I posted a thread about this in the Make the Music section but no one seems to be feeling it. The reason why music was so much better in the past is mainly because it used to be recorded to reel to reel tape in the studio. Even though cds have been out since the 80's they didn't start actually recording the masters to digital until around the early 2000's. Before that in the 80's and early 90's they would record to reel to reel and then transfer it to digital for the cds. That sounded a LOT better than the purely digital recordings of today.

It's not the fact that the programs like Pro Tools allow the artists to do infinite takes and maybe not have to be as good at their instruments or at singing. Or that there is more use of those autotuning programs to 'fix' fucked up performances (though that does sound like shit.) The main thing that has caused music's decline from where it was is that purely digital recording just don't sound that good. Just compare an album from the early 90's or before to an album that came out recently. It's not just that the old music is better. If that same album was recorded today with Pro Tools you might think it sucks because it would sound so much worse.

------------------------------

50+ FREE Mixes on www.DJR-Tistic.com!

Twitter and Instagram - @DJ_RTistic

But it does = good or bad recording

so you feel the digital format is inferior to analog system?

It's kind of complicated to explain but it's like this: I think that the only way that a digital recording comes out really good is if it's a transfer from tape. That's what all the albums were before the late 90's/2000's apparently. So if you're listening to a cd or mp3 of an album from around 1996 or before, chances are you're listening to an analog tape recording transferred to digital. And I think that stuff sounds much than the music that comes out today on average. Not just because the music was better, but because the quality of the recording itself sounds better.

it was the mics, the effects and the tubes, the mixing boards, the way they would mic the instruments, the lack of compression and limiting.
it was a whole bunch of reasons why it "sounded better"
just recording to 2" tape is not the secret but definitely a component.

i made a post on this that my detractors on here told me was a "obvious foregone conclusion".
but i propose that hiphop, fitting into the grand scheme of music pre-hiphop and now post-hiphop, was actually not a genre of music per say in that it was not a new style of playing an instrument or anything but it was actually a fidelity revolt against contemporary recording fidelity a la lo-fi or garage revival in black music executed through sampling recordings that had the desired fidelity that hiphop wanted to "capture" but did not have the means to re-create themself.

>it was...the lack of
>compression and limiting.

http://musicmachinery.com/2009/03/23/the-loudness-war/

https://twitter.com/chuck4prez

Lack of compression?

A Bedroom recording nowadays has more frequency range than most of Sinatra's best records.

It's the appreciation of compression that most analogue enthusiasts espouse....not the lack thereof.

>Lack of compression?

and limiting.

they put volume controls on devices for a reason, let the end user make it loud if they want.

https://twitter.com/chuck4prez

>they put volume controls on devices for a reason, let the end
>user make it loud if they want.

the problem with that is if somebody did that then their record wouldn't be as loud as everything else out that is getting rotation on the radio and might not get played.
although considering most records get played because theyre bought & paid for i really don't understand the whole cycle being perpetuated.

i guess it's the same reason everything has turned to shit.
lack of risk.

At the end of the day I think a lot of people who claim to like Pro Tools recorded, overcompressed albums are forcing themselves to listen it in a way, just to keep up with the times. I eventually gave up on listening to anything from after the 90's and then figured out why it all sounds so bad. Beyond thinking that the music itself just sucks now. The recording and production/mastering methods used are making albums sound worse than what they actually are.

And digital recording is superior in that regard.

As far as dynamic range....one isn't 'forced' to decrease the dynamic range when recording digitally. It's a modern trend in production. But one could record digitally without making that mistake. Your problem is not with the medium of digital recording though.

>but i propose that hiphop, fitting into the grand scheme of
>music pre-hiphop and now post-hiphop, was actually not a genre
>of music per say in that it was not a new style of playing an
>instrument or anything but it was actually a fidelity revolt
>against contemporary recording fidelity a la lo-fi or garage
>revival in black music executed through sampling recordings
>that had the desired fidelity that hiphop wanted to "capture"
>but did not have the means to re-create themself.

isnt this received wisdom?

Yeah, I agree for the most part. Especially about the limiting/compression. How recordings are way over-amplified (that's what I like to call it) and all the dynamic range is missing. That's bad too. I don't know much about the rest because I have limited experience in making music. The tubes and the mic'ing. I think the tape part is key though.

>Yeah, I agree for the most part. Especially about the
>limiting/compression. How recordings are way over-amplified
>(that's what I like to call it) and all the dynamic range is
>missing. That's bad too. I don't know much about the rest
>because I have limited experience in making music. The tubes
>and the mic'ing. I think the tape part is key though.

the mic-ing of the instruments, the way the records were mixed, the types of mics and the tubes/effects are just as equal as using an analog medium and the lack of compression/limiting.

Its compression makes it sound good. Look up reel to reel 1/2" "head bump".

No offense...but this is kinda half-assed.

'Sounds alot worse'....'sounded alot better'. You should try to articulate better. I've heard alot of people regurgitate these types of arguments without really knowing what they're talking about.

What exactly is 'better sounding' about tape?

Many people call it a 'warmer' sound which is attributable to the fact that sound recorded to tape is compressed in the process. There is an analogue curve that softens the higher frequencies. But if that's what one likes....they simply need to compress the digital recording to emulate what their ears are trained to appreciate.

I used to run my cd player through an analogue compressor because I always preferred the sound of records. But I realize that my ears were trained to appreciate that sound and that analogue recording equipment colors the sound moreso than digital. Digital is a truer capture.

mid band compression,..

even if i dont do anything, its like the mids are transparent,..
everything is the lo, an hi frequencies,..

because of that,(atleast my perception)
sound objects dont sound as "centered"
there isnt enough density, everything sounds "light"

in its inverse though,..
the thermal transcoding aspect of digital allows for better "placement of sound object, in regards to dimensional field,..

i think that for some movie stuff (surround),
bi-aural encoding of phase transient components of signal monitored/recorded is more precise,..even though to the machine and human such boundaries should be of phase incoherence(however it still shimmers as photo optical plane), there is still some relative charge displacement the discernable to recording monitoring mechanism,...

i took my zoom h4 recorder,
turn off the mono mix,..
put the wav setting on 96kHz Sampling rate, 24 bits
and then walked around in a circle,..
turned in directions and shouted, whispered,..

the sound images recorded were extremely dimensional.
typically signals 180 degrees off axis there would just be a proximity affect(lo freq) but the microphone and its processing schema was some how picking up angular frequencies conveying precise details of the sound kinetic motion.
"shadow" front/backwards masking,...

in x amount years it would be interesting to see if there is ever a music print for blu-ray,..

severely limts the digital format. i think it's more accurate in areas...but it too tempers the sound. in a less flattering way in my opinion.

all you have to do is have experience with different converters to see/understand the limits of the digital formats. and more and more music is being made on cheap converters..

the technology is getting better...but tape is by far superior IMHO

i also cant believe Labels are relying on 0s and 1s for masters... how easy is it to lose digital data?

http://howardlloyd.bandcamp.com

>Digital is a truer capture.

thats not even debatable.

-------------------------
“The other dude after me didn’t help my case. It was just like…crazy nigga factory going on.”
Dre makes no apologies for his own eccentricities. “I was young, and searching, trying to find myself,” he says. “Never did.”-- Andre B

I disagree that digital by itself is a true capture. I'm not an expert but I would describe digital recordings as having more of a 'high end' and less 'low end' than real life does. But when I listen to a cd from a band on my stereo or in headphones, from the early 90's or late 80's especially, it sounds like they're RIGHT there. So to me tape transferred to digital is for whatever reason the most accurate representation of real life. As opposed to a recording done on Pro Tools or whatever that's purely digital. Which to me personally just sounds like a bunch of noise.

It applies to video too. When I watch videos that are old and were originally captured on tape or film on my lcd screen on my computer it almost freaks me out how realistic it can look. As opposed to the digitally captured videos which look obviously fake to me.

Tilt - Arcade Funk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oPtLcEoyxKY

son those shits were like Dolby for cars, my cocksman

__________________________________________
CHOP-THESE-BITCHES!!!!
------------------------------------
Garhart Ivanhoe Poppwell
Un-OK'd moderator for The Lesson and Make The Music (yes, I do's work up in here, and in your asscrease if you run foul of this

because a lot of bullshit was recorded to tape. Let's not give EVERY analog album a pass.


And for what it's worth, Digital sound makes a lot of good music sound GREAT.

______________



http://www.windimoto.com


http://ten2one.wordpress.com/ <-FEB

http://wallpapershi.net/wallpapers/2012/01/boba-fett-star-wars-star-wars-boba-fett-movie-anime-1080x1920.jpg

I'm an analog head myself...and actually prefer to use older analog equip....but I'm coming to the conclusion that I'm going to have to step up and use digital shyt too...

Yes, I think the sound was a bit better as well back in the day...the music was "better" in a sense because well...you had more actual musicians playing than now....but it's not like if we all went back to all analog equip today music in general would be better...because the time is different...

IMO - it's not about trying to go back and make music like they did back then...that time is done...

it's about building on that time but using equipment of today for this time to create signature music for today....

personally I think if more cats would actually go back and start learning to really play at least one instrument music today would be alot better...far as equipment there's actually some really dope shyt out now...even in digi format..

*****************************************
http://mephonics.com/
*****************************************

>
>Yes, I think the sound was a bit better as well back in the
>day...the music was "better" in a sense because well...you had
>more actual musicians playing than now....but it's not like if
>we all went back to all analog equip today music in general
>would be better...because the time is different...
>

exactly.

>
>it's about building on that time but using equipment of today
>for this time to create signature music for today....
>
far as equipment there's actually
>some really dope shyt out now...even in digi format..

Preach on, preacher. Most of the cats making this argument REALLY aren't familiar with studio technology.

( the funniest thing about it, is that the majority of Classic Hip-Hop and just about everything else since the early 80's was made using digital equipment SOMEHWERE during the process...)

______________



http://www.windimoto.com


http://ten2one.wordpress.com/ <-FEB

http://wallpapershi.net/wallpapers/2012/01/boba-fett-star-wars-star-wars-boba-fett-movie-anime-1080x1920.jpg

I know that they used digital equipment but then they went and recorded that to tape didn't they? And also the vocals were recorded to tape as well so that makes a big difference in the sound. Much better I would argue. And like I said, when that style of recording is then transferred to digital and I listen to it on cd or flac it sounds great to me. So I'm not all the way anti-digital.

Yes, it would sound better if everyone went back to using analog equipment. 'Going back' is not going back when the older technology produced a superior quality product. It's not like we'd all have to get rid of our high speed internet connections and ipads just because musicians started recording tape and tubes again. The world would keep turning and be better off for it.

Then transfered to digital because we still dont know how long digital masters can last. There are reel to reel from the 50's that still play great.

Check out NEW Soul music at: www.myspace.com/starbeing

Bumpin in the STEREO:
Gladys Knight&The Pips
RGE-Black Radio
Randy And The Gypsys
Jean Beauvoir-DATM
Atlantic Starr-Brilliance
Terri Lyne Carrington-TMP

I agree because with reel to reel, you can hear all of the voices and instruments in the actual song and actually how it was recorded in the studio, thats why older music is better than now. I was listening to sheila's third lp this morning on the turntable and I could hear beats that I couldnt hear on the cassette in which tapes would become defective after a lot of wear and tear. with this digital recorded crap, they compress the entire sound so much that you cant even feel the groove and the bass in the song and thats the most important part because it makes you want to dance and bob your head.

This isn't an attack, but the majority of what you're saying is at best revisionism, and at worst, "opinion as fact".

>I agree because with reel to reel, you can hear all of the
>voices and instruments in the actual song and actually how it
>was recorded in the studio,

Same with Digital if done properly.

thats why older music is better
>than now.

I agree in principle, but that's not an absolute truth. *some* older music is better simply because it was written/produced/arranged/performed by someone with talent. But as I said before, there's a TON of shitty old music.



I was listening to sheila's third lp this morning on
>the turntable and I could hear beats that I couldnt hear on
>the cassette in which tapes would become defective after a lot
>of wear and tear.

That's a knock on Analog recording whether you realize it or not. You're contradicting yourself. Cassettes were Analog too. ( and for the record, what do you think Vinyl sounds like when it gets old and worn? Just as shitty.

with this digital recorded crap, they
>compress the entire sound so much that you cant even feel the
>groove and the bass in the song and thats the most important
>part because it makes you want to dance and bob your head.

Now I agree that there's compression, limiting, etc. that will affect the end product, but let's not act like Digital shit NEVER sounds good.

I'll take a "new ( Digital )" Jazzanova record over an "old ( Analog )" Huey Lewis & The News record ANY day...

______________



http://www.windimoto.com


http://ten2one.wordpress.com/ <-FEB

http://wallpapershi.net/wallpapers/2012/01/boba-fett-star-wars-star-wars-boba-fett-movie-anime-1080x1920.jpg

what I was saying is that I had to buy the lp for sheila e's third album because my cassette for it was very muffled and defective during playing because it had lost the cotton foam inside of the tape. also with cassettes....the tape were play a bad part which was torn causing the sound to be very muffled and when the sound is muffled, you cant hear everything in the song.

I was listening to sheila's third lp this morning on
>the turntable and I could hear beats that I couldnt hear on
>the cassette in which tapes would become defective after a lot
>of wear and tear.

That's a knock on Analog recording whether you realize it or not. You're contradicting yourself. Cassettes were Analog too. ( and for the record, what do you think Vinyl sounds like when it gets old and worn? Just as shitty.

> with this digital recorded crap, they
>>compress the entire sound so much that you cant even feel
>the
>>groove and the bass in the song and thats the most important
>>part because it makes you want to dance and bob your head.
>
>Now I agree that there's compression, limiting, etc. that will
>affect the end product, but let's not act like Digital shit
>NEVER sounds good.

And Disco seems to acknowledge this....the over-compression/over-limiting is a DECISION that modern producers are making. It is by no means, a necessity of digital recording.

And again....if you want less compression than you should side with digital in this debate. It is impossible to print a record without compressing a sound. It IS possible to print a CD without any iota of compression whatsoever.

I think a main point of distinction that alot of people are missing is, contrary to their beliefs....they LIKE compression. And that's usually why people prefer records.

in your post.

---
www.ikirejones.com
FW16: After Migration.

Well I'm more expressing an opinion and wondering what others think than really trying to argue it that hard.

...has undeniably IMO made a lot of music sound incredibly sterile compared with old stuff. Looping sections may work in electronic music but when rock-bands do that too and every single bar sound precisely the same-BORING... The sterility you can achieve from protools and similar recording software-yuck...

Of course, that doesn't mean that it CAN'T sound good but unfortunately, efficiency and shortcuts are getting in the way of a more "vibrant" sound IMO. Why spend time to make a song sound dope when you can just record the sections needed once and paste it together in the computer)

>...has undeniably IMO made a lot of music sound incredibly
>sterile compared with old stuff. Looping sections may work in
>electronic music but when rock-bands do that too and every
>single bar sound precisely the same-BORING... The sterility
>you can achieve from protools and similar recording
>software-yuck...
>


I recently watched the Rush Documentary ( forgot the proper title of it), but Alex Lifeson was talking about how a fan ( or critic ) was telling him about how one of his guitar solos was amazing...


Alex then broke it down that it was a Comp ( pieced together from multiple takes). So yeah. Some classic records have used the same techniques. Albeit on analog equipment...



>Of course, that doesn't mean that it CAN'T sound good but
>unfortunately, efficiency and shortcuts are getting in the way
>of a more "vibrant" sound IMO. Why spend time to make a song
>sound dope when you can just record the sections needed once
>and paste it together in the computer)

How is that any different from overdubbing, punching in, and/or multitracking back in the day? It's just quicker, that's all...

and as an aside, are you guys just assigning looping to ALL genres of music? LOTS of bands record live to digital equipment.

______________



http://www.windimoto.com


http://ten2one.wordpress.com/ <-FEB

http://wallpapershi.net/wallpapers/2012/01/boba-fett-star-wars-star-wars-boba-fett-movie-anime-1080x1920.jpg

>>...has undeniably IMO made a lot of music sound incredibly
>>sterile compared with old stuff. Looping sections may work
>in
>>electronic music but when rock-bands do that too and every
>>single bar sound precisely the same-BORING... The sterility
>>you can achieve from protools and similar recording
>>software-yuck...
>>
>
>
>I recently watched the Rush Documentary ( forgot the proper
>title of it), but Alex Lifeson was talking about how a fan (
>or critic ) was telling him about how one of his guitar solos
>was amazing...
>
>
>Alex then broke it down that it was a Comp ( pieced together
>from multiple takes). So yeah. Some classic records have used
>the same techniques. Albeit on analog equipment...

That's not really the same thing, editing or splicing together sections from different takes doesn't necessarily make the music more sterile. I'm saying that the convenience of the method of recording like this nowadays leads to the music as a whole sounding less spontaneous-why let the drummer record his track start to finish with all the difference little fills and accents that come from being a human as opposed to a robot when you can loop one bar?
>
>
>
>>Of course, that doesn't mean that it CAN'T sound good but
>>unfortunately, efficiency and shortcuts are getting in the
>way
>>of a more "vibrant" sound IMO. Why spend time to make a song
>>sound dope when you can just record the sections needed once
>>and paste it together in the computer)
>
>How is that any different from overdubbing, punching in,
>and/or multitracking back in the day? It's just quicker,
>that's all...

That it's quicker is part of the problem. It makes other methods seem costly and as a result, something that back in the day was the cheapest way has become the expensive and vice-versa
>
>and as an aside, are you guys just assigning looping to ALL
>genres of music? LOTS of bands record live to digital
>equipment.

Yes, I know. However, I'm mainly referring to bands and stuff using protools etc.
>
>
>

---
Love,
Nopayne

I'm 27! And how ironic that you have the first Mario Bros. game as your avatar.

let's play ping pong ■

-------------------------
“The other dude after me didn’t help my case. It was just like…crazy nigga factory going on.”
Dre makes no apologies for his own eccentricities. “I was young, and searching, trying to find myself,” he says. “Never did.”-- Andre B

"Slaves got options...cowards aint got shit." --PS
"Once upon a time, little need existed for making the distinction between a nigga and a black—at least not in this country, the place where niggas were invented" -- Donnell A

I'd rather listen to Drake and Nicki Minaj than Illmatic or Ready To Die anyway.

Tape sounds warmer, but only if the engineer knows what they're doing can they take advantage of it in a way that matters.

Music's "quality" and any percieved decline is a function of the business of making music and budgets, turn around time and profits being under more pressure than ever before.

Music is a business and when it's working well, "Nevermind" as a cultural phenomenon and as a recording is possible.

Without it, someone's making a Nevermind-like album with some element be it the pop-friendly hooks, the big sound or SOMETHING lacking just a bit. And only 40 people will hear it.

Because either the artist will be signed and the album will never drop or the artist will not be signed and only 30 ppl bought it on bandcamp, it never cut thru blog clutter.

Aint *strange* enough.

"Slaves got options...cowards aint got shit." --PS
"Once upon a time, little need existed for making the distinction between a nigga and a black—at least not in this country, the place where niggas were invented" -- Donnell A

It's not about the engineer. I have dvds of concerts that were captured on vhs and they're much more enjoyable than a modern concert recording captured with a digital camcorder. Nothing to do with engineers or anything, just the medium it's captured on.

"Slaves got options...cowards aint got shit." --PS
"Once upon a time, little need existed for making the distinction between a nigga and a black—at least not in this country, the place where niggas were invented" -- Donnell A

at first everybody just gets swept up in the expansions
before the realisation that something is always 'lost'
from the old way

_______________________________________
When discourse of Blackness is not connected to efforts to promote collective black self determinism
it becomes simply another recourse appropriated by the colonizer

http://hardboiledbabesanddarkchocolate.tumblr.co

Today there is a system recently developed called the CLASP that allows people to simultaneously record through a reel to reel tape recorder and then into Pro Tools. To give recordings the sound of analog but also the convenience of digital editing. Here's the website for it: http://www.endlessanalog.com/ Some big artists like Aerosmith and KISS are using it so I'm hoping it will catch on.