Is the moneyshot thread too inaccessible for new producers?

[ComfiStile]

I see your point, nobody should expect to walk into a library and be spoon fed the most important parts, but in the case of the MoneyShot thread, there's a hell of a lot of it has exactly zero educational value. In a way, books are already condensed into the important parts. You are not going to have to trawl through a lot of paragraphs of 'this is such a helpful thread!' and 'Big Ups!' and the occasional rambling of completely unrelated crap.

It is sad that the internet is turning the majority into lazy learners, but if we don't move with it we'll all end up bitter old fucks mumbling about how, in our day, the internet was good.

[deadly_habit]

well loads of useless posts and comments kind of go with the territory of a forum, it's not like a wiki page or formatted like a magazine article (plus it's usually relatively easy to spot those posts when just skimming and skip to the relevant ones)

[Jas0n]

I tend to think that even the useless comments have some worth. If half a dozen people quote something and say "that's brilliant, thanks for posting that" - I'll re-read it six times just 'cause I want to make sure I got the most out of what made lightbulbs click on for these other guys.

Additionally it's a forum, and therefore a resource only insofar as it's comprised of conversations - yes? If Macc wants to write a book (or a pamphlet) on production I'll buy a copy, but I see no reason to try to shoehorn his contributions (and of course those of other top teir producers) into a format that they didn't set out to be involved with.

I dunno fellas. I'm a noob, I'm not particularly creative, and I'll probably never really invent anything that's particularly listenable. But the science of production is fascinating as hell and I can say that while I may know some things I've learned elsewhere, everything I really UNDERSTAND has come from that thread or my own research into concepts introduced therein.

I think it's perfect the way it is. Just my worthless little two cents.

[ComfiStile]

I get what you are saying, I really do, but this is a sticky.

Anyhow, just my opinion, whatever happens it probably won't affect me much anyhow, already read the original thread, and it was pretty informative. That guy Macc knows his shit.

[deadly_habit]

i should hope so since he's a mastering engineer and has numerous killer releases of his own under his belt

[ComfiStile]

i should hope so since he's a mastering engineer and has numerous killer releases of his own under his belt

What name does he produce under? Would love to hear some of it

[deadly_habit]

macc
http://www.discogs.com/artist/Macc

[ComfiStile]

Cheers!

[3rdeye]

3rdeye - seeing as you're a teacher and all, would you be okay if I ran it past you for tone/content once I've got a rough draft?

Absolutely mate, happy to help if I can!

[cloak and dagger]

People seem to be confusing "taking the time to do your research" and "read through a 45-page thread mostly consisting of random comments that won't be helpful in the slightest." The book analogy isn't correct at all, as a book is written by a single author and has STRUCTURE, which that thread doesn't. A better analogy would be a book without paragraph breaks and reviews of the book making up the majority of it.


Seriously, condensing it isn't about "earning your stripes" or "putting in effort as a producer." I've never read that thread, and if it was 45 pages of information, I would, but the length isn't the problem. I've just got better things to do than trawl through loads of forum banter to get to information (e.g. making music). I can't blame someone if they're new to producing and feel the same, especially if they feel that their question is more specific and it's more efficient to ask the forum (note the distinction between laziness and efficiency).

[ChadDub]

People seem to be confusing "taking the time to do your research" and "read through a 45-page thread mostly consisting of random comments that won't be helpful in the slightest." The book analogy isn't correct at all, as a book is written by a single author and has STRUCTURE, which that thread doesn't. A better analogy would be a book without paragraph breaks and reviews of the book making up the majority of it.


Seriously, condensing it isn't about "earning your stripes" or "putting in effort as a producer." I've never read that thread, and if it was 45 pages of information, I would, but the length isn't the problem. I've just got better things to do than trawl through loads of forum banter to get to information (e.g. making music). I can't blame someone if they're new to producing and feel the same, especially if they feel that their question is more specific and it's more efficient to ask the forum (note the distinction between laziness and efficiency).

exactly

[deadly_habit]

hey like i said i'm sure there is someone on here who has the patience and time to condense it down to like a pdf of all the relevant info
also there are plenty of books out there that cover the same thing, albeit it you'll have to pay money, but like you said it's all by one author and minus the banter
banter just comes with the territory of forums
that and dsf google despite being a sticky seems to get overlooked

also if people linked to direct posts in a thread instead of just a huge thread for direct questions buried that could help a bit too and teaching people the basics of bbcode and how to do that would prolly go a lot further

[ChadDub]

It's not like it's that complicated either. For mixing all you need to know is:

Make sure your master volume peaks at around -6db.

Properly EQ your individual instruments and samples to where they only put out frequencies that are meant to be produced from that specific sound.

Use a compressor.

And...... I guess that's it?????????

[Electric_Head]

It's not like it's that complicated either. For mixing all you need to know is:

Make sure your master volume peaks at around -6db.

Properly EQ your individual instruments and samples to where they only put out frequencies that are meant to be produced from that specific sound.

Use a compressor.

And...... I guess that's it?????????

That makes sense to us.
But imagine you just started and want to make that emo girl noise, would you bother to read?

[wub]

People seem to be confusing "taking the time to do your research" and "read through a 45-page thread mostly consisting of random comments that won't be helpful in the slightest." The book analogy isn't correct at all, as a book is written by a single author and has STRUCTURE, which that thread doesn't. A better analogy would be a book without paragraph breaks and reviews of the book making up the majority of it..

Exactly. Again, I'm not suggesting spoonfeeding anyone.

also if people linked to direct posts in a thread instead of just a huge thread for direct questions buried that could help a bit too and teaching people the basics of bbcode and how to do that would prolly go a lot further

See, this I like the sound of. And it harkens back to my earlier point at maybe having a sort of mixdown/mastering sticky, which encompasses the Moneyshot thread as one of the more advanced resources.


I'm sure we already have 'simpler' discussions on mixing/mastering on here already, so a list tying all the links together might work. For example the sections might be;

- Introdution/brief glossary of terms
- Links to introductory mastering threada
- Links to more specific mastering questions
- External mastering techniques (hardware compressors, giving your stuff to an ME etc etc)
- Links to advanced mastering/mixdown threads, and lengthier discussions (i.e. the moneyshot thread)

Not dumbing anything down, just organising what is already here into a more easy to use format. To harken back to the library analogy earlier, think of it as a more effective reference system so you can find the book you're looking for (that is suitable to your reading level) than actually have someone read it to you.

[Jas0n]

People seem to be confusing "taking the time to do your research" and "read through a 45-page thread mostly consisting of random comments that won't be helpful in the slightest." The book analogy isn't correct at all, as a book is written by a single author and has STRUCTURE, which that thread doesn't. A better analogy would be a book without paragraph breaks and reviews of the book making up the majority of it.


Seriously, condensing it isn't about "earning your stripes" or "putting in effort as a producer." I've never read that thread, and if it was 45 pages of information, I would, but the length isn't the problem. I've just got better things to do than trawl through loads of forum banter to get to information (e.g. making music). I can't blame someone if they're new to producing and feel the same, especially if they feel that their question is more specific and it's more efficient to ask the forum (note the distinction between laziness and efficiency).

So to summarize, you haven't read the thread but you know exactly what's in it and feel qualified to comment on the quality of the posts. Got it.

[paradigm_x]

There's an awful lot of 'we did it so newbs should have to aswell!' in this thread.

That's not really a very productive way of thinking. Will them having read the full thread affect you differently than if they had a condensed version? Not in the slightest. I'm not having a go, but that is a bit childish, don't you think?

I think that thread should be about learning how to mix effectively. Learning effectively shouldn't mean wading through 40+ pages of 1/3 useful posts. I know if there was a condensed version with a clutter free layout, much like the 'how to make dubstep' guide, I'd give it another read. How about posting each question on the first page, and then linking it to the answer within the thread? It's just too damn cluttered to get any real information out of without feeling like you are wasting all of your time.

The truth is, although that thread is gold, people are either going to go to another forum/website to get their info, or else post an annoying thread asking their question. Said thread will be locked with a link to the moneyshot, and then they will look elsewhere anyhow. People are lazy. That's all there is to it.

Now, please, don't flame. I am not ridiculing anyone or trying to be offensive. But just listen to what I am saying.

Right, so you cant be arsed to read it all again (what, 30 mins or so max?), but you would if someone else copied and pasted the relevant bits to a shorter post?

People are lazy.

Damn straight.

Production and engineering takes years and years and tons of hard work to get good at. How do you think macc knows all that?

How about making a positive contribution and condensing it then if its such hard work?

Jeez.

[paradigm_x]

when you get a book for research from the library do you expect the librarian to read it to you, highlight important passages and explain any words you don't explain from the dictionary?
i think that's how threads containing a wealth of info should be treated. you could always do what some users on doa have done with say their q&a's take direct questions and answers, put them in a pdf and leave out all the crap, then up it for public use, i mean it's not like there's a ton more that can really be added to the moneyshot thread at this point that hasn't already been covered in it

i think it's kind of a reflection of the direction this board has taken when the older regulars who used to enjoy posting here and answering questions don't, or rarely post here anymore (including myself)
it's not so much a to hell with noobs, it's more a to hell with laziness, or this entitlement attitude when the answers are already there for the taking with a bit of digging

+1, A+++ dubstepper, highly recommended, would use again.

[paradigm_x]

hey like i said i'm sure there is someone on here who has the patience and time to condense it down to like a pdf of all the relevant info
also there are plenty of books out there that cover the same thing, albeit it you'll have to pay money, but like you said it's all by one author and minus the banter

Well thats an interesting idea.

What would people consider a fair price if someone, educated and experienced (an editor if you will), trawled this and many other forums and condensed all the useful information into a PDF/LULU book... Someone must have tons of bookmarks of useful threads.

It would be a not for profit/dsf/doa/lets put a cd compilation out situation, rather than Ima buy a ferrari...

Would people who cant be arsed to read the thread read that? Or is it 'i need to know this now, tell me', minus any background research sort of thing ?

[paradigm_x]

It's not like it's that complicated either. For mixing all you need to know is:

Make sure your master volume peaks at around -6db.

Properly EQ your individual instruments and samples to where they only put out frequencies that are meant to be produced from that specific sound.

Use a compressor.

And...... I guess that's it?????????

Maybe you should read write a book. Bob Katz gtfo.

Use a compressor.

Lol.

This whole post is like saying, all you need to know to fly a plane is how to take off, steer it and land.

lol again.