Anderton Posted April 8, 2001 Share Posted April 8, 2001 I was listening to Beck's Odelay the other day, and was struck by how bad it sounded with respect to fidelity, and how that didn't affect how much I enjoy the CD. And then I started thinking, maybe one reason I like it is because of the sound. I tried to imagine what it would sound like recorded in a perfect studio, with perfect mics, a glossy mix, etc., and at least what I heard in my head didn't sound as good. So that led to thinking that maybe the public doesn't have much problem with lower-fi music because that's the way we hear music in the real world. You hear a band play in a stadium, club with a weird shape and parallel walls, a gym, etc. - not an acoustically pure environment. Maybe there's something about lower-fi that just rings more true to most of us; maybe any reaction against CDs has less to do with the medium, and more with how engineers changed the nature of recording so that it would sound good under the CD microscope. Or is it just late on a Saturday night, and I should be going to bed rather than hanging out here? Craig Anderton Educational site: http://www.craiganderton.org Music: http://www.youtube.com/thecraiganderton Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/craig_anderton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curve Dominant Posted April 8, 2001 Share Posted April 8, 2001 originally posted by Craig:>>is it just late on a Saturday night, and I should be going to bed rather than hanging out here? Hell, no, Craig, do not go to bed, do not pass GO, do not collect $200. Go directly to GM's board and jump into Nika's "96K" thread. It's a barn-burner. By the way, I recieved your "Naval Escort Remixes" CD and it is phatt, but I'm not going to say that here, because you requested feedback in email form. curvedominant Eric Vincent (ASCAP) www.curvedominant.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the stranger Posted April 8, 2001 Share Posted April 8, 2001 I have always been of the opinion that lo-fi type stuff usually has way more vibe (the reason I listen to music).Way to many things I pick up these days are so stripped of the level of vibe that was possible.What do you think will be more full of energy and vibe, a band that did an album in a week or two months.I've often wondered if maybe classic bands don't really lose the spark over time as much they just spend way too much time in the studio. This message has been edited by dr destructo on 04-08-2001 at 01:45 AM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alphajerk Posted April 8, 2001 Share Posted April 8, 2001 i like portisheads first album and it sounds like shite, i like mazzy stars first album over the more slick ones too. i like butthole surfers albums, the crappy ones and the slick ones. i like dinosaur jr and never noticed the crappyness to the fidelity until recently but still like it. there is a lo-fi revolution going on right now. i ALWAYS get asked if i can get a lo-fi sound. i try to get a hi-lo-fi sound... one that sounds good but its not overprocessed and homogenized like almost all popular music out today. my recordings sound good but sound like the band REALLY does. the artists smile when they hear it. but NONE want on overslick production whatsoever. BECK got it right on Mutations, not odelay... mellow gold was better than odelay too. alphajerk FATcompilation "if god is truly just, i tremble for the fate of my country" -thomas jefferson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curve Dominant Posted April 8, 2001 Share Posted April 8, 2001 Well, this is all very encouraging! I wondered if I was crazy to put out a CD recorded on a VS880EX, but if y'all like that "lo-fi" sound, maybe this thing will fly after all. curvedominant Eric Vincent (ASCAP) www.curvedominant.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham English Posted April 8, 2001 Share Posted April 8, 2001 I've been trying to dirty up all of my tracks lately. I'll put anything through some distortion- especially drums. But lo fi seems to stand the test of time. So many mixing styles come and go while the oldest classics are still pouring through the speakers. ++ Graham English ++ Ear Training, Songwriting Tips, and Music Theory Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alphajerk Posted April 8, 2001 Share Posted April 8, 2001 you know the public really doesnt care. its ALL in the songs. i got some friends selling cd's right now of a jam session through ONE crappy mic into a standalone cd burner, selling a good bit of them. i think production is too much right now generally. i like it clean but not over polished. too much dirty makes me want a better recording. alphajerk FATcompilation "if god is truly just, i tremble for the fate of my country" -thomas jefferson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiraga Posted April 8, 2001 Share Posted April 8, 2001 Beck is HIFI, not lofi.. his sound is true to himself, high fidelity.. and true to how the world actually IS.. It's the rest of the world that got it wrong.. Brittney Spears is lofi 1000%. Wasn't there an article with The Dust Brothers in EQ a few years ago, 'bout the Odelay Album?? As far as I can remeber it was 50% Opcode's Vision and 50% Sans Amp.. hahaha.. His records will stand the test of time for sure.. more of that please! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tedster Posted April 9, 2001 Share Posted April 9, 2001 Fo me, I think it's a bit dependent on what you're listening to. Steely Dan has to be pristine...Butthole Surfers is yet another noodle altogether, y'know? And I'd like to think that a certain amount of the powers that be recognize that. "Cisco Kid, was a friend of mine" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Flier Posted April 9, 2001 Share Posted April 9, 2001 Yeah, I think it depends on the context, although I agree in general that a lot of stuff these days is waaayyy too slick (see the thread in David's forum about the new Aerosmith CD). However "slick" and "hi fidelity" don't have to equate to each other, it's just that in reality, they mostly do, because to go into a high-dollar studio probably means you have a label budget, and the label is probably gonna expect that you sell a bunch, therefore they demand "slick". Lo-fi can be really cool, and I agree with the sentiment that it's probably easier to get a really inspired vibe going in a lo-fi setting than if you're in a big studio and spending huge amounts of time and money. I love Guided By Voices and they recorded on 4-track cassette for years. Frankly it would've been cool if they could have at least gotten themselves a Tascam 8-track and a Mackie. http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/biggrin.gif But they couldn't afford it for a long time! But tell you what I REALLY think is cool, is when you have some individual tracks that sound really lo-fi and others that sound very clear; the contrast is awesome. Radiohead did a lot of that on "OK Computer" and it's killer! Scratchy, nasty distorted drums against a beautifully recorded piano and vocal... I love it. Some of the lo-fi tracks juxtaposed against the hi-fi ones make you think of sounds you hear at the edges of reality, like when you were a kid with a cheap AM radio and you played with the dial and got all these mysteriously faint stations. Beck does that kind of thing sometimes too. I dunno, I love the sound of a truly technically awesome recording, and that ought to sound great whether it's played on a high end stereo or a cheap boom box. But truthfully, the labels aren't financing much that I care to listen to these days, but there are lots of savvy DIYer's making great music, and getting better and better at recording it themselves. So I guess I can live with lo-fi, and depending on how it's done, yeah, I even love it. http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/smile.gif --Lee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiraga Posted April 9, 2001 Share Posted April 9, 2001 Yeah, the contrast, that's what I mean. Beck has it too. That's where it's happening for me! I might go bonkers and rent two M49s + Neves to record a grand piano, go to a *real* studio, and print it to 1/2". Only to combine it with a drum loop through a Pulteq breaking up just nicely, re'amped through a speaker and kill it with a Fairchild, and mix the lot through and old tube amp & Quadrafuzz.. or that was pretty much what I did a week ago... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uh Clem Posted April 9, 2001 Share Posted April 9, 2001 Only Beck knows if he got it right. Everyone is is bound to trying to just get it at all. It's music, not a math test - right is what you make it be. Steve Powell - Bull Moon Digital www.bullmoondigital.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tedster Posted April 9, 2001 Share Posted April 9, 2001 Lee wrote: >>>at the edges of reality, like when you were a kid with a cheap AM radio and you played with the dial and got all these mysteriously faint stations. Beck does that kind of thing sometimes too. AHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!...You're on the same trip I'm on! I can't believe it! How cool...man, I used to do that...wondering where all of those disembodied voices were coming from... The Edges Of Reality...maybe that's what Transrational is looking for. Well, now you all know (if there was ever any doubt) that I'm completely off my rocker. http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/biggrin.gif "Cisco Kid, was a friend of mine" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham English Posted April 9, 2001 Share Posted April 9, 2001 The Edges Of Reality....hmmm....now that's a cool band name! ++ Graham English ++ Ear Training, Songwriting Tips, and Music Theory Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alphajerk Posted April 9, 2001 Share Posted April 9, 2001 i fell completely of the edge of reality in the summer of 93. tedster, i think if you took the exact same equipment and recorded steely dan and the butthole surfers, now that would be a collaboration, steely dan and the butthole sufers http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/biggrin.gif anyways, same equipment, same studio, same engineers. they would both simply sound like themselves. alphajerk FATcompilation "if god is truly just, i tremble for the fate of my country" -thomas jefferson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stanner Posted April 9, 2001 Share Posted April 9, 2001 i am a big fan of this song called 'natural one' by folk implosion from '95(it was on the"kids" original motion picture soundtrack,but i never saw that) and i was told that that was done w/ one<1> mic in a room and was the start of 'lofi' or somethin...anybody know anything about that particular tune and how it was produced?that tune has "got it goin on" as these modern kids like to say. i just like it alot! AMPSSOUNDBETTERLOUDER Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lisencocasema.net Posted April 9, 2001 Share Posted April 9, 2001 mmm Beck. This guy will use something in his music which ahs a vibe. If a part is a bit out of tune or noisy it doens't matter. Works great. Music is not all about sound qualitly, it's about playing! Think about the 50's, 60's: sound quality was bad, but the music? Old funk and soul ablbum sound great because the have a 'vibe'. The vibe is caused by mic's picking up overheads, distortion and stuff. Guitar Players know alla about the Sonic goodies of using tube overdrive. It sounds sweeeeeeeeeeeeeeet! So my advise is: use overdrive as much as possible, tyr to use one reverb instead of 5 and more of these simple tricks. If it's complicated to mix, maybe keep it simple then. I have to say, I love productions like Steely Dan and so on. But for me here at home I like to keep things simple. Even a 4 track will do the trick. Well, not everything, but I can record some fine guitar and vocals with such a thing. On the other hand I won't give up using Nuendo, Reason and my very trusty soundcard Yamaha's SW1000xg. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CraigLeyhFrameBand.com Posted April 9, 2001 Share Posted April 9, 2001 >>Guitar Players know alla about the Sonic goodies of using tube>>overdrive. It sounds sweeeeeeeeeeeeeeet! Ha Ha If only the ones I have to deal with new about "Taste" ------------------Thank you,Craig S. Leyh CraigLeyh@FrameBand.com Thank you, Craig S. Leyh CraigLeyh@NVSMedia.com Keep It Low! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 9, 2001 Share Posted April 9, 2001 The stuff recorded at Muscle Shoals in the late 60s early 70s sounded great. Sly and the Family Stone sounds great! I think if you capture the music, the feel and intent behind it, you can't go wrong. I love the sound of the music I mentioned above but I also love the sound of this: http://www.jamfree.com/music.htm Go figure? Queen's first 2 albums sound like shit but the content is so overwhelmingly good it never mattered to me until I got into recording. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricknbokker Posted April 9, 2001 Share Posted April 9, 2001 Dig it Lee!!! I know exactly what you're talking about! I was involved in what could best be described as a "progressive dirt-folk" project a couple of years ago, where I would take pristine, effected, well recorded fingerpicked folk tracks and completely destroy everything going on around them, on my 4-trac. What a trip! Everyone who heard them said the same thing- "My, that could have been beautiful!" , which was just what I was shooting for.Btw, I haven't taken 'Mutations' out of my CD player since I bought it-- beautiful indeed! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rusrantaol.com Posted April 10, 2001 Share Posted April 10, 2001 I think it depends on the artist and song. Celine Dion on a 4 track cassette? Nope, I don't think so. Bob Dylan, Beck, or a more organic rootsy artist. Sure. There is more vibe on lo fi gear because it makes you listen more closley, more intimatly. I use analog and digital, and a bunch of hi end and lo fi stuff. But I use it depending on the song or artist. I have a bunch of junky stuff hidden away ready to be pulled out for the right thing. Otherwise it's 16-24bit 44.1-96k digital. Thats surely not lo fi but even then I can muck it up with some pedals or old junky gear. I think a better question would be what do you use to muck up and give your mixes and tracks more character? I'm definetly interested to know that one. Rus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anderton Posted April 10, 2001 Author Share Posted April 10, 2001 >>I think a better question would be what do you use to muck up and give your mixes and tracks more character? << A taste of Quadrafuzz, of course! http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/smile.gif Craig Anderton Educational site: http://www.craiganderton.org Music: http://www.youtube.com/thecraiganderton Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/craig_anderton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alphajerk Posted April 10, 2001 Share Posted April 10, 2001 how about celene dion on NOTHING! ever again. YUK! alphajerk FATcompilation "if god is truly just, i tremble for the fate of my country" -thomas jefferson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gtrmac Posted April 10, 2001 Share Posted April 10, 2001 Somebody mentioned Bob Dylan and I was reminded how bad the "Time Out Of Mind" CD sounds. I couldn't stop listening to it when I got it. This was produced by Daniel Lanois who has produced some other records which are so technically sophisticated sounding it's hard to believe the same person made it. I love it though, it captures the spirit of the music to me. Sometimes Dylan seems to be making up the words as he goes along and the drums sound like they were just using the bleed from the vocal mics. A very unique sounding CD which captures the listener in my opinion. Mac Bowne G-Clef Acoustics Ltd. Osaka, Japan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.