Lo-Fi Emotions

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tooch
  • Start date Start date
T

Tooch

New member
Hey out there! First post here, wasn't sure where to put it so I threw it on here.
Something I've been wondering lately is where my brain got this idea that lo-fi quality = more emotion in some cases. Is it just a weird quirk of mine? I can't think much of what it's related to, just always felt that way. For example I really like Todd Rundgren's album Something/Anything. After already knowing every song on it I bought a beat up cassette of the album and the quality somehow added a lot to my perceptions of the emotions in the melodies, along with the occasional warble and steady tape hiss. Makes me feel a little nostalgic somehow. This is just one case of many for me.
Any of you guys have similar reactions to lo fi stuff?
 
Not me. Most of the time lo-fi annoys me.

Some songs are lo-fi because that was all that was available at the time, and they did the best they could. Good material will shine through lo-fi recordings. But so will bad material.

Some songs are deliberately lo-fi because somehow it is thought to be more 'genuine' and less over-produced. To me this is like deliberately distressing furniture to make it look old and authentic, and it is, in fact, a form of over-production. It is a trendy gimmick.

I do agree, though, that listening to lo-fi music, i.e. on a cassette or a scratchy vinyl LP can touch the nostalgia nerve and bring back a whole bunch of emotional associations that might not otherwise be triggered.
 
Some of my favorite bands recorded lo-fi, 4-track cassette when they started out. Then they became famous and made studio albums. In most cases, I like the 4-track stuff better. I can't put into words why other than it has some magic to it. Maybe it's intimate like you say. It's also probably that they usually played and sang at the same time without much multi-tracking. The studio albums from these bands were all good, too, but had different feel.

And I agree with Gecco--a great song will shine through any recording. Most delta blues is lo-fi, and it's some of the finest music ever recorded. I do think if those players were recorded on DAWs an important element of our emotional response to it would be lost.
 
Thanks for the replies guys, it's cool to see other people's perspectives on this. It feel like kind of an obscure topic to bring up, because it's true, I think the majority of people understandably want to be hearing the best audio quality possible. For me however, there's a certain innocence and earnestness present in some of those recordings where the lo-fi nature was due to necessity, not a manufactured aesthetic. On the other side of the coin, I feel like recordings can be tampered with to create a lo-fi feel in an artful way that doesn't feel gimmicky - think about the intro to "Wish You Were Here" from Pink Floyd for example. I don't think the opening rhythm guitar would feel the same if the audio was pristine.
In the real deep end of the lo-fi spectrum, there's musicians like Daniel Johnston, whose recording quality really compliments his music well I think. Those early tapes of his man... very low quality, but combined with his music and lyrics it just feels very honest and human.
Another thing that I tend to notice on some lo-fi stuff that you can hear daily life going on in some - dogs barking, silverware, traffic.... something about it just makes me feel a certain way than if those elements weren't present. There's some albums I would never want to hear in a lo-fi way, like Pet Sounds from the Beach Boys. It's a case by case thang
 
Last edited:
I think you should make albums like that if and when it's called for, and if a song calls for higher production do that. That's part of the decision -- knowing when to use what sound. I agree on Daniel Johnston and Pink Floyd examples, btw. I'd throw early Lou Barlow into that mix. An album like The Freed Weed does not sound as good produces...it's clear because he redid some of those songs in the studio and they lost the magic. This is one reason I'm never selling my 4 track!
 
gecko zzed said:
Not me. Most of the time lo-fi annoys me.

Some songs are lo-fi because that was all that was available at the time, and they did the best they could. Good material will shine through lo-fi recordings. But so will bad material.

Some songs are deliberately lo-fi because somehow it is thought to be more 'genuine' and less over-produced. To me this is like deliberately distressing furniture to make it look old and authentic, and it is, in fact, a form of over-production. It is a trendy gimmick.

I do agree, though, that listening to lo-fi music, i.e. on a cassette or a scratchy vinyl LP can touch the nostalgia nerve and bring back a whole bunch of emotional associations that might not otherwise be triggered.
Click to expand...

I agree with this.

Lo-fi because that's all you have or how it is is fine with me. Most of what I listen to is "lo-fi" by today's standards.

Intentional lo-fi to try to be cool is lame.
 
Back in the day when all they had was "lo-fi" gear (by today's standards)...they still tried to get the best sound possible...there wasn't an attempt to keep it "lo-fi".

I think i most cases, what people think of as "lo-fi" in order to evoke certain emotions, is more about "sparse" recording...limited tracks/open arrangements/minimal FX/Processing...and not so much about using cheap/crappy gear or intentionally mangling the sound to make it "lo-fi".
 
miroslav said:
Back in the day when all they had was "lo-fi" gear (by today's standards)...they still tried to get the best sound possible...there wasn't an attempt to keep it "lo-fi".
Click to expand...

Exactly. I'd say that 99% of the time, people will use "Lo-fi" as their excuse for not being able to get a good recording. I used to use "Jazz" in the same way. Whenever I'd make a mistake playing, I'd just say it was "Jazz". :D

Taking a well recorded album that was done in a multi-million dollar studio and recorded to sound great, and then transferring that to cassette isn't exactly "Lo-Fi".
 
Emotion in the performance of the (recorded) song has nothing to do with 'lo-fi' or 'analog' or 'digital' - it's all about the players and singers. What the OP may be mistaking as lo-fi=emotion is people doing 'live' studio recording vs multiple-take one-at-a-time recording with so much comping, autotuning and other studio trickery that any emotion is left on the floor.
 
If a band sounds bad, it doesnt matter if its lo-fi or anything else...they'll sound bad.

but I do love lo-fi stuff...ranging grom Graham Coxon solo work to Squirrel Bait and early Husker Du.

I think that if you want to add that aspect to your recordings...you should definately go for it...because modern music sounds bad IMO. I'm not saying its right or wrong...its just my opinion.

I think that some people will never even dare to record in a 4 track, for an example, because they are afraid of being discovered as a fraud...because everybody knows that with digital recordings, no one sounds that bad, right? What I mean is that, when you record with a basic 4 track, for an example, you cant run away from sounding like yourself...there are not many tools for editing audio in such devices...
 
That's probably true a lot of the time. I think way too many people embrace the ease of DAW trickery. On the flip side, I think a lot of people still cling to their 4-tracks and lo-fi mentality because a cleaner recording would expose how bad and uninspiring they really are. It's easy to suck and claim it's an "artistic choice".
 
You know Greg...I couldnt agree more with you on this one. But using a 4 track, at least you are going to get some tape hiss...which I dont know if you consider "unclean"...but I actually think it sounds great.
 
CMolena said:
But using a 4 track, at least you are going to get some tape hiss...which I dont know if you consider "unclean"...but I actually think it sounds great.
Click to expand...

Some people like tape hiss. Some people like the sound of a stylus tracking through vinyl. I like neither. To me both are distractions from the main game, i.e. the music.

I do concede that sometimes extraneous noises can be used for creative purposes. I've done that myself . . . start a song sounding like an old 78, then transforming it to contemporary clean. That's a gimmick you can use a couple of times, before people say "I've heard it all before".
 
gecko zzed said:
Some people like tape hiss. Some people like the sound of a stylus tracking through vinyl. I like neither. To me both are distractions from the main game, i.e. the music.

I do concede that sometimes extraneous noises can be used for creative purposes. I've done that myself . . . start a song sounding like an old 78, then transforming it to contemporary clean. That's a gimmick you can use a couple of times, before people say "I've heard it all before".
Click to expand...

I don't like tape hiss because there are millions of really good tape recordings where there is no hiss at all. It doesn't have to be there, so I don't understand why anyone would want it.
 
Yeah, if the shoe fits...

Bands like Neutral Milk Hotel and Wavves put it it good use - in my opinion, it just depends on the angle one wants to take on the song.

Lo-fi can add inspiration, even if contrived - kind of like the frame of a photo or painting. True, it's not the meat of the art, but it can add a particular perspective to it.

Of course, the technique can be bastardized as well...

Daryl
 
Wonderlick said:
Yeah, if the shoe fits...

Bands like Neutral Milk Hotel and Wavves put it it good use - in my opinion, it just depends on the angle one wants to take on the song.

Lo-fi can add inspiration, even if contrived - kind of like the frame of a photo or painting. True, it's not the meat of the art, but it can add a particular perspective to it.

Of course, the technique can be bastardized as well...

Daryl
Click to expand...

I love Wavves stuff, even the old ones where everything is basically clipping.

I guess its just a matter of what the person the recorded wants...and as there is no right or wrong in recording, there are no problems with that.
 
Yeah, Wavves are real cool. That Williams guy seems to be genuine, which is all I can expect. Actually, being genuine isn't even that big of a criteria for me, but it helps when I hear it.

And for the forum's purposes, I find it's like utilizing fundamental concepts of recording, and taking that knowledge to explode into an artistic barrage of sound, whichever direction that may take. Emotion will be evoked if done properly, regardless.

I don't post often, and man, that opinion looks silly after reading it. Oh well, quick reply!

Daryl
 
I dont think it was silly at all, lol. I guess I've changed my mind about bad or good recordings over time...is there really such a thing? I think being genuine is a FUNDAMENTAL point when recording.

For me recording is much more than...oh that snare sounds bad...that is subjective. Recording is about capturing a moment and translating it into music.
 
Wonderlick said:
And for the forum's purposes, I find it's like utilizing fundamental concepts of recording, and taking that knowledge to explode into an artistic barrage of sound, whichever direction that may take. Emotion will be evoked if done properly, regardless.
Click to expand...

That's correct.

Sound on sound wrote a great quip about all this.

In short, enjoyment of an artistic product (be it a sound recording, a photograph, a film or whatever) isn't necessarily about precision and accuracy: more often, it's about mood, character and subtle enhancements that make the end result more vivid and interesting than real life.

I don't read that to mean they're glorifying inaccuracy. But I think what they are saying is that there's another level to all this, and something that is "wrong" can be so right. Technical music has a place. Not to me, but to many people, and that's their prerogative to write it and listen to it. To me it just comes down to one simple concept: do I want to hit the PLAY button or STOP button when the music comes on. It's that simple.

Cmolena, are you sure you mean tape hiss sounds good? I'd say tape saturation sounds good, but not necessarily tape hiss. Hiss can be tolerable and maybe musical if very low, but if it gets anywhere near the levels of the performance it usually becomes a distraction. Even that is not always true, though, as many delta blues recordings had hiss, and they are definitely listenable (probably because it is authentic to the era and a bit eerie on the recordings). But in general, I'd say hiss isn't too great. Tape saturation sounds fantastic, though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top