How much raw humanity does your music need?

[DSmolken]

This guy's general theme in many of his videos is that rock music lost a lot when it went to digital recording, snapping things to the grid, writing songs with a drum machine and then getting the drummer involved later etc. He's big advocate of the magic of recording to analog tape, loud rehearsals with an entire band present, and all those other long-gone traditions.

How much of that do you believe and insist on implementing those beliefs in your music at all times, how much of you like in theory but time and budget won't allow it in practice, and how much do you just straight up reject as foolishness?

Now, I like the Boojums as much as the next guy, but even they tried the analog tape thing and gave up on it... I'd have to find the interview where they talked about it, but they're probably the most traditional rock band I can think of nowadays. And it seems to be working for them.

 

[rrichard63]

JMHO: if you're talented and inspired and disciplined, you'll make good music either way. If you're not talented and inspired and disciplined, then it doesn't matter which approach you take.

 

[Tim Nash]

I find musicians that say they prefer the old tech, tend to make music that sounds like it's from the same era as the old tech they like. So it's actually hurting their creativity as they've closed their mind to new sonic possibilities. They're just trying to copy old sounds, not create new ones.

 

[Nekujak]

Popular music has always been a product of the music tech of its day. The sound, the vibe, and the musical sensibilities are always rooted in a specific point in time. You can hear a random record from the 1950s, 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s, etc. and pretty much instantly recognize the era from which it came, regardless of genre.

So when folks compare modern music to music from a previous era and claim modern music is inferior, I'd say their opinions are coming from a place of nostalgia. For many people, nothing is ever going to be as good as the music they grew up with, which is fine if that's all they want to keep playing and listening to.

Popular music, by its very nature, is a constant moving target. It's both a product and a reflection, of the time in which it's made, and is perpetually in flux. So comparisons to music from the past are pretty pointless.

Also, the practicality of time, money, and effort is definitely a significant factor in music creation. When I think back to how much time and energy was expended to gather my bandmates, find a space where we could practice at volume, lug and setup our gear, rehearse, and then spend a day recording onto a 4-track, only to end up with a crappy cassette recording... I never want to go back to that. It was fun at the time because we were young and that's all we knew, but anyone who says that was objectively better than making music with modern tools, has their head firmly stuck in the past.

 

[HCMarkus]

Although I love and use today's music tech (generative AI excepted, at least to this point in time), there is definitely a "Loop until we Droop" mentality that has permeated the pop mainstream.

Yes, creativity is still involved, and great stuff is being produced in countless styles. I don't blame the tech for LCD music. By definition, the more Common the Denominator, the bigger the market. But I still enjoy songs that expand beyond four chords into a bridge. Modern tech in no way impedes this; it is just so easy to do repetitive things that production gravitates in that direction.

OTOH, I am not a big consumer of music. I'm working on the other end of things, making it. So why should other producers care what I think?

 

[Tim Nash]

Also, the practicality of time, money, and effort is definitely a significant factor in music creation. When I think back to how much time and energy was expended to gather my bandmates, find a space where we could practice at volume, lug and setup our gear, rehearse, and then spend a day recording onto a 4-track, only to end up with a crappy cassette recording... I never want to go back to that. It was fun at the time because we were young and that's all we knew, but anyone who says that was objectively better than making music with modern tools, has their head firmly stuck in the past.

Couldn't agree more!!!!! I've been from sound on sound ( 2 cassette decks), through Notator with an Atara 1040 1/4" 8 track and a room full of outboard gear, to the DAW. An entire room full of gear now in my Mac Mini. I SO wish we had DAW's 30 years ago!!! Would have saved me days/months of production time.

 

[HCMarkus]

Would have saved me days/months of production time.

Not to mention gear money!

 

[Louie]

I watched enough of the video to get the gist. I see it more about capturing the spontaneity/interaction and the unique character of a band, the recording process is secondary. If I was still in a band, I would consider tracking the band in the same room to tape (depending on the band esthetics), but not from an analog purist POV--It all winds up in pro tools eventually anyway.

And what is often overlooked is it isn’t just “tape”, but the whole signal chain and experience of the engineer that makes an excellent recording, including a good sounding room, and creative environment.