What happened to "getting it right the first time"

[drumsound]

I know exactly what you are saying and I think you've exactly missed my point. There is no difference between cutting 5 takes to tape and comping versus cutting 5 takes to pro tools and later comping. Your statement suggested that comp'ing and punching in were the same thing and in a classroom that may appear to be the case but in practice the two activities couldnt have anything less to do with each other. When you comp something, you record a bunch of shit, edit all the nice parts and move on. You can do this on a tape machine or a non-linear system, whatever. Punching in on a tape deck speifically, however, can be ultra high stakes anxiety with a tight out point or in some cases physically not possible to do, at all. You dont have that risk with comping. When a vocalist knows they have ONE chance to nail the overdub because the punch out WILL DEFINITELY erase the attack of the point following the out, things get fucking tense.

There's nothing subjective about head gaps and punch outs, its just physics. If you want to think its subjective, think whatever you want. Perhaps you need to hear the crushing silence of a band sitting there listening to the playback to see you erased something that you shouldnt have for this to be relevant. For me, thats the most exciting part about making records (this is subjective) and its something that simply does not exist in any way shape or form on a non linear system (that is fact).

there's a whole generation of folks who think overdubbing at all isnt "purist" let alone comping.

dave

I love punching on Tape. Dave is right it's quite a thrill to get a tight punch and have the tallent think you're the shit!

[Brian]

What paste works best on 456?

Flour and water mixture, 2to 1 applied liberally over the whole tape.

[Brian]

ahhh, the guardians of musicianship!


I'm as disappointed as everyone else that every band that walks in doesn't nail every performance in a few takes. but, I'd rather do an edit that 99.9999999% of people will never hear than sit and watch a kid struggle under pressure in front of his bandmates and a ticking clock.

amen. we are members of the service industry, after all.

I agree with your quote but I'm not a member of the service industry.

[Brian]

It's funny that this is even a discussion. Every single person commenting on this has comp'd vocals a billion times. It is EXACTLY the same as cutting and pasting a performance. Period.

If you haven't comp'd vocals, you have punched in. It's the EXACT same thing, and I defy anyone to explain to me how it is different.

are you kidding?

the whole "advantage" of nonlinear recording is the ability to not commit to anything, ever. When you can record three hundred takes, there's absolutely no pressure to get it right. none. No pressure to get it right the first time, no pressure to get it right the three hundreth time.


There is at least one person on posting on this board who has never comped vocal performances.

dave

I did it once and I felt "dirty", never again.

[Brian]

Last, but, not least, There are a lot of bands that get it right the first time. I recorded plenty. Some got it right and then went on to insist on another take and got that one wrong. They still got it right the first time, but, that second take well, a demerit at least.
Forget these buzzwords of "purist, oldschool, modern etc." they don't serve us.
Originally the job was to get a great recording of the artist if it was possible for the artist to deliver one (used to be expected)and keep your engineering and gear from getting in the way and coloring the performance, that was the producer's job if there was one. Then, big time editing came in and boy did you have to know how to use a razor blade. Not all the time, but, when it was necessary.Pitch changing came in but you could only change an entire performance. Then varispeed helped a little, you still had to nail a performance. Mellotron, Fairlight,
delay and reverb all used to emulate a space and performance. You still had to know how to play, some bands created in the studio some came prepared to go. Either way you knew what you were in for. It was fun for all involved.
The advent of fix-no-talents tools, inexperienced engineers, accounting driven A&R at labels, lowest common denominator marketing, and low recording funds get labels returns without million unit sales. Talent is cheaper because someone is delivering substandard art at basement prices to the common market. Engineering is now usually about that service industry and not really much fun like that.
I'm selling all my shit.
Maybe not, cream rises to the top.

[thethingwiththestuff]

that's a nice story, but what about, say, fabian? a pretty face picked off his front step who couldnt sing for shit. he and plenty of others since the beginnings of "popular music", were nothing but experiments in marketing. you're timeline seems a bit suspicious, but familiar, to me.

also, the monkees.

[JGriffin]

that's a nice story, but what about, say, fabian? a pretty face picked off his front step who couldnt sing for shit. he and plenty of others since the beginnings of "popular music", were nothing but experiments in marketing. you're timeline seems a bit suspicious, but familiar, to me.

also, the monkees.

Agreed. No-talent and low-talent music stars have been around for decades, we just have better tools to make them sound good with less hassle. Nothing has changed, really.

Hell, the musicians who ghosted for Pink Floyd on "The Wall" went uncredited for nearly twenty years. How is that any more ethical than autotuning a flat note?

If you've ever recorded anyone besides yourself, and accepted payment, you are in a service industry. Simple as that.

[Brian]

That doesn't make it OK or wrong.
It was better when no talent sounded like no talent, that makes a statement, but, when you make them sound good the value of their contrast is gone rendering both talented and talentless boring and not worrth buying anymore.

[JGriffin]

I thought the cream rises to the top though.

[thethingwiththestuff]

is there an emoticon whose eyes turn brown as he becomes full of shit?

[Brian]

I thought the cream rises to the top though.

Ever heard of a "floater" or an "upper decker"?

[Brian]

The cream rises to the top, but, so does a floater, artificially boyant poo, if they're in the same cup or toilet you can plainly see them both on top, but, would you drink that cream in your coffee?

[joeysimms]

The difference is that the Monkees and Fabian had some really fine players playing great arrangements of great songs. Ashlee Simpson does not.

[Brian]

Joey Simms! I hearby HUG you!

[Brian]

that's a nice story, but what about, say, fabian? a pretty face picked off his front step who couldnt sing for shit. he and plenty of others since the beginnings of "popular music", were nothing but experiments in marketing. you're timeline seems a bit suspicious, but familiar, to me.

also, the monkees.

Agreed. No-talent and low-talent music stars have been around for decades, we just have better tools to make them sound good with less hassle. Nothing has changed, really.

Hell, the musicians who ghosted for Pink Floyd on "The Wall" went uncredited for nearly twenty years. How is that any more ethical than autotuning a flat note?

If you've ever recorded anyone besides yourself, and accepted payment, you are in a service industry. Simple as that.

Are you trying to tell me that Pink Floyd Sucks?