I've come to the conclusion that a studio sound is only found in ... a studio

[miroslav]

examples of what? music I think is throw away crap?

my gawd man Id be here for days...from bubble gum pop through manufactured bands through to what passes as R&B nowadays

Radioactivity by Kraftwerk has more bearing or influence for me than any pop crap the Beatles were known for at first...oh yeah that album followed an industry formula too

Yes...list some examples.
You seem to be saying that anything YOU don't like is "throwaway crap".

THAT is a snobby attitude.
And you seem to have a real problem with ”pros” don’t you…?
Sounds like an inferiority complex in the making....

And Kraftwerk also would NOT have happened without the Beatles.

Your suggestions that bands like Nirvana finally broke out with some real mind-bending music….are laughable!

Their shit was NO better than anything else you can pull up from the modern music scene of the last 60 years….it was just a different take on the same old 3-chord rock….and IMO, they couldn’t even do a good job of that, choosing to actually simplify the genre even more with their "musicianship"…so where’s the genius in that???

 

[kcearl]

Yes...list some examples.
You seem to be saying that anything YOU don't like is "throwaway crap".

THAT is a snobby attitude.
And you seem to have a real problem with ”pros” don’t you…?
Sounds like an inferiority complex in the making....

wow you really want to go with this..ok then


I dont have a problem with "pro's"...it would appear to many of us that it's they have the problem

Im not a snob because I think some music is throwawy crap...much of it is intentionally throwaway crap, 'Stock Aitken Waterman" anyone?..if it sells and has a purpose then good for it...doesn't stop it being throwaway crap


I don't like tons of bands...zillions of bands yet I dont think they are throwaway or crap like


deep purple
new order
nirvana
U2
I could go on and on

don't like any of them...don't think they are crap or throwaway

And Kraftwerk also would NOT have happened without the Beatles.

utter bullshit...the beatles are NOT the foundation for every piece of music that came after them...regardless of how you hold them in regard...albums like radioactivity happened inspite of bands the beatles..Kraftwerk broke the mould instrumentally and compositionally

Your suggestions that bands like Nirvana finally broke out with some real mind-bending music….are laughable!

where did I say that? I said they were a normal punk band that were lofted to such heights by the music business..they then became a formula for more semi manufactured bands and their sounds..where did I imply they were "mind bending"?

Their shit was NO better than anything else you can pull up from the modern music scene of the last 60 years….it was just a different take on the same old 3-chord rock….and IMO, they couldn’t even do a good job of that, choosing to actually simplify the genre even more with their "musicianship"…so where’s the genius in that???

where did I say they were geniuses?


look Miro if your going to start a knife fight I suggest being bettered armed than with a spoon...and at least try to comprehend basic english

"were just a little known punk band...grunge rock and all that utter crap that surrounded it were manufactured by the music industry who then tried to each find the next Nirvana"

no mention of mind bending, ground breaking, or genius <===seeing you like the childish emoticons like they somehow back up what you suggest

 

[miroslav]

...im sure they studied the "Hard Days Night" formula too...nope the music industry studied the Nirvana formula.... for how many years?

That sure sounded like in one breath you were putting down the Beatles while elevating Nirvana…

wow you really want to go with this..ok then

I dont have a problem with "pro's"...it would appear to many of us that it's they have the problem

Who is the “us” and who is the “they”…???
You tend to bring that up a lot on the forums…and it just sounds like you are harboring a personal inferiority complex.

look Miro if your going to start a knife fight I suggest being bettered armed than with a spoon...

If you are talking about music and audio comprehension…for you, I wouldn’t even need a spoon.

What's the matter....is The Cave a little slow today, so you're slumming in the audio forums?

 

[cantthinkofname]

i don't know if i'm in the right thread or not but i've been conducting experiments

i've been going back & forth between decent live vids, youtube 'pro vids', & mp3's

right now i've just been going back & forth between The Fixx & some of the mp3's i found on this site that i like, and i can't tell much difference between the quality. For the computer they both sound great. And liking the song was more important to me, although having a good sound is great too. I don't know enough to say how they would compare if comparing cd quality.

i've been reading guerilla homerecording & it makes alot of sense to me so far, especially listening to comparisons between those who spent alot of money and those who didn't. I can't tell much difference, at least on the computer anyways. (but not saying i shouldn't try for the best sound possible, just saying i wouldn't spend money lining my walls with gold to achieve a neglible difference

 

[kcearl]

That sure sounded like in one breath you were putting down the Beatles while elevating Nirvana…

nope..why would it..I said that they did not intentionally follow a fromula of the 15 second grab you intro of Hard days night...then it says the music industry followed what was the Nirvanas formula...meaning the sound and the image...doesn't imply anything else..I prefer them..I dont like the beatles..I think the who were better than both though if thats OK with you??

Who is the “us” and who is the “they”…???
You tend to bring that up a lot on the forums…and it just sounds like you are harboring a personal inferiority complex.

They = condescending blowhards wallowing in their own importance

Us = those of us not

no harbouring, I have no reason to feel inferior to anyone here..I do this as a hobby..nothing else..why would others on a hobby site make me feel inferior??
I don't think I'm as good as the majority here, nor should I be..I haven't been recording long...but Ive always played or listened to music

If you are talking about music and audio comprehension…for you, I wouldn’t even need a spoon.

you cant even understand English..Ill take that comprehension over audio..especially from some one who thinks that all music derives from the beatles...scoff scoff

What's the matter....is The Cave a little slow today, so you're slumming in the audio forums?

nope Ive been participating in this thread since the beginning, and most of my posts are in the audio forums..I feel for someone young who cant afford the kit and thinks it'll lead to the holy grail..in fact I put together a post with links to loads of free stuff that would possibly help him..this little tiff with you wonderboy has started because some blowhard (love that word) started spouting how he "some NY bigshot in his day" and that the kids are snotty twerps for not listening to him and his ilk...turns out its because he was taken from the industry in his prime..now that's psychiatry 101, pay attention

the rest with you is just pleasure...take it to the cave if you think its going too far..Id gladly accommodate you here, there, anywhere..gawd bless the beatles...without them we wouldn't have the intraweb

 

[kcearl]

i don't know if i'm in the right thread or not but i've been conducting experiments

i've been going back & forth between decent live vids, youtube 'pro vids', & mp3's

right now i've just been going back & forth between The Fixx & some of the mp3's i found on this site that i like, and i can't tell much difference between the quality. For the computer they both sound great. And liking the song was more important to me, although having a good sound is great too. I don't know enough to say how they would compare if comparing cd quality.

i've been reading guerilla homerecording & it makes alot of sense to me so far, especially listening to comparisons between those who spent alot of money and those who didn't. I can't tell much difference, at least on the computer anyways. (but not saying i shouldn't try for the best sound possible, just saying i wouldn't spend money lining my walls with gold to achieve a neglible difference

its a great book...good to go back to as well

 

[darrin_h2000]

utter bullshit...the beatles are NOT the foundation for every piece of music that came after them...regardless of how you hold them in regard...albums like radioactivity happened inspite of bands the beatles..Kraftwerk broke the mould instrumentally and compositionally

Im in full agreement here...Ive seen interview after interview of bands saying that they were influinced by the Beatles...while the only band Ive ever seen that really was like that was Badfinger...If you look and play like Led Zeppelin does, give them the credit...only every band in the 70s-80s followed thier formula.

 

[kcearl]

Im in full agreement here...Ive seen interview after interview of bands saying that they were influinced by the Beatles...while the only band Ive ever seen that really was like that was Badfinger...If you look and play like Led Zeppelin does, give them the credit...only every band in the 70s-80s followed thier formula.

Totally...I think the Beatles did loads of groundbreaking stuff but so did many other bands in the same period...it was still happening in the seventies...genres like hip hop and electronica owe more to krafwerk and Yello than sixties pop...I mean twenty odd years after Dare by the Human League you we're still hearing it in modern music..ground breaking and influential didn't start and end with the beatles and it may not have finished yet

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

I believe the tone of this my band is better than your band and "pro" versus "non-pro" bullshit would change significantly if we put aside the definition of "pro" as being those who make money doing it for a living. While that may be what Mirriam Webster lists as one definition of pro, I personally believe that is a very self-deceiving way of considering it in this context, both for the "pros" and for the up-and-comers.

If we adapt that definition of "pro" all by itself, I too have a big problem with a lot of "pros", and I personally at least am not afraid to admit it. AFIC, "pro" is more of a work ethic and attitude than it is a status within the industry. This is not just true of engineers/producers, but also of musicians, roadies, carpenters, sanitation engineers, doctors, politicians and rocket scientists.

A pro is one who takes the task seriously, works hard to become a master at it, isn't satisfied unless they know they are doing their best to do so, and never truly believes they have fully mastered anything.

A pro never "phones it in" and does not consider "good enough" as being good enough.

A pro doesn't ask if doing something is wrong, they ask if doing it is right, and doesn't make justification for slacking on principle for financial gain.

A pro recognizes their calling and doesn't pursue a vocation or avocation just because it seemed like a good idea, but because it's what they have a natural bent towards being good at.

A pro is willing to take on accolytes and to help and teach others what they know instead of hording the information for themselves because they are secure enough in their stance to not feel threatened, and because they wish to continue a thread of quality in the field instead of seeing it wither in the cold and winds of outside influences.

A pro is always has masters to teach and guide them. No matter how good somebody is at their task, there is always somebody that is better than them in one way or another. The pro recognizes that and will always continue to truly listen to them and learn from them.

You name the vocation, and I'll say that no more than 20% of the people that are "pros" by the standard definition are truly professionals in how they approach their tasks. This is just as true in music performance, engineering and production as it is in any other field.

It is also just as true for the home recordist as it is for the Big Box Studio Boys. There is no us/them; that's a false dichotomy. There is only the individual, and it is up to the individual whether they will take a pro attitude towards their endeavors or not, whether they get paid for it or not.

G.

 

[darrin_h2000]

.I feel for someone young who cant afford the kit and thinks it'll lead to the holy grail..in fact I put together a post with links to loads of free stuff that would possibly help him..

Ive allways had the same approach...cept I do what I can to help them aviod rip-offs that are offered to newbies...there are a lot of them...Im not a gear snob...heck Ive reccomended the line6 mic pres...they are inexpensive as $100 a channel.

 

[cantthinkofname]

its a great book...good to go back to as well

i agree so far, thanks for recommending it, between the advice in this book and the advice here and doing my own experimenting, i think its saved me thousands of would've been wasted dollars.

 

[kcearl]

actually you make some very good points Glen...much of it can be accounted to attitude..


anyway I'm off to record something amateurish..and as far from the beatles as possible

 

[kcearl]

Ive allways had the same approach...cept I do what I can to help them aviod rip-offs that are offered to newbies...there are a lot of them...Im not a gear snob...heck Ive reccomended the line6 mic pres...they are inexpensive as $100 a channel.

I know thats why I find it "not very" amusing when we lock horns on two different pieces of kit made by the same manufacturer...guess it'll never end

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

anyway I'm off to record something amateurish..and as far from the beatles as possible

It sounds like you have a hard day's night ahead of you!

G.

 

[kcearl]

oh f**k that was bad lol

 

[darrin_h2000]

Totally...I think the Beatles did loads of groundbreaking stuff but so did many other bands in the same period...it was still happening in the seventies...genres like hip hop and electronica owe more to krafwerk and Yello than sixties pop...I mean twenty odd years after Dare by the Human League you we're still hearing it in modern music..ground breaking and influential didn't start and end with the beatles and it may not have finished yet

IMHO the Beatles themselves seemed to change over the years to sound like bands they liked...they were into Pink Floyd by the time the late records came out...you could tell from some of the tracks...makes you wonder if they had stayed together that they might have gone through a Black Sabbath phase.

And on Hip Hop...if you told any kid the first hit rap record was done by a white woman in 1978, they wouldnt believe you until you show them a video of "Rapture" by Blondie.

 

[miroslav]

nope..why would it..I said that they did not intentionally follow a fromula of the 15 second grab you intro of Hard days night...then it says the music industry followed what was the Nirvanas formula...meaning the sound and the image...doesn't imply anything else..I prefer them..I dont like the beatles..I think the who were better than both though if thats OK with you??

If you weren’t indirectly propping up Nirvana while tearing down a band that truly was full of real talent…then I wouldn’t have said anything. Thing is, you are approaching music from a perspective that “if I like it=therefore it’s good” and “if I don’t=therefore it’s crap”…and THAT is not a valid assumption.
You talk about “throwaway crap”…but then go bring a band like Nirvana into the discussion and end by saying you like them.
Well…I think I can like the Beatles then…but honestly, if you think I’m one of those Beatle worshipers, you’re wrong. My music appreciation extends well beyond the Beatles…before and after.
The crux of the latest discussion in this thread centers on what elements go toward making a song appealing…the hooks and the ability to grab attention in the first few notes…and you seemed to imply that kind of music is all crap….yet you like Nirvana.
My point is…Nirvana is the same kind of “crap”….and if you listen to their music…they use a basic formula, and if you ever read some of the influences Cobain mentioned, the roots fall smack-dab in the mid-60’s.

And I’ll also point out that not all of the Beatles music was the same formula, the early stuff was very Pop/Teen while their later stuff was not.

They = condescending blowhards wallowing in their own importance

Us = those of us not

Like I said…who is the “us” and who is the “they”…why be vague about it?
And are you the official representative for the “us” group here on the forums…or is it more just your own point of view?

You keep trying to draw some lines in an effort to suggest that people like you are cool/OK because you are not a “pro” and because most pros are snobs (however you define “pro”), but I’ve seen some condescending posts from you in various instances and you too tend to be a blowhard at times too…
…so are you really a “pro”…?

 

[dintymoore]

To me the Beatles were influential, but not that much really. I thought that their vocals, songwriting and recording techniques were too out of reach for most to copy. But they were influential - I thought Billy Joel's "Don't Ask Me Why" was Paul McCartney when I heard it first. The Electric Light Orchestra stated on the back of an album that they were carrying on the work started in "I Am the Walrus".

Bob Dylan was incredibly influential. Hendrix did his tunes and sang so much like him (Purple Haze) that it's crazy.

Not many realize it, but the Wrecking Crew was incredibly influential and pretty much set the standard for pop music in the 60's and early 70's.

Nirvana was super influential - corrected the bad path music was on with that "We Built This City" crap.

No Stones = no Aerosmith?

Led Zep was the most influential band so far that I know of.

 

[cantthinkofname]

Bob Dylan was incredibly influential.

yes but remember what rhone said about bob? Bob Dylan isn't necessarily Bob Dylan.

 

[DrewPeterson7]

This thread's kind of diverted a little bit, but nonetheless is pretty damned interesting.

Successful people HATE process.

This HAS to be an oversimplification - maybe it's different in audio circles than elsewhere, but I can think of plenty of very successful people I know who absolutely love what it is they do. Unless you're saying something along the lines of "they hate the process because they've gone through it so many times in the process of becoming successful," but even then I don't know if I'd agree with that. I'm not saying you're not right in at least some situations (particularly in the obverse - I think there's a lot of truth in your analogy of the hunt for the perfect OD) but I don't think you can say that carte blank like that.

You have ten to fifteen seconds (maximum) to hook the listener. A good song will do it in as little as two notes. It doesn't matter how you do it, but you have to establish your link with your listener and get his attention.

I'm thinking of two cases at the moment, one a female vocalist with an incredible, evocative voice. In one of her hits, the first two or three ascending notes of her a capella intro consistently stopped people in their tracks. I would watch it in businesses with the radio playing in the background. People who weren't even listening would unconsciously stop talking and turn their ears to the radio, if only for a bit. It had that power.

Another was an alt-hit with a great, rasty bass intro. In two seconds, that just dropped-kicked you in the gut. When it was on the #1 station in the city I was in, I'd watch while at stoplights at major intersections and I could see bored people instantly come alive when it came on after a commercial break and lean over to turn up the volume and started bouncing their heads to the rhythm. It was beautiful.

Think back throughout your life, like driving around aimlessly on a Saturday night when you were seventeen listening to the radio with a bunch of your knucklehead friends and "that" intro came on and everyone in the front seat lunges for the volume control at once.

This, on the other hand, is something that I think everyone on this board, myself VERY much included, needs to spend some time thinking about, and thank you for bringing it up in this context.

To your point on listening to the radio for research purposes - I get laughed at almost every time I say this, but say what you want about Nickelback, they release some gorgeously produced hard rock albums.