It's been a good while since I have posted anything here. Trust me, the irony has not been lost on me. Given my proclivity (oooh, that's a good word) to ramble on generally, I have clearly been, it would seem, holding back.
In truth lots has been going on and I really cannot account for why I have not taken the time to write more here. So for some odd reason, late at night, tonight, when I should well be asleep, I have decided that it's time to remedy that.
The family is great and I am as ever the luckiest man in the world.
As for projects, that has been quite a ride lately. For a good bit now the main thrust of my "free time" has been to deal with the perfecting the EARS™ concept and the unreal amount of work that goes along with the related intellectual property issues. On the whole it is going very well, but wow, lots of work. EARS™ has taken on a level of legitimacy that I cannot fully express. It is a unique feeling to know, with 100% certainty that something works as it should. Wonderful, but unique. At least for me.
I have also, after what seems like far too long, really gotten a sense of my next musical project. It's called "With One Voice" and it will very much feature my lovely Michele. I don't wanna give too much away just yet, but I have been quite captivated by a band from my past called Jellyfish - you should check them out - and when combined with my love of the Beatles, Queen and a few others, it got me thinking...and then my friends George and Nils (seriously, how lucky am I?) both gave me, without likely realizing it, some great ideas for how to go about creating the music. Very very VERY excited. Anyway, more on that later....
Right now my other push is a book about CMAS. Or maybe more accurately, my sense of what I have learned from creating and facilitating CMAS. I am not kidding. A book feels like a good idea right now. Even if only as a kind of cathartic exercise, it might prove useful.
I already have some of the chapters/major topics worked out:
(in no particular order at this time)
1. The Music Eduction World is NOT Changing. It's Already Changed.
2. Seriously? You're saying I should do my job less effectively to keep you from having to do yours as well?
3. Money isn't everything, but you cannot expect to run most music programs on very much these days
4. There are only two kinds of music: good and bad.
5. Arrogance is the enemy.
6. Education decisions should always be made based on what;s best for kids, not adults.
7. Yeah. You heard me right. It's not just a music program, it's a legitimate record label. Get over it.
There are surely to be more, but that's what I have so far. My real issue is the book's title. I suppose I will eventually stumble upon it but for some reason I feel like until I have it I cannot truly write. As of now, I am leaning towards:
"I've Come to Kill Your Music Program"
but I am open to other ideas if you have any.
Showing posts with label family. Show all posts
Showing posts with label family. Show all posts
Tuesday, October 25, 2011
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
Remix, rethink, remaster... REDEUX!: How going back can help to move forward
Over the past several years since I have released any new music, several significant things have happened. Beyond the more important ones like lots of Gray-and-daddy time and Tanner arriving, I have also made some very serious changes in my entire approach to to producing music and general audio engineering. A lot of those changes have coincided with the formal adoption of the Contemporary Music And Sound (CMAS) program, and a lot have evolved out of what I feel is just a very natural progression towards such things. The other major factor has likely been my development of a very strong sense that the real beauty of being an independent musician, is just that: the independence to do what you feel is best. Certainly there are endless drawbacks, but if there is one true benefit it is the complete artist freedom I am afforded.
The fact is that I have never been truly pleased with the end result of many of my past recordings. Much of that dissatisfaction can easily be attributed to my, admittedly not always helpful, refusal to ever be satisfied that anything I do is "perfect." (I have a pretty hard time "letting go," but that is another topic) but much of if is also rooted in aural reality. Songs are good, songs are bad, but the production has tended to get in the way and not, in my view consistently, allowed the music to stand on its own - good or bad.
So as I began to finalize the writing of my next project of original material (working title is "Lift) I started to take a look at the older stuff as well to see how I wanted to apply my new production techniques to the new recordings. While doing that I found that it would not take too much effort to go back and "redo" (Redeux?) the production and get many of those old tracks into the aural shape they deserved to be in. It's kind of a going-back-in-order-to-go-forward kind of thing, but it has already proven very useful. "Redeux" is not really about re-recording or re-tracking, it's more about re-thinking the production. Certainly this may cause arrangements, and some other aspects, to change but I think on balance it will all be for the better.
The "Redeux" project will actually be a series of releases. I am not entirely certain how "Lift" will fit into the overall time line, but it'll be along soon as well, and if nothing else, will certainly be worth the wait. I feel the material on "Lift" is the strongest I've ever written, but in truth, as I said above, I am not convinced that I was ever able to give the earlier material its proper due to allow it to stand on its own. Again, the Redeux project is now making that possible.
The first release of Redeux will be from the more recent material that appeared on "Ties" and "Pulse" and a few others. The second will be the entire "Fade" CD from back in 2004 that featured Michele on vocals. For many reason I cannot wait for you to hear those tracks "redone" (Redeuxed?) For a very long time I thought that all the "Fade" sessions were lost forever do to a failed hard drive but just recently I was able to restore the session data and so am really excited to hear what comes of it - Michele's vocals alone are gonna just blow everyone away. There is a possibility of a third release as part of "Redeux," which would be going all the way back and examine the sessions for a "bootleg" from many many years ago that actually still sells well for me called "093003." If we get lucky, as we did with "Fade," to find a way to restore the sessions from the old hard drive, then we can make that third release happen as well. I am cautiously optimistic.
As ever, things all seem to be happening at once, but it's all good. Very good. And now it's back to work...
The fact is that I have never been truly pleased with the end result of many of my past recordings. Much of that dissatisfaction can easily be attributed to my, admittedly not always helpful, refusal to ever be satisfied that anything I do is "perfect." (I have a pretty hard time "letting go," but that is another topic) but much of if is also rooted in aural reality. Songs are good, songs are bad, but the production has tended to get in the way and not, in my view consistently, allowed the music to stand on its own - good or bad.
So as I began to finalize the writing of my next project of original material (working title is "Lift) I started to take a look at the older stuff as well to see how I wanted to apply my new production techniques to the new recordings. While doing that I found that it would not take too much effort to go back and "redo" (Redeux?) the production and get many of those old tracks into the aural shape they deserved to be in. It's kind of a going-back-in-order-to-go-forward kind of thing, but it has already proven very useful. "Redeux" is not really about re-recording or re-tracking, it's more about re-thinking the production. Certainly this may cause arrangements, and some other aspects, to change but I think on balance it will all be for the better.
The "Redeux" project will actually be a series of releases. I am not entirely certain how "Lift" will fit into the overall time line, but it'll be along soon as well, and if nothing else, will certainly be worth the wait. I feel the material on "Lift" is the strongest I've ever written, but in truth, as I said above, I am not convinced that I was ever able to give the earlier material its proper due to allow it to stand on its own. Again, the Redeux project is now making that possible.
The first release of Redeux will be from the more recent material that appeared on "Ties" and "Pulse" and a few others. The second will be the entire "Fade" CD from back in 2004 that featured Michele on vocals. For many reason I cannot wait for you to hear those tracks "redone" (Redeuxed?) For a very long time I thought that all the "Fade" sessions were lost forever do to a failed hard drive but just recently I was able to restore the session data and so am really excited to hear what comes of it - Michele's vocals alone are gonna just blow everyone away. There is a possibility of a third release as part of "Redeux," which would be going all the way back and examine the sessions for a "bootleg" from many many years ago that actually still sells well for me called "093003." If we get lucky, as we did with "Fade," to find a way to restore the sessions from the old hard drive, then we can make that third release happen as well. I am cautiously optimistic.
As ever, things all seem to be happening at once, but it's all good. Very good. And now it's back to work...
Monday, May 3, 2010
Back inside the sound: why I sometimes almost miss my old teaching gig and why "traditional" ensembles matter
This past week I was asked once again to be a clinician for the Arizona Band and Orchestra folks. In short, it was beyond terrific; and to work, even if just briefly, with these amazing young orchestras, was great fun for me.
With all the studio work and training I do; and the songwriting, etc, etc. that makes up the CMAS program, I sometimes forget how much I still love being "inside" that kind of sound. It is a very different world, and in some ways I miss it. Not enough to go back, but...that sound...no matter what else I ever do, I still love it. Frankly, it's been creeping back into my own music in some ways lately, so maybe it's a kind of musical synergy coming to fruition. Who knows. Anyway...
Lately when I am lucky enough to be a part of these kind of things, inevitably the conversation comes around to CMAS. Many times I cannot tell for certain at first if I am being investigated or envied. The truth is liekly somewhere in between.
While it's my job to promote the paradigm shift that CMAS represents to music education, people usually seem so surprised to learn that I have a very real and strong affinity for traditional ensembles. It just seems odd to me. Music is about something more than the specifics of the ensemble. More than a tale of who is playing what instrument. It's about getting inside yourself and life and the world and God and whatever else you wanna connect it to. The organic, pure nature of music is not limited to any specific parameters. I find it odd that this strikes so many as a "new" concept. Many will feign agreement only to privately scorn the music CMAS now fosters in people who would otherwise have no interest in its exploration.
It seems very simple to me and was really reinforced for me while at this recent festival with all these grand orchestras: either all music is viable or none of it is. Sure, you cannot do it all, and everyone will have their strengths and weaknesses in execution; but at it's heart music - of all genres - reaches beyond.
Does it really matter which path you take to get there? Traditional ensembles are hugely important. Truly. But, in the end, it's music that is the important entity. Get it however you can and encourage others to do the same, no? Band, Choir, Orchestra, Jazz, Rock, Country, Rap - that's all just superfluous details. Music is what matters. All music. Sometime I really wonder if CMAS is really that big of a change. I swear, fundamentally, I am only able to approach music one way - I know of no other - regardless of the specific ensembles or genres.
I may not be a "traditionalist" but I am certainly a "purist." And I am very, very lucky to have a life that is 100% family and music. It's just that simple. Really.
With all the studio work and training I do; and the songwriting, etc, etc. that makes up the CMAS program, I sometimes forget how much I still love being "inside" that kind of sound. It is a very different world, and in some ways I miss it. Not enough to go back, but...that sound...no matter what else I ever do, I still love it. Frankly, it's been creeping back into my own music in some ways lately, so maybe it's a kind of musical synergy coming to fruition. Who knows. Anyway...
Lately when I am lucky enough to be a part of these kind of things, inevitably the conversation comes around to CMAS. Many times I cannot tell for certain at first if I am being investigated or envied. The truth is liekly somewhere in between.
While it's my job to promote the paradigm shift that CMAS represents to music education, people usually seem so surprised to learn that I have a very real and strong affinity for traditional ensembles. It just seems odd to me. Music is about something more than the specifics of the ensemble. More than a tale of who is playing what instrument. It's about getting inside yourself and life and the world and God and whatever else you wanna connect it to. The organic, pure nature of music is not limited to any specific parameters. I find it odd that this strikes so many as a "new" concept. Many will feign agreement only to privately scorn the music CMAS now fosters in people who would otherwise have no interest in its exploration.
It seems very simple to me and was really reinforced for me while at this recent festival with all these grand orchestras: either all music is viable or none of it is. Sure, you cannot do it all, and everyone will have their strengths and weaknesses in execution; but at it's heart music - of all genres - reaches beyond.
Does it really matter which path you take to get there? Traditional ensembles are hugely important. Truly. But, in the end, it's music that is the important entity. Get it however you can and encourage others to do the same, no? Band, Choir, Orchestra, Jazz, Rock, Country, Rap - that's all just superfluous details. Music is what matters. All music. Sometime I really wonder if CMAS is really that big of a change. I swear, fundamentally, I am only able to approach music one way - I know of no other - regardless of the specific ensembles or genres.
I may not be a "traditionalist" but I am certainly a "purist." And I am very, very lucky to have a life that is 100% family and music. It's just that simple. Really.
Sunday, March 7, 2010
Harmony
I must confirm a certain amount of embarrassment regarding the fact that last night was the first time in a while I had attended a professional symphony concert. Michele and I, through the generosity of the "Mom's Club" she is part of, were in the audience for a spectacular evening of music, made possible by the Phoenix Symphony. It was really an enjoyable evening on many levels, and as we sat in the hall taking in the music I was struck by just how much I still enjoy being inside that kind of sound - even if only passively as an audience member.
It had been a while since I had felt the kind of pure acoustic musical connection that an ensemble of that nature creates. It was very enlightening for me. The realities of life are such that my schedule simply doesn't permit as much of that kind of thing as it used to, and I am glad that I will be a guest clinician for some of the upcoming All-State music festivals, which will, if only temporarily, place me back in front of symphonic ensembles.
These days it seems like every musical experience I have informs either my teaching or my writing or both. In this case, in terms of teaching, it makes me feel I should be doing more to emphasize the notion that all music is viable with my students. I do this a lot with the more advanced classes already, but I'm thinking I need to implement more of this kind of thought with the lower levels as well. In terms of writing, it's made me glad I am following my instincts on a lot of my newer material to use larger, more orchestrated parts - even if in a "rock" context.
Whatever it turns into, one thing is for certain, there is something to be said for purity of sound, and last night was a great example.
It had been a while since I had felt the kind of pure acoustic musical connection that an ensemble of that nature creates. It was very enlightening for me. The realities of life are such that my schedule simply doesn't permit as much of that kind of thing as it used to, and I am glad that I will be a guest clinician for some of the upcoming All-State music festivals, which will, if only temporarily, place me back in front of symphonic ensembles.
These days it seems like every musical experience I have informs either my teaching or my writing or both. In this case, in terms of teaching, it makes me feel I should be doing more to emphasize the notion that all music is viable with my students. I do this a lot with the more advanced classes already, but I'm thinking I need to implement more of this kind of thought with the lower levels as well. In terms of writing, it's made me glad I am following my instincts on a lot of my newer material to use larger, more orchestrated parts - even if in a "rock" context.
Whatever it turns into, one thing is for certain, there is something to be said for purity of sound, and last night was a great example.
Thursday, February 11, 2010
The perfect piece of gear
So as things have started to calm down just a bit from the arrival of Tanner into our family, I find myself drifting back into my musical mindset. I suppose I am the type who never really leaves it, for better of worse, but in any case, Tanner's birth (he and the whole family are doing quite well, by the way) has gotten me thinking about the idea of "new beginnings."
This has carried over even into my teaching as I have been reworking the student recording labs these past days to make them more functional and efficient for their use. Kind of a lab reset or new beginning of its own.
In any case, as we've been setting up gear and such, students have been asking me questions about the individual pieces and such and how I designed the labs and all manner of related questions. One of the topics has been "what do we still need?" It's an interesting area to me, and one that I have decided to broach more directly with them over the coming weeks.
The truth is, the technology of audio is always evolving and changing. No sooner does a piece of gear get released does it seem like another one comes along that is an "improvement." The fact is that there is always more gear to buy. Always a new tool that can improve the end result.
I am not saying that is a bad thing. But over time I have started to wonder where the line really is between the gear we need and the gear we want. Case-in point: preamps.
For the last many years I have been, like so many others, on a quest for the perfect preamp for my studio. The ultimate absurdity of the notion is not lost on me, but I still find myself wondering what might work best for my varied needs. I have been lucky enough to have a lot of friends who have great expertise in such things-certainly more than me-and have been even luckier to be able to borrow any number of pieces to work with and get a sense of their sound in application.
I have no doubt that my assessment may change or evolve over time, but as I write this I have, as of late, had a recurring thought that has grown ever more persistent over time: there is no perfect preamp. This idea of the best combination of mic/preamp/converter is actually becoming funny to me. I think it must have something to do with the fact that, atthe end of the day, I seem always drawn to the song over the production.
I know, I know, seems a bit off given all the time I spend either in production for myself or others, or the fact that I teach so many students about the skills required for excellent production; but none-the-less, there it is. Even if I stipulate that I am not very good at it, I always view myself first as a writer. I tend to want the music to inform the production, not the other way around. I suspect that is one of the principle reasons that my music tends to be so acoustic based. For all the technology I like to use, I tend to want it transparent to a large extent.
To be fair, I am still trying to get my head fully around the implications of this as it relates to the current CD I am attempting to complete, but my gut tells my that the heart of this is accurate, so I feel compelled to go with it.
The gear does matter. There is some truth in notion of "garbage in garbage out" but in the end I feel that rather than search for the perfect piece of gear, it's far better to be searching for the perfect song.
This has carried over even into my teaching as I have been reworking the student recording labs these past days to make them more functional and efficient for their use. Kind of a lab reset or new beginning of its own.
In any case, as we've been setting up gear and such, students have been asking me questions about the individual pieces and such and how I designed the labs and all manner of related questions. One of the topics has been "what do we still need?" It's an interesting area to me, and one that I have decided to broach more directly with them over the coming weeks.
The truth is, the technology of audio is always evolving and changing. No sooner does a piece of gear get released does it seem like another one comes along that is an "improvement." The fact is that there is always more gear to buy. Always a new tool that can improve the end result.
I am not saying that is a bad thing. But over time I have started to wonder where the line really is between the gear we need and the gear we want. Case-in point: preamps.
For the last many years I have been, like so many others, on a quest for the perfect preamp for my studio. The ultimate absurdity of the notion is not lost on me, but I still find myself wondering what might work best for my varied needs. I have been lucky enough to have a lot of friends who have great expertise in such things-certainly more than me-and have been even luckier to be able to borrow any number of pieces to work with and get a sense of their sound in application.
I have no doubt that my assessment may change or evolve over time, but as I write this I have, as of late, had a recurring thought that has grown ever more persistent over time: there is no perfect preamp. This idea of the best combination of mic/preamp/converter is actually becoming funny to me. I think it must have something to do with the fact that, atthe end of the day, I seem always drawn to the song over the production.
I know, I know, seems a bit off given all the time I spend either in production for myself or others, or the fact that I teach so many students about the skills required for excellent production; but none-the-less, there it is. Even if I stipulate that I am not very good at it, I always view myself first as a writer. I tend to want the music to inform the production, not the other way around. I suspect that is one of the principle reasons that my music tends to be so acoustic based. For all the technology I like to use, I tend to want it transparent to a large extent.
To be fair, I am still trying to get my head fully around the implications of this as it relates to the current CD I am attempting to complete, but my gut tells my that the heart of this is accurate, so I feel compelled to go with it.
The gear does matter. There is some truth in notion of "garbage in garbage out" but in the end I feel that rather than search for the perfect piece of gear, it's far better to be searching for the perfect song.
Friday, October 23, 2009
The State of Music Education (part 1)
After 12 years as a public school music educator I would hardly call myself an expert in the field. That said, I have not only noticed some trends, but I have been lucky enough to move with them and in the process, perhaps, been able to, at lease in some way, change the paradigm. At least a little.
I suppose this is really about MY state of music education; but anyway, after completing a Masters in Conducting from the U of A in Tucson - something I am still very proud of - I began a journey as a music educator that has proven to be far more life changing than I ever could have anticipated. In the most obvious aspects, I met my wife, also a teacher, along the way, which has now blossomed into our son Gray and soon Tanner, so that part of the "life change" is pretty easy to see.
But the more subtle changes have occurred over the past years as I have both struggled and, I think now in many ways, succeeded in finding a viable balance between my true musical self and my desire to help students further develop their own creative process. It sounds horribly cliche, but, perhaps sadly, I truly believe in it. Regardless of where or who, regardless of if I am actually any good at it or not, my real job is to help others find and develop their creative instincts. Whatever they go on to do later in life, the pursuit of further refined creative instincts is at the top of the list of my priorities.
So I no longer direct orchestras as often as I would like, and though I miss it, if I am being truly honest, I am not certain I was ever very good at it from a technical standpoint. Which is not to say that I did not afford my students educationally beneficial opportunities - I am certain I did. But I am acutely aware that, even with the best of intentions, I may not have always been the best at it.
And after many years of growth for both them and me, it became obvious that a change was needed. I clearly hit a wall a few years ago. I no longer felt I could musically connect with the students as effortlessly as before, and as I look back I realize that I was solely responsibly for that growing lack of connection - not the students. Perhaps I hit that wall that so many educators hit after about 5 years, I do not know. If so, at least I was in year 11 when it happened, so I can claim I beat the odds a bit, no?
In the years prior to that I had been somewhat split between the "traditional" classes of band and orchestra - which I truly loved, and the more "contemporary" classes of Songwriting and Analysis, which I also loved and found to be more internally driving. And then, a kind of miracle that is rare in education happened: I found myself in a situation to develop and pioneer a new type of music program. And out of that came what we now call "Contemporary Music and Sound."
To call CMAS successful would be a great understatement. To call me the reason for its success, would be laughable. In so many ways I am now like a guy how is handing out free money - it's not me they love, it's the money. I can take credit for the concept and the curriculum, but CMAS works on its own, and that may actually be the most significant part of my accomplishment in creating it: it does not need me to work.
(end part 1)
I suppose this is really about MY state of music education; but anyway, after completing a Masters in Conducting from the U of A in Tucson - something I am still very proud of - I began a journey as a music educator that has proven to be far more life changing than I ever could have anticipated. In the most obvious aspects, I met my wife, also a teacher, along the way, which has now blossomed into our son Gray and soon Tanner, so that part of the "life change" is pretty easy to see.
But the more subtle changes have occurred over the past years as I have both struggled and, I think now in many ways, succeeded in finding a viable balance between my true musical self and my desire to help students further develop their own creative process. It sounds horribly cliche, but, perhaps sadly, I truly believe in it. Regardless of where or who, regardless of if I am actually any good at it or not, my real job is to help others find and develop their creative instincts. Whatever they go on to do later in life, the pursuit of further refined creative instincts is at the top of the list of my priorities.
So I no longer direct orchestras as often as I would like, and though I miss it, if I am being truly honest, I am not certain I was ever very good at it from a technical standpoint. Which is not to say that I did not afford my students educationally beneficial opportunities - I am certain I did. But I am acutely aware that, even with the best of intentions, I may not have always been the best at it.
And after many years of growth for both them and me, it became obvious that a change was needed. I clearly hit a wall a few years ago. I no longer felt I could musically connect with the students as effortlessly as before, and as I look back I realize that I was solely responsibly for that growing lack of connection - not the students. Perhaps I hit that wall that so many educators hit after about 5 years, I do not know. If so, at least I was in year 11 when it happened, so I can claim I beat the odds a bit, no?
In the years prior to that I had been somewhat split between the "traditional" classes of band and orchestra - which I truly loved, and the more "contemporary" classes of Songwriting and Analysis, which I also loved and found to be more internally driving. And then, a kind of miracle that is rare in education happened: I found myself in a situation to develop and pioneer a new type of music program. And out of that came what we now call "Contemporary Music and Sound."
To call CMAS successful would be a great understatement. To call me the reason for its success, would be laughable. In so many ways I am now like a guy how is handing out free money - it's not me they love, it's the money. I can take credit for the concept and the curriculum, but CMAS works on its own, and that may actually be the most significant part of my accomplishment in creating it: it does not need me to work.
(end part 1)
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Crossfeed the what?
So for some time now I have been toying with the seemingly simple concept of being able to do accurate audio mixing with headphones as opposed to standard monitors, the usual term is called "Crossfeeding" and over time I have become a huge fan of it. It started out as just a kind of frivolity - I just thought it might be fun to see what was possible.
But in more recent times it started to become a more significant and legitimate goal. The driving force was really the birth of my first son Gray. My wife Michele has always been pretty tolerant of the studio work I do at home - in fact, she is pretty accomplished on ProTools herself - but when Gray was born a bit over two years ago, it became obvious that a change was needed if I was ever going to be able to get any work done consistently. To be fair, "Dude, "as we sometimes call him, has a pretty good sense of what works in a mix himself; but let's face it, he's still just a two year old, and daddy's work only keeps him interested for so long. Plus, I'm used to working late at night, and that train pretty much left the station once Gray was in the picture, just from a purely practical standpoint.
My other motivation was to create a viable tool for my students to do their work. (I created a Contemporary Music program a few years ago for a public high school that has proven incredibly successful - I got very lucky; more on that in another post very soon) Anyway, there is a practical matter for them both in the recording labs at the school, and also, like me, if they choose to do work at home. So between my own curiosity and needs, and those of my students, it - accurate headphone mixing - became a more pressing priority recently.
Fortunately, the concept has been around for quite some time, originally gaining some prominence, at least in theory, in the early 1970s, so there was a lot of data to cull and develop the methodology I am currently employing. I would be remiss if I did not acknowledge a very serious piece of work from John Conover dealing with the spacial distortion research of Siegfried Linkwitz. This pretty much is what allowed me to create the final, successful utility for ProTools.
There are a lot of products these days, particularly higher end headphone amps, and even headphones themselves, making use of various algorithms to create the same effect I have generated, but I find myself now somewhat addicted to the tweaking process and it has been fun to work to fully refine my own method.
So as my new Crossfeeding obsession grows - not insignificant towards my motivation is the success I am having at accurately being able to to mix with a good set f headphones - I began to formulate a way to perhaps rethink my entire creative process as well, not just the way I mix. And thus I came upon "Crossfeed the Mix." A kind of band mentality, even though it's pretty much just me for now. I have no idea where it will take me, but it has been very freeing already not to think of my creative output as me, but as "Crossfeed..." Perhaps it is just my imagination, but as I tell my students, the ability to be able to push your creative process is a powerful and wonderful thing if you handle it the right way.
As I begin work on a new CD, I plan to document my progress in these posts as well as the progress of my other creative ventures, including the music education program I mentioned above and my production company too. Certainly, some family items will make appearances as well, and to that end I figure if nothing else, years from now, should I proved disciplined to keep this up, these posts will help serve as a way for my kids (and grand kids someday) to learn more about me. Not a bad motivator that one either.
But in more recent times it started to become a more significant and legitimate goal. The driving force was really the birth of my first son Gray. My wife Michele has always been pretty tolerant of the studio work I do at home - in fact, she is pretty accomplished on ProTools herself - but when Gray was born a bit over two years ago, it became obvious that a change was needed if I was ever going to be able to get any work done consistently. To be fair, "Dude, "as we sometimes call him, has a pretty good sense of what works in a mix himself; but let's face it, he's still just a two year old, and daddy's work only keeps him interested for so long. Plus, I'm used to working late at night, and that train pretty much left the station once Gray was in the picture, just from a purely practical standpoint.
My other motivation was to create a viable tool for my students to do their work. (I created a Contemporary Music program a few years ago for a public high school that has proven incredibly successful - I got very lucky; more on that in another post very soon) Anyway, there is a practical matter for them both in the recording labs at the school, and also, like me, if they choose to do work at home. So between my own curiosity and needs, and those of my students, it - accurate headphone mixing - became a more pressing priority recently.
Fortunately, the concept has been around for quite some time, originally gaining some prominence, at least in theory, in the early 1970s, so there was a lot of data to cull and develop the methodology I am currently employing. I would be remiss if I did not acknowledge a very serious piece of work from John Conover dealing with the spacial distortion research of Siegfried Linkwitz. This pretty much is what allowed me to create the final, successful utility for ProTools.
There are a lot of products these days, particularly higher end headphone amps, and even headphones themselves, making use of various algorithms to create the same effect I have generated, but I find myself now somewhat addicted to the tweaking process and it has been fun to work to fully refine my own method.
So as my new Crossfeeding obsession grows - not insignificant towards my motivation is the success I am having at accurately being able to to mix with a good set f headphones - I began to formulate a way to perhaps rethink my entire creative process as well, not just the way I mix. And thus I came upon "Crossfeed the Mix." A kind of band mentality, even though it's pretty much just me for now. I have no idea where it will take me, but it has been very freeing already not to think of my creative output as me, but as "Crossfeed..." Perhaps it is just my imagination, but as I tell my students, the ability to be able to push your creative process is a powerful and wonderful thing if you handle it the right way.
As I begin work on a new CD, I plan to document my progress in these posts as well as the progress of my other creative ventures, including the music education program I mentioned above and my production company too. Certainly, some family items will make appearances as well, and to that end I figure if nothing else, years from now, should I proved disciplined to keep this up, these posts will help serve as a way for my kids (and grand kids someday) to learn more about me. Not a bad motivator that one either.
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
A place to begin...
Is it just me, or does it seem like these days everyone is looking for a way to reinvent themselves? OK, that was way too rhetorical. Of course we are. Well certainly I am; at least to some extent anyway. I guess I have hit some kind of creative rut of sorts. I suppose it is not uncommon; and in many ways, I'm just going through a "phase" that I bet lots of people hit at one point or another. Funny thing is, no matter how much I acknowledge its commonality, it still seems really significant as I am experiencing it.
So here's the quick rundown: 38 years old. Amazing family - sorry, gotta brag: totally hot wife who puts up with me for unknown reasons, wonderful 2 year old son (and another on the way), 2 goofy but very lovable dobermans, etc. etc. I'm actually far happier than I deserve to be. I am even lucky enough to spend most of my time either creating music or helping others learn to tap into their own creative process and make their own music. And, miraculously, all the bills get paid, and we have a nice roof over our heads.
Like I said, I'm far happier than I deserve to be. But where I have run into trouble is with the various attempts at artistic (music) self-expression that have resulted in varying levels of success. In some ways I'd like to think of myself a simply very driven towards a goal. In others, I wonder if I am not just obsessive over a fantasy.
And so, my plan with this blog is to see where the middle ground of all that might be. Somewhere there is a point of synergy between my dreams and my needs and I'm hopeful that these little "rants" might help further foster a sense of viability on my journey. Should be a fun ride, regardless.
So here's the quick rundown: 38 years old. Amazing family - sorry, gotta brag: totally hot wife who puts up with me for unknown reasons, wonderful 2 year old son (and another on the way), 2 goofy but very lovable dobermans, etc. etc. I'm actually far happier than I deserve to be. I am even lucky enough to spend most of my time either creating music or helping others learn to tap into their own creative process and make their own music. And, miraculously, all the bills get paid, and we have a nice roof over our heads.
Like I said, I'm far happier than I deserve to be. But where I have run into trouble is with the various attempts at artistic (music) self-expression that have resulted in varying levels of success. In some ways I'd like to think of myself a simply very driven towards a goal. In others, I wonder if I am not just obsessive over a fantasy.
And so, my plan with this blog is to see where the middle ground of all that might be. Somewhere there is a point of synergy between my dreams and my needs and I'm hopeful that these little "rants" might help further foster a sense of viability on my journey. Should be a fun ride, regardless.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)