Quote Dzoni:

---

Well, Lodious, I must admit, your logic is undeniable.

However, simply owning a studio doesn't teach you what you actually need to know as a professional, does it? And you say "teach yourself MRT in the evenings". Well, that's kind of what I'm doing now when I can, but my self-teaching lacks direction.

As a point of discussion, let's ignore my specific situation and look at a general case. Where would one actually learn this stuff?

---

Well alongside SOS Magazine and this Forum, how about contacting one of the helpful people who own a studio who post on this forum, and booking studio time to get one on one tuition once every couple of months, and spend your spare time consolidating your knowledge using equipment at home?

Look at how much it will cost you to do a MRT degree, and how much you will loose in earnings and personal development, and how much use a MRT degree is worth. To my mind, you would be bonkers to not start using the Chem. Eng. degree to start putting yourself in the driving seat and be able to make music on your own terms.

--------------------
I like people, it's my friends I can't stand - Larry David.
http://www.myspace.com/lodious

Quote Lodious:

---

Well alongside SOS Magazine and this Forum, how about contacting one of the helpful people who own a studio who post on this forum, and booking studio time to get one on one tuition once every couple of months, and spend your spare time consolidating your knowledge using equipment at home?

Look at how much it will cost you to do a MRT degree, and how much you will loose in earnings and personal development, and how much use a MRT degree is worth. To my mind, you would be bonkers to not start using the Chem. Eng. degree to start putting yourself in the driving seat and be able to make music on your own terms.

---

Ah, yes, that would make sense, but you'll notice I live in South Africa. Judging by the standard of local recordings, there's no way I'd trust any of these "studios" to teach me anything. I mean, they're not that terrible, but not up to international standards in my opinion. If I'm gonna learn, may as well move to the UK (which is actually a mid-term goal of mine). I must, however, agree with you about using Chem. Eng. for some startup capital.

We are crying out for Chemical Engineers over here, there are plenty of Aussies / South Africans over here at the moment. Come over for a couple of years, earn a load of cash and give the UK government the finger for your tax and, bingo....you have a studio!

--------------------
I like people, it's my friends I can't stand - Larry David.
http://www.myspace.com/lodious

Quote Lodious:

---

We are crying out for Chemical Engineers over here, there are plenty of Aussies / South Africans over here at the moment. Come over for a couple of years, earn a load of cash and give the UK government the finger for your tax and, bingo....you have a studio!

---

Hehe... Wow, I feel like I've hijacked this thread.

Quote Rousseau:

---

These types of courses are not explicitly vocational and as such they resemble other degree level courses such as fine art, music, history, philosophy etc.

---

and that seems to be most of them.

I do not want to indulge in a bun-fight with you, because I am sure that you are a very nice person and I have read some of your other postings and found them intelligent and insightful. Indeed, I have a high regard for most people working in tertiary education in this and other fields. In reply to your assertion that I have no knowledge of large parts of the educational system, in the past, I too have worked as a lecturer in languages, MT and economics. I have also worked in the music business for 40 years (on and off!)

But back to your list -

If a student tells me that he or she has studied art, I expect them to have hands-on skills in the visual arts, as well as theoretical knowledge of the styles and the artists. In other words, they can paint and sculpt, as well as discuss Hepworth and Picasso.

If a student tells me that he or she has studied music, I expect them to be able to play an instrument to a professional level, read music, as well as discuss the great composers or understand musical theory.

If a student tells me that he or she has studied history, I expect that person to be able to perform original research, as well as have a profound knowledge of some aspect of human history.

If a student tells me that he or she has studied philosophy, then I expect that person to be able to write fluently on the human condition, as well as have an in-depth knowledge of everybody from Plato to Russell.

Not only do I expect it, but the student and his or her parents, as well as the rest of society, expects it.

If some individual tells me that they have studied Music Technology to graduate level, then I expect, society expects, the student's parents and even the student expects to have a PROFOUND grasp of two subjects -

a) Music

b) Technology

Most of the students coming out of the MT courses that send me their CVs are not able to read a score or a circuit diagram.

That means in plain English, that they are

a) Musically illiterate

b) Technically illiterate.

Many of them do not even play an instrument. Many of them have never been taught how to solder a simple jack plug.

Now, I do not know what is going on and why this is like that.

I know many lecturers in MT and count some as my friends. They are clever and knowledgeable people. I have met many graduates and they too and largely intelligent and eager to learn. But for some reason - probably something to do with the general politics of education - the knowledge that I know is inside the heads of those lecturers is not being handed on to those students.

Rather than design and build a simple valve preamp or an audio filter, they are asked to write essays on plug-ins.

Rather than study the structure of a song and write a counterpoint to the tune, they are being asked to write essays on the impact of rock music on society.

By all means let the student look at the wider picture and even write essays on that wider picture, but what is happening is the wholesale abandonment of the basics.

And to do that, is to betray the trust that students have placed in you.

Some good points there Andy, and I think the admission of an avoidance of a bunfight is a wise one!

I have to hold my hand up here and admit that I do some guest lecturing at Rousseau's invitation on several of his courses. I have often been asked to come in a give the "industry" viewpoint by different institutions, and always turn them down, as it sends shivers down my spine, and only tempts me to enquire why they can't teach about the industry they're supposedly preparing the students for!

However, when Rousseau approached me, I looked into their courses in more detail, and discovering that he himself not only held a doctorate in dull and boring french music, but composed for tv and computer games persuaded me to give him the benefit of the doubt. It's worryingly rare to find leacturers with current experience, not those who left the industry to teach, or worse, have only ever learned from books themselves.

To then get there and find the usual gang of wastrels and minstrels, with the odd gem was nothing new, however the teaching ethos was a revelation to me - they were harsh, they were practical, they cut very little slack, and it was the first set of ivy-covered hallowed halls that actually spent more time on the truth than window dressing. All very encouraging. More to the point, I was given free reign to rant, swear, smoke, shout, and generally give them a hefty dose of reality on top of the hard-nosed teachings.

However Andy, I agree with you, many of these courses are churning out dross, and this institution was no different, with the usual disinterested parties. I do though believe this lot gave them the best shot they're liable to get, and if the kiddies decide to ignore the advice or the opportunities on offer, then that is ore a reflection on their commitment to their art and future, than on the standard of the education provided.

I think that the three of us are all talking along the same lines, just from different angles, which perhaps leaves one only to conclude, as we so often do in the MB forum, that there an inordinate number of dreamers who see MT or general music as a cop-out course, or worse, as society toda continues to inform us, fame is only 10 seconds away, one just waits for it to happen. Gone are the days where one would do anything as banal as work at it....

Hugs all round, and can we all join hands on a mutual soapbox?

--------------------
Ars longa, vita brevis, occasio praeceps, experimentum periculosum, iudicium difficile.

Quote redleicester:

---

I have often been asked to come in a give the "industry" viewpoint by different institutions, and always turn them down, as it sends shivers down my spine, and only tempts me to enquire why they can't teach about the industry they're supposedly preparing the students for!

---

Colleges running 'vocational' courses like these need to be able to show links with the industry they are supposed to serve -- and rightly so. One of the many ways they do that is to get people actively working in that industry to come and give talks to their students. I see nothing wrong in that. Full time lecturers can teach 'about the industry' but since they obviously don't work in it on a daily basis, there is an obvious gap there to bridge. Plus, while they might have a vested interest in painting the scene in rosy colours, someone genuinely struggling on a daily basis to find work will paint a rather more informative and relevant picture.

Quote:

---

It's worryingly rare to find leacturers with current experience, not those who left the industry to teach, or worse, have only ever learned from books themselves.

---

This is true, but it is an inherent aspect of modern courses. As a full time lecturer, you clearly can't also hold down a full time job in the pro-audio industry, and vice versa. Many colleges do have a number of part time trainers who also work part time in the industry. That's the best of both worlds, clearly, but a rare find.

The next best option will be people with an innate training ability (not something to take for granted) who have left the industry for a more stable job, bringing current experience with them. Clearly, the currency of that experience wanes over the years unless they can find a way of keeping their hand in, but it's better than nothing.

The ones that scare me are those who attend the cocurse themselves, graduate, and then start teaching subsequent generations on the same (or similar) courses! This has always been the way of purely academic courses, and I don't have the same concerns for it there. They are passing on pure technical or academic knowledge. It can go from the lecturer's notes to the student's notes (without necessarily passing through the brains of either) quite satisfactorily. But a vocationaly bassed course needs more practical input than that, and someone whose experiences are limmited to the college studio and some gear at home really isn't experienced eneough to help people into the wider world of pro audio... IMHO.

Quote:

---

...if the kiddies decide to ignore the advice or the opportunities on offer, then that is ore a reflection on their commitment to their art and future, than on the standard of the education provided.

---

this is certainly true and is something that frustrates PW and I regularly. On our college visits we see so many people who waste the opportunities being afforded them. Usually, if there are 60 or so students placed in front of us at a Q&A session, we will both independently recognise only two or three with the get up an go to make it in the industry. And on comparing notes with each other and the course tutors afterwards, we are rarely wrong -- it is that obvious.

I'm all for students at college to discover the delights of social interaction, fornication and booze... I thoroughly enjoyed following those pastimes when I was a student too -- but in such a hugely competitive market, you have to put the work in too, and raise yourself several notches above the other 70,000 students graduating every year with the same qualifications!

Quote:

---

...there an inordinate number of dreamers who see MT or general music as a cop-out course, or worse, as society today continues to inform us, fame is only 10 seconds away, one just waits for it to happen.

---

I think many A level students really don't know what they want to do with their lives -- and understandably so -- and thus when looking for the further education they are now expecetd or encouraged to take they choose music tech courses because they look (a) relatively easy, (b) good fun, (c) expand a personal hobby into a full time interest and (d) offer the prospect of fame!

From the college's point of view, they just need to get bums on seats to bring in the money, and if offering MT courses makes that easier for them, clearly that's what many will choose to do. As a result, many of these courses are being promoted somewhat inappropriately, to my mind, which is a shame. And the school's guiding the kids know no better because they have no experience of the industry and go on what the colleges tell them.

One of my daughter's friends is keen to do an MT course, and I know first hand what a ridiculously rosy picture is being painted by those who are supposed to be guiding his choices!

hugh

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

Quote Hugh Robjohns:

---

One of my daughter's friends is keen to do an MT course, and I know first hand what a ridiculously rosy picture is being painted by those who are supposed to be guiding his choices!

---

I'm sure you can point him in the right direction, and poke hard with a big stick!

--------------------
Ars longa, vita brevis, occasio praeceps, experimentum periculosum, iudicium difficile.

Quote Dzoni:

---

As a point of discussion, let's ignore my specific situation and look at a general case. Where would one actually learn this stuff?

---

It all depends what level of "this stuff" and in what context one wishes to use it. For instance, how do you learn to use a brand new desk that has only come onto the market today? Do you go to the manufacturers' courses, or do you buy one and gain the experience you need by actually using it on willing guinea pigs? Or, do you wait until someone else has gained the experience to be able to use it to some degree of success and then let them teach you?

If you want to work in a specific field - let's say live sound with a company that has gained a reputation for delivering high quality - then it's probably best to learn to do things their way, and with the gear they use - that would imply seeking a (probably unpaid) position with them that will lead to paid work once you've made the grade and can perform to their standards consistently.

The same applies in studio work. It's completely pointless being a whizz kid on PT or an SSL if the studio is Neve and 2" tape. Sure, you've got the generals, but you're going to need to learn the tools they've got. It's similar to moving from big analogue desks to the new generation of digital kit - what are you going to do when you get to the gig and there's a D5 sitting their expectantly, and you've only ever used MIDAS?

Were I "one" I'd be seeking an internship with an outfit, and be prepared to work the kind of hours the MD works, show the level of dedication his best folks show, do anything and everything to learn the ropes they way they do it, and do my best to emulate their best practitioners.

It's that simple - not easy, but simple.

--------------------
[url=http://www.facebook.com/pages/hifi-studios/117322741632389[/url]

Let me tell you a story…(caution: epic post!)

Some years ago I ‘left the industry’ to start from scratch a music department at a local FE and HE college. A guaranteed wage (supplemented by a healthy royalty stream), paid holidays and one of the best pensions around were some of the attractive factors (I’m not getting any younger). Not least, I wanted to do something about the burgeoning number of, er, people, who had a copy of Cubase and frankly had not one clue about realising its – and their – potential. I started writing courses and (the hard part) getting them validated. Then I started recruiting students. The department became – and for all I know, still may be – one of the largest and best equipped in Europe. It was staffed almost exclusively by part-timers who could demonstrate current, relevant industry experience, which rapidly became problem number one.

Educational institutions are, generally, skint. Part-time lecturers may be paid i.r.o. £30 per hour, but that’s only for the hours they teach. Preparation and marking also take up a huge amount of time – particularly in the case of new courses, for which there is no existing body of work (e.g. handouts, tried and tested assignments, and lesson plans) on which to draw. So a lecturer may be paid for eight hours teaching a week, but may need to do an additional eight to sixteen unpaid hours a week on top of that to keep abreast of everything. Result: stressed and unhappy lecturers, many of whom, if truth be told, were only doing the teaching work to subsidise their paltry ‘industry’ income and hadn’t yet made the required mental transition from engineer/producer/performer/whatever, to teacher. Really successful industry practitioners, by the way, were very hard to attract…

As I said above, educational institutions are, generally, skint. People here will appreciate the cost of designing and installing thirty soundproofed studios. As Head of Department, I spent weeks just preparing figures and projections to keep the lease company happy (i.e. the bank), and this exercise was repeated many times. Then there was the cost of equipping and maintaining thirty studios, plus three computer rooms and an acoustics lab. Getting the money for that was a full-time job in itself, and I spent most of my life there justifying the huge expenditure, maximising funding streams and getting more and more out of touch with my first love, music. In effect, I had to become an accountant.

Of course, outlay on that scale – we’re nearly at seven figures now – has to be justified by income, which translates to students’ bums on college seats. Whereas my original vision for the department was maybe fifteen top-rate students, with me and a couple of other staff all working together and using the sort of gear that I would personally never be able to afford, through necessity it had to become a monster with some five hundred students enrolled – most of whom were merely ‘cannon fodder’, there to provide the funding for that small number of students that actually had what it took to become the real deal, and who would truly benefit from the opportunities on offer. We had by now entered the business of ‘selling dreams’. The morality and ethics of the situation became impossible to live with; I felt guilty, stressed and, in fact, became quite ill. I just couldn’t cope with the feeling that most of those students – many the same age as my own kids - were pretty much wasting some of the most important years of their lives. The worst thing was that, after enrolling, some of the students also realised these things…

Stressed staff, over-burdened resources, arbitrary budget cuts, endless inspections, reductions in teaching hours and a whole load of stuff that I haven’t even touched on don’t make for a very happy educational experience from either side of the lectern. I knew that most of my problems were unique to setting up a new department and that, once established, things would get easier, but I still found it hard to believe that any state funded institution would be able adequately to provide the resources and experiences that are essential for students in this subject area. So I resigned, took stock, caught up with the developments in the industry that had passed me by while I was in education and, if only to make a point, went hell for leather at resuscitating my career. (Successfully too: in the next few years I made what would have taken me over twenty years to earn as a teacher). Education is a hard job, and I believe it’s one of the very few sectors whose problems could be significantly alleviated by throwing money at them. Unfortunately, the money isn’t there.

So, in my experience, I think you need the following to run a good music tech related course:

1. An abundance and variety of very good gear and working environments

2. Staff who are successful in the industry but who are also gifted teachers and who will also have the time and motivation to undertake a teaching qualification (soon to be mandatory if my memory serves correctly)

3. Rigorous entry requirements for students, in order to separate the wheat from the chaff, keep class numbers down to a minimum, and provide an effective learning environment with loads of access to resources and staff

4. Real industry involvement in the whole educational process, from programme development to internships, course delivery and beyond.

To deliver these things successfully would take resources that just aren’t easily available: money (to get the gear and reduce the need for high student numbers), suitable staff (they’re out there, but in very short supply) and industry. The industry, in reality, comprises loads of SMEs, most of which don’t have the resources to provide meaningful work experience or, crucially, jobs for graduates…

But at least there would be fewer graduates and each would have a slightly more useful educational experience behind them!

--------------------
"Over fifteen years without a slogan"

Quote The Red Bladder:

---

If a student tells me that he or she has studied philosophy, then I expect that person to be able to write fluently on the human condition, as well as have an in-depth knowledge of everybody from Plato to Russell.

---

If only that were true of the philosophy students I taught...

Interestingly, one of the very few people I know who successfully combines a career in recording with an academic role is sometime SOS author Eric James, who runs his own recording company and is also a part-time lecturer at Cambridge -- in philosophy.

Quote reid:

---

Quote arctichare:

---

Quote thenaturallevel:

---

You have a budget of £100,000 design your ideal studio.....blah blah

---

Discuss the impact technology has had on electronic music for both composition, performance and dissemination.

---

I'm struggling to see how the latter question is any 'better' than the first - both are blandly non-specific and lazily open ended in scope. Blimey, but I'm getting old - it was better in my day....

---

I disagree. I think the latter question, an essay question, is much more challenging and less open ended. The question is in the context of 'electronic' music rather than pop/acoustic music and without a knowledge of electronic music and techniques within the field it is difficult to construct any form of reasonable discussion on this topic.

It's fair to say that electronic music has done so much for the whole music industry now that it cannot be overlooked, regardless of the field you may wish to work in.

And, as you say, 'it was better in my day' - I don't doubt you on that. That's the way you were taught and learnt about the music industry. The fact is that the industry is changing very rapidly and for my generation, who is seeing the music industry in a completely different way, writing about designing a studio for £100,000 is not a helpful or challenging exercise.

SJ.

Quote thenaturallevel:

---

Quote Oi Rorbison:

---

Just for personal interest, would anybody who is attending one of these courses be able to post up with typical examples of the exam questions / assignments?


Thanks,

---

You have a budget of £100,000 design your ideal studio.....blah blah

---

this is probably the most common that most people can answer, If i was a lecturer I would set this question let all the students go out and note their fav gear/ask people on the sos website then give them the assignment of connecting it all together and mark them on the most efficiently connected. The second question would be the educating one.

I disagree that all courses are rubbish apart from the Tonmiester course. I did the gateway course, when i started working after I was the most knowledgeable in my place of work. Most of the others were on other courses such as SAE, I also speak to a lot of people each day in the retail sector of music tech and they don’t seem to hot at knowing their stuff. Saying that 100 people started my course 25 finished it.

Just my thoughts

Gary

Quote:

---

So, in my experience, I think you need the following to run a good music tech related course:

1. An abundance and variety of very good gear and working environments

2. Staff who are successful in the industry but who are also gifted teachers and who will also have the time and motivation to undertake a teaching qualification (soon to be mandatory if my memory serves correctly)

3. Rigorous entry requirements for students, in order to separate the wheat from the chaff, keep class numbers down to a minimum, and provide an effective learning environment with loads of access to resources and staff

4. Real industry involvement in the whole educational process, from programme development to internships, course delivery and beyond.

---

These are old chestnuts, so let's go through them one by one, shall we -

1. No. Totally not needed - indeed counter productive. Playing with shiney toys may make the lecturers happy, but it is just a total distraction and a complete and utter waste of time.

2. How about staff who just understand the subject for starters? Many do not.

3. Yes, easily done too, just insist on three proper A Levels with good grades, with physics mandatory and a music test of some sort.

4. Yes, absolutely, but here you deal with item one. Instead of wasting public money on shiney toys for the lecturers to play with, send the students out to surrounding studios to learn the hands on thing there. That would be far, far cheaper and far more effective.

But you have missed one, so here is my Number Five -

5. Spend the first year learning theory. Good old chalk-n-talk. No nancying about like a bunch of girls on a Saturday night with ProTools and Mackie desks, until they understand the theory properly and have the basic skills required to just be in a studio.

That means understanding music and understanding electronics and having simple, practical skills like score reading, fault-finding and soldering.

Firstly the Tonmeister course is good for some things, but not for everything. I chose to do a degree away from Surrey whilst a few of my friends are at surrey.

For a start the main difference is mine is a Bachelor of Arts degree and we took a more artistic approach to some things as well as a lot of the technical stuff, which at the time, is what I wanted.

I regret not learning some things my mates have learnt at Surrey, but similarly my mates there regret not learning some of the things I have. In particular, I used my time to become proficient at Pro Tools (we had numorous HD3 suits) whereas my friend tells me Surrey does not even have an HD rig.

The courses are both good for different things.

With regard to the design a studio question, many lecturers set this assignment as an intial break in for new students to allow them to get to grips with the recording chain and different methods of recording in analogue or digital formats.

Remember that in the first year, nothing normally counts towards your final degree and thus none of this stuff should be viewed as a serious academic untertaking.

However i can say that my course got very difficult in the second and third years in terms of the academic written assignments (this is a degree afterall, not just a 'music tech' college course, so whilst not nessecerily applicable in terms of a sound engineering job, it is something of a right of passage) and also the practical recording work. Students have to be good at performing (instruments), arranging and song writing, recording, production, writing, researching and learning the maths & phsysics of recording. It is quite hard to excel in all those areas, and believe me its not as easy as people think.

The notion of the easy micky mouse Music Tech degree is all to familiar to me, and after the first year of my course many dropped out because they were not expecting it to be that hard. Interestingly, a couple went to the ACM in Guilford where they could study the practical playing and recording side of things without the academic hard graft (their words, not mine).

I am not niave enough to think that a degree is by any means a substitute for experience, but if like me, people use their study time to gain experience working with pro tools and running sessions using gear that we would otherwise never get access to, it can be a lot more than just a bit of paper.

And to people who say degrees dont count for sh*t, I recently had an interview at abbey road and although I didn't have commercial studio experience they called me in anyway. When I quizzed them about it they said it was purley because of my CV and degree result.

BTW soz for typo's im at work and in a hurry ;-).

Much love,

Tom.

--------------------
www.myspace.com/tomfullerproduction
www.myspace.com/thelesserknown

Quote monosyllabic:

---

Quote reid:

---

Quote arctichare:

---

Quote thenaturallevel:

---

You have a budget of £100,000 design your ideal studio.....blah blah

---

Discuss the impact technology has had on electronic music for both composition, performance and dissemination.

---

I'm struggling to see how the latter question is any 'better' than the first - both are blandly non-specific and lazily open ended in scope. Blimey, but I'm getting old - it was better in my day....

---

I disagree. I think the latter question, an essay question, is much more challenging and less open ended. The question is in the context of 'electronic' music rather than pop/acoustic music and without a knowledge of electronic music and techniques within the field it is difficult to construct any form of reasonable discussion on this topic.

---

The latter question - as written - has no context. If answered in a considered and thorough way, doing justice to the question would require a reply that took in almost every significant development in communication, recording and computer technology since the early 20th century, including the theremin, ondes martenot and first radio receivers.

If that isn't non-specific and lazily open ended, then what is?

Quote The Red Bladder:

---

Quote:

---

So, in my experience, I think you need the following to run a good music tech related course:

1. An abundance and variety of very good gear and working environments

2. Staff who are successful in the industry but who are also gifted teachers and who will also have the time and motivation to undertake a teaching qualification (soon to be mandatory if my memory serves correctly)

3. Rigorous entry requirements for students, in order to separate the wheat from the chaff, keep class numbers down to a minimum, and provide an effective learning environment with loads of access to resources and staff

4. Real industry involvement in the whole educational process, from programme development to internships, course delivery and beyond.

---

These are old chestnuts, so let's go through them one by one, shall we -

1. No. Totally not needed - indeed counter productive. Playing with shiney toys may make the lecturers happy, but it is just a total distraction and a complete and utter waste of time.

2. How about staff who just understand the subject for starters? Many do not.

3. Yes, easily done too, just insist on three proper A Levels with good grades, with physics mandatory and a music test of some sort.

4. Yes, absolutely, but here you deal with item one. Instead of wasting public money on shiney toys for the lecturers to play with, send the students out to surrounding studios to learn the hands on thing there. That would be far, far cheaper and far more effective.

But you have missed one, so here is my Number Five -

5. Spend the first year learning theory. Good old chalk-n-talk. No nancying about like a bunch of girls on a Saturday night with ProTools and Mackie desks, until they understand the theory properly and have the basic skills required to just be in a studio.

That means understanding music and understanding electronics and having simple, practical skills like score reading, fault-finding and soldering.

---

Ah yes Mr Bladder, but we're not talking about the same things.

Your vision of what music technology as a concept and as a university degree course should encompass is not necessarily one that is held by the government (ie HEFCE) and many educational establishments. As I'm sure you're aware HEFCE produces 'Benchmark Statements' which provide universities with the kind of minimum requirements and indicative content of all degree courses. Universities are, in many respects, bound by them.

Hence, I would argue that what you mean by Music Tech is in essence Audio Engineering - which should carry a BSc qualification rather than a BA, and for which the subject matter, scope, content, and assessment criteria would all be different. I suspect the majority of courses these days see Music Technology to mean using technology to create music, and as such is less to do with 'engineering'.

As for your old chesnuts...

1. That doesn't make sense. Students need to have practical experience using technology for coursework and skills development. It would be like saying, we'll teach you the piano, but hey we won't have any for you to practice on.

2. Staff who are employed in Universities are required to have minimum qualifications - usually Masters level. Exceptions are made, in some cases, for prior and relevant industry experience. Put it this way, anyone who comes near my course is more than qualified to teach the provision.

3. A levels are easy these days for a variety of reasons, so 3 A's no longer guarantees that a student can write, reason adequately or indeed read music. Indeed, many coleagues in other institutions spend a lot of time bringing students up to the required matriculation standard during their first year.

Why the obsession with physics? One can easily teach the principles of superposition, eigentons and such like in the first year of their course. A requirement for physics would be reasonable on a BSc course (which would by its very nature be 'scientific'), but not on a BA Arts oriented course.

4. Well, students do now pay lots of money for their courses, so that has, to a certain extent, eased the burden of public funding. However, your solution is not practical for a variety of reasons. First, there may be few studios of any quality in the locality. Second, the Government would require that these places be inspected and a univeristy would have to be able to guarantee that students would have parity of experience. And who would supervise the arrangements? and the ppl who will be teaching the students - would they indeed be qualified or skilled in teaching (perhaps they may have graduated from the courses you lambast?)

5. I think you'll find that most Music Tech courses do teach 'theoretical' subject matter of many kinds. I don't quite see how spending a year learning the theory of studio practice (whatever that means) might be more worthwhile than spending a year in a studio practicing. Also, what you mean by a studio and what I mean by a studio may be two radically different things.

I think Paul's assertions are spot on.


Cheers

Rousseau, you sounds like you are in a great position to answer the OP, could you give some examples of the juicier type of questions set on one of your courses? Which establishment do you lecture at?

Thanks,

--------------------
I like people, it's my friends I can't stand - Larry David.
http://www.myspace.com/lodious

Edited by Lodious (17/10/07 04:24 PM)

Quote:

---

3. A levels are easy these days for a variety of reasons, so 3 A's no longer guarantees that a student can write, reason adequately or indeed read music. Indeed, many coleagues in other institutions spend a lot of time bringing students up to the required matriculation standard during their first year.

---

Do you get up at six o'clock the morning of 16th of August each year just to get stuff about exams being easier and so on.

Just trust me, if you got three A-Levels at A grade you can write and reason just fine. Infact your pretty damn intelligent. I could do with you saying a-levels have become easier, because maybe they have a little as they have become more accessible (though after talking to a teacher who took them many years ago and now teaches them, I agreed with them that they have changed so much- and in my opinion in a way that tests a large range of skills and not just memorising- its hard to tell which is easier and which is harder). But they are deffinatley not easy, and this is always the argument that gets brought up but if you think they are so simple them do them yourself!

As for reading a score, if you did A-Level music, you wont have a problem. I do belive though that the score reading part had been taken out of the english and physics sylabus so your not going to have got anywhere in that area if you just did them .

We'll have to disagree here on points one and four: I really think that a variety of pro equipment is essential, and I'm not talking about shiny toys for the staff. And this is not just because a lot of studios don't want students in their rooms (and who can blame them?) it's also because many studios want lock-out rates and block bookings (or at least, they used to). For that money, I'd rather buy the gear and have it available 24/7. Plus when it breaks, they learn to fix it... And of course, we're not just talking about recording bands here, or, God forbid, 'puttin togevver some beats man' - surely?

Point 2: - we're in agreement here then...although I really ought to make it clear that I've met many lecturers whose talent, commitment and teaching ability leaves me in awe - there are some great people out there. I just wish so many of them didn't have to work under such difficult conditions. Unfortunately, I've also met some that shouldn't be teaching at all...

Point 3: Sure, although the economics don't allow many institutions to be that selective

And your point 5 - Of course - but that's what you get with 'real industry involvement'.

Again, I think we're probably all arguing for the same thing here. Part of the reason for my post was to demonstrate that, in my experience at least, the state-funded sector by its very nature was generally not conducive to teaching the subject in the way that I, at least, would have wished. Although ultimately very profitable, it's an expensive subject to set up, and the only way some of these colleges can get in on the game is to over-recruit like mad and then try to keep the spending in check - hence reduced contact hours etc etc. And we know what that policy leads to: loads of courses of 'variable' quality, and far too many graduates with questionable skills and experience. The trick, I suppose, is to find the better ones, which is why these questions are asked so frequently in this forum.

PS I should also make it clear that my experiences were largely based on a 'mixed economy' college. Different types of institution may well do things differently.

--------------------
"Over fifteen years without a slogan"

Edited by Paul Johnson Rogers (17/10/07 04:41 PM)

Quote The Red Bladder:

---

1. No. Totally not needed - indeed counter productive. Playing with shiney toys may make the lecturers happy, but it is just a total distraction and a complete and utter waste of time.

---

I think it is really about balance. You don't need Neve or SSL desks in every room, but you do need a desk capable of demonstrating the general structure and practical issues involved in operating a large format (and in-line) desk.

Similarly, you don't need the latest shiny toys everywhere, but you do need a range of low, mid and high end products so that students can learn the differences between them and -- importantly -- how to make the best use of them within their limitations.

Quote:

---

2. How about staff who just understand the subject for starters? Many do not.

---

Very true. The ability to teach is very different (and equally as rare) as the ability to succeed as a producer/engineer, and many of those who don't make the grade as the latter take up the former...and don't make the grade there either -- but they still get paid so they carry on doing it. Understandable, but not helpful.

Quote:

---

3. Yes, easily done too, just insist on three proper A Levels with good grades, with physics mandatory and a music test of some sort.

---

Harsh but fair

Quote:

---

4. Yes, absolutely, but here you deal with item one. Instead of wasting public money on shiney toys for the lecturers to play with, send the students out to surrounding studios to learn the hands on thing there. That would be far, far cheaper and far more effective.

---

I doubt it would be cheaper, and it would be very hard to organise -- let alone control and maintain the required standards and content. In the end, all that would happen is that the college's income would be handed out to help ailing studios stay afloat and provide income to their owners.

Quote:

---

5. Spend the first year learning theory. Good old chalk-n-talk. No nancying about like a bunch of girls on a Saturday night with ProTools and Mackie desks, until they understand the theory properly and have the basic skills required to just be in a studio.

---

Tell me and maybe I'll learn. Show me and maybe I'll remember. Let me do and I'll understand!

It is not appropriate or effective to do theory without practicals, and no college worth the money would do that, regardless of the nature or content of the course. You have to interleave theory with practical work to reinforce the former and give it relevance.

The problem in many places at the moment seems to be that they do the practicals without the theory needed to underpin it, and that is no help either.

hugh

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

Quote TLKtom:

---

I regret not learning some things my mates have learnt at Surrey, but similarly my mates there regret not learning some of the things I have. In particular, I used my time to become proficient at Pro Tools (we had numorous HD3 suits) whereas my friend tells me Surrey does not even have an HD rig.

---

This is a commonly used argument, but is, in reality a tortoise and hare situation.

Your surrey friends will be familiar with the concepts of a variety of DAWs, and thus equipped to familiarise themselves with PT, or Pyramix, or SADiE or anything else required should they be presented with one. They won't initially be as quick an operator as someone with specific experience, but they'll learn fast and will quickly catch up, tortoise-like to your hare.

In other words, they are equipped sufficiently to pick up the specific skills quickly while on the job because they have the necessary foundation.

Conversely, you may never have the opportunity to learn and experience some of the things they did at college while you were learning PT -- and some of those skills and knowledge may shape their careers in far more important ways.

As with all these things, there is a balance involved, as you say. Personally, I favour the broad brush, lots of underpinning knowledge, long-term approach, rather than the specific and detailed short term instant gratification approach, and I think time and my own experiences have shown that to be better. Other's views obviously vary, but such is the spice of life!

The aim of university, surely -- and no matter what course -- should be to equip the student with underpinning knowledge and transferrable skills sufficient that they can develop further on their own.

Strictly vocational courses, learning the intimate specifics of, say, Pro Tools or hairdressing techniques, tends to drive people into specific and narrow lanes. They may be useful to employers immediately and in the short term, but often they find it hard to expand beyond their limited training and eventually become liabilities rather than developing assets.

I'm not suggesting any of this applies to you specifically, but it is a generalisation I have witnessed first hand in several different areas.

hugh

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

I would like to take this opportunity to defend the "attacked" (this word was used loosely) Music Tech/Music Production.

I don't know about anyone else, but i am doing the course for experience and to gain more knowledge. I don't care about the fact i'll have a degree at the end of it, i just want to learn and hone my skills.

As was mentioned before, people will need to read scores, the course i am on i have music theory lessons where those less capable can learn to read a basic, or simple score including key changes, rests and what not, very handy!

The course does not just focus on one platform, with one DAW. I've had lessons on PC's and Mac's (before i hadn't even operated a Mac) with Cubase, Pro Tools and Logic. Yes OK, there are plenty out there, loads in fact, but surely if you can operate these (main?) three you can at least get by with others. You learn where certain things are, or what they are called so instead of saying "how do i get this thing to fit this thing?" you can say "how do i time stretch?"

The course also has a bit for Mixing. Honing your easrs as to what 'genres' need what sounds. How to approach a requested sound "I want a jazz sounding kit" you know not to over mic the kit and a close proximity [i learnt that today :P]

You also learn about Synths. Yes, i know this isn't engineering but what if you can then go on to make amazing synths that people will pay for (Absynth?) then that basic understanding might help you realise that with more practice, it would be possible.

The way it is laid out is all the theory lessons are squashed to the beginning of the week and the practical at the end. So you leanr it, practice it, reinforce it, learn it all in a week, so you're not forgetting!

So it isn't all bad. before this course i had basic knowledge of Cubase and only thought there was one mic placement for each instrument. So, as someone mentioned above about employment, maybe someone with a degree in Music Tech isn't that bad...they would at least have a basic knowledge in all basic things

Sorry about the long post!!

--------------------
I'm a student. Don't listen...

I see your point and it is a good one.

In my case, we were not taught how to use pro tools. We were taught about the recording process and sound in general.

That specific point i was using to target the general argument that university was a waste of time in terms of practical experience. I was pointing out that I personally used the studios to gain additional ('real world') experience.

In comparison to surrey, we study some of the same things, it seems such as signal processing, and synthesis and recording techniques etc. In contrast, we also focused on the aesthetics of music and production, with musical (score) analysis and musical philosophy. For me these things are as important as the technical side of recording.

Whether this affects my employability remains to be seen; I didn't get the job at abbey road due to lack of experience in a commercial studio (I never expected to get it) and thus I am now working in a good studio to gain the experience i need to progress. But the degree has definitely given me a head start in terms of what I know. Everyone still has to start at the bottom, but if you know the software and the hardware before you start it is easier to progress quickly.

The main thing (for me) that needs to be learnt in the real world, is dealing with clients under pressure and adhering to time constraints. It is one thing fiddling about with a mix over 3 or 4 days, but it is quite different having to bash out good results in a few hours.

Working in a commercial studio has also given me access to neve and ssl consoles which my uni could never provide, I know the SAE and some of the other top notch institutes can provide that level of gear. Still the fundamental skills I learned are easily transferable so it doesn't really make any difference.

While a little less relevent, one of the engineers at Abbey Road (a Tonmeister Grad) told me that Surrey have a Neve in pieces somewhere on site; that is pretty criminal if you ask me! Im sure the current students would appreciate its reassembly in the near future .

Tom.

--------------------
www.myspace.com/tomfullerproduction
www.myspace.com/thelesserknown

Quote TLKtom:

---

While a little less relevent, one of the engineers at Abbey Road (a Tonmeister Grad) told me that Surrey have a Neve in pieces somewhere on site; that is pretty criminal if you ask me! Im sure the current students would appreciate its reassembly in the near future .

---

Well, it's obvious - isn't it? That Neve's reassembly will be the first years practical exam. You should see what the second years have to do....

Quote reid:

---

Quote monosyllabic:

---

Quote reid:

---

Quote arctichare:

---

Quote thenaturallevel:

---

You have a budget of £100,000 design your ideal studio.....blah blah

---

Discuss the impact technology has had on electronic music for both composition, performance and dissemination.

---

I'm struggling to see how the latter question is any 'better' than the first - both are blandly non-specific and lazily open ended in scope. Blimey, but I'm getting old - it was better in my day....

---

I disagree. I think the latter question, an essay question, is much more challenging and less open ended. The question is in the context of 'electronic' music rather than pop/acoustic music and without a knowledge of electronic music and techniques within the field it is difficult to construct any form of reasonable discussion on this topic.

---

The latter question - as written - has no context. If answered in a considered and thorough way, doing justice to the question would require a reply that took in almost every significant development in communication, recording and computer technology since the early 20th century, including the theremin, ondes martenot and first radio receivers.

If that isn't non-specific and lazily open ended, then what is?

---

Assignments at degree level are purposefully openended.

For a final year dissertation there are usually no guidelines at all, maybe some for the students that have trouble finding their own subjects.

When they do give you a bare framework to work from, you are supposed to focus on specific points and ideas you deem important.

If they gave you the exact question to answer then the task would be ten times easier; it tests the students ability to identify and pursue their own lines of argument on the subjects they choose to research.

A Levels are spoon-fed, degrees are not. Infact it is in the first year of uni (which doesn't usually count towards the final degree) where more specific questions are set and discussed, to break the A level students in slowly.

Tom

--------------------
www.myspace.com/tomfullerproduction
www.myspace.com/thelesserknown

Haha, is that right

--------------------
www.myspace.com/tomfullerproduction
www.myspace.com/thelesserknown

I have read through this thread with interest since I posted the first reply and example question. Alot of salient points have been raised, however, this one by TLKtom caught my eye..

"The main thing (for me) that needs to be learnt in the real world, is dealing with clients under pressure and adhering to time constraints. It is one thing fiddling about with a mix over 3 or 4 days, but it is quite different having to bash out good results in a few hours."

This is a very good point. The music/recording industry is a people industry at the end of the day and one thing it is difficult to learn at University is how to deal with difficult clients in a pressurised situation.

i currently am doing a degree in Music Production, yet i am writing assignments on research of ethnographic studies? I am sick of learning bullshit when i want to be in the studio 24/7. I am a good musician but cannot read music.....yet..i have a profound technical interest in computing, wiring etc as i was a electrical engineer and fabricator. Why can't my £2000 a year go towards teaching me what i dont know that could be useful!

What does Ethnomusicology have to do with reverbs for snares?

--------------------
www.stablehousestudios.co.uk

Did you know what the course involved when you applied for it?

Quote TLKtom:

---

While a little less relevent, one of the engineers at Abbey Road (a Tonmeister Grad) told me that Surrey have a Neve in pieces somewhere on site; that is pretty criminal if you ask me! Im sure the current students would appreciate its reassembly in the near future .

---

At least the people at Surrey know what a Neve mixer is - unlike certain other educational establishments I have come across.

Cheers

James.

--------------------
JRP Music - Audio Mastering and Restoration.
http://www.jrpmusic.net

Quote fakiekid:

---

i currently am doing a degree in Music Production, yet i am writing assignments on research of ethnographic studies? I am sick of learning bullshit when i want to be in the studio 24/7. I am a good musician but cannot read music.....yet..i have a profound technical interest in computing, wiring etc as i was a electrical engineer and fabricator. Why can't my £2000 a year go towards teaching me what i dont know that could be useful!

What does Ethnomusicology have to do with reverbs for snares?

---

Magnificent!

Let me answer that question in a round-about way -

I work in a commercial studio. I have the job that so many of you aspire to or you are charged with the task of educating the likes of Fakiekid to become.

Now and then, I sit behind the big desk with all the knobs and lights. Most of the time I do not. Right now, I am working on a computer network. The band downstairs has their own pet producer-engineer, who also works part-time as a college lecturer.

That man is doing that job for shits-n-grins, i.e. he is doing it so that he can keep his hand in. He is not getting paid.

I am getting paid.

So what did I do this week so far?

Well, Monday and Tuesday, I tested a prototype 19" effect for a small company. I had to protocol the distortion, S/N, output levels and a whole host of stuff like that. That meant using machines with which Fakiekid will be fully cognisant. Scopes, D-meters, etc.

When I have finished putting in the new network, I shall be editing some music, according to a marked up score. Something Fakiekid needs to learn. Next week I shall be mastering and authoring some CDs and DVDs. About 10 in all.

If I have any time to spare, I shall get on with repairing a shed load of cables that have been bunged to one side, as being suspect. Then I have to install a new switching system for a fourth multitrack and build the simple wood structure to hold the switches.

In November, I shall be working on a new set of valve preamps and a valve compressor that I have been developing, in order to give the studio a broader business footprint. After all, a studio cannot live from room rental alone - some of you might like to remember that!

On top of these tasks, comes the day-to-day admin that goes with any business, large or small. Returning e-mails, updating websites and building new ones, getting cars and vans to the repair shop, writing letters, ordering CD replications, bla, bla, bla. You get the idea.

In our small community of some 100,000 people, there are about 10 full time sound engineers and about 10 part-timers on top of that. One (your truly!) works in a studio, about six work in broadcasting and the others are PA people.

Those that work in broadcasting will not have to deal with the authoring of CDs and DVDs, but will have to deal with things like line feeds, microwave links and a shed load of kit repairs and installation work, especially those working for the private broadcasters. That is on top of the usual studio work.

The PA people have their hands full with kit repair. The scope, the multimeter and the soldering iron is almost as important as the ear.

So when you have all finished pontificating about the pro and cons of some esoteric irrelevance, such as the effects of plugins on the music of today, you might like to come back down to Planet Earth, you know, the one I live on. The real world where real people earn a living.

I get tired of listening to academics poncing around about the value of learning, when the REAL value in learning is, as Fakiekid so rightly points out, learning something that OF value.

To the lecturers and their students reading this - are you teaching or learning those skills that I and those like me have to have to do our job?

Or as Fakiekid puts it, "What does Ethnomusicology have to do with reverbs for snares?"

I might add to that, what does Ethnomusicology have to do with soldering a wiring loom, marking up a score, trouble-shooting a desk, designing an analogue filter, authoring a DVD or developing a business plan?

Students - if the above skills are not on the curriculum, print this posting and hand it to your lecturer. Ask them, when do you get to learn those skills you will need in the studio?

Quote The Red Bladder:

---

Quote fakiekid:

---

i currently am doing a degree in Music Production, yet i am writing assignments on research of ethnographic studies? I am sick of learning bullshit when i want to be in the studio 24/7. I am a good musician but cannot read music.....yet..i have a profound technical interest in computing, wiring etc as i was a electrical engineer and fabricator. Why can't my £2000 a year go towards teaching me what i dont know that could be useful!

What does Ethnomusicology have to do with reverbs for snares?

---

Magnificent!

Let me answer that question in a round-about way -

I work in a commercial studio. I have the job that so many of you aspire to or you are charged with the task of educating the likes of Fakiekid to become.

Now and then, I sit behind the big desk with all the knobs and lights. Most of the time I do not. Right now, I am working on a computer network. The band downstairs has their own pet producer-engineer, who also works part-time as a college lecturer.

That man is doing that job for shits-n-grins, i.e. he is doing it so that he can keep his hand in. He is not getting paid.

I am getting paid.

So what did I do this week so far?

Well, Monday and Tuesday, I tested a prototype 19" effect for a small company. I had to protocol the distortion, S/N, output levels and a whole host of stuff like that. That meant using machines with which Fakiekid will be fully cognisant. Scopes, D-meters, etc.

When I have finished putting in the new network, I shall be editing some music, according to a marked up score. Something Fakiekid needs to learn. Next week I shall be mastering and authoring some CDs and DVDs. About 10 in all.

If I have any time to spare, I shall get on with repairing a shed load of cables that have been bunged to one side, as being suspect. Then I have to install a new switching system for a fourth multitrack and build the simple wood structure to hold the switches.

In November, I shall be working on a new set of valve preamps and a valve compressor that I have been developing, in order to give the studio a broader business footprint. After all, a studio cannot live from room rental alone - some of you might like to remember that!

On top of these tasks, comes the day-to-day admin that goes with any business, large or small. Returning e-mails, updating websites and building new ones, getting cars and vans to the repair shop, writing letters, ordering CD replications, bla, bla, bla. You get the idea.

In our small community of some 100,000 people, there are about 10 full time sound engineers and about 10 part-timers on top of that. One (your truly!) works in a studio, about six work in broadcasting and the others are PA people.

Those that work in broadcasting will not have to deal with the authoring of CDs and DVDs, but will have to deal with things like line feeds, microwave links and a shed load of kit repairs and installation work, especially those working for the private broadcasters. That is on top of the usual studio work.

The PA people have their hands full with kit repair. The scope, the multimeter and the soldering iron is almost as important as the ear.

So when you have all finished pontificating about the pro and cons of some esoteric irrelevance, such as the effects of plugins on the music of today, you might like to come back down to Planet Earth, you know, the one I live on. The real world where real people earn a living.

I get tired of listening to academics poncing around about the value of learning, when the REAL value in learning is, as Fakiekid so rightly points out, learning something that OF value.

To the lecturers and their students reading this - are you teaching or learning those skills that I and those like me have to have to do our job?

Or as Fakiekid puts it, "What does Ethnomusicology have to do with reverbs for snares?"

I might add to that, what does Ethnomusicology have to do with soldering a wiring loom, marking up a score, trouble-shooting a desk, designing an analogue filter, authoring a DVD or developing a business plan?

Students - if the above skills are not on the curriculum, print this posting and hand it to your lecturer. Ask them, when do you get to learn those skills you will need in the studio?

---

These accusations can be directed at many courses. I did a mechanical engineering degree and when I graduated I thought I new it all. When I started my first job I realised how wrong I was and spent the first twelve months bemoaning the revelance of entropy to everyday mechanical engineering.

Red Bladder,

There you go again, ignoring the plain and simple fact. His degree is called 'Music Production', not 'Audio Engineering, Soldering, fader monkeyage and general equipment maintainance'. Other degrees are called, 'Music with Technology' others are called 'commercial music'. In each case a different skill set is required and taught.

It may be the case that, at some stage in the future, he may wish or be engaged to produce some non-western music - eg some North Indian classical music. Now, you're the one who suggested that audio engineer soldering types need to be able to follow a score, so it is entirely appropriate that he is exposed to this type of music experience. In the case of indian classical music, as you no doubt are aware, it is a good idea to understand the essential differences between 'southern' and 'northern' traditions before production starts.

Furthermore, he may simply be enrolled on the wrong type of course for his future career objectives. The university in question cannot be blamed for that.

Me can I solder? no. Would I want to? No. Do I need to? No.


cheers

Quote Rousseau:

---

Me can I solder? no. Would I want to? No. Do I need to? No.

---

Ah yes, but in the real world, whether you are a composer working at home, an engineer working in a studio, or an arranger working in a customer's studio, the answer to that question and all other technical questions (networking, CD authoring, fault finding etc.) the answer would be Yes, Yes and Yes.

Unless you are Danny Elfmann and have a staff that solve all these problems for you (or you work in a college!) if you cannot cope with the technical problems, you just do not get to compose, arrange or indulge in any other musical activity.

I have been working with someone who actually did have to compose a score along the lines of North Indian folk-to-classical music. He has to do all his own network installation and all his own soldering.

Cables do not solder themselves, you know! DVDs do not author themselves, desks do not fix themselves.

These are the realities of life at the rock face.

I'll post some of my experiences (I haven't read all the posts).

Quote:

---

You have a budget of £100,000 design your ideal studio.....blah blah

---

I have never been set any work like that.

Quote:

---

Needless to say, the course work and home work is set to test the understanding of the students.

---

Maybe, to some extent, in the early part of the course. I would say mostly (almost exclusively towards the end of the course), work is set to test a student's academic skills. Style of writing, correctly citing papers, time management, generally 'subscribing' to academia. I would say the content is irrelevant.

Quote:

---

Is there any engineering content in these courses?

---

Yes, on paper. Hard core maths, how technical principles apply to making a functional device in the real world. NOT: "you turn this knob and it sounds like this".

Quote:

---

Surrey's course is very focused on churning out very good studio engineers with a greater degree of knolwege in music and elctronics...

---

No, Surrey's course is all about creating the next generation of AES members, recruiting them to do a PhD and writing a research paper.

In terms of musical content, I find it entirely sheltered and un-accomadating. How much of a headache does it have to be to find a space to rehearse with a couple of mates for an hour? Should this activity not be encouraged?

Quote:

---

by the way Guilford is a lovely town

---

Hmmmm... Until recently there were no music venues. Now there is one. It's good, but it's out of town and small. The general student population is either foreign, shy and scared-looking, or drunk, loud and business management looking. The general Guildford population is chav. The non chavs are commuters.

The only suggestion I can make is do a course with a placement year, a year in industry. I found this experience entirely interesting and a worthwhile use of my time. I know people who did not have a good time on their placement, but this is no different from just working in a sh*t job behind a bar for a year. Such people mostly just made a bunch of new friends and did things to take their minds off a cr*p job.

Doing a course without a placement would likely be all b*llocks ("turn the blue knob to make it sound nice") or all academic ("James, you missed one apostrophe on page four of your paper"). I don't think a course exists that strikes a balance enough to hold my attention. A placement year can make up for any shortcomings in the course.

Quote jimdrake:

---

No, Surrey's course is all about creating the next generation of AES members, recruiting them to do a PhD and writing a research paper.

---

Fair enough, then again I was only going off what I have been told, most of which is ironicaly from this forum!

Quote jimdrake:

---

In terms of musical content, I find it entirely sheltered and un-accomadating. How much of a headache does it have to be to find a space to rehearse with a couple of mates for an hour? Should this activity not be encouraged?

---

I suppose you could say thats universities for you! I sort of know the feeling- here at LIPA we do have a lot of rooms and facilities available but noone has really told us "if you want this, go here, you can have this, but not this" and so on. Annoying!

Quote jimdrake:

---

Hmmmm... Until recently there were no music venues. Now there is one. It's good, but it's out of town and small. The general student population is either foreign, shy and scared-looking, or drunk, loud and business management looking. The general Guildford population is chav. The non chavs are commuters.

---

Well I suppose when you come from near Halifax its not hard for somewhere to appear quite pleasent! My sister went to guildford school of acting (my parents to teacher training college- my family seems to have something against going to proper universities.) and she liked it.

Quote jimdrake:

---

Doing a course without a placement would likely be all b*llocks ("turn the blue knob to make it sound nice") or all academic ("James, you missed one apostrophe on page four of your paper"). I don't think a course exists that strikes a balance enough to hold my attention. A placement year can make up for any shortcomings in the course.

---

I think thats a fair point, but not fair when applied at my end of the woods. The school of thought here seems to be that you are already in a perfect position to gain a wide array of experience, both because you are in an environment where everyones course is geared towards entertainment in one way or anouther so your skills are deffinatley required, and also because you are in Liverpool of all places!

Quote Rousseau:

---

Me can I solder? no. Would I want to? No. Do I need to? No.

---

..and with one short sentence, Fate was tempted.

Quote reid:

---

Quote Rousseau:

---

Me can I solder? no. Would I want to? No. Do I need to? No.

---

..and with one short sentence, Fate was tempted.

---

Fair enough though. The man never needs to solder.. and lives in the real world (earning a living through music)

--------------------
Support your right to arm bears!

Perhaps this is the answer.....

http://music.guardian.co.uk/news/story/0,,2193860,00.html?gusrc=rss&fe ed=networkfront

Now that would be a course worth attending