Toys R Us plastic Drums, recorded in garage on analog tape - Win a Grammy? Yep.

J

jokerone

Guest
Ok, so I’m watching the Grammy’s last night and the Foo Fighters win Best rock song and the lead singer claims they bi-passed the expensive LA recording studio for his own personal garage where they recorded the song using a 24 track analog mixer to an analog tape recorder. A Toys R Us plastic drum kit was also used.

He claimed its not about computers and such, but the human element. I agree with this, but what was funny was he was telling to an audience filled with the Auto-Tuned, Vocoded, Digtial Mixers and Masterers, Producers and others who make their living off of selling and using the biggest and best equipment around.

As they left the stage, LMFAO’s digitized “Party Rock Anthem” began to play as if in protest.

Just wondering what your thoughts are on this?

thanks
 
Meh. It's all music.

I recorded a friend (playing & singing original material) the other night. His songs hit home in a big way, some of the most inspirational stuff I've heard in a long time. The acoustic guitar he used was probably worth more than my laptop, interface, and software.

And yet, I *still* love Joe Satriani's "Engine Of Creation" album or Crystal Method's "Tweekend" album. I probably couldn't imagine the budget allowed to fund those recordings.

I believe Dave is right, for the most part.
 
In context to the actual interview video they made a while back about the whole recording process, Dave DEMO'D older songs with a crappy plastic drum set. Taylor still played his set for the actual recordings. The actual point they were trying to make was the room has the most to do with the sound your going to get. Instead of recording in a completely controlled dead environment, they wanted "chaos" to get a particular feel they were after. Grohl, "I had this shitty little toys r us drumset we used demoing 'the pretender' and 'best of you', made of fucking plastic, but in this garage it sounded like a fucking Zeppelin record".

Either way, this an excellent read on the process: FOO FIGHTERS: Recording Wasting Light
 
Yeahhhhh, I read the article although they are certainly to be praised for being in control of their creativity it's about as far removed from a "garage" recording as its possible to get. They pretty much have the full Abbey Road setup and little mention made of post which was probably done in their LA studio (606).
Cynical? yup! I have listened to the album and they might have done a better job in the studio.
 
What that Foo guy said is not unusual to those of us of a certain age or sensibility. I maintain that all the modern stuff can sit happilly alongside the ways of old. Back in the late 60s, Tyrannosaurus Rex made great songs and crummy songs using acoustic guitar, bongoes and a host of toy bells, pianos, percussion and whatnot. Meanwhile, the Pink Floyd kind of helped pioneer the "using the studio as an instrument" mode of recording as well as using all manner of electronic gadgetery in what was, at the time, considered cutting edge. They did great songs and crummy ones too. Mark Bolan felt "What the Floyd do electronically, we {Rex} do acoustically".
What has this got to do with the subject at hand ? Just this ~ to alot of people, it was just music. You either liked it or not and alot of folk dug both groups even though they were a million miles from one another in terms of sound and technique/process. They did have some things in common {like both bands contained some of rock's most tragic acid casualties} as do many artists today have certain things in common. I doubt however, that there are many listeners who are really interested in where and how the songs they like are actually put together.
 
I once commented about this when the Foo's were recording and posting stuff on their facebook page.
I thought it was awesome they were recording in a garage with just basic room treatments that anyone could do.
Of course all the dudes here with "real studios" werent impressed and I think a few flat out didnt believe it.
Also, if some of those dudes want to comment again on this subject please post a picture of your grammy's first. If you dont have one yet then dont bother. LOL!
 
Capt Hair said:
In context to the actual interview video they made a while back about the whole recording process, Dave DEMO'D older songs with a crappy plastic drum set. Taylor still played his set for the actual recordings. The actual point they were trying to make was the room has the most to do with the sound your going to get. Instead of recording in a completely controlled dead environment, they wanted "chaos" to get a particular feel they were after. Grohl, "I had this shitty little toys r us drumset we used demoing 'the pretender' and 'best of you', made of fucking plastic, but in this garage it sounded like a fucking Zeppelin record".

Either way, this an excellent read on the process: FOO FIGHTERS: Recording Wasting Light
Click to expand...


Thanks for posting.

Well, I have to admit the mixer and setup seems much more sophisticated from the photos than the article I read about them using razors to slice audio tape and such.
I just found the acceptance speech amusing because here is Lady Gaga sitting there listening to it looking like Queen Tuna fish of the sea in a net with her golden scepter getting lectured about how all of her auto-tuning and vocoding didn’t a Grammy make for her this year. :-)
 
Obviously they had great gear, but they didnt have the perfect room(s). And that my friends is the same problem that most people with HOME studios deal with.

So skilled people, good gear and a good performance can trump a imperfect acoustical enviorment.
 
dreib said:
Obviously they had great gear, but they didnt have the perfect room(s). And that my friends is the same problem that most people with HOME studios deal with.

So skilled people, good gear and a good performance can trump a imperfect acoustical enviorment.
Click to expand...

There is some carpet down under the kit, and a couple a good looking (thick mid band) gobos behind the kit and I think you can just see one off to the right, I also would not mine betting there is some also behind the camera shot. You can make a normal room sound fine to record in if you do a little work on it. Also the amp room looks like extra carpet was put down to take out the low ceiling effect.

It's what we keep telling everyone, good sounds, good playing in, good recording out.

Alan.
 
witzendoz said:
The studio in the garage was hardly the typical home studio equipment wise.
Click to expand...

Haha yeah! Wished my home studio looked like this.... :D

Foos_05.jpg
 
witzendoz said:
There is some carpet down under the kit, and a couple a good looking (thick mid band) gobos behind the kit and I think you can just see one off to the right, I also would not mine betting there is some also behind the camera shot. You can make a normal room sound fine to record in if you do a little work on it. Also the amp room looks like extra carpet was put down to take out the low ceiling effect.

It's what we keep telling everyone, good sounds, good playing in, good recording out.

Alan.
Click to expand...

Yep, very easy but very effective room treatments. I think i recall a picture of moving blankets over the garage doors.

It always kills me when people seek advice on home recording when their chain is a 990,to a mbox to a laptop recorded in a basement, garage, bedroom and someone chimes in with, how is your room treated?
 
I'm sick of Dave's "we didn't use computers on this record" shit. Get over it. The last 3 or 4 albums most certainly did have computers used on them and you sold millions of those albums.

Like he is so insecure about what he did he needs validation for it. Or he is saying he is better than everyone because of their production choice.

For the record I totally agree that musicians have become lazy and have started to just expect the guy editing them to perform magic. Seriously learn how to fucking play your instrument. But the whole "it sounds better because we edited with a razor blade instead of a mouse" is fucking horse shit. He could have had the same results with a pro tools system.
 
dreib said:
Also, if some of those dudes want to comment again on this subject please post a picture of your grammy's first. If you dont have one yet then dont bother. LOL!
Click to expand...

yeah ..... because a grammy means your music is good!
And only grammy winners know anything.
:laughings:
 
dreib said:
Yep, very easy but very effective room treatments. I think i recall a picture of moving blankets over the garage doors.

It always kills me when people seek advice on home recording when their chain is a 990,to a mbox to a laptop recorded in a basement, garage, bedroom and someone chimes in with, how is your room treated?
Click to expand...
I'm with ya' man. We get people coming in here with budgets of 2-3 hundred bucks and the first thing they get told is without room treatment there's no point in recording.
Hell, decent room treatment costs a lot ...... very easily into the thousands.

Everyone here knows I've done this forever ..... I absolutely understand room treatment and the reasons it's important and I have none. Although 6000 albums on shelves is a fairly effective treatment.:D
I close mic which to a large degree eliminates the room and I add 'space' later.

Now someone will lambast me for saying that room treatment is unneccessary but that's not what I'm saying.
I'm just saying you work with what you have.
If you have zero budget and are still getting the basics together .... room treatment is gonna be last on the list except for DIY stuff like hanging quilts or whatever.
 
Lt. Bob said:
I'm with ya' man. We get people coming in here with budgets of 2-3 hundred bucks and the first thing they get told is without room treatment there's no point in recording.
Hell, decent room treatment costs a lot ...... very easily into the thousands.

Everyone here knows I've done this forever ..... I absolutely understand room treatment and the reasons it's important and I have none. Although 6000 albums on shelves is a fairly effective treatment.:D
I close mic which to a large degree eliminates the room and I add 'space' later.

Now someone will lambast me for saying that room treatment is unneccessary but that's not what I'm saying.
I'm just saying you work with what you have.
If you have zero budget and are still getting the basics together .... room treatment is gonna be last on the list except for DIY stuff like hanging quilts or whatever.
Click to expand...




Right on Lt.! I kinda liked that *beer can diffuser* thread that was going on for awhile ..... I wounder what became of that project?
 
Guitargodgt said:
For the record I totally agree that musicians have become lazy and have started to just expect the guy editing them to perform magic. Seriously learn how to fucking play your instrument.
Click to expand...
I think it's inevitable that some musicians would get lazy when technology exists to make things easier. A bit like microwaves and automatic cars and GPS/satnavs make people a bit lazy. But that's not really always the fault of the musician. It becomes a serious dent to the vocalist or musician if the producer is simply going to sample replace whatever you do or autotune you whether you give an Aretha style performance or not. Are there really that many artists that walk into a studio and say "we'll just do one verse and chorus of our song. You just autotune and sample replace and edit the rest !" ? In the same way that film making is a director's art rather than an an actors one, making records, the end product, is more an engineer and producer's gig. Somewhere along the line, that meeting of minds between all involved parties that prevailed over some great music and productions seems to be veering away from the artists. How far it continues to go, if it does, remains to be seen.
Guitargodgt said:
But the whole "it sounds better because we edited with a razor blade instead of a mouse" is fucking horse shit. He could have had the same results with a pro tools system.
Click to expand...
Without a doubt. I've long said that digital editing is simply an extension of what was being done with tape for decades. Splicing, razoring, editing.......Songs like "Blinded by the light" {the Manfred Mann's earth band version}, "Bohemian rhapsody", "Strawberry fields forever" and "Defecting grey" pointed the way ahead to digital, two decades before digital happened. And they still just sound like one continuous song........


Lt. Bob said:
Now someone will lambast me for saying that room treatment is unneccessary but that's not what I'm saying.
I'm just saying you work with what you have.
If you have zero budget and are still getting the basics together .... room treatment is gonna be last on the list except for DIY stuff like hanging quilts or whatever.
Click to expand...
When my son was 4, my wife booked him on this football session but when we got there, the next aged kid to him was 8 and the age range went all the way up to 16. He managed the training part quite well but when it came to actually playing the game, he never stood a chance, never got a kick and spent the whole time running after a ball he had no chance of ever kicking. Afterwards, he was devastated. On the way home, I explained to him that it would take a while for him to become a good player and that he had to put in the time and work. I'll never forget his reply. He said "But I want to be great NOW !".
The moral of the story is that if you're just starting out recording at home, like Lt Bob says, you have to start where you are. Whether it means buying cheap gear or whatnot, just get started. Use what you have. You're going to progress and upgrade in any event.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top