Your opinion please ...

  • Thread starter Thread starter cjacek
  • Start date Start date
cjacek

cjacek

Analogue Enthusiast
Provided that you are a good recording engineer, have great singers and musicians, I believe that if one wishes to obtain a 50's, 60's, 70's or 80's "sound", it is critical that he/she use gear from that era ... No "plugins" nor expensive modern gear will do and that there is no substitute for actually using 60's gear or 70's etc .. to get a particular "sound" for that particular decade. One of the dumbest statements I've read on another board is that it is possible to get "The Beatles" sound by using appropriate "plugins" etc ... Me thinks one has to be extremely stupid to believe that.

>>I WOULD LIKE YOUR OPINION ON THIS<<

Daniel :)
 
Well the only way to get crappy 1950's sound in all its mono glory is to use crappy 1950's equipment.


Just kidding. But seriously. You are right.
 
Outlaws said:
Well the only way to get crappy 1950's sound in all its mono glory is to use crappy 1950's equipment.


Just kidding. But seriously. You are right.
Click to expand...

Gotta tell you that some of that 50's "crap" is pretty amazing sounding ... I'd say that after the 70's, sound recordings started to sound "crappy" ;)

... but thanks for your comments ;) :)

Daniel
 
I wonder if it was the equipment that was used or the methods that were employed. Or the enviroment (studio) that was popular at different times in the past.

What would happen if you took a new u87 into an Amek 9098 into a ProTools rig but recorded a band the way they did it in the 50's?
 
Farview said:
I wonder if it was the equipment that was used or the methods that were employed. Or the enviroment (studio) that was popular at different times in the past.
Click to expand...

All 3 were critical I think.

What would happen if you took a new u87 into an Amek 9098 into a ProTools rig but recorded a band the way they did it in the 50's?
Click to expand...

I think you would get a very good digital recording but nothing remininscent of the 50's sound. Digital is not particularly known for "natural" sounding recordings and "character" of tape + real tubes etc ...

Guys, is this a well known fact that recordings in many studios in the 50's were done at 30 ips in some cases ? WOW!

Daniel
 
I had an even scarier thought: What if you took the band Korn and stuck them in a 50's studio? :eek:
 
heh to obtian a 50's-60's sound put the band in a room use 1 mic on the band and 1 mic on vocals. well for the garage type of sound i guess :)
 
wildflower soul said:
heh to obtian a 50's-60's sound put the band in a room use 1 mic on the band and 1 mic on vocals. well for the garage type of sound i guess :)
Click to expand...


They did have mixers back then you know. They just had to do things in one pass.
 
Farview said:
I wonder if it was the equipment that was used or the methods that were employed. Or the enviroment (studio) that was popular at different times in the past?
Click to expand...

I think the human element is what truly can't be reproduced regardless of the equipment.

The tools that the Beatles and George Martin used to create their sound would only go so far in the hands of those who knew not what to do with them.

On the other hand, if you gave the Beatles and Sir Martin today's modern gizmos, I'm sure he could make magic with them given the same skill and knowledge level that they had with the gear in their era, working with the latest gear.

I am reminded of TASCAM's guarantee of performance that they used to put in many of their owner's manuals and they always refereed to their gear as tools and related them to paint and brushes and as artists, its up to us what we paint.

Cheers! :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top