Many professions have an array of equipment that assist the user in achieving a set goal. Mastering and audio production is no stranger to this concept where specialized gear has been created to aid tasks such as; sonic shaping, recording, editing, and playback. While professional gear is well crafted, impressive, and now in greater abundance, fetishism of that gear becomes a hindrance to the engineer and music creator who wields it. Audio engineers and artists must understand gear for what it is, a tool. They must assess these tools and become infinitely familiar with their selections in order to truly understand the best applications for each piece at hand. They must evaluate these tools on a regular basis and ask themselves if these implements are allowing work to take place in a matter of quality and efficiency. If quality comes up short, there is no question that it is time for the equipment at hand to be removed, or replaced. When efficiency comes up short, one must deliberate the weight of the detriment and its impact on workflow. In a world where informed decisions need to be made at the speed of thought, workflow is a demanding feudal lord.
As thunderous beauty emanates from glorious speakers, engineers can lose their bearings as they adjust knobs and faders to refine a song to its deemed finished point. The north star that guides their way is the playback system. In the mastering world a playback system is the amalgamation of the mastering engineer’s ears meeting the room, loudspeakers, and switching system, the latter often arriving in the form of a monitor controller. At its most base, the monitor controller allows for level matched playback to take place between a before and after version of an audio track. Constant contrast and comparison is done throughout the audio session in order to ensure that any change done to a mix is an improvement. A properly implemented playback system provides the engineer with a tool to help make determinations quickly, providing them with an auditory map. Any convolution that inhibits the engineer from readily knowing where they are on the auditory map should be removed. It only takes moments to become stranded in a roadside ditch, causing precious time to be lost as one finds their way back to solid ground. This is why the playback system is at the heart of a well developed workflow. Without it engineers would move at a snail's pace, driving in the dark.
Complication comes at a cost that can only be justified if quality were to suffer without it. The goal is to make decisions as fast as the mind and body will allow, as each music note that enters through the ears will not hesitate, or pause for an individual to catch up. This idea extends to the number of pieces of equipment that make up an engineer’s chain. One must be intimately familiar with every piece of gear that resides within their studio. Its function, purpose, and ability must be fully explored in order for the engineer to understand when and how it should be applied to the song at hand. When an engineer has an overabundance of gear, or unfamiliarity with the equipment in their workflow, hesitation will begin to bog down their process. Indecision creates the circumstance for opportunity lost. The opportunity that would have allowed for the unclouded mind to solve an audio issue, as opposed to seeking out the right tool in a sea of tools. The opportunity that would have allowed for the next song in the queue to be worked on, as opposed to exploring an implement’s capabilities during a client’s paid session.
There is beauty and sophistication in the simplicity that embodies a successful workflow. Limitations in choices that exist within its make-up lend itself to a speed that fosters resolution. Every tool selected for the workflow has a known purpose, its quality steadfast, in turn nurturing confidence. When these concepts meet with a knowledgeable operator, great work can be achieved more readily than the same operator burdened by the weight of doubt through distraction.