KVR Audio

melomood · Post by **melomood** » Sat Dec 09, 2017 4:09 pm

I shall do a walkabout asking the general public how they feel on this topic and report back
I may be gone for some time

S0lo · Post by **S0lo** » Sat Dec 09, 2017 4:33 pm

How much do the general public actually care about music production quality?

Define quality.

Edit: I have to be fair here and say that the OP did try to clarify his meaning.

DJ Warmonger · Post by **DJ Warmonger** » Sat Dec 09, 2017 4:47 pm

Do the public care? Do they know bad mixing/mastering when they hear it?

Well, there are two points:

- Being able to hear the music at all
Nobody will like the music he doesn't really hear, because it's too quiet, muffled and falling apart when played from mono speaker. A song must hold its own even in very bad listening conditions. That's where mastering plays a big role.

- Smooth mix with no WTF moments
A mix can be better or worse, but it cannot give listener a sensation of "WTF is this crap" as something is completely out of place and wrong. And that's what bedroom mixes often are. I had this problem for years. People are used to certain quality of commercial productions and certain tonal balance, at least.

el-bo (formerly ebow) · Sat Dec 09, 2017 4:48 pm

It barely even matters to me, these days

I think the time I enjoyed music most was as a child. I would be giddy with joy, armed with my little mono cassette player

I know that most people who get to hear my music, these days, would do so on sub-par equipment, so I've released myself from the search for the best/most etc, and am just concentrating on producing some semblance of a cohesive sound. Besides, I'm really starting to embrace lo-fi, so high quality is pretty much anathema to me

Aloysius · Post by **Aloysius** » Sat Dec 09, 2017 5:09 pm

Judging by the crap I hear on the radio, not a lot.

JJ_Jettflow · Post by **JJ_Jettflow** » Sat Dec 09, 2017 5:27 pm

I believe that the production quality matters when it is played with the music of a similar genre, regardless of the speaker quality. If one certain song is a lower volume and/or is small and cardboard-like when played alongside other music that is well produced, people will notice.

In fact, that is a real way to see how your own music stands. I add my pseudo mastered tracks to a playlist and when some friends come over, I will play it through. If someone says "ew it sounds like your speaker just blew" or "can you please turn that off?" when my song is playing, I know I have more work to do.

HunterKiller · Post by **HunterKiller** » Sat Dec 09, 2017 7:05 pm

KBSoundSmith wrote:Not at all. The quality of playback is irrelevant -- how else could $7 ear buds be a thing?

They also don't care about the music. People listen to music for the following reason:

1) as a background to daily tasks (dishes, exercise)
2) as a distraction from silence and the threat of having thoughts
3) as a way of establishing "identity" ("I belong to X culture, sub-culture, etc")
4) to set a general "mood" for other things, like dancing (where the actual music is completely irrelevant -- the slender, gyrating ass isn't), or for film (where Mood is all that matters, and melodic writing is either superfluous, unnecessary, or a distraction from the main event)
5) to establish some level of "ritual" for things like funerals, weddings, etc (although those norms have deteriorated considerably, since people have no longer have any idea whatsoever what music is emotionally suitable for a situation or not)
6) as an excuse to take drugs or give up the rational side of their brain and generally have an excuse for otherwise intolerable behavior

Reality -- most people don't care about music. They'll listen to and enjoy it...but they have no intellectual interest in it, and they sure as hell won't pay for it (People pay for items 3 and 4 -- the sex, the sense of belonging, not the music itself).

Masterpiece. This needs to be expanded into a serious dissertation.

dark water · Post by **dark water** » Sat Dec 09, 2017 7:46 pm

Many interesting points in this thread, and I particularly liked the one by KBSoundSmith.

However, at the risk of being a party pooper, a better question might be ''how much do we as musical producers at KVR actually care about how much the general public actually care about music production quality?''

The reasons for my asking are:
a) I remember seeing similar comments on KVR threads in previous years, and we musicians tend to conclude early on during the multi-page threads that the 'general public' don't care much;
b) there are too many unknown variables: give me the definition of the 'general public' in terms of their music appreciation?
c) would it matter if the 'general public' turned out to be musically conversant or, alternatively, complete dunderheads when it comes to appreciating musical production qualities? Would this have any impact upon your desire to make music? (The answer in my case is no).
d) Even if the 'general public' do not know the verbal language for appreciation of a song's musical production qualities, is such verbal language the best way for them to show that they care about these things?

This will be an interesting thread with some well respected views repeated again, as per previous threads. But ultimately it is a thread driven by the input of about 30 musicians / musical producers and without the input of anyone who is not a musician / producer. The point being that it is easy for us to use this thread as a platform to distance ourselves from the abilities of the 'general public' rather than actually know how to answer the thread question objectively in any way.
Myself, I don't care about the general public. I make music to please myself or my musical collaborators.

Jafo · Post by **Jafo** » Sat Dec 09, 2017 8:09 pm

Depends on the public and the song, but bad production is probably a bigger factor than good production.

aciddose · Post by **aciddose** » Sat Dec 09, 2017 8:23 pm

I think you can divide "general public" vs. "others" if you mean producers, artists and musicians. This is because I believe most of the things that make one interested in the details of how a track is put together or from what, how and why it's really put together from those specific parts are the same things that drive us to become creators and authors and critics. So such interests inherently put us apart from the general "those without such interests".

Winstontaneous · Post by **Winstontaneous** » Sat Dec 09, 2017 8:37 pm

Vortifex wrote:
KBSoundSmith wrote:Not at all. The quality of playback is irrelevant -- how else could $7 ear buds be a thing?

They also don't care about the music. People listen to music for the following reason:

1) as a background to daily tasks (dishes, exercise)
2) as a distraction from silence and the threat of having thoughts
3) as a way of establishing "identity" ("I belong to X culture, sub-culture, etc")
4) to set a general "mood" for other things, like dancing (where the actual music is completely irrelevant -- the slender, gyrating ass isn't), or for film (where Mood is all that matters, and melodic writing is either superfluous, unnecessary, or a distraction from the main event)
5) to establish some level of "ritual" for things like funerals, weddings, etc (although those norms have deteriorated considerably, since people have no longer have any idea whatsoever what music is emotionally suitable for a situation or not)
6) as an excuse to take drugs or give up the rational side of their brain and generally have an excuse for otherwise intolerable behavior

Reality -- most people don't care about music. They'll listen to and enjoy it...but they have no intellectual interest in it, and they sure as hell won't pay for it (People pay for items 3 and 4 -- the sex, the sense of belonging, not the music itself).
Holy shit... I kind of want to disagree, but I have a horrible feeling you are absolutely right. Great post.

I agree but don't see this is a negative. To me it's proof that Music = Magic and serves a critical role in our social/psychosexual/emotional lives. The fact that music can still fulfill these functions when degraded through low-bitrate encoding and crappy earbuds means (to me) that the message transcends the medium. Hearing and listening engage the whole person, not just the ears.

That said I do love high quality gear, processing, vinyl, etc. But the biggest revelation in my own development as a musician was learning to approach music as a listener (not just a trained musician) after I dropped out of music school.

Zexila · Post by **Zexila** » Sat Dec 09, 2017 8:46 pm

Think vast majority wouldn't call song crap or got turned off just because mixing isn't perfect, saw countless of times tracks that are barely passable production wise, but have great musical content got way better accepted than any next over-polished turd in same genre.

shonky · Post by **shonky** » Sat Dec 09, 2017 9:01 pm

Zexila wrote:Think nobody would call song crap or got turned off just because mixing isn't perfect, saw countless of time tracks that are barely passable production wise, but have great musical content got way better accepted than any next over-polished turd.

One example I can think of in the last decade was Burial's early work, which was knocked up in Soundforge from soundtracks, found sounds and samples from old vinyl, so didn't even see a DAW, but hit people on an emotional level, even though it was written, arranged and produced "wrong".

I remember seeing a thread on the Grid at Dogs on Acid years back, where they were mocking the production on old jungle records and comparing this to mid-00s drum and bass, yet it seems there's so much fondness for many old jungle tunes whereas much of the supposedly superior 00s stuff, with its "better" production values has faded into obscurity.