Dumb Digital Rant

  • Thread starter Thread starter Dubwise
  • Start date Start date
Sorry man, didn't mean to make it sound like your engineers are idiots... I am sure they know how to record and mix. My question to you is this: Does your studio have a full time IT staff (or at least a person) that knows what they are doing? Sorry, but most of the time the studios will spend a large sum of money to get the latest ProTools system, but can't tell PCI from SATA. In most circumstances the IT person is some dude that has a vague idea what a DAW is because he had installed Audition at home that he downloaded from eDonkey and maintains Micro$oft Exchange for his pop, that comes in when all hell breaks loose.

An engineer shouldn't be burdened with making computers function well, not crash, and deal with different formats from different studios. That should be the worry of a full-time IT professional that's trained specifically to support audio systems.
 
...."There is no analog Autotune...."

For those of use who grew up making commercial music on analog, yes there is Autotune for analog. It comes in two interchangeable modes. One is varispeed and the other is punch-in-one-line-or-note-at-at-time-on-however-many-separate-tracks-you-need-until-it's-dead-on-in-pitch-or-time. Nothing new and it was quite often the deciding factor between a stellar performance or an amateur take in the old days of hit records.

One can use the cliche, "get a real singer" or "take vocal lessons" but the fact of the matter is that of the 10,0000,0000,000 hit records made on the planet over the past 50 years, there weren't great singers/players on 100% of those hits. Sometimes there were. But not always. "Analog Autotune" was a life saver for many millions of folks using tape recorders...and folks making records.

By the way, I still have bunches of analog machines and occasionally still use them in conjunction with Nuendo or Protools. But no way do I miss tape splicing...or interrupting the creative flow waiting for machines to rewind/ff or lock to other machines. I also don't miss biasing the machines (no way can I totally realign a machine from one tape type to another with a test tape in 20 minutes...that guy who can do that is r-e-a-l fast !) , cleaning them every few hours, not having the signal on the tape sound like what the source was etc.

On the other hand, I'll never sell my analog recorders and in fact, am seriously thinking of buying one of the final new a-824s. There are simply those times where it's nice to know I can record on either analog or digital. Man, we would've killed to have all these choices back in the old days!
 
Dubwise said:
Anyway, this ain't a rant about which format is better, it is why in the world do people use digital at all when it doesn't sound as good as tape. I have never heard a reasonable excuse, just rationalizations for the artist's lack of talent, and engineer laziness.
Click to expand...

It's about money. Duh. The people who write the checks have determined it's cheaper and more profitable. If it wasn't, tape would still be more prevalent.
 
The buying public and the laws of supply and demand are what ultimately determines whether or not the additional expense / time involved in analog recording is worthwhile.

The sad reality is that about 99 out of 100 people who purchase music aren't sufficiently influenced by the difference in sound quality between the recording mediums.

Now if the buying public were to morph over time to the point where they started demanding better-sounding records ... then that could very well change. Not that I'm holding my breath for that to happen any time soon. But if by some chance the record companies discover one day that going analog is, by and large, resulting in a sharp increase in record sales -- or that the buying public is willing to pay more for them -- then I 5 star guarantee you that digital recording technology will die a swift death.

.
 
For NOISEWRECK

"Sorry man, didn't mean to make it sound like your engineers are idiots.."

No worries, I didn't take it that way. I understand your point. I guess I didn't make myself clear enough. 99% of the time these engineers would bring in their own Pro Tools rigs, along with their own Pro Tools operator and their own racks and racks of outboard gear. Then they would still need our racks and racks of vintage and tube outboard gear, and the SSL to not make the recordings sound brittle.

I am sorry, but to need a $20,000 Pro Tools HD rig, $20,000 in NEVE & API pre-amps, your own personal operator at $20/hr(to deal with the things you yourself said an engineer shouldn't deal with), an SSL, an autotune, drum time-alligner, drum replacement samples, and 50+ tracks...just to make a 4or5 piece band sound decent is so unbelievabley assinine, that I feel like I am in the twilight zone tring to understand it.

By-the-way, I am not exagerating...I worked on sessions like these day in and day out. This is how it goes for the big labels. :(

Anyway...happy recording! I just wish people would stop buying major label junk, and teach 'em a lesson. It's all garbage brain rot anyway. And the songs (when their good) are so overdubed, time aligned, tuned, pitch shifted, that they have no life.

Yeah, hell...maybe I'm bitter, but at least my bitterness is fat and warm with saturation!

;) ;) ;)
 
Last edited:
BRDTS said:
...."There is no analog Autotune...."

For those of use who grew up making commercial music on analog, yes there is Autotune for analog. It comes in two interchangeable modes. One is varispeed and the other is punch-in-one-line-or-note-at-at-time-on-however-many-separate-tracks-you-need-until-it's-dead-on-in-pitch-or-time. Nothing new and it was quite often the deciding factor between a stellar performance or an amateur take in the old days of hit records.

One can use the cliche, "get a real singer" or "take vocal lessons" but the fact of the matter is that of the 10,0000,0000,000 hit records made on the planet over the past 50 years, there weren't great singers/players on 100% of those hits. Sometimes there were. But not always. "Analog Autotune" was a life saver for many millions of folks using tape recorders...and folks making records.

By the way, I still have bunches of analog machines and occasionally still use them in conjunction with Nuendo or Protools. But no way do I miss tape splicing...or interrupting the creative flow waiting for machines to rewind/ff or lock to other machines. I also don't miss biasing the machines (no way can I totally realign a machine from one tape type to another with a test tape in 20 minutes...that guy who can do that is r-e-a-l fast !) , cleaning them every few hours, not having the signal on the tape sound like what the source was etc.

On the other hand, I'll never sell my analog recorders and in fact, am seriously thinking of buying one of the final new a-824s. There are simply those times where it's nice to know I can record on either analog or digital. Man, we would've killed to have all these choices back in the old days!
Click to expand...

I can only imagine varispeed adjustment to fix vocal and other pitch problems was a royal pain in the ass, but lesson learned. However, it would seem it still influenced people to perform better, not knowing that individual nanoseconds of lack-luster pitch could easily be dragged into tune with a mouse :)
 
Dubwise said:
I just wish people would stop buying major label junk, and teach 'em a lesson. It's all garbage brain rot anyway. And the songs (when their good) are so overdubed, time aligned, tuned, pitch shifted, that they have no life.

Yeah, hell...maybe I'm bitter, but at least my bitterness is fat and warm with saturation!

;) ;) ;)
Click to expand...
Aye... Well, I have (stopped buying major label junk). And I feel like an alien. Most of the time people come and say "have you heard the new [some popular band's] song"... I am like "who?" and they'll be like "dude... what planet are you on?" ... then I'll say "have you heard [some obscure experimental noise]" and they're like... "uhhhhh... :confused: ". Needless to say, makes for a very limited small talk :D

I know what you mean man. I am not going to comment on the sound, because like you said, I have no idea what a real Pultec or a Studer sounds like. I also don't pretend that my UAD plug is anything but a plug ;) My only issue was with the crashed drives, frozen computers and format issues in your original post, and for those, there are professional IT people who should handle such situations, and actually prevent such situations from arising in the first place.
 
autotune

I dont really mind people nudging slight out of tuneness back into tune. Recording is all about making a timeless flattering version of a song. And if trying to flatter a voice is bad than everyone is guilty of it because thats what mic placement and mic selection does, it flatters a voice. It makes it better than in real life.

The only part that bugs me is not that people are using digital tricks to perfect near perfect performances, its that they use them to make passable gimmicky music out of shit songs. It trickles down man, and it makes everything suck for everyone.

OK OK im sorry, just sick and tired of modern music. I feel like 99 percent of modern bands have humped all the legs way too long. And digital edits and chopped up beats arent enough to impress me, sorry. Guitar "tone" doesnt impress me, sorry. Clarity in upper mids doesnt impress me. A mix that translates well doesnt impress me. Well maybe a little, but its like 99th on my artistic and creative list.
 
Ok Ok The Truth

Its time for the truth. The REAL truth. Record companies are run by old men. Old sad men. And old sad men are sad because they are old. So they want money. Cause i think when you get old the only way you get laid or get respect is by having money or power to some degree. Its like, well i may be old but at least i have a nice car or whatever.

And those people are the ones who make decisions like how much money to spend versus how much we think well make and so on. And im sure they have all the numbers figured out and im sure at this point in music with all the stealing of music off the internet and so on that record companies cant afford to lose money. So they are forced to take no chances. Sign only what will sell. If its not that great, make it seem great. Produce the fuck out of it. MAKE it sell. Sign a couple dumbfucks with matching haircuts and pretend its the second coming. And you want to know whats sick? IT WORKS. It does sell. No matter how lame and obviously fake and cliched an artist is there still isnt a dry panty in the house. And sales go through the roof. So who can blame a company whose purpose is to make money for doing what it takes to making money? I dont like it, but thats the way it is.

Thats why everything sucks and recordings sound like rocks and mud encased in a diamond these days. Cause someone will always do whatever it takes no matter how soulless it is, to be rich or to get laid. Theres no fighting all mankind cause this shits been going on long before "rock and roll". Everyones just out for themselves and not everyone is on the same page or has the same purpose or integrity. And if you tell joe blow that he can have all the glory of being a rockstar without having the talent that made his idols rock stars and all he has to do it sing into this mic and then well flip the digital magic on, than hell do it. Even if one guy is too proud, the next asshole will. Its a losing battle

So all you can do is strive for the utmost in genius and honesty with intent only on relaying the passion and brilliance that is in the human soul at its very core. You know, you are only as good as your word in this world when the day is done and if your word was nothing but a haircut and a mouse click than you arent going to be anything but a haircut and a mouse click.
 
word...

"HAIRCUT AND A MOUSE CLICK"...............I love it!!! :D :D :D :D
 
danny.guitar said:
What kind of tape recorder would you recommend? I've been thinking of doing this for awhile.
Click to expand...
That depends on many factors, including but not limited to the number of simultaneous tracks you need, what your budget is, etc. I don't really know any online resources to look up info regarding tape decks, but I can't imagine there being a great lack of information.
 
Good Friend said:
Its time for the truth. The REAL truth. Record companies are run by old men. Old sad men. And old sad men are sad because they are old. So they want money. Cause i think when you get old the only way you get laid or get respect is by having money or power to some degree.
Click to expand...
Media companies are OWNED by sad old men, but are run by 26 year-old smart asses who think they know even 10% of what there is yet to learn in their blink-of-an-eye lives.

And you know why it works? Not because it's the "old sad men" who are the "dumbfucks with haircuts", and certainly not because it's the "old sad men" who are actually *consuming* the crap that's created by those dumbfucks. It works because it's the idiot peri-pubescents in the 14-28 year old demographic who are stupid enough to actually think that those haircuts make them "k3wl", who think that paying for what sound their telephone makes when it's ringing is actually a worthy idea, and who, while complaining that the music sucks so bad, still can't live without having gigabytes of that very same suck-ass music - music that apparently was worthy enough for them to go out of their way to steal, BTW - on their mePods wherever they go.

Don't play the Logan's Run game there. It's not the old men who are on the sad side of that equation.

G.
 
IronFlippy said:
That depends on many factors, including but not limited to the number of simultaneous tracks you need, what your budget is, etc. I don't really know any online resources to look up info regarding tape decks, but I can't imagine there being a great lack of information.
Click to expand...

2 tracks/1 stereo track. I record with 2 mics at once (at most).

SouthSIDE Glen said:
Media companies are OWNED by sad old men, but are run by 26 year-old smart asses who think they know even 10% of what there is yet to learn in their blink-of-an-eye lives.

And you know why it works? Not because it's the "old sad men" who are the "dumbfucks with haircuts", and certainly not because it's the "old sad men" who are actually *buying* the crap that's created by those dumbfucks. It works because it's the idiot peri-pubescents in the 14-28 year old demographic who are stupid enough to actually think that those haircuts make them "k3wl", who think that paying for what sound their telephone makes when it's ringing is actually a worthy idea, and who, while complaining that the music sucks so bad, still can't live without having gigabytes of that very same suck-ass music - music that apparently was worthy enough for them to go out of their way to steal, BTW - on their mePods wherever they go.

Don't play the Logan's Run game there. It's not the old men who are on the sad side of that equation.

G.
Click to expand...

Hey, I'm 21 and I don't fit into any of those categories. :p

Haircuts don't make people cool. (Are you a guy? Do you curl your bangs in the front? You're gay, sorry).

Ringtones? Cell phones are stupid enough already. Ring tones don't make you cool either, so stop trying to be.

Modern music? It sucks (most of it). The bands suck. Listening to the radio is pointless unless you like music that all sounds the same.

Just my opinion. ;)
 
danny.guitar said:
Hey, I'm 21 and I don't fit into any of those categories.
Click to expand...
I didn't mean to inply that *everyone* in your age group is an idiot Danny. Just the ones who with one hand flip the bird at the music industry, and with the other, shovel as much into their mouths of what the industry churns out as they can. :D

G.
 
SouthSIDE Glen said:
And you know why it works? Not because it's the "old sad men" who are the "dumbfucks with haircuts", and certainly not because it's the "old sad men" who are actually *consuming* the crap that's created by those dumbfucks. It works because it's the idiot peri-pubescents in the 14-28 year old demographic who are stupid enough to actually think that those haircuts make them "k3wl", who think that paying for what sound their telephone makes when it's ringing is actually a worthy idea, and who, while complaining that the music sucks so bad, still can't live without having gigabytes of that very same suck-ass music - music that apparently was worthy enough for them to go out of their way to steal, BTW - on their mePods wherever they go.
G.
Click to expand...

And that's how it is now. And that's how it was then, only the toys the kids play with are different. The good old days are only that way to those who weren't there, really they weren't any different than today. It's ALWAYS been that way.
 
Aad

Analog Tracking
Analog mixing/summing
Digital mastering

That's pretty much the ideal world, I think. When a playback medium comes out that's better then 16/44.1 more of that 2" goodness will translate.
 
i've been a proud roland vs-1680 owner since the day it hit the showroom floor...i have never had any problems with this machine...built like a tank...
why did i buy it? convenience. i think that was the intention of digital at the time...endless # of takes and no compromise with the sound quality, tons of tracks, instant rewind to zero, cut n paste editing, and it fits on a little coffee table...like a dream come true at the time...digital=convenience...
i make music. i record my music. i listen to my music. i like the way my music sounds. that's all that matters, really...doing what you love to do...

do we look at a painting and say "huh, i wonder if that is oil paint or acrylic paint?"...and if we did ask that, would/should that influence our overall perception of the painting...???? and does that have any bearing on the intentions of the painting in the first place? i wonder if i can find a forum for artists/painters where they argue about what the best medium is...i bet i could...hehehehe...
 
Anolog sounds great. (obviously when used properly)

However, one word sums it up for me, and that word is 'rewind'.

Digital is great medium for home recordists who want to get involved but aren't too serious and couldn't be bothered with the hassle and expense of tape.

If I didn't have to go to work and had more time on my hands, I would love to have a go at analog recording. Of course if I didn't go to work, I couldn't really afford either format.
 
For me it's pure economics. I can't afford to work the way I do with tape. If cash were no object, it woyld be 2" tracking, to a DAW for editing mixing through an automated high zoot analog console/summing unit. As it is, for me it's a decent hard disc (Alesis HD24) to DAW (MOTU 2408mkII/computer with Cakewalk) mixed through a mediocre analog console (Tascam M-3500). A hybrid digital system with kind of an analog approach. It would cost me 20 times more to do the same thing with tape. It's a point of deminishing returns I guess.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top