Originally posted by killa
View Post
I agree with this.
But I don't think that darren should be written off, either. I have studied the science for 20 years now, honed in the correlations between what you see and what you hear. Worked extensively at (As Toole states) finsing what is meaningful measurably and what is measurably meaningful. The final step in my process is voicing, no matter how perfect I get them on paper, and no matter how well my paper results match my measured performance. This does not always yeild a technically perfect picture. The largest things, however is that it is always *close* to technically perfect. It has to be in several measurable domains or you will end up with audible issues regardless of the overall response.
Leave a comment: