I have to say I wish more people thought like Ken Rockwell, and I agree with his philosophies completely. To draw a musical analogy (which Rockwell himself does), I'm a professional live sound engineer and bassist. Why is it I can mix a concert on a ?2000 Allen And Heath mixing desk and get results many can't get from a ?60,000 Midas Heritage 3000? Simple... Technique, knowledge, experience and a very in depth understanding of what I'm actually there to do, which is put across the emotion and meaning of what the band are playing to the audience, and any mixing desk I will ever use has the ability to allow me to do just that.
When I use those ?60,000 Midas desks, things just get a little easier. I have VCA's instead of subgroups, I can get tighter into something on the channel EQ and tell it exactly what I want it to do instead of getting a rough approximation (which still works) on a fixed width band of EQ. I can get a little more clean headroom when I'm driving hard, but essentially I can do exactly the same things. The reason I can do that is simply that I've put enough time into what I do to be able to actually do it and I don?t see equipment as being something that should limit me. If I?m using something that?s a little harder to get good results out of, I?ll simply work a little harder but I?ll still get the results I?m after.
Why is it when a beginner bassist (or someone who simply has no natural musical ability) picks up my nice ?1349 G&L L2500 5 string bass it generally sounds terrible and all the beautiful tonal aspects of having a great instrument are lost, yet an experienced, expressive and soulful musician who's spent thousands of hours working on technique and saying what he's feeling through playing can pick up a crappy, second hand Squire P.Bass with a warped neck and play something that has the ability to move people to tears?
Ken Rockwell... I'm with you 100%. It's the photographer/musician/human being who makes the difference.
Seven Levels of Photography
in Leica and Rangefinders
Posted
I have to say I wish more people thought like Ken Rockwell, and I agree with his philosophies completely. To draw a musical analogy (which Rockwell himself does), I'm a professional live sound engineer and bassist. Why is it I can mix a concert on a ?2000 Allen And Heath mixing desk and get results many can't get from a ?60,000 Midas Heritage 3000? Simple... Technique, knowledge, experience and a very in depth understanding of what I'm actually there to do, which is put across the emotion and meaning of what the band are playing to the audience, and any mixing desk I will ever use has the ability to allow me to do just that.
When I use those ?60,000 Midas desks, things just get a little easier. I have VCA's instead of subgroups, I can get tighter into something on the channel EQ and tell it exactly what I want it to do instead of getting a rough approximation (which still works) on a fixed width band of EQ. I can get a little more clean headroom when I'm driving hard, but essentially I can do exactly the same things. The reason I can do that is simply that I've put enough time into what I do to be able to actually do it and I don?t see equipment as being something that should limit me. If I?m using something that?s a little harder to get good results out of, I?ll simply work a little harder but I?ll still get the results I?m after.
Why is it when a beginner bassist (or someone who simply has no natural musical ability) picks up my nice ?1349 G&L L2500 5 string bass it generally sounds terrible and all the beautiful tonal aspects of having a great instrument are lost, yet an experienced, expressive and soulful musician who's spent thousands of hours working on technique and saying what he's feeling through playing can pick up a crappy, second hand Squire P.Bass with a warped neck and play something that has the ability to move people to tears?
Ken Rockwell... I'm with you 100%. It's the photographer/musician/human being who makes the difference.
Paul