1 Horse Towns

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Thomas Bishop wrote:

> "Pooh Bear" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > The only local studios I can think of over here in the UK that even
> > remotely
> > make enough money even to stay open earn their bread and butter by
> > providing
> > rehearsal rooms. You might care to consider if you can do that. It's
> > likely to
> > be a more regular income. Studio work is then the icing on the cake.
>
> I have considered that, but I'm afraid too many musicians here are either
> kids who practice in dad's garage or they rent a house with a basement and
> don't mind the cops being called on them 3 times a night, as long as it's
> "free."

If that's the case I can't see you getting much studio work either to be
honest.

Graham

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Sat, 13 Aug 2005 01:45:31 GMT, "Thomas Bishop"
<bishopthomas@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>I have considered that, but I'm afraid too many musicians here are either
>kids who practice in dad's garage or they rent a house with a basement and
>don't mind the cops being called on them 3 times a night, as long as it's
>"free."


OK. Well, you seem to know all the reasons NOT to open a studio

What do you really want? A studio for you? Can you afford to build
one? If so, maybe you'll pick up pin money working for other people.
Or do you see an opening in your community? Or a market that can be
developed? If you were a bank, would you lend money to set up this
project?

I think the best reason to do this sort of thing is because you're
doing it already in your bedroom or whatever, and getting so much work
that it's criminal to turn the money away for lack of resources.
Another good reason is to do it because you want to. But that's a
hobby, not a business plan.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Paul Stamler wrote:

> "KGT" <kgtracy@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1123783562.767772.241440@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > Is there another business (or business model) that has ever been hit by
> > this amateur competition facilitated by cheap technolgy / I cant think
> > of one.
> > It's like the local garage being replaced by lots of shadetree
> > mechanics because SUN or someone sold them a PC based auto repair
> > system.
>
> Professional magazine feature photography.
>
> When I was coming up, reporters wrote and photographers photographed,
> because photography required a certain amount of technical skill. The
> reporter-photographer team was standard.
>
> In the 1970s, Canon introduced a camera called the AE-1, which automated
> lots of things in a fairly idiot-proof way, and magazines began equipping
> their reporters with AE-1s when they sent them out on a story. The pictures
> were usually technically acceptable. They weren't as good as the ones the
> professional photographers shot, but they were adequate, they filled the
> space, they were pictures, and (most important) the magazines no longer had
> to pay a photographer.
>
> No, the free-lance magazine feature photographer hasn't entirely
> disappeared, but they're endangered.

In the name of doing it cheaper many things have become 'adequate' rather than
good as they once were.

Graham

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In reference to going from serious Semi-Pro to full time ( Musician or
Engineer) a Long time ago a wise older muisician said something I'm
only beginning to appreciate.
" The best way to ruin a perfectly good hobby is make a job out of it"

He might have been right for multiple reasons!

Kevin T.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

KGT wrote:


> " The best way to ruin a perfectly good hobby is make a job out of it"
>

Kevin, that sounds like a good 'sig' line. May I borrow it?
DaveD

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Sure, why not. I did

Kevin T

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Pooh Bear wrote:

> Paul Stamler wrote:
>
>
>>"KGT" <kgtracy@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:1123783562.767772.241440@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>>Is there another business (or business model) that has ever been hit by
>>>this amateur competition facilitated by cheap technolgy / I cant think
>>>of one.
>>>It's like the local garage being replaced by lots of shadetree
>>>mechanics because SUN or someone sold them a PC based auto repair
>>>system.
>>
>>Professional magazine feature photography.
>>
>>When I was coming up, reporters wrote and photographers photographed,
>>because photography required a certain amount of technical skill. The
>>reporter-photographer team was standard.
>>
>>In the 1970s, Canon introduced a camera called the AE-1, which automated
>>lots of things in a fairly idiot-proof way, and magazines began equipping
>>their reporters with AE-1s when they sent them out on a story. The pictures
>>were usually technically acceptable. They weren't as good as the ones the
>>professional photographers shot, but they were adequate, they filled the
>>space, they were pictures, and (most important) the magazines no longer had
>>to pay a photographer.
>>
>>No, the free-lance magazine feature photographer hasn't entirely
>>disappeared, but they're endangered.
>
>
> In the name of doing it cheaper many things have become 'adequate' rather than
> good as they once were.

Same holds true for editors in many publications these days. I'm
constantly apalled at the spellng and grammatical errors I see even in
major papers and magazines.


---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 0533-1, 08/16/2005
Tested on: 8/16/2005 11:19:02 PM
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2005 ALWIL Software.
http/www.avast.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Matt Ion" <soundy@moltenimage.com> wrote in message
news:rFAMe.32304$vj.10381@pd7tw1no...

> Same holds true for editors in many publications these days. I'm
> constantly apalled at the spellng and grammatical errors I see even in
> major papers and magazines.

And on Usenet.

Hal Laurent
Baltimore

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On 2005-08-17 laurent@charm.net said:
>> Same holds true for editors in many publications these days. I'm
>> constantly apalled at the spellng and grammatical errors I see
>>even in major papers and magazines.
>And on Usenet.
True enough, but I expect to see them on usenet and in emails that are
quickly dashed off from one to another. wHen I see them in major
newspapers however I'm appalled. THese are folks who are supposed to
know better.
tHe weirdest trend I've seen there is hyphenating a word to make it
fit within the column space where there shouldn't be such a break.
Hey it's acceptable, we got autotune for ya so ya don't hafta know how
to sing.
Karaoke here tonight!!!



Richard Webb,
Electric SPider Productions, New Orleans, La.
REplace anything before the @ symbol with elspider for real email

--



Artificial Intelligence is no match for natural stupidity

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Hal Laurent wrote:

> "Matt Ion" <soundy@moltenimage.com> wrote in message
> news:rFAMe.32304$vj.10381@pd7tw1no...
>
>
>>Same holds true for editors in many publications these days. I'm
>>constantly apalled at the spellng and grammatical errors I see even in
>>major papers and magazines.
>
>
> And on Usenet.

....with allowances made for tired fingers...



---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 0533-3, 08/17/2005
Tested on: 8/17/2005 8:26:08 PM
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2005 ALWIL Software.
http/www.avast.com

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Hal Laurent wrote:

> "Matt Ion" <soundy@moltenimage.com> wrote in message
> news:rFAMe.32304$vj.10381@pd7tw1no...
>
> > Same holds true for editors in many publications these days. I'm
> > constantly apalled at the spellng and grammatical errors I see even in
> > major papers and magazines.
>
> And on Usenet.

I'll forgive Usenet. Ppl typing fast make errors that really don't mater too
much in the overall context. Going to print is another thing entirely.

Graham