#1684293 - 07/01/06 01:01 AM
Better to sound new…than sound good…???
|
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
10k Club
Registered: 05/23/00
Posts: 12522
Loc: NY Hudson Valley, USA
|
Offline
|
|
So if you get Electronic Musician…you may have noticed in the July issue the interview with producer Dave Pensado…where he makes some extreme statements, and give some harsh criticism amid at the old-school producers.
It’s better to sound new than to sound good.
That’s his “cutting edge” perspective.
I found his comments a bit on the snooty side. And while he has a long list of big-name credits…I can’t help but notice that most of his work is based around the same formula and mostly the same style of music…
…so I really don’t get where he feels he is always putting out stuff that “sounds new”…???
If he had said it’s better to sound new and good…then to just sound good…I would agree.
But to just sound new…and not worry about sounding good…well, that isn‘t going to last very long, now is it?
Unless of course the idea is to just churn out a lot of crappy new stuff at a rapid pace so that no one has any time to notice that it’s not all that good.
It’s easy for someone like Pensado to have those pissing-against-the-wind viewpoints, because he’s in his groove…and most of his productions, are done using the same formula, so it tends to snowball and it’s hard to do bad, once you are on a roll.
I’m just concerned that those kinds of sentiments end up breeding distaste and a lack of concern for perfection, or even considering perfection.
Just keep churning out stuff that has a big momentary flash…and them move on to something else. :rolleyes:
How do you approach your music?
Do you just worry about keeping it fresh, even if it isn’t all that good…or do prefer perfection to flash-in-the-pan?
_________________________
miroslav - miroslavmusic.com"Just because it happened to you, it doesn't mean it's important."
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1684295 - 07/01/06 06:43 PM
Re: Better to sound new…than sound good…???
|
Farview
Senior Member
Registered: 01/11/06
Posts: 76
Loc: Chicago-ish
|
|
Offline
|
|
It is amazing how a little off the cuff comment can send so many people down the wrong path. I can't tell you how many times I've suggested something to someone and go 'well Simon Philips said this' and 'Pete Townsend said that' all the while taking what they had said out of context and applying it to an inappropriate situation. On the rare occasion that I have been able to ask the rockstars why they said what they did, they didn't even remember saying it, or at best, what they said applied to a certain song that they were recording in 1972.
The unfortunate concequence of what he said will be a bunch of musicians who will base their musical philosophy on the off-handed remark of someone trying too hard to be clever.
As if the future didn't seem bleak enough.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1684296 - 07/01/06 11:24 PM
Re: Better to sound new…than sound good…???
|
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
10k Club
Registered: 05/23/00
Posts: 12522
Loc: NY Hudson Valley, USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
Thing is...it isn't really off-the-cuff...as there are about 4 pages of interview where he expounds on that perspective...even referring to the perfectionists as "old farts".
I'm sure that plays well for the younger, instant gratification crowd.
_________________________
miroslav - miroslavmusic.com"Just because it happened to you, it doesn't mean it's important."
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1684297 - 07/02/06 10:47 AM
Re: Better to sound new…than sound good…???
|
Farview
Senior Member
Registered: 01/11/06
Posts: 76
Loc: Chicago-ish
|
|
Offline
|
|
I didn't see the article. I would assume that his theory only works when it is attached to some talent. Still, it explains a lot of what I see flowing through my studio.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1684298 - 07/02/06 08:32 PM
Re: Better to sound new…than sound good…???
|
Editor Boy
Senior Member
Registered: 05/14/01
Posts: 261
Loc: San Mateo,CA,UNITED STATES
|
|
Offline
|
|
I cracked up at Farview's post, because as a studio owner and producer/engineer since the '80s, I've probably heard the same kind of comments a gazillion times. This is actually a huge plus for the home-recording explosion, because now I can say, "Cool, go record your demo/album yourself then and try that idea out."
Pensado obviously has the credits to say whatever he wants, and in a Steve-Albini-kind-of-way, I guess it makes sense to shake stuff up every once in a while in order to arouse controversy and WAKE UP the populace that there IS such a thing as a professional recording-studio industry.
Still, not much grace from a man, who, whether he wants to acknowledge it or not, has built his own production career off of foundations, techniques, and tools long established by others. Personally, I don't find Pensado's "sound" as being particularly new or innovative, but, then again, the squeaky wheel gets the cheese.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1684299 - 07/05/06 05:00 AM
Re: Better to sound new…than sound good…???
|
CWHumphrey
Senior Member
Registered: 05/31/01
Posts: 36
Loc: Los Angeles,CA,UNITED STATES
|
|
Offline
|
|
Tell you what...
This is what I didn't say in Ross's forum on PSW because it turned into a shit storm so fast.
I used to deal with Dave Pensado a lot when I was a technician at Larrabee. He's a smart guy and does his job as mixer well. However, the guy loves to stir the pot. Yes, Editor Boy, I'd say in a "Steve-Albini-kind-of-way", sort of. Being a son of the South, Dave has this genteel aproach to life so he's maybe not as overt as Steve but he can make waves in his own way.
Also, he once talked to me about the "marketing" of the job. It was in a very different context, but I think it applies here. Dave must be deep into his 50's by now. There's always that aspect of agism in the music biz. Dave has had a lot of time to perfect his craft, but, at the same time doesn't want to appear like he's out of touch, "too old" to work with modern music.
I believe that Dave likes the controversy this article has caused. I have to say, however, all of his words are sincere.
Cheers,
Carter William Humphrey
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1684300 - 07/07/06 12:59 AM
Re: Better to sound new…than sound good…???
|
knightsy
Member
Registered: 07/05/06
Posts: 1
Loc: Perth, Western Australia
|
|
Offline
|
|
Define "new"? Is that like the Saboteurs album? Apparently that is what sounds both "new" and "good" at the moment.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1684302 - 07/21/06 07:05 PM
Re: Better to sound new…than sound good…???
|
BrianK
Senior Member
Registered: 12/17/00
Posts: 228
Loc: Los Angeles,CA,UNITED STATES
|
|
Offline
|
|
I vote that it's WORSE to sound New than Good. Now we're equal. See your records in 20 years...!
_________________________
Relax and float downstream...
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1684303 - 07/25/06 03:03 PM
Re: Better to sound new…than sound good…???
|
alfonso
Platinum Member
Registered: 11/06/00
Posts: 1080
Loc: Fregene, Italy.
|
|
Offline
|
|
I don't think that Pensado's provocation is an utter bs.
Every statement, as much as it is interpreted as an absolute truth may be considered bs. somehow, reality is not of one colour only, but words have to be simpler than thoughts sometimes, and need to be analyzed some more.
But hey, have you considered what the hell does it mean "to sound new"? I mean really new, where people turn their heads and get actually interested?
I think it's incredibly rare and much more difficult than "sounding good". Sounding good means that a certain sound has been made/produced useng well what's an established set of rules, It needs a lot of work, sure, but that's homework.
Sounding "new" is really something great, because what is very common is to sound simply bad, but that doesn't have anything to do with sounding new.
You can tell that something sounds bad because all you notice is that the old set of rules hasn't been properly used and, mainly, because what you hear pushes you away.
Sounding bad is sounding old, like sounding good, but just the negative part of it.
Sounding new is sounding interesting, different, stimulating, something more than sounding good.
I don't even know who is Pensado, nor I care, I pretty live in my world of sounds and I only remember music and sounds and forget names, so I don't know if he's able to stand on what he says, but I agree.
My 0.02€
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1684304 - 07/25/06 05:03 PM
Re: Better to sound new…than sound good…???
|
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
10k Club
Registered: 05/23/00
Posts: 12522
Loc: NY Hudson Valley, USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by alfonso:
But hey, have you considered what the hell does it mean "to sound new"? I mean really new, where people turn their heads and get actually interested?
I think it's incredibly rare and much more difficult than "sounding good".
And that's where Pensado's comments don't quite hit home, as he is just as guilty as a lot of other successful folks who hit upon a winning formula for churning out a certain kind of music…a certain “sound”…
…...and then stick with it until it dries up.
So for him to just sit back and make the comments as though he's churning out new, groundbreaking shit on a regular basis while a lot of the "old farts" are doing the same-old...
…is a bit snooty, and inaccurate.
It's almost like he's saying that if the old timers would just stop worrying about sounding good and instead focused more on being "new"...that all kind's of great stuff would come out.
Well....like I said...Pensado seems to be pretty much stuck in his own formula groove...and he is NOT breaking new ground with every release.
So it’s a lame comment…
Also…if you CAN truly break new ground…at first, you may be forgiven if it’s lacking in high-end quality.
But, after that initial break…it would be tough NOT to try and improve on the quality…
...as that would come off as incompetence…
..and I doubt too many pros want that hanging around their necks.
“Yeah…it’s fresh and new…but the sound quality is total shit.”
Does he really think that no one would notice…
...ever?
Heck…if no one really notices “good” anymore…someone please tell me….so I can stop worrying so much on the tracking/editing/mixing, as it sure does takes up a lot of my time!  
_________________________
miroslav - miroslavmusic.com"Just because it happened to you, it doesn't mean it's important."
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1684305 - 07/25/06 07:21 PM
Re: Better to sound new…than sound good…???
|
alfonso
Platinum Member
Registered: 11/06/00
Posts: 1080
Loc: Fregene, Italy.
|
|
Offline
|
|
I tend to think that if you're able to sound new, in the groundbreaking sense above, you'll do your best to grow and to cure every aspect of your expression...
The problem is that "to sound good" is a very generic thing, the first distorting tubes in an amp were cosidered an horrible drawback of the amp design, this is a perfect example on how those minds that instead of conforming on the sound purity ideals of the time decided to "search" and to follow an appearent crazyness established new standards, new tastes, new concepts.
This is a process than never ends, like F.Z. used to say there is no progress without deviation, and deviations always sound like sh*t for the most at the beginning.
But I agree, if you stop moving forward, giving lessons is lame...perhaps giving lessons is always lame, also because a real innovator is never completely satisfied.
It's also true that it's plenty of incredibly good sounding productions of some really unbearable repetitions of overbaked schemes....
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1684306 - 07/26/06 08:09 AM
Re: Better to sound new…than sound good…???
|
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
10k Club
Registered: 05/23/00
Posts: 12522
Loc: NY Hudson Valley, USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
My view is that you should try...and that it is possible...
...to sound new...AND good.
To just say that as long as it's "new"..."good" is not needed...
...is rather myopic an somewhat irresponsible, as it will breed the wrong type of audio/music mentality.
_________________________
miroslav - miroslavmusic.com"Just because it happened to you, it doesn't mean it's important."
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1684308 - 07/26/06 09:12 PM
Re: Better to sound new…than sound good…???
|
J.J. Blair
Senior Member
Registered: 07/22/05
Posts: 329
Loc: Hollywood, CA
|
|
Offline
|
|
Joy Division and all those 4AD bands like Cocteau Twins sounded "new" at the time, but god was the sound awful. But the newness resonated. But they were taking a much larger step in anew direction than Dave's last project. Stuff like that really comes from people on the fringes who listen to stuff we've probably never even heard of, or just true mutant visionaries.
_________________________
Friends don't let friends act like rockstars.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1684309 - 07/27/06 05:31 AM
Re: Better to sound new…than sound good…???
|
alfonso
Platinum Member
Registered: 11/06/00
Posts: 1080
Loc: Fregene, Italy.
|
|
Offline
|
|
Have you never heard of Fennesz?
http://www.fennesz.com/
he's a pioner of what is called "glitch" music, the opposite of every rule on good sounding, the world is getting crazy about him, people that are considered masters of the "good sound" like Sakamoto work together with him....
Personally I think that he makes exceptionally good music.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1684310 - 07/27/06 07:52 AM
Re: Better to sound new…than sound good…???
|
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
10k Club
Registered: 05/23/00
Posts: 12522
Loc: NY Hudson Valley, USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by alfonso: Originally posted by miroslav:
To just say that as long as it's "new"..."good" is not needed...
...is rather myopic an somewhat irresponsible, as it will breed the wrong type of audio/music mentality. I agree on this, but why putting them in opposition?
I'm saying that "new", together WITH "good", will always be better then either alone.
But the thing about "polished"...like the Britney albums you mentioned....I don't really see as them as "good", just because they are polished.
I think more and more product from new bands (the "home brewed" stuff)...is generally NOT on the same sound quality that most pros can deliver...and yet, it's being pushed so much, and flooding the "air waves" (and the Internet) so rapidly...that many are quite happy accepting the "MP3" quality standard because they have come to value instant gratification over any time/effort required to achieve the "perfect" sound.
And I think Pensado's comments are with THAT in mind...and not on the fringes of avant-garde creativity. I think he is saying that worrying about sounding good is a waste of time…just focus on “new” and you will always be on top.
Also…I don’t believe that in trying to sound “good”…your product will automatically fall into some homogenization vat to be assimilated by the “tasteless” collective.
I think that these days…there are too many that try to use “new”…as a replacement for “good”…only because they are probably not competent enough to achieve “good”.
And, the overall “good” standard of the music consumption majority has somewhat been lowered over the last several years by way of the “diluted”…”rough cut” offerings found all over the Internet…
…which only breeds further disrespect of “good”.
Look…if you feed nothing but hamburger to the masses for a very long time…and you always make it “new” by tossing different toppings on it every so often…
…they WILL tend to forget about steak.
Heck…after awhile…steak might come off as rather plain.
I just see something of the Pavlov’s dogs in all of this “new/rough-cut” music that is truly being pushed into people’s ears…and I actually DON’T see all that much “good” being pushed anymore.
The media and the major record companies seem to have jumped on the “Serve it up quick…don’t worry about the garnish!” wagon…
Anyway...that's just my single-person perspective...
...which probably doesn't amount to jack shit in the cosmic plan....
_________________________
miroslav - miroslavmusic.com"Just because it happened to you, it doesn't mean it's important."
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1684314 - 07/27/06 12:11 PM
Re: Better to sound new…than sound good…???
|
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
10k Club
Registered: 05/23/00
Posts: 12522
Loc: NY Hudson Valley, USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by alfonso:
...I think that I am one of the rare forumites that doesn't even own an iPod or similar [/QB]
...oh yeah, one of the little "devices". 
A "similar" was given to me last Christmas.
I played with it for about 10 minutes...and it's been just sitting on a shelf, ever since.
I don't care for them...and contrary to what a lot of folks will have you beleive...there IS a sound difference between them and a CD...
...and I sure can hear it.
I know...it's all about the convenience...carrying a portable CD player is just too much trouble...
...but the real problem is that most folks won't even bother with CDs when they are at home...
...they just stay with the Ipod/MP3 stuff...
_________________________
miroslav - miroslavmusic.com"Just because it happened to you, it doesn't mean it's important."
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1684315 - 07/27/06 12:13 PM
Re: Better to sound new…than sound good…???
|
BrianK
Senior Member
Registered: 12/17/00
Posts: 228
Loc: Los Angeles,CA,UNITED STATES
|
|
Offline
|
|
I have the feeling (tell me if you agree) that he means MODERN, not really "new". In other words, it's not groudbreaking, it's just "what is happening now".
_________________________
Relax and float downstream...
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1684316 - 07/27/06 07:34 PM
Re: Better to sound new…than sound good…???
|
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
10k Club
Registered: 05/23/00
Posts: 12522
Loc: NY Hudson Valley, USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by BrianK:
I have the feeling (tell me if you agree) that he means MODERN, not really "new". In other words, it's not groudbreaking, it's just "what is happening now".
Yeah...there's a lot of new music being churned out all the time...in many styles...but I don't see much of it qualifying as really "new".
I know the terms "alternative" and "modern" rock get used a lot...but let's face it, when you listen to the music...it's not really any kind of alternative and it certainly is not modern...as most of it sounds quite familiar and is often a melding of styles that have been with us for quite a long time.
I'm not saying the new music is not good...just that it's not all that "fresh"...other than the fact it's being done by fresh, new artists...and maybe to much of the younger crowd...the music DOES appear as new/fresh...
…but then their reference points probably only go back maybe 15-20 years...?
And with regard to Dave Pensado's music...while it does sell quite well...and it may sound good...it most certainly isn't modern or new or fresh...
...but rather a lot of the same-old that he's been churning out for awhile now.
I don't mean to beat this thing to death...as I guess we are just kicking this around a bit.
I do believe Pensado makes those statements just to stir the pot a bit...maybe ruffle a few feathers...
...and not because he actually practices what he preaches...
_________________________
miroslav - miroslavmusic.com"Just because it happened to you, it doesn't mean it's important."
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1684318 - 07/29/06 06:43 AM
Re: Better to sound new…than sound good…???
|
BrianK
Senior Member
Registered: 12/17/00
Posts: 228
Loc: Los Angeles,CA,UNITED STATES
|
|
Offline
|
|
I think it's "modern" only in that it's still in line with what plays on the radio or TV. But not necessarily a "classic" sound that would be at home in 1973 or 1982.
Much like a band like Green Day hadserious roots in classic Kinks and Clash, but it did not "sound like it" even though it was gtr/bass/drums. Those qualities of modern music; fast compression, vitually no natural dynamics, and loud mastering.
_________________________
Relax and float downstream...
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1684319 - 07/29/06 09:35 AM
Re: Better to sound new…than sound good…???
|
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
10k Club
Registered: 05/23/00
Posts: 12522
Loc: NY Hudson Valley, USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by BrianK:
Those qualities of modern music; fast compression, vitually no natural dynamics, and loud mastering.
Those ARE some of the identifying features of so-called "modern" music.
When I hear terms like alt/mod...I'm always thinking about the actual music...the songs...IF they are indeed new or just repackaged hash...
...and not so much HOW they were recorded.
If you took some, say......Elvis tracks from the 50s/60s.….
...and then hit them with the modern engineering/production techniques, they would qualify as modern "sounding"...
...but to me they still wouldn’t be “new/fresh”....as far as the music itself.
There are a few ways to look at it, I guess...
_________________________
miroslav - miroslavmusic.com"Just because it happened to you, it doesn't mean it's important."
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#1684320 - 07/30/06 02:28 PM
Re: Better to sound new…than sound good…???
|
wwittman
Senior Member
Registered: 12/07/01
Posts: 120
Loc: peekskill, NY, USA
|
|
Offline
|
|
I think whoever said it's an "Albini-like" statement is right on... in the sense that it's intended to be provocative and to pander to a certain indier-than-thou audience.
I don't take issue with any of the specifics in Dave Pensado's interview.... there's nothing radical there.
EXCEPT for that "better to be new than good" pose.
in the context of his work, it's really meaningless... he DOESN'T go for "bad" sounds, and he knows how to get good ones.
it's marekting hype.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
Moderator: BrianK, J.J. Blair
|
|
|
