Personally, I'm very interested in Mr. Winer's book as I'm sure it will be an informative and entertaining read.

As for using ARC and how it improves one's mixing environment, I'm very much of the mindset that it can certainly be of some benefit, but I also understand and agree with Mike's statements to the fact that it's only addressing one part of the overall problems a room can create.  This is not opinion, it is fact based upon tried and true science.  My only real difference is that I could care less what Danny or anyone else choose to use, choose to spend their money on.  If they see a benefit in using a product for some level of correction that's entirely their choice - who am I to tell someone else they are not seeing benefit form that purchase.  I don't think Danny, or anyone else (with some level of understanding) thinks it's the magic bullet to every single room issue, but if it improves his mixes in any way, only he can decide if the price was worth the level of improvement.

Personally I've debated purchasing ARC, but have held off and truth be told I'm leaning towards doing a more thorough job of treating my room when I tear it apart this spring for a room reworking and refinishing, but that's my choice and it only impacts me.  My choice is certainly easiedby the fact that I own my house, I have no plans on moving, and I'm interested in the DIY aspect of attempting it, who knows it could prove disastrous. 

If the concern is all the marketing speech that gets tossed around by manufacturers, I'd be a fool to believe it doesn't happen in the acoustic treatment world just as much as in the software solution world - it's an individuals responsibility to be an informed consumer and to weed through marketing speak and to find the truth (many times someplace in the middle).  Like I stated, there are very few magic solutions, but like so many other things in life, if it has no impact on my choices, I'm really not that concerned about the choices others make for themselves, and using ARC is one such thing.

Back to Mr. Winer's book - I'm very much looking forward to it and hope to garner some nuggets of information I may otherwise not know or at a bare minimum gain a greater understanding of things I do already do know.

As always, individual mileage may vary.

I've had a chance to get my head straight about this stuff. Sorry this post couldn't be shorter, but it is what it is. Read it or don't.

First off, James and Jonbuoy, thank you for the kind words and the support. I'm glad two people were strong enough to dispute Mike and bothered to get involved. Though I'm completely capable of fighting my own battles, it's a breath of fresh air when a few people chime in to let me know that I'm not totally out of my tree on this. Thank you both sincerely.

Mike: I can't believe that you would bring our past dirty laundry into this thread and then pull your same old passive aggressive behavior techniques that you've always done in the past. Bash me in one breath, praise me in another. Was that right for the thread? Let's sort you out once and for all since you opened up this can of worms.

You know a lot about things yet know nothing at all. The forum needs to be educated about you and your attempts to be the all knowing master of nothing audio. The things you know about, you show proof on whether they be pictures or actual physical things. You mention great audio projects and other things that you have done and no one ever hears them. I clicked on a link in your signature one time that had tunes that sounded like overly-sequenced electronic music. What can I say? I'd think someone of your stature and intense knowledge of the field would have something that is a good representation of what you're about and have done? Yet, this is not the case and I'm not the only one who has commented on your music/production not doing the talking like your mouth does. I can provide work files as well as video in real time of anything I have ever done.

You claim to know about high gain guitar in today's times, yet show forth examples of old amps and effects that wouldn't get high gain of today unless you sent them to someone to be modded. You've never showed any skill in the rock realm, have never presented any ideas to "prove" you can or have ever done it, so there's your scientific proof. You sir, speak for the sake of a voice 8 times out of 10.

I highly doubt you've ever done anything remotely close to the production I created in my version of "Countdown to Insanity" (which was done in sections and not very serious at all on my behalf as it was just a sketch) so before you try to bring up all I have is DanziLand to my credit, concentrate on outdoing what was done in that little song and physically do it all yourself. Go big or go home....and provide proof while you're at it. :) Then I can post up some of my current works as well as client work so that you can hear what I can really do. Yeah, I have work files and can provide video for them as well since "proof" is what this is all about. Take a good look at yourself. "Proof" and you don't belong in the same sentence.

Whatever happened to your high gain sound crusade? Yeah...like everything else you spew garbage on, this too fell by the wayside. Voice for a voice is all you'll ever be to anyone on this forum that has a clue. We all know how things go with you. You start a confrontation, you get put in your place and run away or try to act like a nice guy and play it off.

Everything with you goes in one ear and out the other when you're found to be wrong so you then evade the issue, act cool again for a few months, and then you bring up the past, forget to take your meds and then try to annihilate a person when you really don't have a leg to stand on as a musician or an engineer. Stick to camera and wood working dude, no one will EVER dispute your talents there.

You mention my post in post 8 as being so wrong. Philip mentioned his thoughts about Ethan and ARC. Bitflipper then chimed in with "That's the crux of his criticism of room equalization: it's oversold and over-hyped. I share that view." I've known Dave's stance on ARC since I posted a thread in the software forum praising it. I have no problems with the man or his beliefs. But read his quote again...oversold and over hyped.

That is NOT my experience and I mentioned it. Again, someone not trying ARC as it was delivered by IK and calling it oversold and over-hyped that sells room correction raises flags to me. Sue me for feeling that way. That's not a shot at Ethan as the dude can mix his butt off and is a fantastic musician and speaker as well as a teacher. I hope his book sells millions and have no animosity against him or Dave...let the record show.

My problem is with negatively commenting on something that was not physically tried while selling things that actually DO compete with the product. I'd be willing to bet there are as many people that are still not happy with their room correction as there are those that were not successful with ARC. Prove me wrong and use science if you must. I can jot down a list of names of people that went nuts with room correction and come to me for advice because they are still not happy...trust me.

Dave then goes on to say: "A good room doesn't need ARC, either."

This may be true, but what about your monitors? Anyone thinking that monitors will not need any tuning at all even in a good room is mistaken, yes? ARC helps this problem. It may not cure it, but for me it's helped me enough to where I'm not having any problems with anything and I don't need that ugly room crap messing up MY HOME. In my studio's, I have both ARC and room correction. Do I notice differences mixing in one or the other? No. Sue me for not noticing a major difference or call me lucky.


Does that mean others will have the same luck as me? Absolutely not, but I can only speak for me and the many rooms I've used it in that give me the same results. I voiced my truth having used both room correction as well as ARC. I have that right as someone that USES BOTH. And that's all I have to say to you, Mike....hopefully for the rest of the time we both visit this forum.

Steve Corey: Sorry ARC didn't work for you. However, if you read THEIR instructions, that could be why. I have my own way of doing the correction and will gladly share my step by step procedure with you via pm if you still have ARC and you would like to try it again. My instincts tell me based on your forceful post that you'll decline anything I'd have to offer...so that's fine too. But if you happen to change your mind, I'll gladly forward what has worked for me.

To everyone else: At the end of the day, it was never my intent to derail or deface this thread. I've participated in a few threads with Ethan in the past on this subject, saw ARC was mentioned again here and because I have not shared the same negative results, I posted about it. Everyone else seems to be able to speak their minds on something whenever they want. Sometimes forum members embrace them and deal with it, other times they go on a crusade to make someone out to be a bad guy like what's happened to me here. I'm not a bad guy. I spend my time on here trying to help out people that may have struggled in the same areas as me.

If you like what I've had to offer, have gotten good things from the posts and novels I've shared, that's all I've ever wanted. This little ARC plug works for me regardless of whatever negative comments come up about it. While everyone worries about nulls and all this other stuff, I put a project together and mix it and it always comes out to my liking and sounds good on every system I play it on. Isn't that success even if some of it may be flawed and it works for me?

Not to name names here to involve anyone else in this, but is James wrong too whether or not his tests show ARC is a piece of garbage? He claims it works and has helped him tremendously. Is bapu clueless and haven't his mixes improved as well? Is Philip not a fine engineer never letting us down with incredible work? If you ask these gentleman if ARC has made a difference, you better believe they will say it has regardless of what they have learned along the way.

You can't fix what you can't hear correctly. It doesn't matter how good you are as an engineer. Misrepresentation is just that. When you can hear the right stuff, you end up with a balanced mix even if you use no effects or compression. Without ARC I can't get that anywhere near acceptable.

The worst things about my mixes will be they will be subjective to people as are all mixes done by everyone. But you won't hear blatant errors due to false monitor representation or my rooms messing things up. My artistic take is the thing that may not be YOUR thing. You may hate my style, my instrument choices, my voice, my playing and my mix. But if you listen to my stuff for what it is other than what you think it should be in your vision, you'll not come out of it thinking I'm a clueless idiot.

This is no different than buying a piece of gear that may work for some people, fail for others really. The difference is, I'm just a normal man that tried it and it worked regardless of what may be physically wrong on the science end.

ARC Failures: If someone bought ARC based on my recommendation, used MY instructions in the correction process and still failed, I'm deeply and sincerely sorry it didn't work out for you. If I'm ever remotely close to you in my travels or you live close to me, if you feed me and let me crash at your place, I'll gladly show up and attempt the correction procedure myself for you free of charge until we've exhausted everything. That's how much I believe in this plug and that's how strongly I feel about relieving people of the stress caused by audio misrepresentation. It's a horrible position to be in if you really love this field. One that I can only describe as the clouds parting after a hurricane has passed.

Letting it all die including me: Excuse my extreme passion and constant bragging about this plug. But if you've never tried it and suffer from some of the things I've mentioned in this thread and others, it's worth a shot. If not, correct your room in whatever way you see fit. I'll not comment again or try to help you. I'll keep my dumb little secrets as well as my experience to myself from here on out. Just beware of the "Mike's" on these forums. They always do more harm than good and never have anything to show or represent why you should listen to them other than their big mouths.

I not only have a big mouth, but I can and will back up every thing I've ever mentioned if I need to. That doesn't make me better than anyone else. It makes me able to talk the talk and walk the walk with pride whether you like what I do or not. I'm not a good engineer, I'm not a good musician...but I like to think I deliver consistent results that are acceptable. I can't say the same about a lot of people on these forums that feel the need to speak with a sharp tongue that provide less than fair results or nothing at all. You all know who these people are as it's always the same ones, isn't it? I forever rest my case.

-Danny

Danny Danzi said to me: Sorry ARC didn't work for you. However, if you read THEIR instructions, that could be why. I have my own way of doing the correction and will gladly share my step by step procedure with you via pm if you still have ARC and you would like to try it again. My instincts tell me based on your forceful post that you'll decline anything I'd have to offer...so that's fine too. But if you happen to change your mind, I'll gladly forward what has worked for me.

Whoa, there. That's just calling me closed minded. Where have I ever indicated that I'd "decline anything [you'd] have to offer"? I'd be happy to try again with ARC with whatever variations of measurements anyone suggests. Feel free to PM them to me. But please don't call me closed minded. I'll admit to being "forceful" but I'm forceful based on my research and experience. You are too, Danny, you're very "forceful". We're free to disagree, but don't call me closed minded.

Ethan - are there any plans for a Kindle edition?

I am interested in reading Chapter 10.

As recently as just a few months ago I was asked to justify statements I made about equalizers such as Sonitus FX EQ. I have stated that it has very slight yet audible phase cancelling artifacts but that I still think it was an excellent and very usable FX choice.

A couple of guys, Brundlefly and DrewFX made some passing comments that suggested that what I said probably wasn't accurate. I wasn't accurate.

At some point I became aware of articles written by Mr. Winer that explain why it is impossible to expect to be able to hear any phase shifting caused by EQ systems. I learned the phase artifacts I was listening too were actually part of the recording and not added by the EQ system at all.

I never thanked Drew or Brundlefly for suggesting I go a bit further with this... but I am thankful.

I think Chapter 10 is going to cover the explanation about EQ and phase shift as well as a bunch of other stuff I still hope to understand better and I thank Mr Winer for making information such as this so freely available.

best regards,
mike

mike_mccue


I am interested in reading Chapter 10.

As recently as just a few months ago I was asked to justify statements I made about equalizers such as Sonitus FX EQ. I have stated that it has very slight yet audible phase cancelling artifacts but that I still think it was an excellent and very usable FX choice.

A couple of guys, Brundlefly and DrewFX made some passing comments that suggested that what I said probably wasn't accurate. I wasn't accurate.

At some point I became aware of articles written by Mr. Winer that explain why it is impossible to expect to be able to hear any phase shifting caused by EQ systems. I learned the phase artifacts I was listening too were actually part of the recording and not added by the EQ system at all.

I never thanked Drew or Brundlefly for suggesting I go a bit further with this... but I am thankful.

I think Chapter 10 is going to cover the explanation about EQ and phase shift as well as a bunch of other stuff I still hope to understand better and I thank Mr Winer for making information such as this so freely available.

best regards,
mike

I may not be deserving of any thanks, but I very much appreciate your sentiments here for a number of reasons.

He's certainly got to be happy that other people are enthusiastic about both science and music

I'm one of those.  I'm happy to benefit from the fact that many people have designed some great stuff through their knowledge.

I'm glad that there are many can use those things with great skill, enough to create great sounds too.

I like basic facts I like myths to be dispelled I like to learn about things, I don't like becoming so pre-occupied with the science that I become a nerd.

Nerds are great I just have no desire to become one.

I can understand now where Danny was coming from.  It's is what I suspected was happening before Mike started on his single-minded and stubborn obfuscation routine.  ARC clearly does enough, as Mike clearly pointed out in his descriptions of what it is actually capable of, for Danny to take from there in order to make the good decisions that are apparent in the music he creates, the output I've provided him with in the past and is most strikingly apparent in the skills transferred to people he has schooled.

That was kind of the answer I was asking about and I can see now where that possibility is indeed occuring in real terms as well as understanding the reasons why that would be the case.

Similar to the analogy I already put forward it is tuning the car up enough for him to win races.  It also clearly demonstrates that a skilled operator is still required for best results, and no amount of room correction is going to compensate for a lack there while the reverse may indeed still be true at least to a great extent.

Having arrived at the idea that this is the point Danny was trying to make against a scoffing background noise, I actually think it is a good point to make.  And again he shows he can still produce the goods against a backround of a few nulls and unwanted energy peaks flapping around the place.

You know, I think my room is the sort of room that could really benefit from ARC.

It's not big enough to do any serious trapping, I've got a couple of side panels up in the mirror position, a bigger panel on the front wall and a few bits of foam in one "corner" 

The room size WILL I know cause problems, as it's 10' x 10' by 9' high

I need to get a ceiling cloud up, and then see what ARC can do with it.

Translation to other systems IS slowly improving, but not the extent that I can't afford to NOT check my mixes.

I want to be where Danny is and KNOW that if it sounds good through your monitors, it'll sound good 'mostly' everywhere else.

Yo Bristol, you so square!  Maybee it would sound better in metrics?

It sounds (pun intended) like you might be a perfect candidate for Arc since your other options are limited.  It would be interesting to see what you think about how it works in such an environment.

@

Bit: I meant to make a mention of that quote to James as I saw he mis-quoted there. I knew what you meant when you posted that...and you found the correct thing. :) To answer that, yeah, you're right, I'm not anti-science at all. Jonbuoy described my feelings about it when he said: "I like basic facts I like myths to be dispelled I like to learn about things, I don't like becoming so pre-occupied with the science that I become a nerd."

That said, I AM a nerd but not to the point to where I can watch a bunch of intelligent men talk about the science of recording when in MY mind, it's all about what my ears hear, ya know? Like all this metering stuff...I've seen so many posts about meters and K system etc....gimme a meter that tells me I'm not clipping and leave me alone. LOL!!

I swear man, that's how I feel. There are just so many things to ME that involve science to where they can actually turn a person off from wanting to really get involved in this. Men like you can do both. You're not only super intelligent but you have the attention span to dive into this stuff and suck it up like a sponge. I can barely read an owners manual without saying "let me at this baby...I'll crash and burn and have fun at it!"

So yeah man, I'm definitely not anti-science...I just don't like it to consume me like "theory" in music. I have so many friends that are so consumed by theory, they analyze a progression before they even attemtp to play anything. I'm not saying that's wrong, but I like to listen to something and sing what my heart feels instead of saying:
 
"ok, we're playing in this key and then we go here and here. This means we can use this mode and that mode and.."

You get the idea. I just don't enjoy this when so much science is involved that you live the science more than the craft and it takes away from the fun/experimental/ears factor. Sort of like Bob Katz book...you gotta really have an attention span to read it and get something out of it. Me, tell me the do's and don'ts, then lemme at this stuff! I don't care who created the wheel or what happened in olden times..lol..just let me at this thing, teach me how to operate in certain situations and let my ears do the rest, ya know? :)

Steve: I too am sorry for any miscommunication...it was never my intent. I sincerely hope the stuff I gave you makes a difference with ARC if you didn't do the correction that way. If you have any problems or questions, feel free to pm me...and the offer stands...if I'm ever remotely close to you or anyone else, I swear as God is my witness, I'll gladly come and hang out and do the correction for you if you'd allow me to. I travel quite a bit so you never know where I may end up. :) Good luck with it and my apologies for our miscommunications.

Alegria: Thank you for that...it means a lot. If I made you think about something, that's enough for me! Hahaha! I listen and read you too man...and learn/think as well. So we all help each other really. I come off as a wind-bag that is in the know with certain things, but man, I'll never close myself off from anyone that wants to share and teach me their ways. So I'll keep bringing it if you do! :)

Jonbuoy: Yeah, that's exactly how I was hoping people would take to what I've said. We're so on the same page, I had this smile on my face reading your post like a lil kid that just won a shopping spree at Toyz R Us. :) Whatever this thing does...warts and all, it works. That's really all I can say. Like for example, and this is a bit off topic, but it's one of those anomalies that *I* can't explain.

I have a Z06 Corvette as you know. It came stock with 385 Hp off the showroom floor. If you dynacomp a car that supposedly has said HP, it usually comes out to way less. We dyna'd mine at 384.6 which was a real surprise. Most of the cars in my year came out to 340 hp. My cousin got a newer Z06 that came stock with 405 HP. When we dyno'd his, it came out to 362. Newer car (by 3 years) better technology, probably way more precise, better science but for some reason, my lil first generation of the model which was advertised for less HP literally had more. We of course both ruined our cars putting on gadgets to get more HP out of them, but that's a story for a different thread. LOL!

My point in saying that is, sometimes there are just weird things that happen and even when things look to be correct or even incorrect, they work better than science may explain even if there are obvious warts. There's no question in my mind that people will find a million things wrong with ARC if they really test it out.

Why it works for me the way it does, I have no clue. Why I can start a mix at one of my 2 studio's and then bring that mix home to my house and hear the exact same stuff, I have no idea. How it's made an incredible difference in a 12x12 room loaded with stuff that looks like a lil music store with guitars hanging off the walls, a big screen tv, drums, boards and every little space filled in this room to where my chair barely fits, I have no idea either. LOL!!

My room in my house is absolute garbage for audio and I'll admit to that. It looks like Van Halen's old practice pad minus all the beer cans and cig butts all over the floor. LMAO!! But man, everyone that comes here mentions how great everything sounds and what's even more weird, whatever gets mixed here sounds the same everywhere just like my studio's.

The weird thing about both of my studio's...I have all the room tuning they both could have. Bass traps, all the ugly stuff I hate, foam...you know how that stuff looks. I STILL could not mix things right in either of my two rooms. Both were built to recording studio specs for the dimensions that were chosen. I went to an acoustic architect for my main room and the same guy built the new studio I just got involved with.

He excels in studio builds and has been building them for 30 years. But I still wasn't happy until I ran ARC in both of them. I even tried the room analysis thing where I hired a tech to come out and do the room and I had a Rane eq for each set of monitors. Though that helped incredibly well, it didn't help as much as ARC did. So how can I not brag about it? Then I take into account that it helped me in my crap man cave at the house...and well, it was just this incredible experience that I couldn't shut up about.

In the new studio, we have bass traps there. Before ARC, you couldn't sit in the back of the room without hearing insane bass to where the mix no longer sounded like anything you'd want to release. We have client couches there and well, you always want to make an impression no matter where they sit or stand. Once we ARC'd the room, that stopped and you could literally enjoy the mix from the back of the room. It's not like it is when you sit at the console, but man, I'm talking 100% difference just because we added ARC. So it's definitely doing something...or maybe just correcting the monitors in a better way. Whatever it is, honest I'd be lost without it...that's for sure.

jsaras: Hahaha you know I'm with you there! I think we're all a little techy though....I don't mean to play it off like I'm a dope or I don't embrace science. The fact of the matter is, some of it intimidates me...the other thing is, well, I just like using my ears and getting right down to business without the theories and additional jargon that can go with it. But whatever works for a person whether it be self-analysis, Ethans book or additional services, ARC, Ergo or the correction that comes with JBL's (which failed miserably for me by the way) it's best to use what we feel comfortable about and tell the tales the way we live them while explaining what we did to get these great results. :)

-Danny

mmmm...the so-called room I'm using right now is a long rectangular thing. The ceiling goes up along the long axis...18' X 10' with a walk-in closet at one side. I'm using a clothes closet as an iso cab right now.... ....I found that using both bass traps and foam padding on the ceiling/walls it has done a major amount of work on the sound in that room.  I'm now wondering about getting some kind of room analysis to see what further things can be done. And, yes, it does mean I might use the evil other....ARC... ...if I need to...


Danny:  Have you ever tried singing in a concrete silo?  

Danny Danzi

trimph1


 Danny:  Have you ever tried singing in a concrete silo?  

Sort of...I fell down a well one time and boy was I singing for hours until someone found me! LOL! :)
 
-Danny

   


We have a few of them up here.... ...might be fun to try them out.... 

Silos that is.....

I'm working on an 'ambient' piece with strange processes going on ...I know the feeling....

Back to the original topic.

I'm looking forward to getting my hands on this book.

For me and likely many of us here I'm not sure it's a case of needing to learn more, normally for me with Ethan's work it's more of a case of unlearning what I thought I knew.

Unlearning bad ideas is often more pertinent and helpful than amassing more information.  I'm hoping for a 20-40% reduction in my current 'knowledge'...

I'm also hoping to learn ideas for some room correction that is effective and yet satisfying to my partners need for asthetically pleasing alterations to her living room...

It may not be 100% correction in a case like this, but if it gets you 80% there, then that may be the best I can do for now.

80% may be a little over-optimistic. 50% would be reason to celebrate. Please take some measurements before and after. Without objective measurement, it comes down to "yeh, that sounds better, I think". 

(Sorry, Danny, I know "objective measurement" sounds a little like science, but if you're ever going to convince the propellerheads to share your belief in this product, eventually you're gonna have to back it up with numbers.)

A waterfall plot will reveal not only what ARC is doing for you but also what it's not (and can't). Frequency response is not static; it changes over time. That's what a waterfall plot shows you: frequency response over time. You'll find that some frequencies ring out much longer than others (the result of constructive interference caused by room resonances). ARC can't help you with that other than to turn down the volume of the worst offenders. Only absorption can help with that.

I am not trying to dissuade you, Mike. Given your circumstance - not being able to install acoustical treatments - I would have no reservations about using ARC myself.