"Logan Shaw" wrote in message
...
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
Yes - again the recording studio side tends to attract more people who
might have wanted a career in front of the microphone if things had gone
according to plan.

Or people who are good musicians but who specifically would NOT want
a career as a professional musician...

:-)))
I could have probably done either, but I chose the control room as opposed
to the studio. I like to eat regularly:-)

Iain

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...

One mixer famous for the excellent results he got on early Top of the Pops
- where it really *was* live, complete with orchestra and arrangements
such to copy the actual record, played the records a few times before the
studio day, and more or less memorised them.

That's a good method. Most classical engineers familiarise themselves
in some depth with the work which they about to record, by listening to
other well regarded versions. However, differences in interpretation and
tempo can sometimes be alarming. As a producer I often work with
said, when listening to a Naxos recording "Is that Beethoven III?
It sounds vaguely familiar. .. a note here, a phrase there..," :-)

Iain

"justin" wrote in message
...
In article , Phildo
wrote:

"justin" wrote in message
...
In Europe you are not an Engineer without formal four year university
degree, regardles of the profession.

Ahem, complete and utter ********.


Nice argument.

You spoke complete and utter ******** and I call them as I see them. I know
loads of sound engineers without degrees and none of them have any problems
with using the term.

Being good at a subject and managing to get a degree in it is no measure
of
competence for the job. I have known engineers with no qualifications but
lots of experience who could knock spots off Tonmeister graduates and
tonmeister graduates who couldn't mix concrete.


That may be true, but typically a 4 year, post secondary school
experience in a recording studio won't come even close to a 4 year
university drill. I'm talking university degree, not some SAE, Full
sail or whatever one year course student mill, offering "tonemeister"
certificate.

I never said that. Easier way would be to do a basic course like the C&G182
first then get job experience. That would be how it works for most sound
engineering jobs. If you want to do studio design or acoustic consultancy
then go for the tonmeister.

OP wanted information on audio ENGINEERING degree and you arrogantly
knocked him by implying he doesn't know the difference between audio
technician and a tonemeister.

Not at all. He said he wants to be a sound engineer. These come in many
different forms (and not all of them require a degree). He needs to be more
specific about what he wants to do. Just saying he wants to be a "sound
engineer" doesn't cut it.

That may mean the same thing where you're coming from but he can't GET
an Audio Engineering/Tonemeister job in Italian broadcasting or
production facility without university degree in music or applied
technology.



Neither would you unless you had some major international
production credits.

So? He never said he wanted to do that. All he said was he wanted to be a
sound engineer. Stop hallucinating and reading things that aren't there.

Just to put the things in a perspective, in Italy and elsewhere
continental EU the difference is equivalent to the difference between a
nurse and a physician, a draft person and an architect or a sales
assistant and a marketing director. So is the knowledge, skill,
responsibility and competence level. Salary too, about 30-50%.

When you apply it to classical recording or similar maybe but they're just a
bunch of elitist snobs.

And since you are posting from the University of Berlin, give Deutche
Rundfunk a call and ask them for the job requirements. They invented
the term Tonemeister some 60 years ago.

What a pillock. The DFS news server is open to everyone and most people now
use it as their news server. I have nothing to do with Berlin uni. I'm
posting from a cruise ship in the middle of the Caribbean.

Phildo

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...

To me, an engineer designs or fixes things. I'm an operator. I operate all
sorts of sound equipment. And proud to be called just that. I fix the
broken bits of my kit at home - later. Wearing a different hat ;-)

You're the old school, Dave:-) Not image conscious:-)

Two of the most skilled mixers I have ever had the pleasure to
with had the lowly job title of Gram Operator at the BBC.

Iain

In article ,
Iain M Churches wrote:
Yes - again the recording studio side tends to attract more people
who might have wanted a career in front of the microphone if things
had gone according to plan.

Or people who are good musicians but who specifically would NOT want a
career as a professional musician...

:-)))
I could have probably done either, but I chose the control room as
opposed to the studio. I like to eat regularly:-)

At one time that was true, but my side of the game is now mainly freelance
too, so lots of time to decorate the spare room. ;-)

--
*Out of my mind. Back in five minutes.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Iain M Churches wrote:
To me, an engineer designs or fixes things. I'm an operator. I operate
all sorts of sound equipment. And proud to be called just that. I fix
the broken bits of my kit at home - later. Wearing a different hat ;-)

You're the old school, Dave:-) Not image conscious:-)

I don't have to prove anything to myself. I'll happily take a day's work
rigging a studio then clipping mics on the talent and sit quietly standing
by while someone else mixes. And still love a day on a Fisher boom -
although I'd be the first to admit I'm not as good as I once was, through
lack of practice. And grams work has come suddenly rather back in fashion.
If it's the sort of show where music and FX can be put on there and then,
I'm rather cheaper than dubbing suite time. ;-)

Two of the most skilled mixers I have ever had the pleasure to
with had the lowly job title of Gram Operator at the BBC.

In the good ol' days any current TV mixer would have started out tracking
booms and rigging, then 'move on' to boom operating, then grams, then
mixing. You learnt your craft slowly.

IMHO, nothing like going through all the jobs that as a sound supervisor
you're going to 'supervise' while mixing.

It's something I really don't like about at least some 'film school'
graduates. They expect to be Lighting Directors etc without starting as -
and learning how to do it well - a camera assistant. Same with sound. They
say "I'm a sound recordist" - but ain't got a clue about boom operating.
And I hate with a passion the use of personal mics unless they're the only
option. Which they very rarely are.

Rant over. My new TV has just arrived and needs setting up. A back
projection Sagem using DLP technology. Lets see if it's as good as it
looked in the shop. If not, it's going back and I'll get a CRT one as I
intended. ;-)

--
*Men are from Earth, women are from Earth. Deal with it.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 23/03/05 18:57, in article , "Phildo"
wrote:

In Europe you are not an Engineer without formal four year university
degree, regardles of the profession.

Ahem, complete and utter ********.


Nice argument.

You spoke complete and utter ******** and I call them as I see them. I know
loads of sound engineers without degrees and none of them have any problems
with using the term.

Phil, the issue is linguistical. While I have absolutely no problem calling
myself a "sound engineer" in English, I would never dare to call myself a
"Toningenieur" in German. In German, for example, "Ingenieur" is a title
that is comparable in status and usage with "Doktor".


Joe

--
Joe Kotroczo

On 23/03/05 20:23, in article , "Dave Plowman
(News)" wrote:

(...)
Two of the most skilled mixers I have ever had the pleasure to
with had the lowly job title of Gram Operator at the BBC.

In the good ol' days any current TV mixer would have started out tracking
booms and rigging, then 'move on' to boom operating, then grams, then
mixing. You learnt your craft slowly.

I'm ashamed to admit that I'm unfamiliar with the term "gram" or "gram
operator... Anyone care to explain?

Personally I found boom operating to be very hard... With boom poles that
is, never come across a Fisher boom. I always thought they'd gone out of
fashion, at least for feature film shooting.


Joe

--
Joe Kotroczo

In article ,
Joe Kotroczo wrote:
In the good ol' days any current TV mixer would have started out tracking
booms and rigging, then 'move on' to boom operating, then grams, then
mixing. You learnt your craft slowly.

I'm ashamed to admit that I'm unfamiliar with the term "gram" or "gram
operator... Anyone care to explain?

The person who plays in music, sound FX etc, into a TV show which is
either live, or recorded as live - ie little or no audio post production.
Grams - because originally these would have come from mainly gramophone
records. Later reel to reel tape or NAB carts. Now anything from Minidisc
to Instant Replay, 360, etc.

Personally I found boom operating to be very hard... With boom poles that
is, never come across a Fisher boom. I always thought they'd gone out of
fashion, at least for feature film shooting.

Fisher type booms are still used in studios for things like sit-coms and
multi-camera shot soaps, etc. They have more reach than any pole - and are
far less tiring to use. But are difficult to transport to a location as
they are rather delicate things. But they require special skills - a
Fisher boom operator can change to a pole happily - assuming he has the
physical attributes - but not so easily the other way round. Although, of
course, there are many skilled in both fields.

Basically, for single camera shoots, a pole will usually suffice. For
multi-camera - ie 'live' type things - a Fisher is near essential. It can
rack in and out - say from about 10-20 ft - as fast as it can swing. You
can't do that with a pole.

--
*See no evil, Hear no evil, Date no evil.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Joe Kotroczo wrote:

On 23/03/05 20:23, in article , "Dave Plowman
(News)" wrote:

In the good ol' days any current TV mixer would have started out tracking
booms and rigging, then 'move on' to boom operating, then grams, then
mixing. You learnt your craft slowly.

I'm ashamed to admit that I'm unfamiliar with the term "gram" or "gram
operator... Anyone care to explain?

Hi, Joe

Would you believe... gramaphone? My dad was an old-style TV chief
engineer and it was always a hoot when he got flustered with my
infernally loud "gram deck"...

Gav

PS wow on the Quicksilver heads-up.