{"id":301599,"date":"2025-11-18T20:38:36","date_gmt":"2025-11-18T20:38:36","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.ecoustics.com\/ask-an-expert\/artist-intended\/"},"modified":"2025-11-18T20:39:22","modified_gmt":"2025-11-18T20:39:22","slug":"artist-intended","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.ecoustics.com\/ask-an-expert\/artist-intended\/","title":{"rendered":"WTF Is ‘Just as the Artist Intended’? Spoiler: Not Even the Artist Knows"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

While setting the record straight on \u201cstudio sound<\/a>,\u201d I couldn\u2019t resist taking a swing at another heavyweight in the Buzzword Hall of Shame: \u201cJust as the artist intended.\u201d This one isn\u2019t just flimsy \u2014 it\u2019s a full-blown, steaming pile of marketing fantasy. So I\u2019m grabbing the shovel and doing some long-overdue cleanup.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

After collecting records for nearly 50 years, I\u2019ve yet to see a single one stamped with, \u201cThis came out exactly as I intended,\u201d signed by the artist. Which leads to two obvious questions. First: how is anyone supposed to know what the artist actually intended in the first place? Second: how would we even know whether the artist felt this particular track lived up to that intention?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What I\u2019ve heard repeatedly in artist interviews: \u201cThis track started out completely different, then we got in the studio and Bob the engineer said \u2018Let\u2019s try this,\u2019 and boom \u2014 we had a song.\u201d So which version of the \u201cartist\u2019s intention\u201d does the song actually represent? The initial idea that never made it to tape… or the final LP version that came together through equal parts artist, recording engineer, mixing desk, and mastering chain? With very few exceptions (I\u2019m thinking Trent Reznor, Tom Scholz) most records are collaborative works. That makes the notion of a singular \u201cartist\u2019s intention\u201d for each track infinitely harder to pin down.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Nobody markets an album as \u201ca heroic stack of compromises,\u201d but that\u2019s exactly what most of them are. The label wants it finished yesterday and on the cheap. The artist has their own ideas. The engineers and session players want to get home at a reasonable hour. And somewhere in the middle of all that a key piece of gear dies and gets swapped out because nobody has the time or budget to wait for a repair.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Artists are famous for being perfectionists, but even they have their breaking point. What if after three months of long days and 167 takes the artist finally said, \u201cScrew it, just use number 49, I\u2019m done\u201d? We as consumers never hear that part of the story, so figuring out what was actually intended is almost impossible. And if that song becomes a mega hit, it suddenly turns into \u201cexactly what they meant to do\u201d in every interview afterward. Nobody wants to admit their biggest success was someone else\u2019s idea or a lucky accident.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But let\u2019s pretend for a moment the recording really is exactly what the artist intended. Will anyone else hear it the same way? Not a chance. No two people perceive sound identically because a whole mix of factors gets in the way. Genetics, culture, hearing health, life experience, physiology of the ear and brain, and the way our brains process sound all shape what we hear, and that perception shifts with age and even with the moment we\u2019re in. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Identical twins have been studied since they eliminate a lot of variables, and their hearing still shows major differences. Which raises a tougher question: did the artist\u2019s intention actually make it to the recording, or did the recording simply line up with what the artist thought they heard<\/em>?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n