rant about 'academia'..preparing for real world audio work

[dkgross]

yup..I'm gonna piss some people off with this

 

I had a tour come thru the main studio I feelance at last week..None of the 'employees' were around, so I gave it. The tour was from a local and well repsected 'liberal arts' college up here...the main audio professor and about 15 students. All oogling on the monster PT Icon rig and other stuff in the facility. wheee. Fun to show....

 

The professor (damn nice dude)..started talking all about the $10k monster modular rig they just got, their Buchla, and all kinds of other pretty cool, but somewhat esoteric stuff. Metasynth, Kyma (which I would give my left you know what to have), etc.. Geek fest heaven. DP or Ableton seemed to be their DAW of choice, along with Cuebase. And a handful of Logic users

 

THEN it came time for Q&A..of course..one nice lady asked 'what do you look for in an intern/new employee, and what software do you use here?" (which caught me off guard as I JUST gave a PTools post-production demo...)

 

To cut the story short. only 2 of them had ever used ProTools. NONE of them (INCLUDING THE TEACHER), had ever seen or heard of Spectrasonics. None of the students had ever mic'd a set of drums, or recorded/edited a Voice Over.

 

After 30 minutes of this kind of Q&A, and my realization that these kids were paying a shitload of money for an education that was SORT OF preparing them (learning signal flow by patch cords on a huge modular is GREAT), for something..but it sure wasn't preparing them to come work in most studios that they'll run into in the real world...I kinda got the impression that the students were giving the teacher the evil eye with the 'why aren't we learning this stuff?" kinda vibe....

 

..just to counter..one of the guys that works with us is a Full Sail grad...he knew his s#!+ when he came in..but I attribute a lot of that to his thirst for knowledge as well....

 

SOOO...straighten me up! Am I just being an old fart, or am I just missing the point completely? (caveat...I have NO formal training..I went right from High School to being in a band for 20 years, the starting at the bottom in different studios and learning the old fashioned way..by working in studios, watching, buying gear, and suffering thru Roland Sampler manuals).

 

[Les Beshears]

Yup! You hit the nail rite on the head DK and didn't even piss me off. Colleges are grinding out students with "pedigree" education and when I look around I have to wonder just how many jobs are availabe comensurate with all the "credentials". The old fashion way, work hard, learn, get kicked around a little is the only game in town if you ask me. Fancy sheepskin looks good hanging on the wall, and it may open the door but the time honored method of success still reqires a lot of work.

[dkgross]

Don't get me wrong..I'm ALL for getting as much knowledge as possible...whatever it takes. Can't ever go wrong with a college education (especially since I don't have one...). Knowledge is good.

 

I suppose what I would really love to do is talk in depth to these students to see what THEIR expectations are...I think I'm really just reacting to what I perceived as a bit of 'what the hell??" coming from the students (and even the teacher) when I talked about what 'my' real world expectations of graduates is (any my bit of shock realizing few of them had PTools experience, or knew what Spectrasonics plugins were). Then again..I've never been able to play with a Buchla... damnit

 

And, since I'm not in the academic environs at all, I do feel like I may be speaking out of turn.

[ski]

When you're in school... OK, when I was in school (conservatory with a pretty heavy non-musical curriculum as well) there really wasn't any encouragement to study outside the bounds of what was being taught. And as it turned out, my piano teacher was teaching a technique for piano playing which he couldn't even successfully manage. It was so brutal that I developed tendonitis. I heard about a teacher outside of the school who specialized in undoing that kind of damage, but it was verboten to study outside of school. And change teachers within the school? Almost unheard of. But the only way I got through school was to do both, and it was an extraordinarily difficult situation to be in.

 

So it's not like the school's policies were such that the students were put first. Rather, the prestige of the school and the teachers came first. And the motivation to be the best you can be was supposed to take place within the campus walls only.

 

Simply put, there just isn't encouragement to study beyond what's being taught. And most students generally won't know any better because what they're learning is all new to them, so they're consumed with that full time.

 

[fader8]

ski makes a good point in that you can fall victim to the "special interests" of a particular professor. This can very easily happen at small liberal arts colleges that only have one prof handling the "Music Technology" or (God forbid) the "Electroacoustics" curriculum. Back when I studied at my first music school, I was on an engineering/production track and they didn't even let us have access to the electronic music labs! Our domain was limited to the studios, halls, control rooms and mastering lab.

 

At least in America, there's a big difference between going to College and going to a trade school like Full Sail. Trade schools are geared toward prepping you for specific jobs. Colleges are supposed to teach you how to think and find and follow your passion.

 

As a business owner, I'd be thinking about employees who have the most potential over the long haul. Do I want to hire the kid just out of Full Sail that can handle any PT rig or do I want the college grad that understands music, arranging, business, communications, I.T., can write, can cable a Buchla or write a Max patch, and maybe even design and build widgets or program in Kyma or even core audio. I can always send the latter out to a few PT/Logic operator seminars!

 

I guess it depends on where you see the value of people. What they can do now, vs what they may achieve in 10 years.

[dkgross]

agreed to both your posts. The studio I'm at now is a great example. The Full Sail dude came in right out of the gate with a lot of great tech knowledge, but no real world experience. We also have one guy that literally came from Costco (he plays bass tho)...and now, he's 2nd in charge.

 

It seems to me that with the ease of access to knowledge now (vs when I was 'college age', that the schools would adapt a bit better...

 

Again..not beat a dead horse..but to have a room full of students (most of them played an intrument of some kind or another), not have knowledge of Spectrasonics was just a shock to me....

[camillo jr]

I subbed at a local music arts school and they had the opposite problem, IMO. They were trying to teach them ALL the DAWs plus some related software and they were swamped. Some were dealing with it pretty well but I could see a sort of resentment out there.... so many tantalizing tools, so little time for any mastery.

 

I feel that getting anything approaching "mastery" with software is similar to doing the same with a physical instrument. There are levels of mastery and you have to get good at some things before you can take on others. If you are forced to pretty much skim everything you're studying it doesn't leave much to hang on to.

 

I've seen several of those students end up in sales in the local music stores nursing some huge debts and wondering what it all meant.

 

Not saying that some won't find it useful but I didn't get the feeling that practical knowledge was the school's priority.

[dkgross]

Not saying that some won't find it useful but I didn't get the feeling that practical knowledge was the school's priority.

 

That seems to be what I'm hearing from others I've talked to as well.

[Beer Moth]

Theory is useless without practical application.

Practical application withouy theory will do til someone can let you know what's happening.(Theory).And give you a few pointers as to where you might be able to go.

 

It seems that the whole education system westernworldwide is losing its way.

The more they try to improve it,the worse it gets.

And the less experience and proven ability is valued.

Paper (albeit virtual paper thesedays) is everything.

 

Aaaaaaaaaaarrrrrggggghhhhhh!!!!!!!!!

 

JMO

[Andyreww]

Theory is useless without practical application.

Practical application withouy theory will do til someone can let you know what's happening.(Theory).And give you a few pointers as to where you might be able to go.

 

It seems that the whole education system westernworldwide is losing its way.

The more they try to improve it,the worse it gets.

And the less experience and proven ability is valued.

Paper (albeit virtual paper thesedays) is everything.

 

Aaaaaaaaaaarrrrrggggghhhhhh!!!!!!!!!

 

JMO

 

Very well put!

 

The problem is that the higher up the education chain you go the more theoretical / less practical learning becomes - this is until you get tp PHd-Level when you develop/test theory.

 

I can't speak about the music industry specifically ('cuz I don't know much about it) however; all organizations need different levels of education to function - not just a bunch of highly educated theorists. A challenge I see is that we are losing practicality as organizations push up entry requirements towards theory based qualifications.

 

Its the same all over....

 

Andy

[sc137]

We have several part-timers teaching our program. Some of us have decided to focus all of our curriculum and exercises on a few pieces of software with the intention that the theory will translate when a student moves to a new software.

 

In the past, students would do some loops in garageband, record drums in pro tools, add effects in logic, then try to showcase in ableton. It didn't make sense to me that the students spent half of their time figuring out the buttons instead of doing the project. Now we focus classroom exercises in Garageband and Logic Pro but have other DAW's available. If a student knows PT then they work their. If a student would rather work in ableton, we say go ahead.

[adamgonsa]

ski makes a good point in that you can fall victim to the "special interests" of a particular professor. This can very easily happen at small liberal arts colleges that only have one prof handling the "Music Technology" or (God forbid) the "Electroacoustics" curriculum. Back when I studied at my first music school, I was on an engineering/production track and they didn't even let us have access to the electronic music labs! Our domain was limited to the studios, halls, control rooms and mastering lab.

 

At least in America, there's a big difference between going to College and going to a trade school like Full Sail. Trade schools are geared toward prepping you for specific jobs. Colleges are supposed to teach you how to think and find and follow your passion.

 

As a business owner, I'd be thinking about employees who have the most potential over the long haul. Do I want to hire the kid just out of Full Sail that can handle any PT rig or do I want the college grad that understands music, arranging, business, communications, I.T., can write, can cable a Buchla or write a Max patch, and maybe even design and build widgets or program in Kyma or even core audio. I can always send the latter out to a few PT/Logic operator seminars!

Agreed.

 

The problem is that the higher up the education chain you go the more theoretical / less practical learning becomes - this is until you get tp PHd-Level when you develop/test theory.

This criticism holds some truth, but there are definite merits to focusing in on something and becoming an expert.

 

I think when talking about education and vocational experience (or education vis-à-vis vocational experience) it’s really important not to fall into patterns of easy categorization. A stodgy academic theorist competing for a job against a hardscrabble salt-of-the-earth type is a compelling story but I don’t know a single person who fits neatly into those stereotypes. Folks who get entry level jobs and internships are often doing everything they can to seek out educational material that updates or “fills in the gaps” of what they’re learning hands on, and students are more often than not looking for real world experience to compliment their educations.

 

I got a master’s degree from a school that had a Buchla and professors that thought it was important that you knew how to use it. Cool factor aside that wasn’t the most pertinent job skill to learn. However, I also had access to a kyma lab, people that knew Max/MSP inside out, and great minds that have worked hard to stay contemporary (like Joel Chadabe). All of that stuff was immensely useful in developing me as an engineer and a person. Being in a big city also gave me access to studios and engineers that the school had longstanding relationships with. School was really helpful, especially with the level of rigor/focus of a graduate program, but it wouldn’t have been enough by itself. No one at the school, students and faculty, really expected it to be though.

 

There are salient arguments to be made about the cost/benefit of education over vocational experience, but I think you need some degree of both to get really good at what you do and stay competitive.

 

I do wish there had been room in my curriculum for a few business classes. Learning through your mistakes sucks when it's your business

[ski]

I enjoyed reading your post.

 

There are salient arguments to be made about the cost/benefit of education over vocational experience, but I think you need some degree of both to get really good at what you do and stay competitive.

 

I don't think you can make cost/benefit analyses when it comes to careers in the music business. So much of one's success depends on work opportunities which don't present themselves in remotely the same way as they do in the business world. And if anyone wants to see examples of cost/benefit ratios approaching the "what are you, stupid?!?" point, one needs to look no further than any kind of arts educational programs.

 

Let's take academia out of the equation for a moment, as it doesn't fit into "the music business" as it's commonly discussed, and certainly isn't a part of the entertainment field... I would daresay that there's little requirement or expectation that anyone have a degree. I'd take it a step further to say that no one really wants to even hear about whether you have one or not. This is not, of course, to imply that getting formal education is a waste of time. But anyone who goes through school thinking that they've been "vocationally trained" to be able to do anything other than take on a journeyman position afterwards has stars in their eyes. And that's because anyone with little experience in any given field means that people can't trust you. Trust comes into play 10000000% more than knowledge that you have a degree in so many aspects of "the business".

 

So you can be the most extraordinarily talented (___fill in the blank___) in the world but you still have to prove yourself.

 

And of course, another unquantifiable aspect which can't play into cost/benefit perspectives of music education is talent itself. Schools can't pump out talent or dedication or drive. That all has to come from within.

[Reiver]

For what its worth...

 

I remember being a kid with masses of enthusiasm and a solid pedigree in ruining my parents stereo equipment from trying to work out how the hell they got all those sounds in there.

( I was six, I'm not proud. It seemed like magic!)

 

I got older, learned a bit about the process and found a City and Guilds Sound Engineering course ( C and G are a UK based vocational training organization of reasonable standing) that promised to teach me 'all you need to know about audio engineering' .

 

The reality was two years of electrical engineering, a little tape splicing and a couple of sessions with a graphic EQ and a patch bay.

The principal tutor had spent a few years doing theater sound and never set foot inside a studio.

 

The result of this was that I was put off for years. The course mystified instead of enlightening, covered up the ignorance of the course tutor by getting us to analyze resistor codes and wire up basic circuits instead of teaching us to listen too and control sound waves.

 

Now, I am not a professional, but I am proud of the work I do, go to the listening booth, check out soundcloud and make your own judgments. However, I can safely say that all I have learned took place prior too and after the course I took.

I was perhaps unlucky and it would be wrong of me to condemn all academic teaching of audio production and engineering but I cannot help but feel that unless the teaching of basic skills and knowledge in the uk has improved greatly post my own experience anyone who wants to learn would be better served by buying a decent system, some software and attempting to make an accurate recording of their own farts than by signing up for one of the many C&G sound engineering courses that exist in the uk.

 

Ok this is an edit. Just gone off on my own experiences and perhaps not entirely engaged with the rest of the discussion.

I do still think I have a point.

Which would be that the young and inexperienced get presented with masses of alluring ads that promise to turn them into the next Phil Spector ( JUST LIKE EVERY OTHER PRODUCT) and deliver very little. Neither the audio nor the academic worlds are any less prone to this than any other.

Being a producer / working with music is COOL, therefore it sells, its a product plane and simple.

 

 

What is more, we will always have teachers who wish to push their own agenda. And yet there will always be teachers who genuinely wish to share their passion and knowledge whilst encouraging young talent.

I feel that web sites like this one, magazines like sound on sound, and countless other old and new media sources can offer a a vast amount to the teaching of ongoing generations of artists and producers. The more we share our knowledge and learning experience and encourage the RIGHT approach the better chance the inexperienced have of coming too understanding.... and the better chance we have of counteracting the many purely for profit organizations there are that will happily take your money to teach how to suck an egg.

 

Ok rant over

Reiver Out

Edited October 25, 2010 by Reiver

[adamgonsa]

I enjoyed reading your post.

Thanks!

 

Let's take academia out of the equation for a moment, as it doesn't fit into "the music business" as it's commonly discussed, and certainly isn't a part of the entertainment field... I would daresay that there's little requirement or expectation that anyone have a degree. I'd take it a step further to say that no one really wants to even hear about whether you have one or not. This is not, of course, to imply that getting formal education is a waste of time. But anyone who goes through school thinking that they've been "vocationally trained" to be able to do anything other than take on a journeyman position afterwards has stars in their eyes. And that's because anyone with little experience in any given field means that people can't trust you. Trust comes into play 10000000% more than knowledge that you have a degree in so many aspects of "the business".

Right, no one wants to hear about your education, unless it fits into how you present yourself as a professional. That's what I meant about seeking out external education and staying competitive. Taking the time to educate yourself about developments in digital audio (i hope) speaks volumes about your work ethic and level of interest. Of course it has way more to do with reputation and credits and who you know and who can vouch for you but every little bit helps. Especially when you're in the position of being a journeyman or intern or apprentice and you're just trying to get a toe hold.

 

Your point about no "vocational" preparation in school is well taken. I guess what I was saying is that education is part of a total package. And I'm not just talking about school. If you can demonstrate knowledge then who cares how you obtained it? As long as your understanding is thorough, that's all that matters. Of course book learning is just a small piece of an overall set of qualifications, but it speaks directly to discipline and focus. Which aren't bad right?

 

So you can be the most extraordinarily talented (___fill in the blank___) in the world but you still have to prove yourself.

True, but where is the expectation that you won't? I hope I'm not coming off as a relentlessly optimistic cheerleader for degree programs, because I am not. They have a lot of problems, especially in the category of promising too much and delivering too little. That said, I don't know a single grad (I got my masters in 07) that thought "Well, I'm done now. No more demonstrating my worth needed. This piece of paper is my golden ticket." Who could possibly be that naive, and where did the perception come from that school churned out people so foolish? Everyone I knew in my degree program was hustling while we were going to school. Picking up internships, or mixing jobs, or live sound gigs, or trying to sell custom Max patches...something. Straight up 16+ hour days. And all of us knew it would be more of the same when we got out. Unless you move to academia, marry rich, win the lottery, or leave the field altogether it's to be expected.

 

The world owes you nothing. No single internship or degree makes you a valued commodity. It's the sum of your work and experience. I agree that education isn't everything but I think it's something. An important something.

 

And of course, another unquantifiable aspect which can't play into cost/benefit perspectives of music education is talent itself. Schools can't pump out talent or dedication or drive. That all has to come from within.

100% agree.

[Kent Sandvik]

If I would go to such a school, or send my kid to one, I would check their track record with placing individual students to entry-level jobs in the industry, or otherwise if they collaborate with known heavy-hitters. If that's missing, no way to spend money on such an education. Just my opinion.

[ski]

Hi Adam,

 

Just a couple of things I wanted to reply to...

 

Of course book learning is just a small piece of an overall set of qualifications, but it speaks directly to discipline and focus. Which aren't bad right?

 

I hope I didn't give the impression that schooling counts for nothing, as that wasn't my intention. I think it's hugely valuable. But let's take that academic learning/training... Let's take for example a studio intern applying for a job. They get the job. Maybe that's based on the fact that they have a degree from a school. In fact, many studio interns get their first gig because of precisely this reason. Or maybe they're still in school and the internship program is part of the curriculum; by way of that they're working in a studio for a while. OK, so they're in the door! And once they're in...

 

That person's discipline and focus will be passively tested. For example, no engineer or studio owner wants to find the ass't sleeping on the couch when they should be in the control room. But it does happen. And the first time it does? OK, they get told off and they learn a lesson.

 

Same goes for the young radio engineer who's not concentrating on their job and let's the DJ's bleep-worthy banter on-air during a commercial break.

 

When these breaks with protocol or expectation happen once, there's a price to be paid, but it doesn't necessarily kill trust immediately because it's understood that they're green. But repeating the same mistakes indeed shows a lack of understanding, dedication, and focus. And not to have to correct a greeny for some of the most common mistakes counts for a lot.

 

My point is this: perhaps even more than talent and ability, trust plays a huge role in one's career path and makes/breaks people's reputations. That's not to say that there are infinite numbers of stories to be told about people with huge personality flaws, drug addictions, or flakiness that were able to transcend those problems because their talent trumps all of that. But on the flip side, people are also known to get fired for just one infraction. It all depends on the level of the gig, and the expectations of professionalism at different levels of the business.

 

"This piece of paper is my golden ticket." Who could possibly be that naive, and where did the perception come from that school churned out people so foolish?

 

If we think of the progression of schooling, a student's focus is initially going to be learning the basics, and not so much how this is all going to play out in the real world. They just don't have that perspective yet. But anyone enthusiastic enough to enroll in a school has the expectation that they're working towards something bigger. Assuming they're confident in their abilities they may well have idealistic views of job opportunities without fully understand the rigors of the job, etc. So the naivete comes from having dreams of following a certain career path (and understandably so!). But the same time they don't have perspective on how things work in the real world. The two go hand in hand.

 

Does any audio or EM or MT curriculum offer such a dour course as "What Your Degree REALLY Means Once You Graduate 101"? Hey, I dunno, maybe they do for all I know. I know that when I was in school (conservatory) there was no guidance counseling to help me shape the course of my career studying piano performance. Maybe things have changed. But to conclude, I think naivete is an expected by-product of young graduates.

[adamgonsa]

My point is this: perhaps even more than talent and ability, trust plays a huge role in one's career path and makes/breaks people's reputations.

Excellent point and well said.

 

Does any audio or EM or MT curriculum offer such a dour course as "What Your Degree REALLY Means Once You Graduate 101"?

Ha! none that I know of. There definitely should be.

 

I know that when I was in school (conservatory) there was no guidance counseling to help me shape the course of my career studying piano performance. Maybe things have changed. But to conclude, I think naivete is an expected by-product of young graduates.

Maybe it comes down a definition of 'young'. When I was in my late teens and early 20s I may have been that "optimistic" but by the time I went back for a graduate degree (at 25) I was a wizened and bitter. Not really, just a lot more realistic.

 

Your points about trust and relationships are dead on.

[dkgross]

 

I do wish there had been room in my curriculum for a few business classes. Learning through your mistakes sucks when it's your business

 

THAT's the best thing I've read in a long time. Amen.

[adamgonsa]

The most recent episode of the mastering focused podcast I produce was education themed. I spoke with two engineers, one who went to school and benefited from it tremendously, and another who didn't but still operates a successful business. Obviously it doesn't solve the formal education vs. practical experience debate but it's interesting to hear both perspectives.

 

The formally educated engineer (Paul Geluso, chief engineer at Harvestworks) makes the point that while school won't turn you into a good engineer or producer it opens lots of doors. In addition to being an engineer he's also a teacher and a researcher studying how to add height information/matrixing to surround systems. He suspects his career would have been much narrower without his education.

 

Bob Macciochi (Subvert Central Mastering) is the other engineer, and didn't formally study. Rather he mixed for years and sat in on other engineer's sessions while he built up his chops. He's definitely not against education but worries that formal programs don't focus enough on critical listening.

 

The whole episode is at the podcast website.

[dkgross]

thanks for the link. Will check it out!