re: what is the corredt level for the sub-woofer when mixing in 2:1. I'm in the music technology staff room at our college. nobody here knows, does anyone have the answer?!?

As you can see, I have given a reply of sorts on the other posting you made, but let me make a simple couple of observations . . .

1. Don't students go to a college to learn that kind of thing from lecturers and professors?

2. Dosn't the college have a propper monitoring system and didn't the manufacturer or supplier test the room and adjust the levels for you?

--------------------
www.the-byre.com No longer Forum Member

Blue Sky monitors have a subwoofer calibration guide plus a set of calibration tones for download.

http://www.abluesky.com/p_s_gb/p5s10.html

You'll need an SPL meter.

There's further info about sub placement in the media desk manual that you can download.

You must be able to get loads about this from Google.
Look up 'subwoofer calibration'.

Or this SOS article
http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/Jul02/articles/subwoofers.asp
(smithee beat me to that one - but it did take about 3 seconds to find)

I'd be worried why no one in the music tech staff room of your college knows this.

--------------------
Aim: R1ch on A1m
MSN: rich@nrgproductions.co.uk

Which college is it please?, i'm very very curious to know.

--------------------
Aim: R1ch on A1m
MSN: rich@nrgproductions.co.uk

we prefer to keep this anonymous. Atleast we're trying to find the answer to this question, because we care.

Is it......? SAE. Hahahahaha.

WOW this is incredible.

Several months back I was seriously contemplating weather to go to SAE or to a traditional uni.


I'm so glad I did my reasearch.

But we're not saying it's SAE...are we???

--------------------
Aim: R1ch on A1m
MSN: rich@nrgproductions.co.uk

i couldn't comment on whether we are SAE. But surely we can't know everything about everything, and judging by the answers we've had, like 'use your ears' it seems like none of you guys knows the answer, at least not a proper quantifiable scientific answer...

Quote jaybee:

---

we prefer to keep this anonymous. Atleast we're trying to find the answer to this question, because we care.

---

I'm not suprised. I'd probably want to remain anonymous too!
Your quest for knowledge is very noble but I can't imagine you've tried too hard.
It took me a total of 3 seconds to find this article from the SOS archives:

http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/jul02/articles/subwoofers.asp

I haven't read and so don't know if it specifically covers what you want, but I think the point is proven.
No one expects the tutor to have all the answers off the top of their heads, but the ability to search from well known sources and at least an understanding of the thoery behind it is not unreasonable .

Quote The real musiclover:

---

Is it......? SAE. Hahahahaha.

---

I would seriously not be suprised

BTW it seems every other Studio SOS features these days has some talk about positioning of sub woofers etc...

--------------------
Neowin - Where Unprofessional Journalism Looks Better

Edited by Smithee (12/09/05 01:53 PM)

No, but it could be.....? All that 'effin money they make and asking us lot, and then moaning cause we haven't come up with magic solutions (or ones understood) in a few hours.

If it's a LEA college, then it's understandable, if a private audio specialist (ahem) school....

let's not get too hostile people. back to the original question-whats the correct level for the sub in 2:1-can anyone supply the answer???

Yah exactly!!! but we're not the ones at a college where music tech is studied and taught asking for advice on how to setup a subwoofer.

--------------------
Aim: R1ch on A1m
MSN: rich@nrgproductions.co.uk

Quote jaybee:

---

i couldn't comment on whether we are SAE... ...seems like none of you guys knows the answer, at least not a proper quantifiable scientific answer...

---

Whoever you are, whatever you charge... It's too much.

You seem to have had a couple of answers with at least a semblance of science on your other thread.

Ooh, goad us into giving the right answer.

You think this is hostile? You haven't lived.

It seems we have discovered the 'emperor's new clothes'nobody knows how to do this. The staff at this college are at the vanguard.

Bob Katz wrote a useful piece on this in his book, Mastering Audio. A similar version is on his website here. Room acoustics addressing low frequency modes is also important in setting up a subwoofer.

thanks for a constructive answer, will check the answer, we have this book in our library. we are very well equipped at this college, don't you know.

Quote jaybee:

---

The staff at this college are at the vanguard.

---

Meaning outside standing by the Transit?

maybe you could work on your joke skills.

Quote jaybee:

---

we are very well equipped at this college, don't you know.

---

What college???..Have I missed something?

--------------------
Aim: R1ch on A1m
MSN: rich@nrgproductions.co.uk

Maybe you could work on your sub woofer set up skills.

very good.

I thought so.

Quote jaybee:

---

It seems we have discovered the 'emperor's new clothes'nobody knows how to do this. The staff at this college are at the vanguard.

---

What's the bloody matter with you? I gave you the answer in your other posting. Also several people here have pointed you at a host of places where you can read up on this subject.

It is fair to point out that this is fairly basic stuff and that your lecturers should know this kind of thing.

Just for the record, I wrote in answer to your other posting "Try C-weighted sound meter at the mix position and pink noise through the system. Volume from sub should be the same as the volume from the left and then the right (ie. not the two together). The result is more acurate if you divide the sound up into bass and mid-highs before putting it through the system, so you will have to know what the X-over frequency is of your system (most seem to be at 80Hz)."

You asked us - we answered and now you are being rude. I just don't get it!

--------------------
www.the-byre.com No longer Forum Member

Neither does he (or she?) Nah, definitely a he.

Quote The Byre:

---

Quote jaybee:

---

It seems we have discovered the 'emperor's new clothes'nobody knows how to do this. The staff at this college are at the vanguard.

---

What's the bloody matter with you?

---

LOL classic...oh btw thanks for the advice a while back Byre

--------------------
Aim: R1ch on A1m
MSN: rich@nrgproductions.co.uk

we asked for the correct LEVEL, none of the replies can provide a definitive to this exact point. Anyway, if you look over the thread, you'll see we were only responding to other peoples hostility......

Edited by jaybee (12/09/05 02:28 PM)

Try reading some of the things you've been given links to. In what way do they not answer your question?

I think everyone who answered your question assumed you were talking about how to setup a subwoofer correctly. It now sounds like you're wanting to know what SPL the sub should be putting out... that's a meaningless question and there is no meaningful answer.

If you want to know how to setup a subwoofer correctly, then your question has already been answered. Search on SOS or contact the manufacturer who should provide you with the information you need. M&K, for example, are incredibly helpful.

We?

I'm sure you'll get your piece of paper and natty job whether anyone answers your question or not.

--------------------
Stuff what I done

Wahey! Bingo.

Contact the manufacturer, always a good start.

http://www.abluesky.com/p_s_gb/p5s10.html

This link I gave earlier shows a chart of common calibration levels.
Were those figures not to your liking?

There is no one level. Only a complete and utter idiot would entertain the idea that there is one set level for listening to music. The only thing you have to worry about is the comparative levels of the stereo pair and the sub within the usual range of volumes. Now go away and read, learn and inwardly digest EVERYTHING that Bob Katz has to write on the subject.

http://www.digido.com/portal/pmodule_id=11/pmdmode=fullscreen/pageadder_pa ge_id=29/

When you've done that, come back with any questions that you might have and I for one shall be all only too happy to answer them.

--------------------
www.the-byre.com No longer Forum Member

Quote jaybee:

---

we asked for the correct LEVEL, none of the replies can provide a definitive to this exact point. Anyway, if you look over the thread, you'll see we were only responding to other peoples hostility......

---

Because the operation of the sub is inextricably linked to the positioning within the room, and it's interaction with the other drivers, and the overall system's interaction with the room's physical acoustic parameters...... there is NO definitive answer to that point without knowing ALL the other variables


if you and the rest of your teaching department aren't aware of that, then you or any of the other staff are IMHO probably incompetent to be teaching music technology

probably so much so that the answer to this "question" is probably something laughable like Nominally +4dBu line level, the same as the input to the active monitors you're probably using....

where you might derive the signal from is anyone's guess, since, fortunately, we don't know what else is involved at whichever college this is.


Max

--------------------
if you don't know who i am, i aint gonna tell you.

Ultimate Fish said it.

Jaybee, your question is too vague to give a specific answer. It's like asking "What's the correct type of tyres to use on my car? It's a front-wheel drive".

In order to answer that, you must also tell us:

Car make/type
Engine size/power
Intended terrain type
Probable driving conditions
Intended purpose/use of the vehicle

...and many other possible points. One could go on forever, but some info is usually a good starting point.

Before you accuse me of hostility too, I studied at SAE Glasgow, so have no interest in flaming them. I'd be highly surprised if you were a member of staff from SAE.

It strikes me that you're more likely a student (than staff) who can't be bothered doing his own research, and is getting indignant when no-one obliges you with a ready-made reply.

If you are staff, you have no right to be charging/teaching anyone. Not because you have to ask questions regarding something (everyone has to sometimes), but you can't even present the question in a suitable manner or with sufficient supplementary information to allow anyone to answer fully.

Tell me, how would you reply if a student asked you "What's the correct level for the faders [on the console] to sit at for a good mix?"



--------------------
www.ehsound.co.uk - Live Sound Hire & Services

Bloody hell, multiple crossed posts.

My typing really takes a hit when I have a head cold. Where's the *sniff* graemlin?!

Mike

--------------------
www.ehsound.co.uk - Live Sound Hire & Services

oh, by the way, just a quick question,

is the subwoofer made by Goodmans or Aiwa?

and did you buy it in Dixons?

Jaybee, I've just seen your other post asking about mic'ing a flute.

I'm now convinced you're a student looking for homework answers. If not, and you are a member of staff at an MT facility, then you have to rank as one of the laziest and most incompetent I've ever heard of.

If I'm wrong, I'll gladly stand to be corrected. I'm not holding my breath however.

Mike

--------------------
www.ehsound.co.uk - Live Sound Hire & Services

Quote Michael Harrison:

---

I'm not holding my breath however.

Mike

---

Especially with that head cold, eh?

Try Sudafed. Easier than setting up a subwoofer.

Quote jaybee:

---

re: what is the corredt level for the sub-woofer when mixing in 2:1. I'm in the music technology staff room at our college. nobody here knows, does anyone have the answer?!?

---

11.9

--------------------
I've got rhythm, I ain't got pitch

Quote The real musiclover:

---

Quote Michael Harrison:

---

I'm not holding my breath however.

Mike

---

Especially with that head cold, eh?

Try Sudafed. Easier than setting up a subwoofer.

---

I'll be sweating it out with two hours of Taekwondo in the gym later tonight.

At least I'll have some success in getting something kicking...

--------------------
www.ehsound.co.uk - Live Sound Hire & Services

Quote Max The Mac:

---

Quote jaybee:

---

we asked for the correct LEVEL, none of the replies can provide a definitive to this exact point. Anyway, if you look over the thread, you'll see we were only responding to other peoples hostility......

---

Because the operation of the sub is inextricably linked to the positioning within the room, and it's interaction with the other drivers, and the overall system's interaction with the room's physical acoustic parameters...... there is NO definitive answer to that point without knowing ALL the other variables

Max

---

Im a first year stundet in uni (snigger if you want) and even I knew that. And this guy asked if the college staff room and STILL didnt have a clue... the lectures need a slap.. and the sack.

I don't care

Incidentally, I suppose, in the interests of Muck NOT being thrown at the nominally innocent, I should tell you i DO know which college it is, and it is NOT SAE anywhere...

i will however not be further drawn on the subject.


Max

--------------------
if you don't know who i am, i aint gonna tell you.

As the saying goes:
Those who can, do, those who can't, teach.

I'll get my coat...

--------------------
Neowin - Where Unprofessional Journalism Looks Better

I do and I teach, the teaching pays for my doing. I'm Happy!! Its good when your workspace has a recording studio.

Quote jaybee:

---

and I teach

---

Cracker!!! This is going to be one of 'those' threads (light the blue touch paper) . . .

--------------------
www.the-byre.com No longer Forum Member

Quote:

---

jaybee:
I teach,

---

OK, now I'm curious - what do you teach?


(And why did you start a second thread with this question when you already had an active thread wih the same question?)

Actually I thought that was an excellent joke. (The one about the transit van - heavens these various flames came in quick !)

Anyway.

If I understand the question correctly, you are asking if there is a rule-of-thumb like: 'If the main monitors are on 8, the sub should be on 5', or 'If your main monitors are 50W, the sub should be 100W'.

Don't shoot the messenger: there isn't.

You are looking for the level at which the monitoring system as a whole gives a flat frequency response, and this varies by room and by system.

So it depends on the relative power and efficiencies of the main monitors compared to the sub, the designed crossover point, and on the position of the speakers in the room and the room resonances. A mathematical solution to this problem is beyond me in detail, but would be iterative, not exact.

The main reason I haven't got subs is that they are legendarily problematic to set up. There is no way I could ever be bothered to crawl around my room experimenting with position and level, and running test signals etc etc etc. Unfortunately, that is what is takes.

You may ask why the crossover point of nearfields is a less problematic area. The answer is that you are using them in the, er near field, and they don't go as low as subs, so the room is less of an issue. Also, the designers have a pretty good idea of the relative positions of the woofer and tweeter, because they are nailed in place.

Oh, well. Good luck.

--------------------
Instant gratification is actually pretty good. It's fast as well.

Edited by SecretSam (12/09/05 04:51 PM)

Quote jaybee:

---

let's not get too hostile people. back to the original question-whats the correct level for the sub in 2:1-can anyone supply the answer???

---

What a f***ing stupid question! You actually teach this stuff?

OK. The answer is 85.73db. At a guess.

Happy to help.

Could help more if I knew what the speakers, amps, room dimensions, acoustic treatments, reverb times etc are.

--------------------
Dynamite with a laser beam...

***MODERATION EDIT: Which bit of the following statement, taken from the huge cut and paste you made, did you miss or not understand? I appreciate that you were trying to help but please don't infringe someone else's copyright to do it. (Unless of course you had permisson - in which case PM me and I'll reinstate the text) 0VU***

***EDIT Update:
The link for Digital Domain (Bob Katz's site) is:

digido.com

where the specific article to which this post originally referred may be found under "Articles" then "Subwoofers".

0VU ****


These HTML documents are Copyright 1999-2003 Digital Domain, Inc. All rights reserved. The following are trademarks of Digital Domain, Inc.: Digital Domain, Digi-nary. These documents may not be reproduced in any manner without the permission of the copyright owner. We invite the audio and music community to link to this web site, which will be periodically revised. Last revised December 2003.

Edited by 0VU (13/09/05 10:56 AM)

www.soundonsound.com/sos/jul02/articles/subwoofers.asp
www.soundonsound.com/sos/apr03/articles/studiosos0403.asp

I use Chesky Records' 'Gold' set-up disc, tracks 14-16, for sub set-up;
Finlandia Records' 'Surround Test CD' also has some useful tones and sweeps
(trks 30-67); the Denon 'Audio Techical CD' has some more esoteric stuff.

Hi Monsieur Maboul, I notice your haven't made many posts so here's a belated 'welcome to the forum'...

Regarding the Mod's edit of your post... it's common practice to link to sites from this forum, and it's perfectly ok to do so. I think you'd get away with copying and pasting a short paragraph of text from another site, especially if you credit it accordingly, but it's still better to post a link.

Goin back to the original question i always stick the sub right in the corner and turn the levels right up till it rumbles the studio.

hope this helps

it's terrible the people they bring in to suposidly teach these days. In my old college they hired someone from my course (which wasnt even music tech) to do some music tech lecturing and the sound for some college gigs... this guy doesnt know .. anything.. and is half deaf.. wtf

There should be somthing to let people know the college lecturers are competant and not just someone who knows [ ****** ] all but had the gift of the gab to blag someone in an interview.

Quote Mophed:

---

it's terrible the people they bring in to suposidly teach these days. In my old college they hired someone from my course (which wasnt even music tech) to do some music tech lecturing and the sound for some college gigs... this guy doesnt know .. anything.. and is half deaf...all but had the gift of the gab to blag someone in an interview.

---

I completely agree. However, we can't blame the poster for being brought in and doing his best. What I have a problem with is going into a hissy fit because you get less than ten replies.

edited spelling

Edited by Wibbleflex (13/09/05 10:36 AM)

Quote:

---

Ultimate Fish:
Regarding the Mod's edit of your post... it's common practice to link to sites from this forum, and it's perfectly ok to do so. I think you'd get away with copying and pasting a short paragraph of text from another site, especially if you credit it accordingly, but it's still better to post a link.

---

Sorry, I should've made myself clearer on that edit.

Just to confirm what Ultimate Fish said, there's normally no problem with links or appropriately credited quotes/extracts but cutting and pasting entire articles (without permission) is not generally allowed, especially when the owner of the article has felt the need to express their copyright but given permission for it to be linked (rather than reproduced). I'll put the link in if I can find it.

and er... Welcome to the forum Maboul

Just thought I'd jump in there as 0VU really is an asset to the forum, knowledgable, friendly and usually suffers fools fairly well to boot.

Wouldn't want anyone getting the wrong idea from his robust moderation

Edited by Ultimate Fish (13/09/05 11:42 AM)

i'd just like to say that as a music technology user I'm a bit suprised by the tone of the forum. Alot of negativity and finger pointing.

Only in this thread - and there's a reason for that.

And plus, we're musicians! Negativity our speciality

--------------------
Stuff what I done

Hi,

I am a colleague of the initial 'post-er' on this thread and I am very disappointed at many of the reponses. First of all, I would like to thank the people that did respond constructively, your comments were very interesting.

On the other hand, I feel the question has been mis-understood by quite a few people. As experienced industry workers and good educationalists we obviously knew you could adjust your monitor set up taking into account the room and equipment variables.

The point of the post was to find someone who has a lot of experience specifically in setting up surround systems to find if there is anything more scientific that can be used to obtain reliable mixing environments. Many surround systems come with guides but these are still not objective, hence the desire to find someone who specialises in this.

The amount of 'ego-posts' within this thread has been very disappointing with many people clearly undermining their knowledge by mocking others. Also, what is the point of having a forum if when any user comes on, they are mocked. Surely, if a younger enthusiastic user asked a relatively simple question we shouldn't mock them, but help them, and that is one excellent reason to have institutes around.

J

Hi jonkemon78, welcome to the forum..... I think the problem is that the original post contained it's fair share of ego.

Had your colleague not referred to being part of a college then they'd probably have got a better response. Instead they posted, what was, frankly, a badly worded question that clearly demonstrated a lack of basic knowledge and suggested a distinct laziness in trying to find the answer through another source.

But yes, you'll get ego posting here, just as you would on many messageboards, but to be honest this forum has more knowledable, helpful people than many I've spent time on.

And we come back to the original point. Any decent monitoring system will come with manuals telling you how to do this stuff. A good manufacturer will support you in setting up their product correctly. Most provide test tones and instructions on how to use them to make sure you've got the relative level of your sub correct.

Finally, I would also say the original post wasn't about surround, it was specifically about a 2.1 setup, and that was mis-typed as 2:1.

I think you'll find the reason most people here will have a lack of patience is that you've got some guys here (and I don't count myself in this) who really know their stuff and have bags of experience. There are courses and colleges out there teaching things badly and sometimes plain wrong. You'll find little sympathy for that.

Quote jonkemon78:

---

Hi,

I am a colleague of the initial 'post-er' on this thread and I am very disappointed at many of the reponses. First of all, I would like to thank the people that did respond constructively, your comments were very interesting.

On the other hand, I feel the question has been mis-understood by quite a few people. As experienced industry workers and good educationalists we obviously knew you could adjust your monitor set up taking into account the room and equipment variables.

The point of the post was to find someone who has a lot of experience specifically in setting up surround systems to find if there is anything more scientific that can be used to obtain reliable mixing environments. Many surround systems come with guides but these are still not objective, hence the desire to find someone who specialises in this.

The amount of 'ego-posts' within this thread has been very disappointing with many people clearly undermining their knowledge by mocking others. Also, what is the point of having a forum if when any user comes on, they are mocked. Surely, if a younger enthusiastic user asked a relatively simple question we shouldn't mock them, but help them, and that is one excellent reason to have institutes around.

J

---

Hold on i have have the answer you are looking for!!!!

Your Knob for your subwoofer should be set exactly 1 quater turn less then the setting that makes you need the loo

Then put your satelites on 6 or 7 o clock.
Subjectively that should work fine.

The Posing of the question in the manner used, Clearly and decisively implied a complete ignorance of the subject matter... which , given the professed position of the member in question, gave natural rise to the consensus that there was at the very least "an issue" with the competency of the faculty in question.

Furthermore, when challenged, instead of a mature, reasoned clarification of the thrust of the question, and supporting content implying comprehension of the issues, a combative , almost proudly ignorant response was elicited.

There are a number of qualified, professional, ethically upright members who undertake this sort of thing for a living, and even more who teach Music , Music Tech, and related subjects.....

All of whom almost certainly knew both the answer, and how to phrase the question constructively.

NO implication of understanding of the core acoustic issues was given at any stage until your post.

Sadly, I, and other members of the Moderation staff have personally encountered members of Faculty at various locations, who were unquestionably incompetent to be teaching at any serious level.
This is something that is of serious concern for any number of reasons....

Primarily, it's fair to say a consensus exists about the following points.,

1) Students are usually firmly encouraged to do their own leg work and research, that is how they learn the subject matter thoroughly. Thus, most Forum members frequently do not contribute all that much in response to blatant "Do my assignment for me" questions.... But are more generally charitable towards open and frank students, asking supporting questions in a clear attempt to undertake their work in an appropriate manner. Ultimately, this would hopefully lead to students passing out of classes with better grades and a real understanding, as opposed to a bit of paper/. Given that there are some 10,000 Students after @150 jobs .... this is in everyone's interests.

2)
When, occasionally, Teaching staff ask questions, and it's something that is of intrinsically basic importance that they understand in order to be able to competently teach any higher level of Music tech. Then many are generally inclined, fairly in my view, to be perhaps a bit less than utterly charitable with such members. It's one thing to be asking complex and challenging questions that aren't about the obvious core principles within our field... in the name of research or clarification of areas that are subjective at best, nightmares of inconsistency at worst, it's quite another to be asking questions that by both content and manner, imply a disturbing lack of comprehension.

After all, if the people teaching students about these matters, do not fully comprehend it themselves, what chance have the students got of being able to make good use of such "knowledge" ??

Suffice it to say that we have encountered these disturbing scenarios a few times too many.... In the Flesh as well as "Cyberspace"


A recent discussion with Hugh revealed he had even scarier stories of such things than I did....

He's at the IBC show right now... I'm sure he'd have comment to make were he around.

\

Max

--------------------
if you don't know who i am, i aint gonna tell you.

Thanks 'ultimate fish' for the sensible reply.

I agree with you somewhat however, I don't think a mis-post of ':' or '.' should make a difference to the response. I think though, my point has been brilliantly summed up by our friend 'Thorbing purple helm lord' with his response. 'Nothing I say is true' should read 'Nothing I say is funny'.

In addition, I think my Colleague was only putting it into context, explaining his situation when he mentioned the college. I find that many engineers slate educationalists and institutions because of insecurity. They feel that we think we know everything, which is totally not true, we know we don't and crave more knowledge. I also agree though that there are institutes who do teach poorly but these are taught by engineer types mentioned above. Anybody who truly knows the area, knows that there are normally several different techniques for doing even the most simplest things and we encourage this within our colllege, I feel this should be the attitude everywhere.

Well don't that just beat all! I mean, bloody hell, what a damn cheek. Your friend posted a question on how to set up a stereo with sub and I and several others gave him a comprehesive answer. He even got links to pages where he can read up on this subject. We thought that he is perhaps a first year student or maybe an A-level pupil that needs pointing in the right direction.

He came back with the satement:

Quote jaybee:

---

It seems we have discovered the 'emperor's new clothes'nobody knows how to do this. The staff at this college are at the vanguard.

---

and quite honestly, one does not know where to start with something like that.

Firstly, let's get one thing straight here: some of the people posting on this forum are top engineers with credits to CDs, films etc., that you have heard of. I can think of three or four people on this forum that have produced landmark recordings. Benchmarks against which the rest of the industry measures itself. One of these people has even taken the trouble to post a reply to your friend.

And what does this well-known engineer get for his pains? Bloody rudness from some jumped up little twerp who says the only he and his collegues are 'in the vanguard.'

Now, to top it all, we hear that he is a lecturer in some college somewhere.

I would to tell you some of the credits of some of those on this forum and even on this thread, unfortunately I cannot, but if you and your friend take the time to get to know some of them and read their posts and perhaps even meet some of them now and then, you would not write bithering rubbish like that.

We all sometimes put our feet in our mouths (me in particular!) and I often get to feel hot breath on the back of my neck as I argue with mastering and broadcast engineers about the very fundamentals of their trade, but that really beats all!

--------------------
www.the-byre.com No longer Forum Member

o.k. calm down geezer, i was joking, you know, having a joke. i think you need to administer a 'chill pill' and listen to some of your mates landmark recordings. innit.

Quote: "A recent discussion with Hugh revealed he had even scarier stories of such things than I did.... "
_________________________________________________________

A band came to our studio two years back with an older guy as their engineer. They were all students at some college somewhere and the recording was a demo for their college band.

To cut a long story short, this 'engineer' made every mistake in the book. I can honestly say that of all the guest engineers here, he was head-and-shoulders the worst. The drums collapsed into one mushy phase cancellation in mono and the rest was just as bad or worse.

Yes friends, you've guessed it! He was their music tech lecturer!

--------------------
www.the-byre.com No longer Forum Member

yeah sure. Having said that, the producer of pepe deluxe's album, featuring a massive u.k no.1 which got picked up by Levis for their ad campaign, teaches.. yes you've guessed it, music tech. Your point is pointless.

Quote jonkemon78:

---

I find that many engineers slate educationalists and institutions because of insecurity. They feel that we think we know everything, which is totally not true,

---

1. Many of us here either are or have been music tech lecturers.

2. You wouldn't chucking futtle it's totally not true!

--------------------
www.the-byre.com No longer Forum Member

Clearly, you are the same type of lecturer I was discussing in my post. One, who's ego is very important to them. You didn't get the vanguard joke and now you are acting very defensively.

When you consider the number of young people on this forum as either registered users or guests.

And the amount of money they potentially have available to pump into the music education pot.

Well the attitude of the original thread poster doesnt do much to publicise this industry in a favourable light.

I had learned about sub placement withing two or three posts on this thread. Very educational, ive never used one. But the lecturer seemingly couldnt get it!

How many young potential students watching this thread have just been finally convinced to keep their money in their pocket. Buy a small home studio, and learn by experience and perhaps some hours here, the library and so on.

How much money did this silly lad just deprive his industry of?

I just don't get it. You are making yourself and the business claim to work in look amateurish and incompetent.

Why would you want to do that?

Can I just say that I think this is fantastic forum with some very helpful and knowledgable people. The Byre, in paticular, is one of those who often reply with a good and helpful answer (as per the original version of this thread).

I do get very annoyed by posts that say things like "NO REPLIES-nobody knows? or nobody cares?!" as if people have a right to an answer - especially if the question is meaningless, as in this case. We seemed to have loads of these a liitle while ago and I think it is extremely bad nettiquette, even if it was in jest.

Occasional and infrequent bumping a post to bring it back to people's attention is a better way IMHO.

--------------------
Andrew

Hey jonkemon78/jaybee… please stop digging.

Tim ;o)

--------------------
Studio: www.kymatasound.com

Quote jonkemon78:

---

Thanks 'ultimate fish' for the sensible reply.

I agree with you somewhat however, I don't think a mis-post of ':' or '.' should make a difference to the response. I think though, my point has been brilliantly summed up by our friend 'Thorbing purple helm lord' with his response. 'Nothing I say is true' should read 'Nothing I say is funny'.

In addition, I think my Colleague was only putting it into context, explaining his situation when he mentioned the college. I find that many engineers slate educationalists and institutions because of insecurity. They feel that we think we know everything, which is totally not true, we know we don't and crave more knowledge. I also agree though that there are institutes who do teach poorly but these are taught by engineer types mentioned above. Anybody who truly knows the area, knows that there are normally several different techniques for doing even the most simplest things and we encourage this within our colllege, I feel this should be the attitude everywhere.

---

Unfortunately the way your pal goes about eliciting the knowledge he 'craves' leaves a lot to be desired.

Is he this rude to the students?

--------------------
I've got rhythm, I ain't got pitch

Quote:

---

Your Knob for your subwoofer should be set exactly 1 quater turn less then the setting that makes you need the loo

---

lol yea if u follow through the levels are definitely to high!

this smells like a student post to me...especially with a subject heading like that...looks like some1 one left there practical till the last minute and no1 is willing to help!

Edited by mood (13/09/05 03:45 PM)

Quote jaybee:

---

yeah sure. Having said that, the producer of pepe deluxe's album, featuring a massive u.k no.1 which got picked up by Levis for their ad campaign, teaches.. yes you've guessed it, music tech. Your point is pointless.

---

not at all, your suggestion is rediculous.. with everything there are those who are good at what they do and those who are not... and those who dont have a clue should definatly not be 'educateing' other people,.. passing on bad skills, judgements and ideas is completely counter productive. It's no wonder that people won't believe someone knows what they are doing by having a peice of paper (qualification), because the peice of paper could be signed by the biggest dipstick and music technology retard going.../ the lecturer's at that college

Quote Grim Audière:

---

Can I just say that I think this is fantastic forum with some very helpful and knowledgable people. The Byre, in paticular, is one of those who often reply with a good and helpful answer (as per the original version of this thread).

I do get very annoyed by posts that say things like "NO REPLIES-nobody knows? or nobody cares?!" as if people have a right to an answer - especially if the question is meaningless, as in this case. We seemed to have loads of these a liitle while ago and I think it is extremely bad nettiquette, even if it was in jest.

Occasional and infrequent bumping a post to bring it back to people's attention is a better way IMHO.

---

Round of applause required, methinks. Particularly the part regarding ettiquette...

Mike

--------------------
www.ehsound.co.uk - Live Sound Hire & Services

Quote jonkemon78:

---

Clearly, you are the same type of lecturer I was discussing in my post. One, who's ego is very important to them. You didn't get the vanguard joke and now you are acting very defensively.

---

What "joke"? After several very experienced people had (with hindsight) wasted their time trying to explain that the question was meaningless without more info and/or context, we all got roundly abused for being too thick to understand what the original poster meant.

Well excuse me, I just run a commercial studio and try to make a living at this lark, as do a lot of other people who have weighed in.

So here's a very modest challenge to you and/or jaybee. Why don't you post a reply publicly naming which educational facility we are talking about, and we and the market can all draw our own conclusions?

If you prefer to continue hiding behing a veil of anonymity, don't be surprised if people respond in a suspicious, unhelpful manner.

Your call.

--------------------
Dynamite with a laser beam...

do some work! aren't we bored yet???!!!By the way, how do you set up a bass woofer?

Well it's clear we have a couple of trolls.

Best not reply to this thread any more...

Can the mods kill it?

Quote Ultimate Fish:

---

Can the mods kill it?

---

But I am enjoying it! A bit of agro now and again is good for the soul!

--------------------
www.the-byre.com No longer Forum Member

true enough. Speaking of which there was a punch up on the forecourt of Tesco's petrol station in York yesterday

Apparently one guy filled his car, then started filling petrol cans.... Otherwise he might have had to get off his backside and walk somewhere .... bloke behind him didn't appreciate it...

Yeah, an les lat, reat da fred faav staa's. An all dat, lat, innit. INNIT? jaybee

--------------------
Stuff what I done

INNNIT. How do you set up a tweeter, by the way.

Quote jaybee:

---

INNNIT. How do you set up a tweeter, by the way.

---

You don't.

Oh, I mean: you shouldn't. It may prove to be too challenging, technically.

I didn't get the van joke either, could you expand on that a little bit further?

--------------------
I cna tpye 300 wrods per mniute

look. its been fun, its been emotional. Thankyou for all the answers, good and bad. W'eve been through alot together. Its clear that Me and my colleagues have proved a point and maybe you guys can have learnt a little something too. Goodbye.

How to set up a sub:

1) Treat the room with bass traps to make it fairly even in bass-response in different parts of the room.

2) Make sure the main monitors are not overblown in the bass department.

3) Put the sub in the listening position, then crawl around the front of the room, looking for the most even response. Site the sub at this spot.

4) Adjust the sub's filter to cross-over with the mains, for example at 48 Hz.

5) Set the sub's level lower than you expect.

6) Listen to loads of different music. No bass notes should jump out, or be missing. You will have to fine-tune the filter, the position, and the phasing of the sub, to ensure the smoothest response.

7) I'd recommend REL subs.

8) Don't get upset and posture. Winding up the Forum with "NO REPLIES-nobody knows? or nobody cares?!" was a bit silly. Of course we care, some of us, anyway. It's just that many of us have visited the 'studios' of some collages, and found them and their staff woefully deficient in acoustic, and recording knowledge. (Tie lines to a nice hall in the building? No??? Oh, well! Put the 'studio' in a decent room? Don't be silly, we need the room for storage, or an expensive harpsichord no-one will use, except the department head. You get the gist: The Studio gets stuffed into a silly room in a silly place which will cost a silly amount of money to 'fix'. Rant over!)



G

--------------------
PA stuff on FB

Quote jaybee:

---

Its clear that Me and my colleagues have proved a point and maybe you guys can have learnt a little something too. Goodbye.

---

what point is that? that you shouldnt be employed as lecturers?

Quote:

---

Its clear that Me and my colleagues have proved a point and maybe you guys can have learnt a little something too.

---

If (and I have some doubts) you actually are a member of staff, not some stupid, spotty little chav who thinks the world owes him a living and is about to score another unit failure through sheer halfwitted ignorance and laziness, I certainly agree that you and your colleagues have proven a point.

Your - and by your claimed association with them - their, ignorance, arrogance, stupidity, incompetence and total unsuitability to occupy any position of responsibility in any organisation, let alone a place of education, have very successfully been proven. Congratulations.


As for who learnt what, I'd suggest that if you think anyone here has learned anything out of this thread, other than the above, and perhaps not to waste time helping people who are too far up themselves to realise that help is being given, you're even more of a fool than I think you are.

If I didn't know some teachers/lecturers and students that are the complete opposite of you I'd say that all my worst fears about the state of audio education have been confirmed. Still, it's always helpful when the lowest common denominator is found.

Quote jaybee:

---

do some work! aren't we bored yet???!!!By the way, how do you set up a bass woofer?

---

This reply gives it all away as far as I'm concerned.

Now shall we all move on and forget about this wind up? Continuing this endless discussion is a waste of energy in my opinion.

--------------------
Imagination is more important than knowledge - A. Einstein

Wow! That was dramatic

A ten second search of Google would have provided countless helpful responses to the original question had it been a serious enquiry -- although a perfectly adequate answer had already been provided by the Byre in a concurrent thread posted by the same person, so perhaps it wasn't intended to be a serious enquiry at all. Did a damn fine job of filling up forum bandwidth didn't it!

I suggest we all leave this discussion well alone now, and watch with interest to see how jaybee and his colleague interact in future threads. Perhaps things have just got off on the wrong footing....

hugh

--------------------
Technical Editor, Sound On Sound

just thought i would add a small post to say how shocked i am that a question of this level is being asked by a music tech lecturer.

I am a trainee teacher, going into Music Education from 11-18 and have my main roots in sequencing and notation software.

The question is one of many answers, its like asking "what level do i mix music at?". There is no right and wrong level, but surely you don't want the sub turned down so low you can't hear it and obviously not so high as all you can hear is bass.

I also hear the comments from others saying can't do, teach. Which is very hurtful to those teachers/training who really do want to inspire and give students knowledge. I really hope that people don't tar everyone who is in education with the same brush.

this really does make me quite angry

--------------------
There is nothing Grim about this Reaper
We Fell From The Sky

@ HRJ

Welcome back old bean.



--------------------
if you don't know who i am, i aint gonna tell you.

Thanks Max. Yes, back more or less in one piece from contributing to the severe overcrowding of Amsterdam's transport infrastructure!

Just to add one more generalisation to this thread regarding the teaching staff of music tech courses. There are some absolutely excellent teachers around, most are perfectly competent, but a sizeable number are rather poor. Probably nothing new in that, of course, but this last category are probably unaware and will not accept their personal limitations, and will rarely do anything to better themselves.

Regulars here may recall a thread concerning a 'senior' college lecturer who contradicted the teachings on digital audio fundamentals given by a 'junior' lecturer. In this case the junior lecturer, aware of her inexperience in the subject did considerable research before hand to ensure she explained the topic correctly, and when contradicted in front of her students she sought some reassurances from this forum. When tackled privately about the difference of understanding the 'senior' lecturer, full of ego and arrogance, argued endlessly that the 'junior' was wrong. Even when I became involved and demonstrated very easily the follies of his ways he still refused to accept that his understanding was inept. As far as I know, this 'senior' idiot is still teaching incorrect fundamentals to students on his courses. I could list many other similar examples, and it is easy to form the impression that music tech courses in general are not good... but that would be incorrect. Some are excellent, many are very good, a few are let down by weak lecturers and facilities in some areas, and some are downright awful.

I don't support the notion 'those who can do, those who can't teach!' I 'did' for a long time (and still do) and then I taught to give something back to the industry... and I still teach through the pages of SOS amongst other outlets. I know lots of extremely competent teachers at all levels of academia, and I have been impressed with the capabilities of several music tech and related courses up and down the country.

However, I've also met a depressingly large number of people who simply don't understand the topics they are trying to teach, don't have any real world experience, or are hampered by inadequate facilities and equipment.

Finally, I should just add that not every lecturer who works in a music tech department will (or should) know everything. I wouldn't expect someone who teaches music composition to understand the inner complexities of oversampling, for example. However, I would expect a music tech department to have competent lecturers who, between them, should be able to cover all the bases from music composition and performance, music business practice, fundamental audio theory, practical recording technqiues, and acoustics. Furthermore, I would expect all college lecturers to have the ability to conduct basic research to find answers to specific questions. It was the latter that appeared missing in the original poster's abilities.

Hugh

Welcome back from IBC and I'd wish I had been able to go there to check out all the new HDTV stuff that is coming out now.

You raise a few interesting points here Hugh - and I would just like to add we had a lecturer here not too long ago with some of his class who had been teaching the class that +3dB was a doubling of the volume. In that one day, he managed to make about five or six such fundamental mistakes - and you must remember that his class of 18 or whatever students now go out into the World armed with the 'knowledge' that +3dB is double the volume.

The problem is and has always been that anyone can go out there and call them selves audio engineers. Add to that, the subject was waaaaay simpler when I started out. When I returned to the industry after X years of writing and running a very different type of business, I discovered HUGE holes in my knowledge (that have beeen magnificently displayed by some of my postings! e.g. pre-emphasis on CDs!).

There was never any digital to worry about and so no need to worry about sampling - over or under! There was no 5.1 and all the complications that it brings with it. Tape was forgiving and mastering was done by men in white coats somewhere far away.

So the subject has become much more academic and is rapidly getting even more so. Now we have to get our heads round encoding and living in a multimedia World, as well as dealing with music. So when I have finished reading some endless score, I can start worrying about authoring DVDs and encoding and syncing to video. And kids have to enter that World. They cannot grow into it as you and I did.

This natural difficulty that come with technical advance (if people want to watch a DVD then someone has to make sure that the Boo-Men come from back-left and in all formats!) is now combined with a dramatic drop in learning standards and a dramatic and unrealistic rise in expectations.

When I did GCE O Levels it involved calculus, logarithms etc., etc. Today's GCSE at O or Standard grade does not. Education at a higher level has become an inclusive (rather than an exclusive) activity. In other words, everybody wants and expects to receive a university education and a good job in some 'sexy' industry like media or music. When 'hopefuls' turn up on my doorstep (some believe it or not, with their mothers!) one of my standard questions is 'What is the number one expressed as a logarithm?'

It never ceases to amaze me how many people (who want to study audio engineering or even claim to have done so!) have yet to meet basic maths (which is a pity, as it is good fun!)

But in today's World, the education itself has to be inclusive. We all have to be able to do it. Oversampling is not as easy to understand as, say, multiband compression, so let's not bother, otherwise half the class will just get lost and fail the course. Then where would we be?

If all that were not bad enough as it is, the colleges in the UK are being starved of proper funding. Lecturers are paid less than teachers and we all know what happens if we pay peanuts . . .

Some lecturers are highly motivated and the job in itself is reward enough. I have a friend like that, and because living up here is cheap, he can afford to be a college lecturer. But in the SE of England that luxury would be denied him.

But if all that is not bad enough, enter private colleges who are prepared to take on those students who cannot meet the already lowered entrance standards of some of the 'real' accredited universities and tech colleges.

So here we have this magnificent mis-match: a subject that was always a bit of a swott that has become so much harder to understand - electronics, digital theory, musical theory, accoustics, computer programming and networking - meets a World looking for instant answers.

So, at what level does one set up a sub in a 2.1 configuration? One? Two? Three? Eleven?

Please don't bang on about decibels - they are logarithmic!

--------------------
www.the-byre.com No longer Forum Member

For once you gall is justified, Andrew

It doesn't just apply to Music Tech, though - is it not reasonable to expect that someone who goes to University to study a language knows what is the difference between a verb and a noun, what case means, and the bare basics of syntax? Apparently it isn't!

(Kids these days!)

-Paws

--------------------
Signature (up to 200 characters). You may use UBBCode in your signature

Quote The Byre:

---

I would just like to add we had a lecturer here not too long ago with some of his class who had been teaching the class that +3dB was a doubling of the volume.

---

Hmmm... not an uncommon cause of confusion. A doubling of acoustic power would be a 3dB increase. A doubling of signal voltage would be 6dB. The issue here is the term 'volume' which is an entirely subjective term, rather than a quantifiable, measureable thing. Subjectively, a doubling of perceived volume requires about 10dB more signal voltage....

Quote:

---

In that one day, he managed to make about five or six such fundamental mistakes - and you must remember that his class of 18 or whatever students now go out into the World armed with the 'knowledge' that +3dB is double the volume.

---

To be fair to the teaching profession, such 'errors' are not always the fault of duff teachers. Sometimes the students simply mis-hear or mis-interpret what the teacher has (correctly) stated.

Quote:

---

Add to that, the subject was waaaaay simpler when I started out.

---

I'm not sure that is really true. The fundamentals of audio and acoustics, mic and speaker design, music perforamnce and so on haven't changed significantly. The equipment we use has changed, obviously, but I don't really think working with digital audio is any more demanding than knowing how to align analogue multitracks.

Quote:

---

There was never any digital to worry about and so no need to worry about sampling - over or under! There was no 5.1 and all the complications that it brings with it. Tape was forgiving and mastering was done by men in white coats somewhere far away.

---

You must have been out of the industry for one heck of a long time Digital has been with us for thirty years or so. Surround sound in various guises for at least as long (arguably 60+ years if we consider Fantasound). Modern 24 bit digital systems are every bit as forgiving as tape ever was if used intelligently, if not more so. Okay, so I admit the white coats are a thing of the past... except in Glass Mastering clean rooms!

Quote:

---

So the subject has become much more academic and is rapidly getting even more so.

---

Sorry, I still don't think it is more academic now that previously. Tonmeister courses have always been highly technical simply because to be the best, you needed that level of understanding. Okay, so if you don't understand digital clocking you may well end up with clicks and splats everywhere. But twenty years ago if you didn't undertand bias you'd end up with a really nasty sounding tape recording. What's the difference?

Quote:

---

combined with a dramatic drop in learning standards and a dramatic and unrealistic rise in expectations.

---

Personally, I'm not entirely convinced about the reduction in learning standards -- at least not as far as the private sector and better public sector schools are concerned. I think people are just more aware now of the section of school children who don't progress well. In 'olden times' they would have left school earlier to enter employment, rather than be made to sit exams they can't succeed in.

However, the unrealistic expectations thing is certainly a serious issue. There is a culture these days that everyone should be a 'star' and that no one should ever fail. That everyone should have rights to the job they want, rather than the job they are capable of doing.

Quote:

---

When I did GCE O Levels it involved calculus, logarithms etc., etc. Today's GCSE at O or Standard grade does not.

---

I don't remember doing calculus at O level. I think that was A-level material. My step daughter sitting her GCSEs this year is doing logarithms...

Quote:

---

When 'hopefuls' turn up on my doorstep (some believe it or not, with their mothers!) one of my standard questions is 'What is the number one expressed as a logarithm?'

---

Er... zero! Gizusajobmate... I won't bring my mum...

Quote:

---

Oversampling is not as easy to understand as, say, multiband compression, so let's not bother, otherwise half the class will just get lost and fail the course.

---

Actually, I think oversampling is fairly easy to understand conceptually. It just requires a good teacher and an attentive class.

Quote:

---

If all that were not bad enough as it is, the colleges in the UK are being starved of proper funding. Lecturers are paid less than teachers and we all know what happens if we pay peanuts . . .

---

Some colleges may be being starved of funds. Others have more money than they know what to do with. I recently visited a college that had spent over £70 million on a new 'meeja' builing, and 25% of the budget had gone into decent acoustic isolation between studios, rehearsal rooms and classrooms. Very impressive it was too!

But the point you make is an important one, especially regarding salaries. If you want good teachers and lecturers you have to pay good money. It's obvious! The same applies to the police, nurses and doctors and so on... These should all be well respected and highly regarded positions within our society. They were once. But sadly, people accord more status on 'celebrities' these days.

Quote:

---

Some lecturers are highly motivated and the job in itself is reward enough. I have a friend like that, and because living up here is cheap, he can afford to be a college lecturer. But in the SE of England that luxury would be denied him.

---

Very true. I was once offered a job as a lecturer at an establishment in Oxford but the salary was well below what I could have earned as a freelance sound recordist -- and that's not particularly great!

Quote:

---

So, at what level does one set up a sub in a 2.1 configuration?

---

How about 'with a level of competence'

Good Rant, Andy. We should form the Grumpy Old Blokes Boring Young Folks About Recording Technology and Studies.

Who else will join my Society of GOBBY FARTS?

hugh

--------------------
Technical Editor, Sound On Sound

Hugh:
>Personally, I'm not entirely convinced about the reduction in learning standards -- at least not as far as the private sector and better public sector schools are concerned.

But what is the pass mark required… seems these days kids only need to score about 10% to get a pass and something like 45% to get a distinction!

Pah, in my day… err, I think I just may qualify for the GOBBY FARTS society too

Tim ;o)

--------------------
Studio: www.kymatasound.com

Quote Tim Rainey:

---

Hugh:
>Personally, I'm not entirely convinced about the reduction in learning standards -- at least not as far as the private sector and better public sector schools are concerned.

But what is the pass mark required… seems these days kids only need to score about 10% to get a pass and something like 45% to get a distinction!

Pah, in my day… err, I think I just may qualify for the GOBBY FARTS society too

Tim ;o)

---

In higher education its as follows

Pass mark 40% or above

For any courses with classification i.e. Foundation Degree, Masters etc.

40% or above pass
60 - 69% Merit
70% and above is a distinction.

Similar kind of guidelines for BA level but they get definitions as 2:2, 2:1, First or Third etc.

University regulations on what is required from students to actually pass a HE course leaves a little to be desired though.

We could keep this going for a long time and I believe we have exchanged views on this subject more than once. As we are both more or less singing off the same hymn sheet, apart from details, there is room for someone to shout at us from the sidelines.

The lecturer in question managed to make those mistakes in my presence and I (like you) asked exactly what he meant by volume - and yes, he meant perceived volume. He then laughed when I sujested that he might be wrong.

As for calculus, I did the London GCE O in 1966 (I think!) and we were the last year to do calculus and many schools went over to doing GCSE exams instead as they were far easier. I failed Maths O (GCE) the first time around and had to do a 'lap-of-honour' in January. Our school did GCSE's as well as an experiment and they seemed very easy and I got an A or a one or whatever the top mark was.

I have never understood what was wrong with the old O and A Level GCE system as set by the universities of London, Cambridge and the AEB. For some reason, someone decided to fix this system and I was never aware of it ever being 'bust!'

That does not mean that I want to see humanity go back to dusty old dickensian 'chalk and talk,' but as we rush off into a brave new World of multimedia studies, could someone somewhere please set a benchmark so that if I hear that a student has a BSc, that will mean a bit more than 'knows how to use ProTools.'

As you may just be able to tell, I feel strongly about this and not because I could give a hoot about standards in general, or because of the effect on the industry or society, or that, if kids do not know that the answer is zero, we shall all go to hell in a handbasket.

I am annoyed because young people today are being 'sold a line.' On another thread, you, John and others came to the conclusion (again) that there are three, four, or perhaps five colleges teaching audio tech today, that do so to a standard that provides their graduates with a realistic chance of employment and career. And we all know that you can go to any college or even none at all and still have a career. The industry is full of people who did the tape-op route, but most of them (e.g. me) had to roll up their sleeves and get a sheepskin or the knowledge equivalent if they wanted to stay in the game.

That means that there are God-knows how many (I hate to think, but it must be over 100 - go on, give me the figure!) that are churning out 25-30 graduates each and every year into a complete and utter vacume. They are being tipped over the edge into a shelf-stacking, burger-flipping abyss.

It's the youngsters who send me their cv's and hope against hope for some kind of career that I feel sorry for; they and their parents that cough up £20k+ for an education that is not worth having.

Oh, back to work (Grumble, grumble, grumble . . .)

--------------------
www.the-byre.com No longer Forum Member

Thanks for the higher education figures Richard.

Quote from the BBC:

"It's the pass marks that are being lowered a little bit each year it seems and now they are about 25% below what they were 12 years ago," Mr Robinson said.

He said to obtain a grade C in a maths GCSE set by the OCR in 1988, pupils would have had to have gained 65% - but in 2000, that level had dropped to 45%.”

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/low/education/1505761.stm

Notice that was for the year 2000

I’ve recently seen these ridiculous figures quoted:

16% = pass
47% = A plus

In my day, for a pass, we had to score 125% and lick the master’s boots clean too

Tim ;o)

--------------------
Studio: www.kymatasound.com

Quote Hugh Robjohns:

---

Very true. I was once offered a job as a lecturer at an establishment in Oxford but the salary was well below what I could have earned as a freelance sound recordist -- and that's not particularly great!

Quote:

---

So, at what level does one set up a sub in a 2.1 configuration?

---

How about 'with a level of competence'

Good Rant, Andy. We should form the Grumpy Old Blokes Boring Young Folks About Recording Technology and Studies.

Who else will join my Society of GOBBY FARTS?

hugh

---

I suppose I should, being as I'm officially classified as a miserable Git

Oddly, familiar thing about that Oxford job and teaching...

When I moved back to Oxford from Wales, I was slightly perturbed to discover that the available Media/Audio/tech teaching jobs within the local area ALL paid less than I had been earning In Wales for the same thing.

Oxford, possibly one of the most expensive places to live outside of London, pays less than North Wales.... one of the cheapest places to live in the Uk

Offered posts, declined all.,... on the same grounds.... Simply couldn't afford to live on it... never mind support 5 kids and my horrific gear habit...

I Still teach some Media Tech , but as a freelance contractor, and I get to set the rates.... (within reason)



Max



Note to self, I should shut up now before Hugh nicks all my clients



--------------------
if you don't know who i am, i aint gonna tell you.

Quote The Byre:

---

As for calculus, I did the London GCE O in 1966 (I think!) and we were the last year to do calculus and many schools went over to doing GCSE exams instead as they were far easier.

---

That would be CSE exams, not the modern GCSE which is somewhat different. I sat my GCE O level in 1977 and we were the last year to use slide rules...

Quote:

---

Our school did GCSE's as well as an experiment and they seemed very easy and I got an A or a one or whatever the top mark was.

---

As I recall, the top grade in a CSE exam was roughly equivalent to a C (pass) grade in the GCE. Modern GCSE exams today have similar sliding levels of difficulty, but are supposed to be graded with absolute equivalence. Ho hum...

Quote:

---

I have never understood what was wrong with the old O and A Level GCE system as set by the universities of London, Cambridge and the AEB. For some reason, someone decided to fix this system and I was never aware of it ever being 'bust!'

---

Quite. It's a case of being seen to do something, even if the something wasn't what was actually needed. Far easier to fiddle with womething that already works, instead of trying to fix something that is obviously broken.

hugh

--------------------
Technical Editor, Sound On Sound

Quote Hugh Robjohns:

---

As I recall, the top grade in a CSE exam was roughly equivalent to a C (pass) grade in the GCE. Modern GCSE exams today have similar sliding levels of difficulty, but are supposed to be graded with absolute equivalence. Ho hum...

---

Interestingly enough, when I took my GCE O Levels in 1986, some of the subjects we did what they called '16+' at the time, which I think is what evolved into the GCSE later. We sat the exam and basically received an O Level and a CSE. For one set of exams in French I received a GCE O Level Grade C and a CSE Grade 1. Not entirely sure what the rationale behind this odd setup was, to be honest.

'What is the number one expressed as a logarithm?'

WGAF?????

"So, at what level does one set up a sub in a 2.1 configuration?"

*You set the level so the drool comes out of each side of the mouth, evenly. The mouth of the sales rep.

*About a foot higher than your foot.

*It's a sub, so it goes in the basement, stoopid.

*20,000 leagues under the sea.

*That will do for now . . .


[/coat]

g

--------------------
PA stuff on FB

At least as regards the context of this thread, can I be a founder Gobby Fart too please?

--------------------
Dynamite with a laser beam...

Quote Richard H:

---

Quote Tim Rainey:

---

Hugh:
>Personally, I'm not entirely convinced about the reduction in learning standards -- at least not as far as the private sector and better public sector schools are concerned.

But what is the pass mark required… seems these days kids only need to score about 10% to get a pass and something like 45% to get a distinction!

Pah, in my day… err, I think I just may qualify for the GOBBY FARTS society too

Tim ;o)

---

In higher education its as follows

Pass mark 40% or above

For any courses with classification i.e. Foundation Degree, Masters etc.

40% or above pass
60 - 69% Merit
70% and above is a distinction.

Similar kind of guidelines for BA level but they get definitions as 2:2, 2:1, First or Third etc.

---

'Pass marks' are something of a simplification and don't really accuratley describe the way many University courses are marked. For example, Maths at Oxford used to be something like this:

Each 3 hour paper, of which there are 8, contains 8 questions of 25 marks each. You are expected to attempt about 4 questions per paper. A number of tallies are taken:

-all marks gained are added up, giving a simple total

-the score for each question is sqaured, and these sqaures numbers are then added, to give a sqaured sum total. This measure is best serviced by answering questions as fully as possible - one 20/25 is worth four 10/25s for example

- scoring over 20 in a question scores you an 'alpha', over 15 scores a 'beta'. The number of alphas and betas scored is tallied.

Class boundaries are then decided using a mix of these measures.

eg
3rd - 300 marks
2.2 400 marks 5 betas, one alpha
2.1 600 marks, 5 alphas
1st 800 marks, sum squared total > 10,000

In terms of a tradional %age, no-one scored much above 50% - no-one is expected to as the papers are not designed that way.

Bit off topic, but what I wanted to show was that % scores on their own do not mean much...

(having said that, school exams are all much easier these days without a doubt, anyone trying to deny it is either a fool, or works for the government... (not XOR there)

Quote Hugh Robjohns:

---

Good Rant, Andy. We should form the Grumpy Old Blokes Boring Young Folks About Recording Technology and Studies.

Who else will join my Society of GOBBY FARTS?

---

Some of us 'young folks' are listening attentively & nodding heads in agreement...

Mike

--------------------
www.ehsound.co.uk - Live Sound Hire & Services

Quote Hugh Robjohns:

---

Quote The Byre:

---

...

I have never understood what was wrong with the old O and A Level GCE system as set by the universities of London, Cambridge and the AEB. For some reason, someone decided to fix this system and I was never aware of it ever being 'bust!'

---

Quite. It's a case of being seen to do something, even if the something wasn't what was actually needed. Far easier to fiddle with womething that already works, instead of trying to fix something that is obviously broken.

hugh

---

Hmm ... well we're *way* off topic but I cannot let this pass - sorry.

At the time of the change, it wasjudged that there was a fundamental problem with O levels - that they were designed for a very small percentage of the population and designed (at least originally) for people who would eventually be doing academic subjects in the few Universities we had prior to the 1960s expansion. Over the years, their design changed, but the exclusivity did not.

CSEs were designed to be a lower level of exam, but at their inception, required a very early choice for candiadtes. In some areas, your route to O or CSE was decided as early as 11 and almost always by 13.

This early streaming and extreme exclusivity of the qualifications was changed and eroded over time, but it was still a fundamental problem of the O level exam.

The 2nd thing that happen in education was the debate between inclusive and exclusive education. The O level, by its design, was based on an exclusiv model of education. However, inclusive models have become standard in many educational systems, including the UK.

Hence you have a problem. Even with an exclusive educational system, the O level was considered extreme and too high level for too many. But it is fundamentally bust if you move to an inclusive educational model.

Hence the move to GCSEs and the subsequent chnage to A levels.

Note that I neither defend nor advocate all this - but I just couldn't let the comment "chaneg for change's sake" pass. There were fundamental educational reasons - both practical and philosophical - for the change.

If I was to express an opinion, I think that GCSEs have done some good, but many of the promises made about GCSEs have not been delivered, and the pendulum seems to be swinging away from inclusive educational models anyway. The fear that they suppress excellence and just average out educational achievement to a drab norm has turned out to have some truth. I would not be surprised if we see a fundamental change back to something like a GSE/O level hierarchy within the next 5 to 10 years.

--------------------
Andrew

Quote Michael Harrison:

---

Quote Hugh Robjohns:

---

Good Rant, Andy. We should form the Grumpy Old Blokes Boring Young Folks About Recording Technology and Studies.

Who else will join my Society of GOBBY FARTS?

---

Some of us 'young folks' are listening attentively & nodding heads in agreement...

Mike

---

Agreed.

Seablade

Quote Hugh Robjohns:

---

That would be CSE exams, not the modern GCSE which is somewhat different. I sat my GCE O level in 1977 and we were the last year to use slide rules...

---

I was born in 1977