|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Nov 22, 2014 13:56:06 GMT -6
tapeop.com/blog/2014/11/21/end-rant-104-food-thought/I've pulled together a collection of recent thoughts I've had about the recording process. You can agree or not agree. The important thing is to use your ears, mind, and creativity to make great recordings. Recording equipment matters, but it doesn't really matter. It may take you years to learn, or outgrow, some of your gear. At a certain level of recording gear, every $500 step buys you tiny, incremental benefits. Vintage gear is a mirage; not something you really need, but maybe something to conceptually strive for. Some random chain of vintage equipment isn't what really made those records worth listening to 40 years later. Considering every possibility in front of you is paralyzing. Just because you came up with a new overdub or part doesn't mean it's good. Percussion overdubs are 90 percent unnecessary. Backing vocals are 75 percent unnecessary. It's not possible to steal someone's recording tricks; they never work the same for you. Fidelity means everything and nothing, at the same time. Sources that sound natural might not be natural at all. "It was recorded live" doesn't indicate anything about the quality. A simple recording is not a bad recording, nor is it underproduced or lo-fi. Recorded simply does not mean recorded poorly. Using more mics doesn't always equal great sound. Anything that "looks" in time is likely not really in time. Anyone casting doubt on the way another person records is a fool. Great songs sound better, no matter what happens next. Excellent arrangements make the instruments and vocals sound better. Quality instrumentalists make their parts sound great and fit together better. The best singers make the mic sound better and the song more compelling. A great engineer can make a recording sound better, but they usually can't affect the five scenarios above. A great producer can put the right people in the right situations and make them shine. A bad producer can make everyone uncomfortable, pick the wrong people, choose the wrong takes, and still make great recordings despite all this. Recording equipment doesn't make records; people make records. Nothing else matters when people get to enjoy the music.
|
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Nov 22, 2014 14:29:25 GMT -6
I stopped at BGV's are not necessary.
|
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Nov 22, 2014 14:54:51 GMT -6
tapeop.com/blog/2014/11/21/end-rant-104-food-thought/I've pulled together a collection of recent thoughts I've had about the recording process. You can agree or not agree. The important thing is to use your ears, mind, and creativity to make great recordings. Recording equipment matters, but it doesn't really matter. It may take you years to learn, or outgrow, some of your gear. At a certain level of recording gear, every $500 step buys you tiny, incremental benefits. Vintage gear is a mirage; not something you really need, but maybe something to conceptually strive for. Some random chain of vintage equipment isn't what really made those records worth listening to 40 years later. Considering every possibility in front of you is paralyzing. Just because you came up with a new overdub or part doesn't mean it's good. Percussion overdubs are 90 percent unnecessary. Backing vocals are 75 percent unnecessary. It's not possible to steal someone's recording tricks; they never work the same for you. Fidelity means everything and nothing, at the same time. Sources that sound natural might not be natural at all. "It was recorded live" doesn't indicate anything about the quality. A simple recording is not a bad recording, nor is it underproduced or lo-fi. Recorded simply does not mean recorded poorly. Using more mics doesn't always equal great sound. Anything that "looks" in time is likely not really in time. Anyone casting doubt on the way another person records is a fool. Great songs sound better, no matter what happens next. Excellent arrangements make the instruments and vocals sound better. Quality instrumentalists make their parts sound great and fit together better. The best singers make the mic sound better and the song more compelling. A great engineer can make a recording sound better, but they usually can't affect the five scenarios above. A great producer can put the right people in the right situations and make them shine. A bad producer can make everyone uncomfortable, pick the wrong people, choose the wrong takes, and still make great recordings despite all this. Recording equipment doesn't make records; people make records. Nothing else matters when people get to enjoy the music. Larry Crane was the writer. Note to self...don't book Larry Crane for my projects. |
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Nov 22, 2014 14:59:02 GMT -6
i want my 2 minutes back from reading that.... It's about as arbitrary as Jimmy Fallon's thank you notes, and equally as unfunny 8)
|
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Nov 22, 2014 15:54:09 GMT -6
I'm curious why there would be any objection to most anything there. I would file it under "not news" and think why would he bother to post this....but, if someone's finding particular objection, maybe it needed to be said to a new audience.
|
|
|
|
Post by jcoutu1 on Nov 22, 2014 16:16:26 GMT -6
I'm curious why there would be any objection to most anything there. I would file it under "not news" and think why would he bother to post this....but, if someone's finding particular objection, maybe it needed to be said to a new audience. You're right. Maybe I should condem Tape Op for publishing it rather than Larry for writing it. |
|
|
|
Post by M57 on Nov 22, 2014 18:24:01 GMT -6
tapeop.com/blog/2014/11/21/end-rant-104-food-thought/Recording equipment matters, but it doesn't really matter. It may take you years to learn, or outgrow, some of your gear. At a certain level of recording gear, every $500 step buys you tiny, incremental benefits. Vintage gear is a mirage; not something you really need, but maybe something to conceptually strive for. Some random chain of vintage equipment isn't what really made those records worth listening to 40 years later. Considering every possibility in front of you is paralyzing. Just because you came up with a new overdub or part doesn't mean it's good. Percussion overdubs are 90 percent unnecessary. Backing vocals are 75 percent unnecessary. It's not possible to steal someone's recording tricks; they never work the same for you. Fidelity means everything and nothing, at the same time. Sources that sound natural might not be natural at all. "It was recorded live" doesn't indicate anything about the quality. A simple recording is not a bad recording, nor is it underproduced or lo-fi. Recorded simply does not mean recorded poorly. Using more mics doesn't always equal great sound. Anything that "looks" in time is likely not really in time. Anyone casting doubt on the way another person records is a fool. Great songs sound better, no matter what happens next. Excellent arrangements make the instruments and vocals sound better. Quality instrumentalists make their parts sound great and fit together better. The best singers make the mic sound better and the song more compelling. A great engineer can make a recording sound better, but they usually can't affect the five scenarios above. A great producer can put the right people in the right situations and make them shine. A bad producer can make everyone uncomfortable, pick the wrong people, choose the wrong takes, and still make great recordings despite all this. Recording equipment doesn't make records; people make records. Nothing else matters when people get to enjoy the music. |
|
|
|
Post by jeromemason on Nov 22, 2014 19:00:16 GMT -6
I'm curious why there would be any objection to most anything there. I would file it under "not news" and think why would he bother to post this....but, if someone's finding particular objection, maybe it needed to be said to a new audience. You think BGV's are not needed 75% of the time? I mean, I really did stop reading at that point. I'm not sure if the guy is serious or this is some new trend of Thanksgiving Fools. |
|
|
|
Post by cowboycoalminer on Nov 22, 2014 19:02:42 GMT -6
All in that article is opinion. And like ass holes, everybody has one. Come to think of it, some people are one.
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on Nov 22, 2014 19:07:51 GMT -6
Jeesh, nerds...I just freaking copied it and posted it because I thought a few of them were interesting. It's not the fucking bible.
|
|
|
|
Post by M57 on Nov 22, 2014 19:16:19 GMT -6
I'll take that as a compliment. |
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Nov 22, 2014 19:47:10 GMT -6
M57 1st post= Epic lol! 
|
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Nov 22, 2014 19:46:59 GMT -6
I'm curious why there would be any objection to most anything there. I would file it under "not news" and think why would he bother to post this....but, if someone's finding particular objection, maybe it needed to be said to a new audience. You think BGV's are not needed 75% of the time? I mean, I really did stop reading at that point. I'm not sure if the guy is serious or this is some new trend of Thanksgiving Fools. Yes. I'd go 98%....but, I'm not interpreting that as "don't have harmonies"....or "they serve no purpose in bettering the music". If you were to consider anything that enhances a piece of recorded music as "necessary", you'd have to include things that would be absurd to call necessary. If you've sat through artist after artist, unhappy with what they hear go "add stuff" that doesn't make anything better. Convinced that what's down is PERFECT....it just sucks without the whatever spice they are about to go try....I chuckled at that. He coulda said "doubling guitars is not necessary 80% of the time" or maybe "guitar solos aren't necessary 93% of the time"--and I'd still laugh....and I play guitar. Because that's also true. Once you've recorded enough people who stack new tracks because the existing ones don't work and think for SOME reason the shaker or doubling the guitar in the other speaker will make it work....and hear the result, the louder that chuckle gets. Icing on a poop cake. Back in the day, I think it was worse--before everyone and their mother had a home studio to demo things--I would often be present the first time a singer heard themselves sing their new song. AWKward.... If he'd said "no one should ever sing harmonies"....I'd stop reading, too. Plus, if one doesn't vibe with your experience...move to the next one. I only have a single complaint with the whole thing....and that's the semantics of "good song" vs "good music" sounding good no matter what happens next. It's pretty easy to find or make the proof that your fave song can suck hard played/sung poorly. Some people just use the two concepts interchangeably....which I assume he is one of those guys. |
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Nov 22, 2014 19:48:55 GMT -6
Jeesh, nerds...I just freaking copied it and posted it because I thought a few of them were interesting. It's not the fucking bible. nooo, it's the book of revelations, in this case revealing just how stupid that dude is lol, i kidd 8) |
|
|
|
Post by tonycamphd on Nov 22, 2014 19:54:17 GMT -6
You think BGV's are not needed 75% of the time? I mean, I really did stop reading at that point. I'm not sure if the guy is serious or this is some new trend of Thanksgiving Fools. Yes. I'd go 98%....but, I'm not interpreting that as "don't have harmonies"....or "they serve no purpose in bettering the music". If you were to consider anything that enhances a piece of recorded music as "necessary", you'd have to include things that would be absurd to call necessary. If you've sat through artist after artist, unhappy with what they hear go "add stuff" that doesn't make anything better. Convinced that what's down is PERFECT....it just sucks without the whatever spice they are about to go try....I chuckled at that. He coulda said "doubling guitars is not necessary 80% of the time" or maybe "guitar solos aren't necessary 93% of the time"--and I'd still laugh....and I play guitar. Because that's also true. Once you've recorded enough people who stack new tracks because the existing ones don't work and think for SOME reason the shaker or doubling the guitar in the other speaker will make it work....and hear the result, the louder that chuckle gets. Icing on a poop cake. Back in the day, I think it was worse--before everyone and their mother had a home studio to demo things--I would often be present the first time a singer heard themselves sing their new song. AWKward.... If he'd said "no one should ever sing harmonies"....I'd stop reading, too. Plus, if one doesn't vibe with your experience...move to the next one. I only have a single complaint with the whole thing....and that's the semantics of "good song" vs "good music" sounding good no matter what happens next. It's pretty easy to find or make the proof that your fave song can suck hard played/sung poorly. Some people just use the two concepts interchangeably....which I assume he is one of those guys. ehh, yeah, case in point, yet another genius "mic placement" or "it's the performance" or "it's the song" that matters spiel  it's so friggin tiring that it comes off as... well... retarded, especially coming from tapeOP. |
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Nov 22, 2014 19:59:12 GMT -6
Amazing how consistent the voice of experience is, huh?
|
|
|
|
Post by swurveman on Nov 22, 2014 22:28:17 GMT -6
Is this the Larry Crane that was Mellencamp's guitar player?
|
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Nov 23, 2014 10:57:09 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by swurveman on Nov 23, 2014 13:27:13 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Nov 28, 2014 15:15:17 GMT -6
I just like the Taoist kind of one... Gear, and fidelity, matter incredibly, and also don't really matter.
and I've found that other one to be true lately, things on a grid may or may not sound in time.
|
|
|
|
Post by popmann on Nov 28, 2014 17:14:18 GMT -6
except it's not. It's not contradictory. It's not a zen riddle with no answer.
Gear makes a difference--ie, if you think cutting a vocal with a U67>GreatRiver>La3a>96khz Burl will yield a similar sounding track to ChineseLDC>Interface preamp>44.1>software compressor....you'd be deaf. ie, Gear CLEARLY makes a difference.
BUT....
I can show you recordings I've made with this and that set of mix tools....these and those preamps....these and those mic lockers....different sample rates....and when you listen to the end result, they're not that different. Meaning you're not gonna say "hey those are great....and those others are awful. Because I will compensate for whatever tools are at hand. Thus end result isn't hindered by any particular lack of gear....or made all that much better by the having lots of "nice" gear....thus gear doesn't make a difference. Without even getting into the fact that next to no one cares. Look at people scramble for those Zep reissues. Great recordings? I fucking think not. So--you can play from that perspective, too--that it makes little difference.
He's just playing the two POV/perspectives on "makes a difference" . No zen mystery puzzle.
|
|
|
|
Post by M57 on Nov 28, 2014 17:43:57 GMT -6
Look at people scramble for those Zep reissues. Great recordings? I fucking think not. So--you can play from that perspective, too--that it makes little difference. I'm not sure if I'm agreeing ore not. Great recordings are great recordings - Great performances are great performances. Gear Matters - Period. Performance Matters - Period. Though they are intertwined and not entirely exclusive of one another - for purposes of this argument, they are. Generally speaking, no matter what is being recorded, great gear in the hands of a hack will sound better than mediocre gear in the hands of a hack - and the same can be said of a talented engineer. To say it matters, and doesn't matter is a faux koan. |
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Nov 29, 2014 12:00:01 GMT -6
it's like you said, in comparison to the human, the gear is not important. it's only important to certain humans with skill enough to use it well. and let me say it again, some of my favorite albums of all time were recorded on "bad" gear. and I can't tell you how much trash I've heard from high end rooms on gearslutz or whatever. the gear doesn't matter. I think people that think it's gear that makes good recordings are the ones with false beliefs. way too much emphasis is put on gear quality, but, it is fun to talk about, and obviously to use as well once you've developed your ears and taste. a lot can be done with a minimalist rig of a few thousand bucks, and a computer. that old saying that was going around, "give me an SM7 an interface and a laptop and watch me make a great recording." I think that's true. Past a certain point, we are just putting cherries all over the tops of our beautiful cakes.
I do think though that there is a certain special kind of record, the kind that become ageless classics, those kinds of records seem to me to be only possible in high end studios. The whole package: great songs, performances, production, and fidelity. The rock and roll heavyweight champions of the world kind of records that just don't have flaws. This however is completely upended by the classics that come out of bedroom, garage studios. Your Wu Tang Clan, Daft Punk, Aphex Twin. The grittier electronic and punk and rap stuff is just as good as any Abbey Road cut on any level, including fidelity. This proves that resourceful musicians are not in fact limited by gear, and to bring it around, that the gear doesn't really matter in the right hands.
|
|
it's so friggin tiring that it comes off as... well... retarded, especially coming from tapeOP.
