English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Within mainstream media, more specifically music, sound engineers and producers seek recording environments that are acoustically optimal for recording musical artists and sound. From the minimizing of noise to the isolation of instruments and the multitrack recording process itself, the focus of the session often favors technical and performance precision over concern for more qualitative attributes such as emotion and artist-production environment interaction. As a result, recordings tend to become clinical—a specific studio is chosen for its sound quality (reverberation, delay, and frequency response, to name a few) that changes only when the instrument within the room changes. Ironically, it is often a practice by producers and sound engineers alike to add artificial sonic elements post-tracking as a method to alter the production rather than capitalizing on the natural acoustical and sonic environments. Though resulting productions may fit the commercial needs of the entertainment industry and consumers, it is argued that limiting the role of the sound engineer to such a clinical studio approach eliminates the potential for capturing critical cultural information that aesthetically rich location-based recordings can provide. Such attributes have the potential to transform the musical performance, the production itself, and the consumer listening experience. It is suggested that additional captured acoustic artifacts act as environmental cues and are necessary to documenting and developing an understanding of the culture of musicians and the production process. Through such a critical cultural approach, this paper discusses how selected works, contributions, and perspectives of three influential sound scholars—John Cage, R. Murray Schafer, and Alan Lomax—can be integrated into sound engineering pedagogy and more broadly, to the future of sound engineering and the preservation of culturally relevant sonic elements. As a result, a model is presented, followed by a series of examples and recommendations. The role of the sound engineer is redefined to reflect the newly proposed critical cultural approach to sound engineering. By adopting this definition and approach, the performance, recording process, and consumption can be transformed into unique experiences comprised of important cultural information and rich sonic aesthetics as a result of the interaction between person, environment, and sound.

Redefining the Role of the Sound Engineer: Applying the Theories of Cage, Schafer, and Lomax Towards Establishing a Critical Cultural Approach to Sound Engineering