×
What's new
By:

How much raw humanity does your music need?

D

DSmolken

Member


This guy's general theme in many of his videos is that rock music lost a lot when it went to digital recording, snapping things to the grid, writing songs with a drum machine and then getting the drummer involved later etc. He's big advocate of the magic of recording to analog tape, loud rehearsals with an entire band present, and all those other long-gone traditions.

How much of that do you believe and insist on implementing those beliefs in your music at all times, how much of you like in theory but time and budget won't allow it in practice, and how much do you just straight up reject as foolishness?

Now, I like the Boojums as much as the next guy, but even they tried the analog tape thing and gave up on it... I'd have to find the interview where they talked about it, but they're probably the most traditional rock band I can think of nowadays. And it seems to be working for them.

 
I find musicians that say they prefer the old tech, tend to make music that sounds like it's from the same era as the old tech they like. So it's actually hurting their creativity as they've closed their mind to new sonic possibilities. They're just trying to copy old sounds, not create new ones.
 
Popular music has always been a product of the music tech of its day. The sound, the vibe, and the musical sensibilities are always rooted in a specific point in time. You can hear a random record from the 1950s, 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s, etc. and pretty much instantly recognize the era from which it came, regardless of genre.

So when folks compare modern music to music from a previous era and claim modern music is inferior, I'd say their opinions are coming from a place of nostalgia. For many people, nothing is ever going to be as good as the music they grew up with, which is fine if that's all they want to keep playing and listening to.

Popular music, by its very nature, is a constant moving target. It's both a product and a reflection, of the time in which it's made, and is perpetually in flux. So comparisons to music from the past are pretty pointless.

Also, the practicality of time, money, and effort is definitely a significant factor in music creation. When I think back to how much time and energy was expended to gather my bandmates, find a space where we could practice at volume, lug and setup our gear, rehearse, and then spend a day recording onto a 4-track, only to end up with a crappy cassette recording... I never want to go back to that. It was fun at the time because we were young and that's all we knew, but anyone who says that was objectively better than making music with modern tools, has their head firmly stuck in the past.
 
Although I love and use today's music tech (generative AI excepted, at least to this point in time), there is definitely a "Loop until we Droop" mentality that has permeated the pop mainstream.

Yes, creativity is still involved, and great stuff is being produced in countless styles. I don't blame the tech for LCD music. By definition, the more Common the Denominator, the bigger the market. But I still enjoy songs that expand beyond four chords into a bridge. Modern tech in no way impedes this; it is just so easy to do repetitive things that production gravitates in that direction.

OTOH, I am not a big consumer of music. I'm working on the other end of things, making it. So why should other producers care what I think?
 
Nekujak said:
Also, the practicality of time, money, and effort is definitely a significant factor in music creation. When I think back to how much time and energy was expended to gather my bandmates, find a space where we could practice at volume, lug and setup our gear, rehearse, and then spend a day recording onto a 4-track, only to end up with a crappy cassette recording... I never want to go back to that. It was fun at the time because we were young and that's all we knew, but anyone who says that was objectively better than making music with modern tools, has their head firmly stuck in the past.
Click to expand...
Couldn't agree more!!!!! I've been from sound on sound ( 2 cassette decks), through Notator with an Atara 1040 1/4" 8 track and a room full of outboard gear, to the DAW. An entire room full of gear now in my Mac Mini. I SO wish we had DAW's 30 years ago!!! Would have saved me days/months of production time.
 
I watched enough of the video to get the gist. I see it more about capturing the spontaneity/interaction and the unique character of a band, the recording process is secondary. If I was still in a band, I would consider tracking the band in the same room to tape (depending on the band esthetics), but not from an analog purist POV--It all winds up in pro tools eventually anyway.

And what is often overlooked is it isn’t just “tape”, but the whole signal chain and experience of the engineer that makes an excellent recording, including a good sounding room, and creative environment.
 
Last edited:
I think the technology has nothing to do with it. I think a lot of people lust for old retro nostalgia. I think musical vision and drive is what matters. My basement is full of old tech. And I am sure if i plugged it in and tried to make a track with it, it will sound very similar to what I do with my DAW and VIs. The tech will not change the personality behind the creative work and vision.
 
Nitrateaudio said:
I think the technology has nothing to do with it. I think a lot of people lust for old retro nostalgia. I think musical vision and drive is what matters. My basement is full of old tech. And I am sure if i plugged it in and tried to make a track with it, it will sound very similar to what I do with my DAW and VIs. The tech will not change the personality behind the creative work and vision.
Click to expand...
I think the tech has A LOT to do with it. The invention of electric guitars, amps, pedals etc changed everything. Going from acoustic guitar to electric changed my "vision and drive" a great deal.
 
Tim Nash said:
I think the tech has A LOT to do with it. The invention of electric guitars, amps, pedals etc changed everything.
Click to expand...
Of course. My impression was we were focusing more on recording tech (as opposed to the instruments we use to make noise) in this thread. The invention of the 12-tone chromatic scale had a pretty big impact on western music, too. ;)

Replace the word "process" (which can be interrupted in a variety of ways) with "technology" and this captures my feeling on the matter succinctly:

Louie said:
I see it more about capturing the spontaneity/interaction and the unique character of a band, the recording process is secondary
Click to expand...
 
One thing that has changed, though, is that in the old days you pretty much got the amount of humanity you got. Low budget, no punch-ins for missed notes, no budget for lots of takes, no splicing - lots of humanity whether you wanted it or not.

High budget, you had the option of getting perfectionist, and many end results of high budgets were derided as "overproduced" and "too polished". I don't mean to pick on them in particular, but I remember Def Leppard saying their producer insisted on recording guitar chords one string at a time so the timing would be perfectly tight, with no strumming.

Nowadays, with MIDI guitar that's way easier than strumming. Low budget often means less humanity. With higher budgets you have, again, a full choice, but nowadays even those of us with not much money or time or dedication can emulate the worst faults of the most overproduced records of old.

And maybe looking at it that way makes it a more interesting question?
 
I use at least a gallon of humanity per song. 🪣

I don't miss the days of tape punch-ins, drummers that speed up, singers off pitch, or tape flutter and hiss.
I also don't miss drum machines with 3 levels of dynamics, abuse of overquantized midi to the point that sequencers touted 'humanize midi' features as a major selling point, grainy digital delays/reverbs etc.

We're in golden age of technology for creatives, and have easy access to tools that are so powerful we can produce pretty much whatever we want.

And that frees us to pursue our humanity.
 
Tim Nash said:
I think the tech has A LOT to do with it. The invention of electric guitars, amps, pedals etc changed everything. Going from acoustic guitar to electric changed my "vision and drive" a great deal.
Click to expand...
I still disagree. I was recently re-listening to a Joni Mitchell album I never heard in its entirety. Hejira from 1976. I am very familiar with her other works, and especially later works, but this one I never understood and wound up getting a remastered version for a very good deal.

The recording tech and the instrumts are older and inferior to her later 90s and 00s albums. It still has her signature songwriting but the music and performances are far superior. I think it has to do with the fact that she was in peaking creatively in that mid 70s era.
 
Spirit Groove said:
I use at least a gallon of humanity per song. 🪣
Click to expand...
Well, I use at least two gallons of humanity. 🪣🪣

No, that's not even remotely true. And what exactly is a bucket full of humanity - soylent? 🥫

Plenty of people have adopted the ethos of older technology without having to use old technology:
  • Record live to digital
  • Use only a limited number of tracks and/or effects
  • Make decisions early in the process and stick to them
  • Work fast and leave mistakes in
That said, there was no single way that people interacted with older technology. In some cases, it meant really knowing the music before going in and recording it. On the other hand, you had studio musicians who cranked out songs in a couple of takes. And then you had Steely Dan, who could bring in group after group until they found the sound they wanted.

It's not about the technology, but obviously people have to be able to work with the tools that are available at the time.
 
David Cuny said:
It's not about the technology, but obviously people have to be able to work with the tools that are available at the time.
Click to expand...
But it IS about the technology and that's why I said this:

Spirit Groove said:
We're in golden age of technology for creatives, and have easy access to tools that are so powerful we can produce pretty much whatever we want.
Click to expand...
Now that technology is essentially powerful enough to longer be an obstacle to creativity the artist can choose just about any path.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom