTechBoi]

No way in hell, a drummer not wanting to kick it? Thats the best part!

[@AdamSliger]

right?!

[@fitusf9590]

@11:33 Can't keep a tempo and doesn't wanna use the kick. I'm calling the cops.

[@mainsailsound983]

Track counts on my pop Productions are normally 60 to 80, including vocal stacks.

[@minawave7126]

another fun informative video

[@AdamSliger]

Let me know how it goes 😂 appreciate ya

[@MyonMuzik]

450 was my most track numbers + 15 sends and 30 group channels

[@AdamSliger]

Was this for an entire movie lol

[@johnrpittenger]

There's really only one main debate among any kind of artistic person for any artistic endeavor. Does gear matter or not.......... Obviously good gear helps but trust me a large portion of artists that think gear doesn't matter.

[@techslfink9722]

💯🤯I guess lacking knowledge of true facts about characteristics of equipment, rooms and sound can put you on the wrong track. I’m not an experienced producer, mixing or mastering engineer but I have tons of experience listening and working with audio and electronics. Can only say I do agree 100% with you!

[@AdamSliger]

Beautiful thing is you can have all this stuff wrong and still end up making great music!

[@Hectagonist]

Regarding Pro Tools, 2010's were where it became really apparent they were falling behind the competition and they started making changes in the company. Honestly, in the last 5 years or so they've steadily been making improvements and adding features and that'll keep them in the game a little longer. For me, it's still my favorite DAW to mix and edit on (especially if you have Eucon control surfaces). But ultimately, when everything is moving towards bedroom producers they'll lose relevance in music production since they can't compete with feature rich DAW's like Reaper that are also dirt cheap. But they may still remain the top choice for Post Production for the foreseeable future

[@AdamSliger]

Pro Tools is my favorite by far but it does have a learning curve, and many of the features are not important for the everyday user, so I get why people skip it altogether. But I personally will never switch! I don't see any other DAW taking over in the corporate/film world, heck you're more likely to find someone using Adobe Audition in a film setting before any other non-PT DAW.

[@joeMW284]

I don't think Pro Tools is "on it's way out" but I do think its market share will be significantly diminished as time goes on. I feel like the next generation is much more likely to be starting out on something like Logic or Ableton. Pro Tools appeals most to those who prefer a more analog-like workflow. Also, Avid is a dog of a company to deal with and their subscription tiers are terrible... track limits!? Seriously... what year is this? To an amateur, $40/month just so you can have more than 32 tracks is pure craziness. Logic is $200 and you're done. Reaper is friggin' $60 and the free trial is perpetual. Kids are broke and they're gonna use what they can get their hands on.

[@rome8180]

Yep. I just made a similar comment. I listen to a lot of podcasts like Tape Notes. The artists will often play snippets from demo versions of the songs. And I can tell you, almost all working artists are using Logic to record themselves. I would wager that Logic has like 80% of the market share for self-recording artists, especially if we're talking about genres like indie rock, indie pop, folk, alt rock, etc. A lot of albums simply aren't made in conventional studios anymore. The process now often involves artists recording their own tracks at home and sending them to a mix engineer to mix. Since so many artists are using Logic, if the mix engineer also uses Logic this means the artist can send them the whole project instead of just the bounced tracks. So I would expect even more mix engineers and producers to switch to Logic for that reason.

[@joeMW284]

@@rome8180 kind of unrelated, but I personally don't find it particularly useful to be sent project files if I'm commissioned for mixing. It takes just as long or longer to tweak an existing project to my liking as it does to just create a new one and import the files. Artists also have a tendency to be bad at organizing things in their projects... Exporting the tracks forces them to wrap up their edits and label things properly.

[@AdamSliger]

@@rome8180 Even if an A List artist is working in Logic, I would bet $$ that most of the time the person tracking the real vocal and the mixer are both using Pro Tools. And I'm asking for multitracks anyway, I don't care what DAW you use at all. Bounce me the tracks even if we're both in Pro Tools!

[@AdamSliger]

@@joeMW284 Agreed! I am not accepting a project file unless you have consolidated everything and committed all of the plugins that you want to preserve/all software instruments.

[@KC-bi9jw]

Me when someone says Pro Tools is trash: 1v1 me bro

[@Sonnell]

I mean, everything art is subjective. So there must be music where kick drum is not important or good. And there will be people for whom this is true, and people for whom this is not true. All these polling in this sense are nonsense. Just take most of the old music, where there were no kick drum! Or were only listened live, never recorded or mixed. Or were lacking bass or high end. Etc. People loved them. And many still do. Polls and opinions are nothing more than simply interesting, entertaining, and something to learn from, as you meet different opinions than yours.

[@AdamSliger]

I don't disagree with you on any of this! Obviously not every song needs kick drum. But in a traditional rock band, I'd def fire a drummer who refused to play the kick in songs that clearly needed it lol.

[@Sonnell]

@@AdamSliger Sure, that drummer has a difference in artistic opinion, or forgot his kick drum in the taxi. :)

[@irradix213]

i'd heard that MJ bought the Beatles catalog when McCartney told him he didn't own or want it bc it was in stereo

[@AdamSliger]

i'm pretty sure Paul wanted it, but MJ outbid him!

[@HOLLASOUNDS]

Here is My Hot take, an average smart phone can record perfectly usable vocals with some basic editing with EQ and effects, its quick easy and efficient. The only thing to be mindful of is treating that phone like a mic, IE move it back and forth from the mouth during quite to loud parts and dont blow air into the mic. No pop filter required just sing which the air and mouth focused on the back of the phone. I recorded vocals with a phone like this and it was very useable, I also record drum samples and other sounds used in production with My phone.

[@AdamSliger]

The best mic is the one you have 🤘🤘

[@HOLLASOUNDS]

@AdamSliger Ohh I have decent mics Rode NT1A and Audio Technica AT40 40 its just a phone is like I said quicker, more efficient, easier, faster, sounds usable so why bother setting up the mic?

[@legacyShredder1]

​@@HOLLASOUNDS I'd argue that a phone is far less efficient and slower in a real production setting. The tiny electret mic on a phone has to be controlled digitally and every aspect of it's directionality (polar patterns) is artificial, which is going to affect everything from tone, direction, and dynamic range. Sure I can make phone audio work, but it's nowhere near as fast or quality as a dedicated microphone chosen specifically for the task at hand. Any real studio is going to have multiple quality mics plugged into a quality chain ready to go at any given time so there's no reason to even consider a phone.

[@HOLLASOUNDS]

@@legacyShredder1 Definitely however after I put the Reverb and other stuff it sits good in the mix and sounds fine, and its just My own voice for Vox and not recording a full song. If I was recording a full song or recording someone else but I still wanted to be mobile I would use My zoom recorder. If I wanted to record good vocals for a paying client I would use My Rode AT1 A or AT 40 40 and if they want more I would hire the local Studio for $50 an hour they have all the gear including high quality mics there. I would pret with the singer at My place then We would go to the Studio specifically to spend time recording several takes of the vocal then finish at home. All depends how much money they are paying or how We are splitting the Royaltys and what relationship We have basically.

[@Durkhead]

Xm8500 is only 20 bucks

[@davidnika446]

The no kick drummer is pretty funny actually!

[@JeremyAndersonBoise]

76% who voted for mixing with “any” speaker have never had the privelege of doing it in a real studio, but 100% of them still like having an opinion to share on the internet. Just like I do. 🤷‍♂️ why? Why? Tell em that it’s human nature…

[@flickeringgreenflame8493]

40 tracks - Well - in the 80s they used 48 track set -ups. "48" is more than "40". Depends on the genre, though. And whether you include stems in your count.

[@jeffdavid1234]

dual 24 track broke down to 42 tracks or less 2 track sync 4 track automation, and maybe 2 track ref on the second 24 track. There were some done with more track but would mix down each of the slave 24 track, vocals, and strings to the master 24 track.'

[@kougan_music]

The no kick one is bonkers. The rest, I think it's mostly a case of you don't "need" X to make a great mix/song/take. But they're defending their stance so boldly and blindly that it swung too far and developped into the wrong opinion

[@AdamSliger]

I think this is a totally fair evaluation!

[@GizzyDillespee]

I suppose if you're recording lounge exotica, who needs a kick drum when you've got floor toms, and maybe even congas or a djembe? Or maybe they are the kind of metal band who replaces their kicks with filtered samples of a machine gun. I've met people who did the most amazing mixes on ridiculous speakers or a pair of Beats or whatever. Everybody knows a situation like that, so that's probably why the hot take got so many votes. The question is, were they mixing raw instrumental tracks, or production-ready loops that already were EQ'd to fit together.

[@ESanEN-music]

Highest track count: 109. Is that too much??

[@AdamSliger]

Nope!

[@kassemir]

I mean, I know there's people who have recorded drums where they have had the kick drum on a stand, and some one is hitting it by hand with a mallot similar to the one on a kick pedal. So, like, it's not impossible. Though, for this example it's probably just a drummer with poor kick pedal technique too emberassed to admit it.

[@jaceychan7099]

No kick drum? All it takes is one song to break through and all the copy cats and band wagon jumpers will come out of the woodwork they might be on to something weather I like it or not

[@tiagowoodyard]

heroes by david bowie has like no kick drum in the final mix.

[@laserfloyd]

It's there, but it is low and subtle. If the kick were removed from the song, I'd wager it would sound off or strange.

[@tiagowoodyard]

@@laserfloyd yeah, they did record the kick, Visconti (who the song is partially about) decided that the kick should be barely audible.

[@elbeethrie5140]

@@tiagowoodyard oh yea, its definitely there chillin in the cut.

[@sickmessiah]

I always end up with more than 40 tracks .. LOL .. If you include bus's 100 to 150 is my typical range when done .

[@nelejanbbi4616]

mixing is just fancy arranging

[@satch72]

On the speaker thing, I mean you CAN mix on anything, and probably get a decent sound. But it's not ideal for sure

[@AdamSliger]

Yeah lol can and should are not the same thing

[@Machivode]

@@AdamSliger many people can't get good spaces and speakers so i believe can you can get used to what 'flat' is relative to your space if you stick with it and test mixes in your car and other places its harder but i do think it can work. gear gating BAD!

[@AdamSliger]

I’m not saying you can’t do a good mix with affordable stuff, but ANY speaker is wild

[@rome8180]

Imo, familiarity is the only thing that matters. And in ways, it's actually easier to mix on worse speakers. That's the whole theory behind NS10s and Mix Cubes. And a lot of people are mixing on AirPods for the same reason. By removing all the extended low end and/or detailed highs, it allows you to really focus on the midrange, which is the most important element to having your mixes translate.

[@AdamSliger]

I would say familiarity is second, first would be accuracy! When I got my room treated properly (not this one I film in, my actual control room) it changed my view on this a lot. But you can still do really well with familiar speakers in a room you’re used to, it’s just easier when the accuracy is dialed in.

[@damianoakes2592]

The mono thing is interesting because I think there are advantages to mono: it translates better to a lot of different speakers, it's good for sparse arrangements, it has an overall thicker sound, and most crucially, I think you can get away with some effects in mono that you can't in stereo, which can give you more room to experiment. For instance, you can't really bathe a track in reverb, a la Phil Spector, and still have it sound natural in stereo, but you can in mono. To me, the decision to do a song in mono instead of stereo is a little like shooting a movie in black & white instead of color; if it's right for the material, go against the standard.

[@greganikin7003]

Do u have time machine?

[@AdamSliger]

I'm not sure I've ever gone full mono other than for custom music that's meant to be played out of single speakers for events tbh. However I did have a client get their record mastered by someone really new once, and the guy accidentally sent back mono masters, which didn't get caught by the artist until it was already distributed lmao.

[@greganikin7003]

@@AdamSliger that is funny. probably track didn"t have much stereo things going on if client didn't notice it

[@niteshades_promise]

you couldn't pay me to use pro tools. mixcraft and reaper is all you need. 🍻

[@AdamSliger]

Pro Tools is definitely not for everyone!

[@poissonpuerile8897]

Is the hot take about microphones being interchangeable with the right EQ not at least _theoretically_ possible with the right impulse responses? An IR to convert the used mic to a flat frequency response and another to impart the characteristics of the desired mic on that should go a long way to achieving this, should it not? This could even overcome differences in axis, distance and other responses... in theory. Considering that IRs are used a ton now, is the recording standard of the future not destined to be recording with a flat measurement mic and then applying expensive mic-recreating IRs?

[@AdamSliger]

It’s complicated, but sorta yeah kinda? But also no. For example, if we use “off axis sound” as a parameter to discuss…the off axis “thing” and the on axis “thing” aren’t captured as two different things. You just get the one audio file. So it’s not like you can have an IR make the off axis sound “uniform” for lack of a better word. Mic emulations are pretty good right now tbh but there’s so much more going on there than just EQ. I think transient response is the hardest thing to “fake” and you can’t make it faster because you can’t edit something that simply isn’t there. If your measure of how a mic sounds is just its EQ profile then yeah you can do a lot with that, but there’s just so much more to it.

[@poissonpuerile8897]

@@AdamSliger Interesting response, thanks! I should think that the transient issue could be resolved by using a calibration mic that is highly sensitive to them (which I believe to be the case already). Then, an IR could easily shape them into an SM57, a U87, or whatever your taste and budget desire. That said, I suspect there _are_ characteristics that don't lend themselves to modeling. But then again, in a world where most people listen to digitally compressed music on bloody _earbuds_ (and mostly crap ones, at that), would anyone but sound engineers and the more discerning musicians even notice?

[@AdamSliger]

@@poissonpuerile8897 no prob - I think it's theoretically doable but a mic that has the detail of a U87, the fastest transient response possible, etc and so on, then it would cost an absolute ton to manufacture. At a certain point it would be easier to just use the mic you want, or something close enough. I have a pair of the Slate VMS and they do a really good job of getting the vibe of the mics they model, anything beyond that and I think we're chasing something that's not really worth chasing, because of the exact thing you said at the end haha.

[@Hectagonist]

Like Adam mentioned, the big one is off-axis response which is impossible to replicate. The physical size of the capsule is the determining factor. Small diaphragms have less diffraction and phase cancellations in high frequencies which gives them their smooth off-axis response. Large diaphragms can create interference patterns, making the off-axis high end uneven and can create a beaming or narrowing of the polar pattern for higher frequencies. Since the mic just sums all of this together, there's no way to replicate it. This is also probably why UA has released multiple modeling mics of different sizes.

[@AdamSliger]

Slate did too for probably the same reason!

[@MihaiSorohan]

"In My Room" album by Jacob Collier was recorded with only ONE SM58. The whole album. Got 3 Grammy Awards on it. Just sayin'

[@AdamSliger]

I never said you can’t make good music with an SM58 in my life lol

[@Durkhead]

7:40 your ears will adjust it just takes a while

[@AdamSliger]

idk, when i got my room treated by a professional (not this room i film in, my actual control room) it took about 5 minutes to realize that the "adjusting" i was doing before wasn't as useful as i thought

[@Durkhead]

@AdamSliger did it help your mixes translate better though?

[@AdamSliger]

Immediately yes