Re: Defining "pro"

["Wavecomputer360" <wavecomputer360@gmx.de>]

Hm, the simplest example I could think of would be a cheapo Chinese
Stratocaster copy and a handmade Warr TSG or something. One is made with 
the
idea in mind to deliver a cheap product which can be made and sold in huge
numbers, hence hardware and components aren´t highest quality but are
clearly used with retail price in mind. The other product is manufactured
from selected materials, made to custom order and open for any kind of
custom ideas. It is made in small numbers because due to its price there´s
no huge potential market.

In the case of JBL Control One and B&W Nautilus... well, I think the
Nautilus really is a consumer product which clearly has some kind of
lifestyle aspects to it. The C1 is also a consumer product which  meets
professional demands (like old Cantons from the 70s do, too). Same thing
applies for the Yamaha NS-10 or the Auratones, while we´re dealing with
speakers.

I would consider something like the Yamaha CS80 as a pro-quality 
instrument.
Even after almost 30 years it still produces a sound and offers a user
interface which I´d consider unsurpassed while other semi-pro machines of
the same era (or later) like the Korg Polysix or Roland Juno 60 clearly 
show
that they were a compromise between price and playability, features and
hardware. OF course, there were more "professional" albums produced on 
these
cheapo instruments than on a CS80 but to me it´s a question of the UI
quality, the layout and the control surface, coupled with sound and
performance.

In the end, "pro" is what you make of it. But the better the quality the
easier it will be to produce quality (and satisfying results).

Stephen


"I´m striving for the mysterious. The obvious doesn´t interest me." (Jon
Hassell)

"Hoellenengel" -- new album by Stephen Parsick, street date October 1, 
2005.

Visit the official [´ramp] website at www.doombient.com

WTB: "England´s Hidden Reverse" by David Keenan (Coil, Current93, Nurse 
With
Wound, David Tibet).


----- Original Message -----
From: Rainer Thelonius Balthasar Straschill <rs@moinlabs.de>
To: <Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com>
Sent: Sunday, October 16, 2005 8:02 PM
Subject: AW: Defining "pro"


So where is the difference between consumer and pro needs? From a
judicial standpoint, both consumer and pro products are (in Germany)
governed by the same law (GPSG), and actually have stronger requirements
for consumer products; this law does treat safety requirements, not any
functional aspects.

And what is considered pro or consumer is then up to what the
manufacturer thinks - making (with regard to your example) a JBL Control
1 pro while a B&W Natilus is a consumer product - making the JBL higher
quality...

But coming back to the ongoing discussion: pros can often be recognized
by using products of lesser quality, because they can't afford the
products an amateur with a well-paid day job and no need to make ends
meet with his passion could.

Rainer

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Wavecomputer360 [mailto:wavecomputer360@gmx.de]
Gesendet: Sonntag, 16. Oktober 2005 19:16
An: Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com
Betreff: Re: Defining "pro"


To me "pro" means high quality hardware that delivers high quality
results as opposed to "consumer" hardware which just satisfies consumer
needs but does not cover higher demands. Like comparing hi-fi speakers
with studio monitors...

Stephen.


"I´m striving for the mysterious. The obvious doesn´t interest me." (Jon
Hassell)

"Hoellenengel" -- new album by Stephen Parsick, street date October 1,
2005.

Visit the official [´ramp] website at www.doombient.com

WTB: "England´s Hidden Reverse" by David Keenan (Coil, Current93, Nurse
With Wound, David Tibet).


----- Original Message -----
From: Travis Hartnett <travishartnett@gmail.com>
To: <Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com>
Sent: Sunday, October 16, 2005 7:07 PM
Subject: Re: Defining "pro"


It's only elitist if you've bought into the idea that the worth of a
thing is measured primarily by its monetary value.  One can describe
something as "profitable" or "non-profitable" in reference to its
economic measure without touching at all on any artistic merit the thing
may, or may not have.

If you're getting upset because someone says you're not a "professional"
musician, then it's probably because you want their approval and you're
not happy with the criteria they're using to dole it out.  Yes, it's
very hard to make a living (of any sort) from music, but using
"professional" to mean "likes doing it a whole bunch" is out of line
with the way the term is used in regards to virtually all other fields
of endeavour.

"Professional" is more related to occupational status, not artistic
merit.  To say that something is of "professional" quality commonly
means that it's good enough to have been produced by someone whose
livlihood depends on it, regardless of whether the person who created
the thing actually does so.

TravisH



On 10/16/05, sonic steph <ml@dadaprod.org> wrote:

>
> I guess it is not funny at all, but making a living of music sounds
> completely elitist.. As this is only possible if only few people
> produce music.. the disc industry make people think that very few
> people are really talented, which is obviously wrong, regarded to all
> the stuff you can hear on the net, on the metro or wherever you listen

> to non commercial music.. so a pro to be pro sounds to me more like a
> capitalistic bahaviour than a musical one..
>
> bye
>
> stephane
>