Week 3 - READINGS

This week I read Alten, chapters 2 and 3. In general, it is weel-explained, clear and concise so it is easier to understand what the author is talking about. A few times I did not get what he was explaining, but it is because of all the very technical terms. - The third chapter answers more efficiency to the first question than the second chapter, because it explains everything that we need to know about ; how the room needs to be shaped to produce a better recording quality ; what are the sizes used to record sound ; how to isolated the sound ; how to prevent unwanted noise ; etc. It really tells us how the sound is travelling in the space, so we can know how to find a good room to record without losing all the richness and the quality of the vibrations and the reflections that we need depending on what type of recording we do. Now I know that the microphones have different ways to ''hear'' the sound and that they need to be positionned in a way that they do not interfer with the shape and the composition of the room. Also, when you record, you have to think about the early and the reverberant sound that the room will produce. Sometimes, for example for the radio shows, to have a little bit more noise on the studio produces a nicer ambiance for the listeners. But, on the other hand, it is not true for, example, the recording of a rock band. The room dimensions have to be created in relation to the sound outside versus the sound inside or vice-versa. - Before I started to read about it, I knew that sound was a complicated thing to deal with. Now I think it is worst ! By this, I do not mean that it does not interest me anymore, which is really not true. But now I can imagine how difficult it is to think about : the room dimensions, the isolation, the reflections/reverberance/echo/early sound, the noise all at the same time just to produce a sound that our ears will hear perfectly clear. What is kind of funny is that when we hear even a little little bad sound or transient on a song or on a tv show, we think : ''wow, the sound-editor is not good''. Now, I will think about it before I say so because sound is a hard medium. The thing I find is more difficult in the readings is all the technical terms and the abreviations of sound measures. I would like to have a table with all their significations just to be able to take a look at it whenever I want. The Hz, dB, ms, NC and cie are losing me sometimes. - For the third question, I cannot really tell more than I did last time : the readings are not based on this subject (the sound on film, tv, intermedia, etc.), but more on basic and general subjects. I will add to it next time. The only thing I learned about it is that on radio studios, they let more of what is considered as ''noise'' on the studio to produce a better ambiance (as I said earlier on my text).