You don't need a PhD or even a BS in the Recording Indsutry (that's what I have) to realize this guy is stating the obvious. Many many people have said the same thing for the past few years.
How many people have a survival manual within arm's reach of them? Do you happen to be wearing tinfoil on your head too?
lol
Actually, to be completely honest, I do have a copy of the Boy Scout field book http://www.bsafieldbook.org/ on my shelf here in my home office. As an Eagle Scout I tend to use it for reference every once in a while.
A friend of mine took his girlfriend to the Virgin Islands and surrounding area (he worked for the airlines). They were walking down the beach and he went to go sit on a rock and apparently got stuck by a sea urchin in his butt.
He said he was in such pain he couldn't move. He knew that amonia would help relieve the pain so he begged and begged and begged his girlfriend to pee on his butt. She eventually did and he said it was an instant relief.
Similar to smell/taste, not everything can be completely quantified. Or perhaps we just havent understood how it works or have the current technology to replicate it.
I am an audio engineer, and yes our ears can only hear from 20Hz to 20kHz, when you put a brickwall filter at 20kHz and above, there are a lot of people in double-blind tests that tend to sense that "it doesn't sound right".
We can't explain it other than to say there are things about our senses we just dont currently understand yet.
I am an audio engineer and have a (4 year BS) degree in recording.
In college I specifically took a class about high-end audio. It was divided into critical listening and "audiophile" topics.
Essentially there are some differences in technology. ICs DO indeed sound more harsh and shrill than tubes which of course sound warmer but not as "bright". Also the quality of the internal components have an effect as well. This of course is in terms of an analog signal. Once a signal becomes "digital" then unless bits are lost, the components don't really effect the quality of the sound (assuming the D/A converters are not hosed).
CDs of course sound different than audio. This is primarily due to quantization error in the sampling process. Essentially they are only 16 bits which means 96 (or 98) dB of dynamic range. But there is also some distortion that happens which isn't directly audiable, but we do tend to "precieve" or "sense" it anyway. This of course assumes we are listening critically at it.
When CDs originally came out, they were still being mastered with the same technique as vinyl. Vinyl has the RIAA curve applied to it in order to save physical space on the platter and then the curve is de-applied upon playback with an RIAA approved device. Well, CD players don't have that reverse RIAA curve, so a lot of these first CDs sounded like ass because all of their low end was nixed. That tended to give a very very bad taste in the mouths of audiophiles.
I don't buy into the $500 cable thing, but it can be proven that you get what you pay for. If you use a $20 cable from radio shack it might not be as high as quality as a $40 or $70 cable. I have personally never heard the difference between a "professional" cable and an "audiophile" cable but I know people who swear by that stuff. The only thing I can chalk it up to is that maybe we don't fully understand how we precieve or sense audio and sound.
The book was half and half - half was a bunch of audiophile garbage, and the other half was fact and the science and technology of audio. A good read if you want to learn more about sound and modern audio technology.
'Freefall' by Hoffer is an awesome book which is actually non-fiction but reads like a novel.
It details the events leading up to, and covering a Canada Air Boeing 767 that ran out of fuel in mid-flight. But it wasn't all drama - he went into GREAT detail about how the internal systems of the plane are tied together. Describing everything from the fuel quantity processors, to the electrical distribution systems, to the metric conversion at the time, to the multitude of human errors that caused the incident.
My statements were not absolute and my comparison to the inventors was an analogy.
Yes - there are several artists as well as inventors that actually manage their own businesses. The ones that do are usually very successful.
However, I know a lot of artists, large national acts, medium regional acts, and smaller local acts and most of them do not have the capacity, the knowledge, and/or the desire to carry out all functions of a record label. Also if you study the industry, you will see that this is the majority, not the minority.
Just to give some background on myself - I am an audio engineer, live in Nashville, and have a BS in the study of the Industry. I have a fair understanding of how it works. Not to say that we shouldn't be looking to improve models (I could write an entire book about that - as well as many/.ers) but we some things are simply not feasible.
I was one of those people who was fortunate to have business skills and understand how money works prior to the age of 18.
Honestly I don't know the history about Marley, however I would venture to say that if he hadn't allowed the record label to exploit his masters, then his music probably wouldn't have ever left the Carribbean and wouldn't remained largely unknown. Not to say he didn't get screwed in the deal, but usually a single person cannot carry out all of the functions of a record label, AND still produce enough art to sustain themselevs.
Again to reiterate my initial point, I didn't say "can't" and "all" but I said "most" and "usually don't". It's just the way the world works.
I think you are confused on a couple of things and the Industry is slightly more complicated than you probably think.
First off, most studios are just that; studios. They only do the recording, mixing, editing, mastering etc and usually have no affiliation with the record labels. The record labels are the people who are memebrs of the RIAA and front all of the money, market the recordings etc.
Also publishers hold the copyrights to the lyrics and composition while the record labels usually hold the phonorecord copyright. Pubs and labels are definately two different entities. A pub's job is to exploit songs and get them in the hands of the labels to record the songs. And the labels job is to exploit masters.
Hope this makes sense. If you have more questions about the industry feel free to ask. I have a degree in it and live/work in Nashville.
An individual singer/songwriter usually does not have the business skills, capital, resources, networking contacts etc to promote their own material. They are the creative element of the mix. Most of the time they need a business element in order to market, exploit, and further the artistic element.
Since most singer/songwriters do not know much about business, or they are not able to conduct the business themselves, they have to partner with someone who does. This partnership results in the limited transfer of the right to copy and exploit the person's creative works.
Think of it this way - how many inventors would want to actually manage their own companies? Most would not. Most would want someone else to handle the business, the accounting, the marketing, the selling, the taxes, etc so that the inventor themself could focus on the actual productivity and creative side of things: the inventing itself.
That analogy is very similar to the typical situation a singer/songwriter is faced with. Focus on the art, let someone else sell it.
- Many if not most of todays record companies started out selling technology not music.
- Records were produced to sell record players.
- Control of patent rights were more important than control of copyrights.
Predevelopment 1857 - Leon Scott de Martinville designs a device that records sound wave shapes phonoautograph 1863 - F B Fenby designs a system that uses paper tape to record and play back piano music player piano the 1st binary recording system. 1877 Edison invents the phonograph and records Mary Had A Little Lamb. Edisons device used a tin foil covered cylinder. The stylus cut a hill and dale groove.
1887 Emile Berliner, inventor of the microphone patents flat disc records 1888 Wax cylinders replace tinfoil. 1890 Dictating sales slow. Glass puts a machine in a saloon charges a nickel a play. First entertainment cylinders. 1894 First home cylinder players. 1897 Berliners flat 78 rpm records louder and easier to mass produce. Made of shellac. 1901 Berliner & Johnson form Victor Talking Machine Co. 1902 Johnson designs tone arm. 1906 Johnson introduces the Victrola hidden horn unit increasing the ASF. 1912 Cylinders decline. 1919 Work begins on developing an electrical recording chain. 1924 The electrical recording system introduced. 1925 Radio begins to cut into record sales. 1926 First home electrical player introduced 1929 Stock market crash and free radio kills record industry. 1931 RCA-Victor release 33 1/3 rpm long play record. Format fails. 1933 Record sales hit bottom 1934 First radio/phono combination. 1936 Juke boxes help industry recover 1946 Peter Goldmark & William Bachman of CBS begin the develop of microgroove & vinyl records. 1947 High fidelity magnet recording 1948 Columbia introduces the 12 inch, 33 1/3 vinyl record. 1949 RCA introduces the 7 inch, 45 rpm record. 1950 Sales of 78 rpms decline. 1952 RIAA formed. 1954 Compact Cassette introduced by Phillips 1958 First stereo records released. 1961 Stereo FM radio starts 1971 Quad SQ disc by Sony/CBS 1972 Quad discrete by by RCA 1977 Direct to disc revived. 1978 Record sale peak then decline. 1982 Tape sale top record sales. 1983 Compact Disc introduced. Record sales plummet.
It is interesting to note that a lot of our tape and magnetic storage technology came from the Germans after their fall in WW2. Those German engineers were damn good!
Westrex 45/45 stereo system - Left channel modulates inner groove. - Right channel modulates outer groove. - A mono signal causes lateral only movement - An out of phase mono signal causes vertical movement.
There are 86 square inches of surface on which to cut. - More Time = More Space - More Level = More Space - More Bass = More Space
Space is measured in lines per inch (lpi). This is called the pitch of the lathe. - This is the number of grooves (lines) per inch of radius. - More Time requires higher lpi - More Level requires lower lpi - More Bass requires lower lower lpi
Pitch = (Run Time x 33.3 rpm)/Radius (3 inches) - Max Pitch about 300 lpi - Minimum groove width is 1 mil. - Maximum groove width is 6 mils. - Average groove width is 2.5 mils. Gw = [(1000/lpi) + 1] / 2
An increase in lpi should be accompanies by a decrease in depth. An increase in depth should be accompanies by a decrease in lpi.
Pitch and depth (groove width) are controlled by a cutting computer. The pitch must be changed before the loud parts to prevent over cut. A one half revolution delay is required for the preview channel.
The variable pitch control receives right channel information from the preview system so that the pitch can be increased before loud signals that might cut into the previous groove. Left channel information comes from the program system. A difference signal from the preview system is also sometimes provided.
RIAA Curve 1953 RIAA instituted an EQ curve that narrowed the grooves and improved play time. Boost high freq. 17 dB at 15 kHz and cut the low freq. 17 dB at 50 Hz. - RIAA pre emphases is automatically added. - Post emphases is done at the phono pre amp.
- Inner groove distortion causes high frequency loss (scanning loss). - A compensation system was tried but mostly abandoned. - Avoid putting bright (sibilant) cuts in this area.
- A low frequency crossover is almost always used to prevent lift out. - The effect is to move low frequency signals into the center. - The frequency below which this happens is variable.
- Cutting head is a moving coil device powered by Cutting Amps. - Cutting stylus is a heated sapphire - The cut produces a chip that is vacuumed up for safety. - The Master Lacquer is an aluminum disc covered in lacquer cellulose nitrate.
The cutting console has four channels of everything 2 preview, 2 program. All controls are stepped for resetting purposes. A reference lacquer may be cut to test settings. A Master Lacquer may not be played. An Eqed Master tape was made for other Mastering Labs.
An individual singer/songwriter usually does not have the business skills, capital, resources, networking contacts etc to promote their own material. They are the creative element of the mix. Most of the time they need a business element in order to market, exploit, and further the artistic element.
Since most singer/songwriters do not know much about business, or they are not able to conduct the business themselves, they have to partner with someone who does. This partnership results in the limited transfer of the right to copy and exploit the person's creative works.
Think of it this way - how many inventors would want to actually manage their own companies? Most would not. Most would want someone else to handle the business, the accounting, the marketing, the selling, the taxes, etc so that the inventor themself could focus on the actual productivity and creative side of things: the inventing itself.
That analogy is very similar to the typical situation a singer/songwriter is faced with. Focus on the art, let someone else sell it.
First off... the sales guys are usually comission which means the harder they work, the more they make. That is not the way it is with most jobs.
Secondly, marketing actually increases revenue, so again there is a need to "reward" the marketing department for helping to increase revenue, market share, etc.
Pure and simple IT is a utility to a company which does the dirty work, and although essential, is not involved in the growth of the company directly.
If you want to make more money, I suggest you go into sales, or start your own business. Other than being a high paid professional, doctor, attorney, etc, it is really the only way to build wealth in the US.
I live in Nashville, I'm an audio engineer, and have a degree in the recording industry. I know many music industry attorneys and I've seen and read many large artist-label contracts.
Generally, all contracts for the last 5-7 years have a digitial distribution clause in it. For those that were written prior to the "digital age", most of them have a clause which says something to the effect of "this agreement covers future and unnamed methods of distribution, including media, broadcast, methods of transmission, and any other unforseeable future technologies".
That pretty much circumvents that. The RIAA may not be the sharpest tools in the shed, but they are not complete idiots either.
I remember reading an article in Wired last year about a company integrating GPS units into digital cameras. The Lat/Lon would be included into the metadata/timestamp of the image.
Think of the possibilities of this... Timestamps combined with location would make sorting thousands or even hundreds of thousands of pictures MUCH eaiser!!! Perhaps an onboard compass included would give a bearing as to which way the camera was pointing.
Does anyone else have any information about this sort of thing?
Each PRO has their own way of determining how royalties are paid. I think they come up with formulas and algorithms to determine the "weight" of each song in their catalog and then pay based off of that. Again this is only for live performances - broadcast plays are distinctly tracked.
Well.... If you have "Metallica-Lite" and they play live in a bar, then the bar owner is responsible for obtaining the licenses from the Performing Rights Orgs ASCAP or BMI or SESAC. The PROs then pay Metallica a few cents for that.
Instead of tracking nickels and dimes, the PROs generally issue blanket licenses for venues which covers a given amount of audience members for a given amount of time. For example, your local stadium might have a license from ASCAP, BMI, and SESAC which says they can play any music from their catalogs in front of 7 million people for the next 365 days. Your local bar might have a blanket license from these groups that says they can play anything from their catalogs to 75,000 people over the next 365 days.
Every venue that plays music has these blanket licenses - universities, resturaunts, clubs, (theaters - both grand and film are excluded), coffee shops, department stores, etc etc. And these PROs even have secret agents that go around to these venues and write down what they hear over a few hours and then check to see their blanket license is current. If it isn't they had better pay their license plus a fee or they get sued in court.
I can't call you a dumbass (or anyone else for that reason) for not understanding this because it is not a clear issue. Anytime you have attorneys and accountants involved epsecially in creating legislation, things tend to get complicated and illogical quickly. Hell, I have a degree in this stuff and I often times get confused and have to consult some of my textbooks.
Actually in the US once a song has been recorded, then mechanical licenses are compulsory as long as you pay the statutory rate.
For example.... Usher writes a song. No one can use that song without Usher's permission. Well once Usher, or anyone else, actually records that song into a sound recording, anyone can record that song in their own way (without changing up the song) as long as they pay the compulsory license fee of $.08/copy of that song.
If that song sits on the shelf and doesn't get recorded, then the copyright holder does not have to grant a mechanical license to record. But again, once the copyright holder grants a mechanical license to ANYONE (himself included) he has to approve a mechanical license to anyone who wants it. This is why sometimes you will see people call themselves a songwriter vs a recording artist/performer. There is a distinct and legal difference between the two.
Well... I wouldn't call it piracy... It would really be more of an infringment in its purest form.
Also, recording a song someone else has written is not called a cover - its called a mechanical reproduction. This is handled through the Harry Fox Agency with the pubs and the original author.
Performing a song someone else has written in public as a live performance is called a cover. Those rights are handled by either ASCAP, BMI, or SESAC.
Slashdot Mirror
You don't need a PhD or even a BS in the Recording Indsutry (that's what I have) to realize this guy is stating the obvious. Many many people have said the same thing for the past few years.
How many people have a survival manual within arm's reach of them? Do you happen to be wearing tinfoil on your head too?
lol
Actually, to be completely honest, I do have a copy of the Boy Scout field book http://www.bsafieldbook.org/ on my shelf here in my home office. As an Eagle Scout I tend to use it for reference every once in a while.
A friend of mine took his girlfriend to the Virgin Islands and surrounding area (he worked for the airlines). They were walking down the beach and he went to go sit on a rock and apparently got stuck by a sea urchin in his butt.
He said he was in such pain he couldn't move. He knew that amonia would help relieve the pain so he begged and begged and begged his girlfriend to pee on his butt. She eventually did and he said it was an instant relief.
Kinda kinky, eh? ha ha ha
Similar to smell/taste, not everything can be completely quantified. Or perhaps we just havent understood how it works or have the current technology to replicate it.
I am an audio engineer, and yes our ears can only hear from 20Hz to 20kHz, when you put a brickwall filter at 20kHz and above, there are a lot of people in double-blind tests that tend to sense that "it doesn't sound right".
We can't explain it other than to say there are things about our senses we just dont currently understand yet.
Look up the Haas Effect.
In order to "fool" our ears things have to be under 30ms. We can "fool" our eyes at 41ms (1 sec divided by film - 24fps).
This means our ears are a lot more preceptive than our eyes are.
Gold does tend to conduct well, but the main reason they use it because it doesn't really oxidize.
I am an audio engineer and have a (4 year BS) degree in recording.
0 81894-1600862?v=glance&n=283155&n=507846&s=books&v =glance
In college I specifically took a class about high-end audio. It was divided into critical listening and "audiophile" topics.
Essentially there are some differences in technology. ICs DO indeed sound more harsh and shrill than tubes which of course sound warmer but not as "bright". Also the quality of the internal components have an effect as well. This of course is in terms of an analog signal. Once a signal becomes "digital" then unless bits are lost, the components don't really effect the quality of the sound (assuming the D/A converters are not hosed).
CDs of course sound different than audio. This is primarily due to quantization error in the sampling process. Essentially they are only 16 bits which means 96 (or 98) dB of dynamic range. But there is also some distortion that happens which isn't directly audiable, but we do tend to "precieve" or "sense" it anyway. This of course assumes we are listening critically at it.
When CDs originally came out, they were still being mastered with the same technique as vinyl. Vinyl has the RIAA curve applied to it in order to save physical space on the platter and then the curve is de-applied upon playback with an RIAA approved device. Well, CD players don't have that reverse RIAA curve, so a lot of these first CDs sounded like ass because all of their low end was nixed. That tended to give a very very bad taste in the mouths of audiophiles.
I don't buy into the $500 cable thing, but it can be proven that you get what you pay for. If you use a $20 cable from radio shack it might not be as high as quality as a $40 or $70 cable. I have personally never heard the difference between a "professional" cable and an "audiophile" cable but I know people who swear by that stuff. The only thing I can chalk it up to is that maybe we don't fully understand how we precieve or sense audio and sound.
BTW, the book which was our "textbook" for that class at http://www.mtsu.edu/~record/ was The Complete Guide to High-End Audio:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0964084961/002-7
The book was half and half - half was a bunch of audiophile garbage, and the other half was fact and the science and technology of audio. A good read if you want to learn more about sound and modern audio technology.
Which post house?
'Freefall' by Hoffer is an awesome book which is actually non-fiction but reads like a novel.
6 39831-6353510?v=glance&n=283155&s=books&v=glance
It details the events leading up to, and covering a Canada Air Boeing 767 that ran out of fuel in mid-flight. But it wasn't all drama - he went into GREAT detail about how the internal systems of the plane are tied together. Describing everything from the fuel quantity processors, to the electrical distribution systems, to the metric conversion at the time, to the multitude of human errors that caused the incident.
A MUST read for ANY and ALL ENGINEERS!!!
Check it out here:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0312922744/104-3
My statements were not absolute and my comparison to the inventors was an analogy.
/.ers) but we some things are simply not feasible.
Yes - there are several artists as well as inventors that actually manage their own businesses. The ones that do are usually very successful.
However, I know a lot of artists, large national acts, medium regional acts, and smaller local acts and most of them do not have the capacity, the knowledge, and/or the desire to carry out all functions of a record label. Also if you study the industry, you will see that this is the majority, not the minority.
Just to give some background on myself - I am an audio engineer, live in Nashville, and have a BS in the study of the Industry. I have a fair understanding of how it works. Not to say that we shouldn't be looking to improve models (I could write an entire book about that - as well as many
I was one of those people who was fortunate to have business skills and understand how money works prior to the age of 18.
Honestly I don't know the history about Marley, however I would venture to say that if he hadn't allowed the record label to exploit his masters, then his music probably wouldn't have ever left the Carribbean and wouldn't remained largely unknown. Not to say he didn't get screwed in the deal, but usually a single person cannot carry out all of the functions of a record label, AND still produce enough art to sustain themselevs.
Again to reiterate my initial point, I didn't say "can't" and "all" but I said "most" and "usually don't". It's just the way the world works.
I think you are confused on a couple of things and the Industry is slightly more complicated than you probably think.
First off, most studios are just that; studios. They only do the recording, mixing, editing, mastering etc and usually have no affiliation with the record labels. The record labels are the people who are memebrs of the RIAA and front all of the money, market the recordings etc.
Also publishers hold the copyrights to the lyrics and composition while the record labels usually hold the phonorecord copyright. Pubs and labels are definately two different entities. A pub's job is to exploit songs and get them in the hands of the labels to record the songs. And the labels job is to exploit masters.
Hope this makes sense. If you have more questions about the industry feel free to ask. I have a degree in it and live/work in Nashville.
An individual singer/songwriter usually does not have the business skills, capital, resources, networking contacts etc to promote their own material. They are the creative element of the mix. Most of the time they need a business element in order to market, exploit, and further the artistic element.
Since most singer/songwriters do not know much about business, or they are not able to conduct the business themselves, they have to partner with someone who does. This partnership results in the limited transfer of the right to copy and exploit the person's creative works.
Think of it this way - how many inventors would want to actually manage their own companies? Most would not. Most would want someone else to handle the business, the accounting, the marketing, the selling, the taxes, etc so that the inventor themself could focus on the actual productivity and creative side of things: the inventing itself.
That analogy is very similar to the typical situation a singer/songwriter is faced with. Focus on the art, let someone else sell it.
Ive been working with audio since I was 12; it is second nature to me.
My degree is in audio engineering and thus had some very basic courses to take.
Well, I would play Super Mario, Tetris, and a few others on my TI-86.
No sound, no one else could see the screen, no distraction.
One day my prof walked up to me in the hall and asked me not to come back to class "if I was just going to sit there with my head down".
Later on I figured out the guy was bi-polar and has serious emotional issues.
- Many if not most of todays record companies started out selling technology not music.
- Records were produced to sell record players.
- Control of patent rights were more important than control of copyrights.
Predevelopment
1857 - Leon Scott de Martinville designs a device that records sound wave shapes phonoautograph
1863 - F B Fenby designs a system that uses paper tape to record and play back piano music player piano the 1st binary recording system.
1877 Edison invents the phonograph and records Mary Had A Little Lamb.
Edisons device used a tin foil covered cylinder. The stylus cut a hill and dale groove.
http://ultrasonicdesigns.com/audio/vinyl/1.JPG
http://ultrasonicdesigns.com/audio/vinyl/2.JPG
http://ultrasonicdesigns.com/audio/vinyl/3.JPG
1887 Emile Berliner, inventor of the microphone patents flat disc records
1888 Wax cylinders replace tinfoil.
1890 Dictating sales slow. Glass puts a machine in a saloon charges a nickel a play. First entertainment cylinders.
1894 First home cylinder players.
1897 Berliners flat 78 rpm records louder and easier to mass produce. Made of shellac.
1901 Berliner & Johnson form Victor Talking Machine Co.
1902 Johnson designs tone arm.
1906 Johnson introduces the Victrola hidden horn unit increasing the ASF.
1912 Cylinders decline.
1919 Work begins on developing an electrical recording chain.
1924 The electrical recording system introduced.
1925 Radio begins to cut into record sales.
1926 First home electrical player introduced
1929 Stock market crash and free radio kills record industry.
1931 RCA-Victor release 33 1/3 rpm long play record. Format fails.
1933 Record sales hit bottom
1934 First radio/phono combination.
1936 Juke boxes help industry recover
1946 Peter Goldmark & William Bachman of CBS begin the develop of microgroove & vinyl records.
1947 High fidelity magnet recording
1948 Columbia introduces the 12 inch, 33 1/3 vinyl record.
1949 RCA introduces the 7 inch, 45 rpm record.
1950 Sales of 78 rpms decline.
1952 RIAA formed.
1954 Compact Cassette introduced by Phillips
1958 First stereo records released.
1961 Stereo FM radio starts
1971 Quad SQ disc by Sony/CBS
1972 Quad discrete by by RCA
1977 Direct to disc revived.
1978 Record sale peak then decline.
1982 Tape sale top record sales.
1983 Compact Disc introduced. Record sales plummet.
It is interesting to note that a lot of our tape and magnetic storage technology came from the Germans after their fall in WW2. Those German engineers were damn good!
Here is some information about Vinyl:
Westrex 45/45 stereo system - Left channel modulates inner groove. - Right channel modulates outer groove. - A mono signal causes lateral only movement
- An out of phase mono signal causes vertical movement.
http://ultrasonicdesigns.com/audio/vinyl/4.JPG
There are 86 square inches of surface on which to cut.
- More Time = More Space
- More Level = More Space
- More Bass = More Space
Space is measured in lines per inch (lpi). This is called the pitch of the lathe.
- This is the number of grooves (lines) per inch of radius. - More Time requires higher lpi - More Level requires lower lpi - More Bass requires lower lower lpi
Pitch = (Run Time x 33.3 rpm)/Radius (3 inches)
- Max Pitch about 300 lpi - Minimum groove width is 1 mil. - Maximum groove width is 6 mils. - Average groove width is 2.5 mils. Gw = [(1000/lpi) + 1] / 2
An increase in lpi should be accompanies by a decrease in depth. An increase in depth should be accompanies by a decrease in lpi.
Pitch and depth (groove width) are controlled by a cutting computer. The pitch must be changed before the loud parts to prevent over cut. A one half revolution delay is required for the preview channel.
The variable pitch control receives right channel information from the preview system so that the pitch can be increased before loud signals that might cut into the previous groove. Left channel information comes from the program system. A difference signal from the preview system is also sometimes provided.
http://ultrasonicdesigns.com/audio/vinyl/5.JPG
The variable depth control receives the difference (left minus right) signal from the preview system.
http://ultrasonicdesigns.com/audio/vinyl/6.JPG
RIAA Curve
1953 RIAA instituted an EQ curve that narrowed the grooves and improved play time.
Boost high freq. 17 dB at 15 kHz and cut the low freq. 17 dB at 50 Hz.
- RIAA pre emphases is automatically added.
- Post emphases is done at the phono pre amp.
- Inner groove distortion causes high frequency loss (scanning loss).
- A compensation system was tried but mostly abandoned.
- Avoid putting bright (sibilant) cuts in this area.
- A low frequency crossover is almost always used to prevent lift out.
- The effect is to move low frequency signals into the center.
- The frequency below which this happens is variable.
- Cutting head is a moving coil device powered by Cutting Amps.
- Cutting stylus is a heated sapphire
- The cut produces a chip that is vacuumed up for safety.
- The Master Lacquer is an aluminum disc covered in lacquer cellulose nitrate.
The cutting console has four channels of everything 2 preview, 2 program. All controls are stepped for resetting purposes. A reference lacquer may be cut to test settings. A Master Lacquer may not be
played. An Eqed Master tape was made for other Mastering Labs.
http://ultrasonicdesigns.com/audio/vinyl/7.JPG
http://ultrasonicdesigns.com/audio/vinyl/8.JPG
http://ultrasonicdesigns.com/audio/vinyl/9.JPG
http://ultrasonicdesigns.com/audio/vinyl/010.JPG
http://ultrasonicdesigns.com/audio/vinyl/011.JPG
I am big into Christian music and work in the industry every once in a while.
Check out my website and zip me an e-mail:
http://www.ultrasonicdesigns.com/
Well... it is real simple.
An individual singer/songwriter usually does not have the business skills, capital, resources, networking contacts etc to promote their own material. They are the creative element of the mix. Most of the time they need a business element in order to market, exploit, and further the artistic element.
Since most singer/songwriters do not know much about business, or they are not able to conduct the business themselves, they have to partner with someone who does. This partnership results in the limited transfer of the right to copy and exploit the person's creative works.
Think of it this way - how many inventors would want to actually manage their own companies? Most would not. Most would want someone else to handle the business, the accounting, the marketing, the selling, the taxes, etc so that the inventor themself could focus on the actual productivity and creative side of things: the inventing itself.
That analogy is very similar to the typical situation a singer/songwriter is faced with. Focus on the art, let someone else sell it.
First off... the sales guys are usually comission which means the harder they work, the more they make. That is not the way it is with most jobs.
Secondly, marketing actually increases revenue, so again there is a need to "reward" the marketing department for helping to increase revenue, market share, etc.
Pure and simple IT is a utility to a company which does the dirty work, and although essential, is not involved in the growth of the company directly.
If you want to make more money, I suggest you go into sales, or start your own business. Other than being a high paid professional, doctor, attorney, etc, it is really the only way to build wealth in the US.
I live in Nashville, I'm an audio engineer, and have a degree in the recording industry. I know many music industry attorneys and I've seen and read many large artist-label contracts.
Generally, all contracts for the last 5-7 years have a digitial distribution clause in it. For those that were written prior to the "digital age", most of them have a clause which says something to the effect of "this agreement covers future and unnamed methods of distribution, including media, broadcast, methods of transmission, and any other unforseeable future technologies".
That pretty much circumvents that. The RIAA may not be the sharpest tools in the shed, but they are not complete idiots either.
You do realize that more than 1 million people fly in the US every day right?
Having a 1 in 1 million rate on this thing would not be acceptable IMO.
I remember reading an article in Wired last year about a company integrating GPS units into digital cameras. The Lat/Lon would be included into the metadata/timestamp of the image.
Think of the possibilities of this... Timestamps combined with location would make sorting thousands or even hundreds of thousands of pictures MUCH eaiser!!! Perhaps an onboard compass included would give a bearing as to which way the camera was pointing.
Does anyone else have any information about this sort of thing?
Each PRO has their own way of determining how royalties are paid. I think they come up with formulas and algorithms to determine the "weight" of each song in their catalog and then pay based off of that. Again this is only for live performances - broadcast plays are distinctly tracked.
You can probably investigate more of the specifics on their websites here:
http://www.bmi.com/licensing/
http://www.ascap.com/about/
http://sesac.com/licensing/learn_more.html
Well.... If you have "Metallica-Lite" and they play live in a bar, then the bar owner is responsible for obtaining the licenses from the Performing Rights Orgs ASCAP or BMI or SESAC. The PROs then pay Metallica a few cents for that.
Instead of tracking nickels and dimes, the PROs generally issue blanket licenses for venues which covers a given amount of audience members for a given amount of time. For example, your local stadium might have a license from ASCAP, BMI, and SESAC which says they can play any music from their catalogs in front of 7 million people for the next 365 days. Your local bar might have a blanket license from these groups that says they can play anything from their catalogs to 75,000 people over the next 365 days.
Every venue that plays music has these blanket licenses - universities, resturaunts, clubs, (theaters - both grand and film are excluded), coffee shops, department stores, etc etc. And these PROs even have secret agents that go around to these venues and write down what they hear over a few hours and then check to see their blanket license is current. If it isn't they had better pay their license plus a fee or they get sued in court.
I can't call you a dumbass (or anyone else for that reason) for not understanding this because it is not a clear issue. Anytime you have attorneys and accountants involved epsecially in creating legislation, things tend to get complicated and illogical quickly. Hell, I have a degree in this stuff and I often times get confused and have to consult some of my textbooks.
Actually in the US once a song has been recorded, then mechanical licenses are compulsory as long as you pay the statutory rate.
For example.... Usher writes a song. No one can use that song without Usher's permission. Well once Usher, or anyone else, actually records that song into a sound recording, anyone can record that song in their own way (without changing up the song) as long as they pay the compulsory license fee of $.08/copy of that song.
If that song sits on the shelf and doesn't get recorded, then the copyright holder does not have to grant a mechanical license to record. But again, once the copyright holder grants a mechanical license to ANYONE (himself included) he has to approve a mechanical license to anyone who wants it. This is why sometimes you will see people call themselves a songwriter vs a recording artist/performer. There is a distinct and legal difference between the two.
Well... I wouldn't call it piracy... It would really be more of an infringment in its purest form.
Also, recording a song someone else has written is not called a cover - its called a mechanical reproduction. This is handled through the Harry Fox Agency with the pubs and the original author.
Performing a song someone else has written in public as a live performance is called a cover. Those rights are handled by either ASCAP, BMI, or SESAC.