[atlantaprog] Re: Byrne, Police, Etc.

I've been home recording since '92 or so, starting on turdball multitrack 
cassette machines (anybody remember the Sansui WS-X6 6-track?) and moving up 
through ADATs and finally up to hard-disk/computer recording.  I've also paid 
for my share of studio time, and worked with talented (and not so talented) 
engineers with great (and not so great) outboard gear -- recording to 2" tape 
and to ADAT.  Is there a difference across that spectrum?  Of course!  But is 
it really that huge?  It totally depends.  I've heard "pro" recorded discs that 
sound like total crap, and home-recorded stuff that sounded unbelievable.  I've 
made really amazing recordings on 4-track cassette, and really awful recordings 
in studios.  Yeah, 2" tape sounds "better" in some ways.  But is it critical?  
Not so much to my ears.  Other things are more important.  Like avoiding the 
crappy edits Brian describes, for one....  But Byrne's point is quite true -- 
you can record a fully marketable album on a laptop these days.  But that 
assumes you know something about recording.  If you don't know anything about 
recording and, more to the point, don't want to learn (for whatever reason) a 
studio is the way to go.  
 
I've reached a point where I believe "sound quality" to be kind of a false 
goal.  I'd rather hear 4-track tape hiss on a killer GbV tune, or crappy 
Chateau D'Herouville room noise on "Just Want to See His Face" from "Exile on 
Main Street".  If I record a demo, and that has the feel/impact I'm after, I'm 
using it to build a track around -- even if it's not sonically pristine.  As 
Jeff mentioned earlier, I would rather have unlimited time to record than 
unlimited gear.  I'd rather be able to set things up in my basement to be able 
to record at a keystroke and do it until we capture the quintessential 
performance, then make 30 compromises ("we'll just get rhythm tracks", "we'll 
only record 6 songs", "that take will have to do") just to get "studio quality" 
recordings.  The best records ever made (IMHO),    from Robert Johnson to the 
Beatles, were all made on technology significantly less capable than pretty 
much every piece of gear I own.  Well, except for the $3K Neumann mics.  :?)   
 
My current band is at a juncture where if we are to proceed any further along 
the "working band" route, we need to make a record.  I am lobbying hard to do 
it in my basement, with my mics and mic-pres, on my computer, for the grand sum 
of $0 in recording costs.  I'm getting some pushback from the rest of the band 
on this, but I feel strongly that the last 3 discs I've recorded are completely 
"release quality".  Do they sound like Jimmy Iovine recorded them at the Record 
Plant, or we worked with Geoff Emerick at Abbey Road?  No, but I had no problem 
putting them out there with my name on them as producer and engineer.  And my 
spider-sense tells me that I'd rather save the dough-re-mi to pay for some 
radio/print promo once we get a disc pressed and some tracks online.  Which 
will very likely sell actual discs and get actual bodies at shows.  IMO, a 
great-sounding recording is only great-sounding if it is being heard by actual 
people...
 
Anyway, that's my two rambling cents. :)
 
BTW - I saw the Police at that same show, Wade.  The wife and I had regretted 
for months not making every attempt to get them when they went on sale, so on 
Saturday AM we hit eBay to find a pair.  We happened to luck into club seats, 
which were great.  I thought the show was fantastic; amazing sound, and it was 
thrilling to see one of my favorite all-time bands, which I was sure I had 
missed any chance of ever catching live.
_________________________________________________________________
Share life as it happens with the new Windows Live.
http://www.windowslive.com/share.html?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_Wave2_sharelife_122007

Other related posts: