Join Us

Empowering the Next Generation of Women in Audio

Join Us

Editing SoundGirls into Wikipedia

Why is editing a Wikipedia article so important?

First of all, Wikipedia is the modern equivalent of an encyclopedia; it is the first stop in finding an answer. With over 5.6 million articles in the English language, it is one of the most comprehensive collections of knowledge available. Currently, there are very few female Wikipedia editors and a very small percentage of female-related articles. Art+Feminism is looking to change that by training new Wikipedia editors (it could be you or me or anyone). They are not the only ones either. Wikipedia has its own group of Wikiprojects dedicated to providing female-related articles.

Editing an Article

While I had not formally edited a Wikipedia article before, I was vaguely familiar with their style and guidelines, so I thought I would try my hand in becoming a Wikipedia editor and share my experiences with SoundGirls. I had some knowledge of formatting and citing in the Wikipedia style, but I also made sure to keep several tabs open of Wikipedia’s helpful tutorials.

Wikipedia requires strict standards in sources, citations, and sentence structure. There is a lot to keep in mind when writing an article, and so Wikipedia has tutorials and templates to copy from. Self-promotion is not permitted when creating an article. Therefore, sources cannot be a personal website or an IMDB page. Bias is also frowned upon, which means many controversial articles are locked from the fledgling editor.

Often new editors are guided to almost complete topics, ones that only need cleanup in citations or a couple of extra facts.  Many niche articles are plagued with improper citation and writing flags. From there, an editor can build up their chops before turning to a completely new article. Focusing on pre-existing articles also helps with the moderating backlog that is a constant problem for Wikipedia.

Creating an Article

Even knowing all of this, I still decided to create a completely new article.  I wrote about Karen Lam, a female film director, and producer, known for her horror short films and for promoting other women in film.  While I did meet her briefly, I have no professional association with her, and therefore I had no conflict of interest with which to color the tone of my article.  She had been interviewed several times in local and national magazines, and her films had won several awards. This meant that she was relevant and documented enough to have an article based on her. I, the lowly blog writer, still early in my career, do not have the right credentials to have a Wikipedia article, and so it goes. As an added bonus, a film directed by Karen had its own article already and therefore referenced my subject. An article that is not referenced by anything else is an orphan, which often suggests the irrelevance of the topic.

Not including the time it took to research her, I was able to write my article and submit it for the first time during the Art+Feminism event, and within minutes I received my first error flag. I had cited IMDB for awards won by my subject, and so I updated the article, took out a few awards that were only listed on IMDB, and put a new award mentioned in a reputable press release. I did not hear back for a month and a half. My article was then finally approved.

Wikipedia Advice

  • When first delving into the land of editing, start with a pre-existing article or your “personal sandbox.”
  • Take your time, and learn the ropes of syntax and citation.
  • If you do desire to write a new topic, then find several print sources as well as reliable internet sources.
  • An image is nice, but not necessary.
  • Conflicting facts between reliable interviews do happen, if you are unsure of a fact, then do not include it.
  • Avoid topics that you are connected to, either with heavy emotional bias or professionally.
  • Know that errors get noticed quickly, but positive responses are slow.
  • Errors are not permanent but instead are a learning experience.
  • Finally, your article is always open to change and grow, so if you want to update anything, give it a shot.

Wikipedia was made to be edited by the public, and it can be another tool to grow the influence of women in media and to break the glass fader.

Where to Start

In my prior article on Wikipedia editing, I focused on the basics of choosing a Wikipedia article topic and the reason for writing them.  Through this article, my goal is to give you a few definitions and resources in other ways to make women more present in the online encyclopedia.  For further tips and ideas, you can view my Wikipedia profile (Lyrelyrebird), which I formatted as a hub for SoundGirls looking to start their Wikipedia journey.

Green Articles and Red Articles

When a Wikipedia article already exists, any link to the article is blue in color while any link to a non-existent article is red.

Wikipedia red link

It is tempting to search for these “red” articles and start a page from scratch, and many people do, but Wikipedia is littered with pages that have only the bare minimum of word count and are lacking in proper sources.  Internally, Wikipedia rates articles based on their quality with green designating a “good” article. It takes time and effort to turn an article “green.” New articles and major edits must be approved by veteran editors, and any mistakes or errors are flagged for fixing.  Once everything is finally up to snuff, then the article is slated for a final review and approval before the green designation is assigned. Even then, if the article is about a living person, the article might need babysitting for updates as time passes.

Green articles are great examples for templates and guides in editing articles needing TLC. One cannot feasibly memorize every code trick that Wikipedia has available, so use others’ insight to your advantage. For example, when working on an article about a sound designer, find a page of a more well-known designer or even a cinematographer and see how that article formatted things like filmography and career highlights. I use copy and paste frequently, and Wikipedia encourages it. Consistency is part of why Wikipedia is a respected first stop in researching any topic.

This is also a good approach when working on a “stub” article (one that is too short or needs more verified information) or working on a poorly written articles.

What will you see on a pre-existing article?

Once you are logged in, the top of every Wikipedia article will show several tabs such as “Edit” (where the magic happens), “View History” (an edit log), and on the other side is “Talk.”

Wikipedia top bar

Talk Pages

The talk page is a mini-forum where collaborating editors can communicate page plans and goals. This is also where error flags are discussed in more detail. More established articles often have many notes on edit histories and unverified content.  If one is not respectful of the talk page, then an edit war may occur. An edit war happens when a segment of an article is repeatedly changed by two or more editors. If changes to the article are malicious, the article gets locked. Many of the most popular articles in Wikipedia are locked to prevent these occurrences.  The best way out of an edit war is to step back from the article and reevaluate it again through the talk page at a later date, but there are ways to request dispute resolutions if one of the feuding editors is acting in bad faith.

Categories

Articles are grouped by way of Categories. A page is assigned to categories and you’ll see an article’s assigned categories at the bottom of it’s page.

Wikipedia categories

Categories with enough articles have subsections called Subcategories:

Wikipedia subcategories

An article will reside in an appropriate subcategory whenever possible before populating the main Category.  As with articles, it is better to start with existing Categories before creating new ones. Parent Categories (more general groupings) with too many children can make a topic more confusing than it has to be, and articles can be overloaded with related topics.  In my opinion, because adding Categories is a simple task, it is better to save it for future edits when the main Category becomes too unwieldy.

Lists

Wikipedia list example

Lists can be confused for Categories, but they have one large difference. Categories apply to every article they can be used for, but Lists are reserved for the best examples of a subject matter.  Another difference is that Lists are a type of article (it can be edited like a page), while a Category is not an article.

I would also caution that due to their formating, Lists inherently cannot be “good” articles, and should be deemed as a lower priority.  I have mentioned both Lists and Categories in my user page as edit ideas, but please prioritize the existing ones before making new ones, and use my talk page if you have any questions or ideas.

User Page

A user page is your personal page, similar to a profile page (but functions like an article where you have to build it yourself). Not every user page look the same, and some users ignore their pages altogether.  There are a few rules on what should and should not go on a user page:

If you are unsure about having a user page, then ignore it, you are not required to edit it.

Sandbox

After you create your Wikipedia account, you get space for both a user page and a sandbox page.  Like a sandbox in real life, the sandbox is where you can play/practice using Wikipedia and get familiar with how it works.  Wikipedia encourages you to create and test your new article ideas in the sandbox before adding it to the main encyclopedia.

A note on languages

While I and the majority of the rest of Wikipedia editors are English speakers, Wikipedia is an international encyclopedia. Nearly every language is represented, and many popular articles are written in all languages. That means there are editors for those languages, and resources for those editors to follow language-specific styles. If you are comfortable in a language and want to edit in that language, go for it. Be aware that some articles may not exist in English, and your sources should be in the language you are editing in.

WikiProjects

WikiProjects are groups of like-minded editors who have a passion for a particular subject matter.  The broader a subject matter, the more editors working together and the more resources the project has to work on specific articles.  Often the WikiProject pages are full of templates and tips for turning articles green and are great places to frequent as a new editor. My favorite resource is their list of high-priority articles, or articles that are either close to completion or are of more prominent subjects.  I suggest Women in Red and Women in Green but have links to other WikiProjects on my user page.

help

Missed this Week’s Top Stories? Read our Quick Round-up!

It’s easy to miss the SoundGirls news and blogs, so we have put together a round-up of the blogs, articles, and news from the past week. You can keep up to date and read more at SoundGirls.org

February Feature Profile

https://soundgirls.org/shannon-deane-post-production-engineer-and-stunt-car-driver/

The Blogs

A GOLDEN AGE

What’s Your Rate?

Take the Note and Move On

Internet Round-Up

SoundGirls Jett Galindo and April Tucker interviewed about SoundGirls and The Recording Academy’s Diversity and Inclusion Initiative.

“Part of what Sound Girls is trying to do is just show that, ‘Hey there’s other women out here doing what we’re doing. We exist and we’re doing the job well,’” Tucker said.

“It’s a matter of representation,” Jett Galindo said. “Just seeing themselves on these websites, on the Academy Awards, on the Grammys, succeeding…it reminds them that it’s doable.”

The Recording Academy Task Force on Inclusion and Diversity is announcing the first ever industry-wide Producer and Engineering Inclusion Initiative. Together with prominent producers, labels, artists, agencies, management companies, and other stakeholders we’re making strides to create industry-wide change.

The Initiative asks that at least two women are identified and therefore considered as part of the selection process every time a music producer or engineer is hired. It also asks working producers to agree to take issues of gender diversity within music’s technical fields into account when deciding who to mentor and hire for further development. You can find women to hire on The EQL Directory

SoundGirls News

https://soundgirls.org/event/soundgirls-mentoring-session-at-expoacustica-2019/?instance_id=1460

https://soundgirls.org/event/orlando-soundgirls-social-5/?instance_id=1457

https://soundgirls.org/event/houston-soundgirls-social/?instance_id=1459

https://soundgirls.org/event/bay-area-chapter-1st-mondays-meetings/?instance_id=1451

https://soundgirls.org/event/an-evening-with-bob-horn/?instance_id=1456

Viva La Muxer – SoundGirls Volunteers

SoundGirls and SoundGym

Music Expo – Miami – Representation on Panels –

DiGiCo Training for Melbourne SoundGirls

Austin One World Theater – Demo & Tour

SoundGirls Launches Initiative for Members Working in Production Sound

Shadowing/Mentoring/Internship Opportunities

https://soundgirls.org/shadow-foh-ld-on-amanda-palmer-tour/

Shadow TM Erika Duffee – Canada

https://soundgirls.org/soundgirls-mentoring/

SoundGirls Resources

Spotify and SoundGirls Team Up – EQL Directory

SoundGirls – Gaston-Bird Travel Fund

Letter for Trades and Manufacturers

Women-Owned Businesses

SoundGirls Scholarships 2021 Now Open

Events

Sexual Harassment

https://soundgirls.org/about-us/soundgirls-chapters/

Jobs and Internships

Women in the Professional Audio

Member Benefits

Take the Note and Move On

Working professionally as a sound designer and composer has a lot of perks.  It’s not the kind of job that has you answering phones all day or dealing with a lot of crabby people. This is the work of artists and creators. It’s the kind of job people have when they say, “Love what you do, and you’ll never work a day in your life.”  It sometimes feels almost surreal to me that I can spend the greater part of a workday trying to develop the perfect sounding tornado, complete with distressed cows, splitting lumber, gale-force winds, and a menacing thunderstorm.  When you’re finally ready to put that “Finished” stamp on your labor of love, though, it is so satisfying, that is if the director is as excited about your tornado as you are.

They might not be. They might not want a tornado at all, and this is the part that hurts. You spent all that time letting your creative juices flow into this tornado, and it was perfect! You let so many people listen to it, and everyone loved it. Everyone except the one person who gets the final say. “Let’s cut the tornado cue,” will be the saddest thing you’ve heard all day.  I know. I’ve been there too. One of the things I’ve learned over the years, though, is how to take the note and move on. It was tough at first, but it gets easier and easier with every show.

When a piece of music or a sound effect that I have created gets cut, I can’t help but feel personally rejected.  This is the hardest hurdle to get over. It reminds me of the preschool work my 4-year-old brings home from school every day.  Of course, I love it so much. I’m so proud of the work she’s done, but it is just not possible for me to keep every single scrap of paper she has ever touched.  The first time she saw me throwing away some of the worksheets she had brought home that day, she questioned my decision. She told me that she had made that at school, and she wanted to know why I would throw away something she made.  I told her that I was so happy she shared it with me, I enjoyed looking at them, and I did keep one of the five worksheets she brought home because it was really special. I told her I would keep other future projects and worksheets, but not everything.  She got it, and it sparked an epiphany for me. My work is not my baby.

If a director cuts something I’ve created, it’s only because it wasn’t right for this moment. I’ve had directors many times tell me, “Wow, this piece of music you’ve written is so beautiful, but I think it just changes the intention of this scene.  We need to go in a different direction.” This is completely fine for me to hear now. Once I learned to separate my personal attachment from my work, it became much easier to receive constructive criticism.

Ok, so we’ve learned the difference between constructive criticism and rejection, but what about all the time we lost making that piece of music that is now not going to be used at all?  What if I spend tons of time on the next piece just to have it cut also? Dwelling on all the “what ifs” is a trap. Do not allow yourself to fall in. Instead, use the piece that got cut to your advantage.  There’s a reason you wrote it the way you did, so there must be something about it that matches the scene. Ask the director what specifically they do and do not like about this piece. Tempo? Length? Orchestration?  Lots of times I’ll get answers like,”I really like the piece, but I just wish it was guitar instead of cello, and I wish it was faster and shorter.” This is an excellent note because it means you can just tweak a few things on the same piece of music.

I find that many directors have a hard time envisioning (aurally and visually) a concept without the actualized completed project in front of them, so when presented with something they did not have in mind, their instinct is to cut. It is our job as designers and composers to guide directors through our concept and to help them get specific about their feedback.  Taking a little extra time to talk through why a note is being given can be the difference between a cut and a tweak of your work.

While turning a cut into a tweak is always a possibility, it is not always going to happen. Sometimes the final result is a cut. That’s ok too. It’s important not to get discouraged about that.  Never throw away work that you like. It might not be right for this project, but if it’s something you’re proud of, you will use it again in the future.  In 2002 I wrote a piece of music for one of my weekly production class lessons that never really got any use, but I always kept a recording so that I wouldn’t forget about it.  In 2016 my writing partner and I were working on a new musical. I kept skipping the big, show-stopping ballad because I just couldn’t think of something that was everything that particular moment needed to be. I sprung up out of a dead sleep one night and remembered that song I wrote in college. It was perfect. All I needed to do was change the lyrics, add a few more instruments, and there it was. It ended up being everyone’s favorite song of that show, and it fit the actor who was performing it perfectly.  I know 14 years is a long time to wait, but it was an easy wait. When the time was right to bring it out again, I just knew.

Sometimes presentation is all about timing.  When I’m sound designing a show that will utilize ambiances, for example, I almost never load those cues into a rehearsal room unless it’s imperative to the rehearsal process.  When I was first starting out, I would give the rehearsal everything I had as soon as it was ready. Unless you’re lucky enough to work with a company that is rehearsing in the space where they will also be performing, I think it’s safe to say that the rehearsal space almost never accurately represents the performance space.  The rehearsal spaces I generally work with consist of a free version of QLab and two speakers. That’s it. If I’m creating a beach ambiance, it might consist of twenty separate files that are all sourced from different places at different levels and times. It can be difficult for the director to have the foresight of that final product when the thing that they have as a placeholder is twenty sounds coming at them from two speakers that are focused directly at their face.  I find that I have a higher chance of avoiding an ambiance cut by waiting until tech for the reveal. So much of that kind of cue relies on programming and placement, and I want to make sure a director is correctly informed before they make a final decision. If the director does end up cutting the ambiance during the tech process, I feel better about that decision because I know they heard the cue precisely the way I intended. If the cue had been cut while still in the rehearsal space, it would be harder to move on knowing that the decision might have been different if the director had heard the final version of the cue with all of the technical elements in place.

I also find that accepting a cut is easier if I have a few options when presenting a cue or piece of music to a director.  I think of each cue as an audition where I’ve been asked to perform a few contrasting pieces. Of course, I will present my favorite option first, but if it’s not matching the director’s vision, I have two more chances before having to go back to the drawing board.  This makes the blow of the initial cut a little easier, and the bonus is that all three options could be useable! Either way, you’ve created three things that might be useable in a future project, if not this one. No creative work is a waste of time; it’s just a matter of finding the right application.

Overall, the thing to remember is that not everything you create will be used right away. That’s the deal we accept when we choose to collaborate with others. It would be very dull to work with a team of people that had the same thoughts and ideas as you. Approach your projects with grace and positivity. Know that everyone is there to serve the project, and any cuts or changes made are in support of that idea. Prepare your work to be presented in the best light possible, but be ok with letting it go…for now.  If you are a working composer and/or sound designer, it is because people know you do good work. You will be able to keep moving forward and making adjustments to the work until the right thing pops out. If you start to feel discouraged when part of your work doesn’t make the cut, trust the process, take the note, and move on.

What’s Your Rate?

 

Questions about pay rates show up often on the social media and trade forums for our industry.  Many times, the response is something along the lines of knowing your worth, past experiences, what the job is, and balancing the rate to the market. All are valid benchmarks that can lend a hand to helping determine a standard rate but also makes it hard to assign a specific number due to a lack of clarity.  Another component for rates in our industry are classifications such as A1, A2, Breakout Tech and more.

Determining the rate can be frustrating and confusing.  Most of those searching hope to find a specific number shared by those with substantial experience in the pricing game. The reality is that many won’t share that detail because they don’t want to lose their edge in the market or get undercut and lose work. I understand the competitive nature of the industry, but the lack of sharing can leave those new to the field or to the area at a disadvantage to getting the pay they deserve. Those that underestimate their value bring the market down for all of us as well.  I wish there was the perfect formula for rates in our industry, but that is not the case. The geographic market varies, and I don’t have the knowledge from a comprehensive perspective to add value to that component, but I can offer my perspective on some other qualifiers that you might take into consideration as you determine your rate.

Start by analyzing what is being asked for.  For example, will your responsibilities require you to provide leadership, communications, task management of others, or client relations?  These are soft skills that come via education and demonstrated leadership. If so, take into consideration your skill set with these components as part of your value.  Consider accessing your level of expertise with these components on a rating scale (i.e., 1-5). Gathering feedback from mentors, colleagues, and your employers can help you make these determinations.  Being able to lead a team, provide clear communication, delegate tasks, problem solve, maintain a level head, and setting an example of how to relate to the client are all skills that have value and should be part of the formula in rate setting.

What’s your experience?

Your experience comes into evaluation in several ways.  Somethings to consider include the size of the event and the equipment required.  Evaluate the experience you have in comparison to these event details.

Event needs aren’t always determined by audience size, but there is a growing intensity that comes with larger venues.  Consider developing a scale by event size. For example, set a value to events that range between 1- 500, 500- 5000, 5000 – 10,000 and so forth.  Think of it this way, if you can run an arena-sized PA without batting an eye your rate should be significant.

Classifications

Rates also fluctuate between job classifications. These classifications often describe the expectations of the work. An A1 is the leader, usually FOH person, and determines many aspects of the audio for the event. Whereas an A2 is their support throughout the show with stage patch, changeovers, and more. Depending on the size of the event, positions can break down into more detailed groupings such as breakout tech, Mon tech, RF tech, system tech, etc. Assess the classification that best associates to the role you will serve and determine a value for that.

Updating your rates

Overtime with gained experience your price should go up. Some people do a yearly increase, others every couple of years. This depends on how quickly you are learning and gaining skills as well as the different kinds of events you’ve worked on. This also comes with time; seniority leads to higher rates than someone who has just started in the field. Everyone should stay up to date on new technology.

Leverage your experiences overtime to justify your rates. If this is your first time out your rates will be lower than the rates of a seasoned professional. This is simply due to limited experiences, just like getting a job at a big box store. A new hire will start at a low rate and as they prove themselves and gain experience the store will give raises over time. This is no different for us.

Analyze the market

Each market can have a different rate as well as different breakdowns of positions and needs.

Attempt to assess what the resource market is in the area you live and for the event scale in question.  Often in large markets, the workforce is flooded with freelancers creating a highly competitive bidding market.  If there are 100 events in one day and 300 qualified A1’s to choose from you may find to land the job you need to lower your rate. This could be due to others being willing to work for less than not work at all. The supply for technicians is high while the demand for technicians is low.

In reverse of that, if you’re in a market that is growing faster than the rate of established technicians your prices could be higher because you are a rarity and organizations find more value in you for their show. The supply is low while the demand is high, of course, you will need to make sure your skillset is on par.  Your established skillset can drive higher rates too, but that usually comes with time to prove yourself or by developing an established career with excellent references.

Geographic and demographic economics affect rates too.  The market also includes what clients are willing to pay. Sometimes in smaller markets with a lower cost of living, rates end up being smaller because clients aren’t necessarily ready to pay the big bucks for a show, wherein in other markets clients are willing or have to put more money toward a project for the outcome they want.

There is still no magic formula that gives you an easy to apply rate. Many of the components I have mentioned are common factors in the industry. As you take a job or establish your rates, consider an incremental assessment of your role and experience, event size and equipment requirements, the tech classification that applies, and what the market will bear to help determine your rate. Solidly knowing how you define your value can be used to justify your rate or start the negotiations.

A GOLDEN AGE

Women and the Grammy for Best Engineered Album, Non-Classical

The first person to win a Grammy for Best Engineered Album, Non-Classical was Ted Keep for “The Chipmunk Song” in 1959, the year of the inaugural ceremony.

Sound engineering has come a long way since the days when creative usage of variable tape speed was a cutting-edge production technique. The audio engineer, in turn, has become more than just a technician. The quality of production can—and often does—make or break a record. For that reason, the Grammy for Best Engineered Album, Non-Classical is a coveted and prestigious award.

Though audio has made many advancements, women’s representation is still playing at a low volume: Out of 415 nominations in this category, only ten women have ever been counted as nominees.

When we shuffle through the history of recorded music, it’s impossible not to notice that female engineers are mostly unaccounted for. Stories of Delia Derbyshire, Ethel Gabriel, and Cordell Jackson occasionally glimmer through to the surface, but they’re few and far between. Seeing as women have been systematically gatekept from STEM fields, this makes historical sense. Even so, it’s a bit shocking that there was a total absence of women in the Best Engineered Album, Non-Classical category for 40 years until Trina Shoemaker was nominated for and won the first award in 1999.

Women only comprise about 3% of studio engineers today. Breaking into and advancing in the studio environment continues to be challenging for women, especially as the competition to get into the room is fierce even among men.

The good news is that our numbers are going up. The past decade has seen more female engineers receiving Grammy nominations than ever before. Women have been consistently represented in Best Engineered Album, Non-Classical for the past four years in a row. In 2019, three of the five projects up for the award have featured female tracking, mixing, and/or mastering engineers. Efforts are being made towards inclusivity; the Recording Academy launched a Diversity Task Force and hosted open forums in multiple cities, and a growing number of producers and studio owners have pledged to focus on diversifying their staff.

How’s that for a “step up?”

“BEST ENGINEERED ALBUM, NON-CLASSICAL”

Female Nominees / Winners Timeline

1959

No women nominated.

1960

No women nominated.

1961

No women nominated.

1962

No women nominated.

1963

No women nominated.

1964

No women nominated.

1965

No women nominated.

1966

No women nominated.

1967

No women nominated.

1968

No women nominated.

1969

No women nominated.

1970

No women nominated.

1971

No women nominated.

1972

No women nominated.

1973

No women nominated.

1974

No women nominated.

1975

No women nominated.

1976

No women nominated.

1977

No women nominated.

1978

No women nominated.

1979

No women nominated.

1980

No women nominated.

1981

No women nominated.

1982

No women nominated.

1983

No women nominated.

1984

No women nominated.

1985

No women nominated.

1986

No women nominated.

1987

No women nominated.

1988

No women nominated.

1989

No women nominated.

1990

No women nominated.

1991

No women nominated.

1992

No women nominated.

1993

No women nominated.

1994

No women nominated.

1995

No women nominated.

1996

No women nominated.

1997

No women nominated.

1998

No women nominated.

1999

The Globe Sessions (Sheryl Crow) – Andy Wallace, Tchad Blake & Trina Shoemaker, engineers

***WINNER

2000

No women nominated.

2001

No women nominated.

2002

No women nominated.

2003

C’mon, C’mon (Sheryl Crow) — Trina Shoemaker & Eric Tew, engineers

2004

No women nominated.

2005

No women nominated.

2006

No women nominated.

2007

No women nominated.

2008

No women nominated.

2009

No women nominated.

2010

Ellipse (Imogen Heap) – Imogen Heap
***WINNER

2011

No women nominated.

2012

No women nominated.

2013

No women nominated.

2014

The Blue Room (Madeleine Peyroux) — Helik Hadar & Leslie Ann Jones, engineers; Bernie Grundman, mastering engineer

The Moorings (Andrew Duhon) — Trina Shoemaker, engineer; Eric Conn, mastering engineer

2015

No women nominated.

2016  

Recreational Love (The Bird and the Bee) — Greg Kurstin & Alex Pasco, engineers; Emily Lazar, mastering engineer

2017

Dig in Deep (Bonnie Raitt) — Ryan Freeland, engineer; Kim Rosen, mastering engineer

Undercurrent (Sarah Jarosz) — Shani Gandhi & Gary Paczosa, engineers; Paul Blakemore, mastering engineer

2018

Every Where Is Some Where (K. Flay) — Brent Arrowood, Miles Comaskey, JT Daly, Tommy English, Kristine Flaherty, Adam Hawkins, Chad Howat & Tony Maserati, engineers; Joe LaPorta, mastering engineer

No Shape (Perfume Genius) — Shawn Everett & Joseph Lorge, engineers; Patricia Sullivan, mastering engineer

2019

All The Things That I Did And All The Things That I Didn’t Do (The Milk Carton Kids) – Ryan Freeland & Kenneth Pattengale engineers); Kim Rosen (mastering engineer)

Colors (Beck) – Julian Burg, Serban Ghenea, David Greenbaum, John Hanes, Beck Hansen, Greg Kurstin, Florian Lagatta, Cole M.G.N., Alex Pasco, Jesse Shatkin, Darrell Thorp & Cassidy Turbin (engineers); Chris Bellman, Tom Coyne, Emily Lazar & Randy Merrill (mastering engineers)

Head Over Heels (Chromeo) – Nathaniel Alford, Jason Evigan, Chris Galland, Tom Gardner, Patrick “P-Thugg” Gemayel, Serban Ghenea, John Hanes, Tony Hoffer, Derek Keota, Ian Kirkpatrick, David Macklovitch, Amber Mark, Manny Marroquin, Vaughn Oliver, Chris “TEK” O’Ryan, Morgan Taylor Reid & Gian Stone (engineers); Chris Gehringer & Michelle Mancini (mastering engineers)

* When I was compiling data for this article, scrolling through the years where no women were nominated had a profound impact on me. I felt it was important to include them here. – AE

ROUNDUP:
Trina Shoemaker (Winner)

Imogen Heap (Winner)

Leslie Ann Jones

Emily Lazar

Shani Gandhi

Kim Rosen

Patricia Sullivan

Kristine Flaherty

Michelle Mancini

Amber Mark

Viva La Muxer – SoundGirls Volunteers

Viva La Muxer annual benefit event at Plaza de la Raza on May 25th is seeking SoundGirls Members to Volunteer.  This is a great event and a great way to get work experience.  If you are interested in volunteering please apply here

Positions include

  • Stage Manager
  • Talent Liasion
  • FOH/Board Op.
  • Backline Tech
  • Entertainment PA 1, 2 & 3
  • A1, A2

Call times are 12 pm to 11 pm, all volunteers will be provided meals.

About Viva La Muxer

Viva La Muxer is Las Fotos Project’s annual fundraising benefit that celebrates and uplifts women-identified artists, entrepreneurs, and changemakers from across Los Angeles. The 5th annual arts and music benefit event features live performances, 100+ curated arts exhibits, family-friendly workshops, resource booths, food and drinks, dancing, networking, and more!

100% of Viva La Muxer proceeds will support Las Fotos Project programs, a nonprofit organization and brave space where teenage girls gather to collaborate, learn, and be inspired through photography

2019 THEME: MIGRANT MAMAS

This year’s theme, Migrant Mamas, is an ode to all women who have transcended geographic and generational borders in order to lay the groundwork for future generations. This event will be dedicated to elevating the migration stories of the women who move us to dream big, take risks and to lead with love. ⠀
⠀
We celebrate their stories as “migrant” stories, because their journeys are not static. The influence they have on the people they touch are continually flowing between the lands they call home. Their individual contributions create widespread economic, cultural and political impacts. ⠀
⠀
We honor them as “mamas”, not only as biological mothers but as spiritual ones as well. They are women who have nurtured new lives, provided spaces for healing and cultivated the growth of new generations. We reach for their wise words, the smells from their kitchens, the sounds of their songs and the inspiration from their stories.

Missed this Week’s Top Stories? Read our Quick Round-up!

It’s easy to miss the SoundGirls news and blogs, so we have put together a round-up of the blogs, articles, and news from the past week. You can keep up to date and read more at SoundGirls.org

February Feature Profile

https://soundgirls.org/shannon-deane-post-production-engineer-and-stunt-car-driver/

The Blogs

Behind the Board

Designing Signature Sounds

Basic Aspects of a Live Sound Mix

Aspectos básicos sobre una mezcla de sonido en vivo

Internet Round-Up

The Recording Academy Task Force on Inclusion and Diversity is announcing the first ever industry-wide Producer and Engineering Inclusion Initiative. Together with prominent producers, labels, artists, agencies, management companies, and other stakeholders we’re making strides to create industry-wide change.

The Initiative asks that at least two women are identified and therefore considered as part of the selection process every time a music producer or engineer is hired. It also asks working producers to agree to take issues of gender diversity within music’s technical fields into account when deciding who to mentor and hire for further development

In November 2018, Marta Salogni and Lauren Deakin-Davies emerged victorious at the Pro Sound Awards, winning the Studio Engineer and Breakthrough Studio Engineer awards respectively. Now, in a PSNEurope first, Daniel Gumble sits in on a conversation between the two as they interview each other on their fascinating careers to date

 

 

 

 

SoundGirls News

https://soundgirls.org/event/bay-area-chapter-1st-mondays-meetings/?instance_id=1450

SoundGirls and SoundGym

Music Expo – Miami – Representation on Panels –

DiGiCo Training for Melbourne SoundGirls

Austin One World Theater – Demo & Tour

https://soundgirls.org/the-studio-side-an-evening-with-bob-horn/

SoundGirls Launches Initiative for Members Working in Production Sound

Shadowing/Mentoring/Internship Opportunities

https://soundgirls.org/shadow-foh-ld-on-amanda-palmer-tour/

Shadow TM Erika Duffee – Canada

https://soundgirls.org/soundgirls-mentoring/

SoundGirls Resources

Spotify and SoundGirls Team Up – EQL Directory

SoundGirls – Gaston-Bird Travel Fund

Letter for Trades and Manufacturers

Women-Owned Businesses

A More Inclusive Industry

Events

Sexual Harassment

https://soundgirls.org/about-us/soundgirls-chapters/

Jobs and Internships

Women in the Professional Audio

Member Benefits

The Studio Side – An Evening with Bob Horn

SoundGirls Presents an Evening with Bob Horn.

Ali “A MAC” McGuire will be in discussion with Bob Horn about his career. Bob will deconstruct a track he has worked on explaining his workflow and process. The evening will end with a Q&A from attendees.

Bob Horn has mixed for multiple grammy award winning artists as well as some of the industries’ most famous including Usher, Timbaland, Lupe Fiasco, Brandy, Akon, Ne-Yo, Brian Culbertson, Nelly, Macy Gray, Everclear and more. In 2013, Bob won a latin grammy for mixing Beto Cuevas’ album “Transformación”.

X