Technology getting in the way of the music

D

david strait

New member
Do you guys ever feel like all the stuff that's involved in geting a "good" recording is more of a burden to your music than it is an asset? Don't get me wrong, I enjoy using the equipment that I have and trying to get a quality representation of the songs that I've written, but sometimes I feel like there's a point that the technology has become superfluous in context with the quality of music I'm putting out (Maybe that means I just need to learn to write better music). but I'm sure that alot of you listen to leadbelly, John Lee Hooker, etc., people who made great music that came across despite the one-take/one mic lo-fi analog recording. I think that alot of times art is sacrificed to the skill of producing art. This really does't have much of a point, I just wanted to know if any of you feel me on this one?
 
This is exactly why sound engineer and studios will never be supplanted by DIY home-recording. Engineers concentrate on the recording process and the sound quality, leaving the artist free to concentrate solely on performance.
 
Absolutely David, and of course Blue Bear is surely correct (although Dave Stewart of Eurythmics was an exception). Although when they released Bruce Springsteen's Nebraska they had to use the version he'd done on a cassette 4 track at home; they couldn't reproduce it in the studio.
 
I've heard or read somewhere that most of Beck's Mellow Gold album was done at home on a 4-track.

Good point about sound engineers not being replaced by home recording. I've never thought about that aspect of the validity of those two different roles in the creation of music.
 
david, you are not alone in your thinking...a few of us here (myself included) have made a conscious decision to focus less on the recording end and more on the songwriting......
 
That's good to hear. I just got my home studio up and running a couple of weeks ago and its great to be able to demo my songs for friends, bar owners, people who might want to colaborate, etc. but the tech side of it can become kind of addictive. always want to get it sounding a little better, a little funkier, a little more vintage, whatever. Then i realized last night that it had been a couple of weeks since i had really sat down to write or practice for my next show. I guess there's a balance there somewhere. There always is.
 
I think all of us have to figure out what we do well and what we enjoy most and keep the primary focus on that.

Like many (perhaps most on this site) I started recording as a way to document things I'd written/composed. Along the way I learned to play several instruments and tried to develop some enginnering/production chops.

I found I was spending way too much time trying to write clever arrangements and record perfect takes. I also got hung up on having the newst this and the bestest that. It didn't seem to be making the songs better and in fact, sometimes the song got lost along the way.

A couple of years ago I decided that I wanted to keep my focus on writing (and improving my guitar/keyboard chops). Now I demo a song rather basic (I hardly use much of the reording gear I've accumulated).

If I have a rare song that I think has market potential (maybe one out of every 20 I write) I will then spend some cash for a good singer, good guitar player, etc). I may track at my studio (which may even include paying someone else to engineer) or I may pay to track at a studio that has a better room (or a good engineer).

While I sometimes have to spend more (vs. trying to do everything "in-house" I get a better finished prodcut with less stress. I can focu on being a writer rather than a writer/producer/engineer/guitarist/keyboardist/drummer/singer/arranger/contractor/equipment tech (did I forget anything).

The good news is, I havn't bought much new gear in the last 2 years!

As Bluebear said, there will always be a need for "real studios" ,"real engineers" (and hopefully "real musicians").
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top