What does lofi--hifi mean to the market?

A

analog4

New member
Hi everyone,

A real Newbie sounding question...

What does lofi and hifi mean in terms of recording technique,
music genre, etc. to the general public and/or non music biz
internet users?????

May sound like a lame question---Just examining a couple of
marketing techniques and trying to look for differences---

Thanks in advance for your input....
 
Do you mean like indie rock style lo fi??..like sebadoh and guided by voices or something?
I think for those styles lo fi is cool...like elliott smith, pedro the lion or damien jurado...if it was recorded with good equipment by a wanker pro producer their stuff would probably sound like crap....kind of a paradox...
am i just imagining it or will only a very very tiny percentage of people on this board have any idea of the musicians I am referring to? If not welcome to the history of music in the last 15 years...

47ronin
 
That's the point!!

Hi 47ronin,

The reason I started this thread is while wandering around
web sites devoted to music, there is an obvious discussion
going on about "lofi" music and the participants in these
discussions have very strong opinions on the subject...

I'm glad you waded in on this one 47 and could you give us
old farts a brief history of your meaning of lofi music..I am
truly interested

Thanks.
 
I'm pretty familiar with the whole lo-fi thing that 47's talking about. It's kind of dumb, and I think most of the artists considered "lo-fi" would probably agree with me on that, it's more of something they got labelled by stupid magazines than what they actually call themselves. It's basically a name that a bunch of bands, but especially sebadoh and guided by voices, got because their recordings weren't very high quality, usually done on 4-track or cassette. That's pretty much the only distinction that ties these bands together, as sebadoh and elliot smith are typical college-rock whiney musicians, and guided by voices are more ROCK music, but with very short songs and weird lyrics. Of course, the label is dumb since most of these musicians recorded lo-fi not out of some militant aesthetic belief in the superiority of cheap technology, but because that's what they could afford. Bob Pollard from GBV has been quoted as saying that they didn't record on 8-track because his wife wouldn't let him buy one. Despite the stupidity of the label, I do agree with the overall concept (born of punk rock) that just because certain music isn't pristinely recorded, it isn't worth releasing. Another disclaimer: despite the tone of this post, I actually like elliot smith and am not that fond of gbv. Sebadoh I hate. But I have a feeling that most homerecording.com posters would like gbv the most, especially their newer, better recorded stuff.
 
Thanks Pirateking,

I'm asking because dumb or not, it seems to be a "buzz".

You mentioned that magazines coined the phrase and I'm
sure most musicians don't particularly like labels of any sort
----that's for media types------

So if I've got this right, certain home-based punk style bands
recording on analog equipment have had the media jump
on the wagon and are hyping the thing calling it "lofi" music.

Would this extend to other genres of music, say folk/rock??
--Or is this term used only to describe these particular types
of bands???????

Interesting!!!!!???
 
I don't know about modern lo-fi trends, the bands that I talked about hit their peak in popularity in the mid-90's. Elliot Smith and GBV are still around, but are both recording for major labels with big budgets. In terms of genre, Elliot Smith is kind of folky, started out as all acoustic guitar and vox, similar to Nick Drake. Very pretty sad songs. Like I said, GBV is more straight rock, in fact that was part of their initial appeal, the fact that they sounded like they were trying to play arena rock but obviously recorded at home in someone's living room. Sebadoh started out kind of punky and got folkier as they went on (Sebadoh was centered around Lou Barlow, who had been in the band Dinosaur Jr. for a little while, if you've heard of them).
 
Hi Pirateking,

Sorry, my knowledge of new bands is pretty limited.

I am however always interested in new trends..

The history of modern music seems to be innovation coming
out of somebody's living room, basement, etc. and I am
trying to educate myself.....

Who listens to this stuff??--college students??

So "lofi" refers more to the recording technique and quality
than the actual genre, as you say some acts have got folky
over time...

Would a retro folk/rock 70's sound recorded on a 4 Track by
some old fart be considered "lofi" and fit into this category???

Always nice to know where you fit....
 
I would say lo fi kind of peaked in terms of hipness probably 3 or four years ago....then bands use to put disclaimers on the albums that said things like this album recorded on all analog equipment...etc etc...
I think in some ways it was a reaction against the 80s style everything but the kitchen sink method of production.

If you listen to recent music by the likes of elliott smith, sebadoh,etc it sounds professional at least in terms of the production values...the approach to the songs is probably a lot different than your average pop music though.

Yes, I think lo fi as a movement would have been centered around college and community radio....It never really translated well into mainstream radio....although elliott smith did perform at the oscars and in fact win one for best original song from the film Good Will Hunting....with a song that could be considered lo fi recorded to some degree....

I do sometimes listen to old recordings I did on a four track or even a boombox and find they have a certain warmth or immediacy that can be lost if you mess around with reverbs and compressors especially too much....plus with fewer overdubs you cant be as lazy with coming up with parts....

I think with acoustic folk style music lo fi has been very influential....but then you could say that people like nick drake or townes van zandt were doing lo fi 30 years ago....

I think now unless it really meshes well with the songs recording deliberately lo fi is kind of stupid....


the strokes new album is somewhat lo fi although it sounds good and is incredibly popular by noncommercial pop standards

good luck

47ronin
 
You ask: "Would a retro folk/rock 70's sound recorded on a 4 Track by
some old fart be considered "lofi" and fit into this category??? "

Although as previously mentioned the whole category of lofi is kind of meaningless and media-generated, I think the implication of being called "lofi" is that you take some kind of pride in your simple recording techniques, and perhaps even believe in the superiority of cheap recording technology (because it's faster, allows you to get the song across while it's still fresh and means something as opposed to spending days and days recording the same song). For me, it comes from the punk rock concepts of immediacy, that amateurity is ok, and an emphasis on the song and the message over being polished and perfect. So personally, I wouldn't call your music "lofi" unless musically it came from this kind of background. If your music is very precise, complicated, and/or musically challenging, and just happens to be recorded on a four-track, I wouldn't call it lo-fi. HOWEVER, I'm probably in the minority on this view. I think most people, seeing that you call yourself lo-fi, would assume that you're just talking about recording quality, not any kind of ethos or musical manifesto. So go ahead and do what feels right. I guess my final point is that all musical categories are vague and essentially meaningless, and the category of "lo-fi" is especially so.
 
Hey 47,

Thanks for coming back in on this one...

So is this a fad or a sub culture??

The information you guys are posting is very interesting
to me..

The reason this thread was started was due to my observations
in roaming around looking at sites, etc.
There seems to continue to be a following for "lofi".
In marketing,they say an edge is worth $1m.
In my previous corporate life, I looked for edges all the time.
While never related to the music business, they always had
a "feel" when observed from outside and the really good ones
had a passionately loyal following---this has the same "feel".

When you say the hipness peaked a few years ago, the question
remains did it leave an impact on its followers..If so, how deep
an impact. That warmth you described in your early recordings
on analog equipment is basically the same description I see being
used by all sorts of internet users.

I'm still learning here---let's keep talking on this one
 
Hi Pirateking,

I couldn't agree with you more.....But marketing is marketing
and if a bunch of media types get lazy and coin a term that sticks
creating an ill defined category of music which an identifiable
and quantifiable group of the public will passionately support,
I would expect indie label guys like myself owe it to the musicians
we work with to research these things fully...
Personally, my music does fall into the old fart folk/rock
category and that is the cross I will continue to bear....But if
I can give one of the young people I work with up here a
broader audience by sticking this label on them...........

It's certainly worth discussing...
 
Hey analog, waz up man!

I don't know if just sticking the label "lo fi" on a young band that your working on is going to get them any further than as far as their music will take them in the first place.........

I do not think that the whole lo fi movement really had such a tremendous impact, and I especially start to get that feeling when I come into these boards and listen to people discuss music production in terms of the equipment they use...........The ironic thing about everyone (most people) on this board is that they all have what I think most people would call "lo fi" equipment....However, they all want the big production sound........And I say that based on what I here and read in places like the Mp3 clinic......So if lo-fi really had such an impact there would be more people around here who are proud of their shitty production (like me lol)........

No really though, in all seriousness, I am not really proud of it, however, I do understand that the equipment I'm recording on is lo fi and has it's limitations, and I don't expect to get hi - fi results with my lo - fi equipment.....So lets just say that while I'm not going to make some big stink about lo-fi being superior to hi-fi (because that's ridiculous) I will say that when you realize you are lo-fi , you can then get alot more accomplished with your music IMHO......

BTW, I would like to say that as far as lo fi being born as some media frenzy trend, it definately had something to do with the Grunge movement.........Most of the grunge music was recorded that way even though when it first came out it wasn't called lo-fi; it was just called Grunge, for other obvious reasons..........However, soon afterwards bands like the afore mentioned bands ie "sebadoh" and "Guided by Voices" and "Pavement" broke into the public eye because the grunge musicians paved the way with their shitty recording capabilities......BTW, I'm calling them shitty but I actually like them for the production and the music.............But the bottom line is that "indie rockers" are associated with lo-fi alot just because of the fact that they don't have mutt lang producing their album....


On the other hand, There is another take on the whole lo-fi scenario........... take a band like Ween, who started out here in NJ and was doing lo-fi stuff before the grunge bands ever hit it big........If you want to see guys that creatively use lo-fi tech in their recordings check out WEEN.....Those guys do all sorts of creative things with four tracks...........Beck was another one...When he first started out his recordings were extremely lo-fi and he used the lo-fi tech creatively to make something that was interesting to listen to...not because it was lo-fi, but because of his creative use of lo-fi tech that allowed him to produce something that sounded new even though it recorded with older technology..............And when I say that it sounded new I don't mean in terms of technology but I do mean in terms of creativity and originality...

So, when I think of lo-fi that's what I think of........I think that it doesn't make any sense to be just lo-fi for the sake of lo-finess.........I think that the idea is that if you are going to be lo-fi you have to be able to use that old technology in a way that is new!.........Listen to the band Ween's earlier albums like "Pure Quava" or "God ween satan" or even "chocolate and cheese"and you'll see what I mean.......Those guys were the quintessential lo-fi recorders.......

BTW, analog, I was on my way to your thread on postcard....So, I might as well just tell you here that I thought it was very cool and that I would be interested in a tape...........Also that I really don't know how to fix the sax......I don't know enough about playing sax but I do know that something is wrong....Could it be the playing of the sax? I know, for example, and this may be completely unrelated, but however, I can't get a tone when I try to play violin because I just am no good at playing the darn thing.........Someone once told me (mind you it's hear say) that a saxaphone made it hard for people learning the sax to get a good tone...........I don't know how experienced your sax player is....They seem like they keep good timing and all that so just take that for whatever it's worth.......Other than that could it be the tuner? I just dunno...I wish I could help more :(


-nave
 
Last edited:
Dude.
I love Ween, especially "Pure Guava."
Yeah, I don't think calling your band "lo-fi" is going to help make them popular, especially because most popular bands nowadays have really slick production. I think for most kids these days, lo-fi would be a turn off. But kids are dumb.
My favorite artists that I consider lo-fi are pretty different:
1. The Mountain Goats - which despite the name, is almost always just one guy playing acoustic guitar and singing, which I don't usually like, but this guy pulls it off somehow. The lo-finess of it kind of makes it sound cool because he has a nasal voice and tends to play pretty fast, and the poor recording quality makes it sound like an old record playing on a gramophone.
2. The Microphones - I hesitate to call this lo-fi, because Phil Elvrum, the mastermind behind the band, is obviously a recording genius. The songs have pianos, xylophones, strings, all kinds of guitars and drums, weird backup vocals, etc., etc. but all obviously recorded at home, not in some slick studio. I like it because it's very technically impressive, but the lo-finess of it makes me optimistic about the lack of limits for home recording. Imagine a depressed Brian Wilson recording in his living room on a 4-track. All the songs are about sand, sun, blood, water, and air. Weird.
 
"but the lo-finess of it makes me optimistic about the lack of limits for home recording."

Pirate, good point..... That is the best way to look at the whole lo fi deal.....As I said before, once you realize that you have limitations you can really start getting things accomplished with your stuff because you won't be wasting your time trying to figure out how you can get sounds that you can't get...Sounds that you can't get, not because of lack of musicianship but because of lack and limitations of equipment.....

BTW, Ween is cool aren't they,,,,at first I didn't really like them because they are almost too lo-fi and they get kind of too silly....but after you listen to them for awhile you realize that those guys are damn good musicians that can play just about any and every style of freakin music that ever existed in the world......and NOW, I must say that I'm a pretty big Ween Fan...and Pure Quava is also my favorite.....I really like the opening song.......Something about the little birdy or something? I don't remember the name......But who is it , Dino or Jean or something? He does some pretty neat subtle effects in that song with pitch shifting that are particularly interesting......I find that sometimes they go a little crazy with the whole pitch shifting thing but in that song when he uses it subtley in sounds really cool........It's like a bad freakin acid trip or something :D


-nave
 
Hey Nave,

The sax thing is really perplexing because most often Gina's
tone is dead on ----even playing in the same keys...

If the pads get moist or wear this can affect pitch as well as
the reed....
We'll be trying her other sax on the weekend and re-record this
stuff----I'll let you know---

Back to lo-fi

As "tradespeople",which we all are at one level or another,
we look at terminology and practises in a certain way---the
most common mistake all tradespeople make is assuming the
consumer views things in the same way we do......remember
this is strictly a discussion on marketing.......

Ok a session player that works with me has also been researching the same question from a statistical point of view..
He told me this morning he has identified over 600,000 sites
relating to lo-fi music....

Easy to trivialize the subject from our point of view but every
time I dig a little deeper, I'm finding out there appears to be
some commercial value to this term---Bullshit -----maybe
But we are talking marketing after all!!!!!
 
Analog your definately right there is commercial value in the term, for sure,.................Just go to amazon and review some albums..........Look at the older albums by beck (before..um....mellow gold) and look at the older albums by Ween..............Read the reviews and you will see that the editor himself promotes those albums as being lo-fi and sounding like they were recorded in somebodies basement or bathroom and how they are very creatively done despite tech limits...Those are all words that you will hear coming out of the editors mouth when reviewing the album.....They aren't necessarily my opinions at all..............That's why I gave you Ween and Beck as examples......Because, IMHO, as far as the industry is concerned, those two bands, are the quintessential lo-fi bands.......Not necessarily because of my opinion, but because of the industry, the critics, and whoever else......If you go to amazon and read those reviews by the editor, you will see what I mean.....:)


-nave
 
Hey Nave,

Off I go to Amazon for a bit.........

Us indies need every edge we can get.......It's cooooold out there!
 
lol, I here ya man.....You indie guys got my support cause most of the stuff on the big labels is just trash as far as my subjective opinion is concerned..........I was reading through those reviews the other day and that's why I brought them up....They do mention lo-fi right? as far as I remember they do........You might have to read through a couple of albums.........I like reading those review things though, some of it is good writing, even if just that..........I guess that's what they say bout all the critics now a days though ya know.....What I mean to say is that the critics of the critics say that the critic's writing is just rhetoric and nothing more......did that make sense? lol :)


-nave
 
Hey Nave,

If you want to see why critics write the way the do.....
Simple-----just follow the cash man!

You were right, they use the term to sell the product
ie. define market segmentation---must be appealing to
someone right?????

I've found a British site using the term to sell easy listening
lounge music-ya know-- sit back relax and listen to the lofi
sounds etc etc etc...

Bastardized term no doubt..

One of my current projects is to place CD racks with small
retail chains to provide a sales outlet for indie artists on a
co-op basis....I'm really torn because there may be some
merit to use lofi in the rack's signage or strategically in packaging
design...

This thread continues to be a worthwhile discussion for me..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top