Small Tape Op magazine critique

[Meriphew]

I will preface this critique by saying that I adore Tape Op magazine, and I constantly rave about the magazine at every opportunity I get.

Having said that, one thing that I would like to see in the magazine, is more photos of the studio/recording environment, actual session photos of the musicians recording, mic'd up instruments/amps, various equipment used in the recording process, track sheets, etc. Almost like a recording session photo documentary.

I don't think that portrait/promo photos of the artist/engineer really add much to the article. I understand having one photo of them so you know who you're reading about, but sometimes there's like three different photos of the person standing/sitting/posing.

Anyways, just wanted to add my 2 cents.

[TapeOpLarry]

When we arrive somewhere to do an interview there is usually no session in progress. Plus we do want a "personality" photo, and if possible not the person in front of a console shot we're all familiar with. This all means that photos of actual sessions need to be culled from other sources, and many times producers and engineers didn't take any photos, and if the artist had any done the person we interviewed doesn't have access to them. And sometimes the sessions are for not-yet-released albums and people are protective. Plus, if someone gives us some photos we may use them, but many times when they do they are low-res, grainy and useless for printing in the mag (think iPhone pix).

Thanks for caring. I know you like the mag, and you know we try...

[dsw]

I always thought that too Larry, we're all gear heads....show the gear!

(don't change babe, we'll do lunch....)

[TapeOpLarry]

I know John and I both feel the same way (and he does the layout) - that a mag full of endless photos of racks of gear is BORING! It ends up all being some of the same shit - who cares? I would like to see more actual sessions in some cases, so maybe we'll ask for more shots. I can tell you though, from my own experience, that I don't have very many shots of my most well-known sessions. Probably none in most cases.

[cgarges]

I got a big laugh out of the issue (last year maybe?) where it seemed like all the interviewees had shots of them on couches. It was so ridiculous!

Chris Garges
Charlotte, NC

[TapeOpLarry]

"What brand of couch does your studio use?"

[hank alrich]

"What brand of couch does your studio use?"

Potato couches.

[albystarvation]

Well, I only just registered so please let me know if I step on someone's toes with this...
anyway, I thought i'd just chime in to say that to me, TapeOp is just right like it is....
And that's why: I am a buddying drummer/recordist in my mid-40, and IMHO mostly all of he other recording/studio mags are ... dare i say gear-centric? I mean, big photos of nice rooms, CRs stuffed to the hilt with so much germanium and tubes to make a WWII documentary envious, mics sexier than #insert your favourite Quentin Tarantino starlet name here# .. you know the plot.

Fact is, I read usually the other mag ( the one whose acronym rhymes with 'distress', you know) and, upon finishing it, I lust for gear, knobs and faders.
After reading TapeOp, instead, i'm eager to make some more music and record it.....
And that's what we should be after, isn't it??

So, for me, more photos will render the mag closer to the other gear-centric ones ( not that i dislike reading a product review, but I like them more without glossy images of some sultry LDC.. less GAS for me!)
My 2c.
Alberto.

[Meriphew]

After reading TapeOp, instead, i'm eager to make some more music and record it.....

The actual articles in Tape Op are top notch, and they are inspiring, I just think that more interesting photos could really enhance that.

[mrclean]

I of course love the magazine...

But I really wanted to see the inside of that Water Tower studio...

[Meriphew]

I of course love the magazine...

But I really wanted to see the inside of that Water Tower studio...

That's EXACTLY what I was thinking when I was reading that article.

[bannerj]

I of course love the magazine...

But I really wanted to see the inside of that Water Tower studio...

That's EXACTLY what I was thinking when I was reading that article.

I'm guessing part of the limitation here is the overall budget of the magazine. I'm assuming everything has to be simplified and streamlined. Other magazines (magazines that I generally don't read or enjoy) tend to over focus on photography--everything is about the spread, the covers etc.

Having said that, I don't think it is fair to think of it as a matter of whether there should be gear pics or no gear pics. That kind of a dichotomy doesn't give photography much credit. I think the right kind of a photographer could find interesting things to present for the readers to be able to connect with the interviewee's creative space. I think the general rule of thumb to avoid 'gear porn' is well noted and a good ethic. However, I too would like some better way to connect with the creative spaces. When i read an interview, I'm trying to get the spirit of this person's creative mindset/space/process etc.... So, yeah, it would have been sweet to see something inside of Jackson Analogue's space.

Yet, again...it costs money to hire photographers...and I like getting TapeOp for FREE. I like telling others about this amazing FREE magazine that blows out any other print resource on resource on recording I know of.

[Meriphew]

Yet, again...it costs money to hire photographers...and I like getting TapeOp for FREE. I like telling others about this amazing FREE magazine that blows out any other print resource on resource on recording I know of.

I think a great portion of people who record now days (both in the studio and at home) tend to document the recording process with photos, and most recording studios have photos of their studio space. Maybe they could submit some of those photos to go along with the article.

[TapeOpLarry]

"I think a great portion of people who record now days (both in the studio and at home) tend to document the recording process with photos, and most recording studios have photos of their studio space. Maybe they could submit some of those photos to go along with the article." -Meriphew

Right, BUT most folks take REALLY CRUMMY PHOTOS!!!!! Believe me. Want page after page of washed out flash photography, photos that run the size of a postage stamp at 300 dpi, grainy iPhone pix, or "retouched" atrocities? We can provide that. Luckily John likes the mag to look decent. We run photos of studio spaces, and sometimes sessions, if we have them, and we ask for what people can provide. It's amazing, given that people practically beg us to be in Tape Op, that when it comes down to getting some photos it usually gets turned around and we're treated like we're asking for miracles, or they send us crap like mentioned above and say how great it is.

It's like asking for an overdub on a super-pristine 96/24 session and getting an MP3 recorded in a closet on a 99 cent microphone. Doesn't always work...

[Meriphew]

Right, BUT most folks take REALLY CRUMMY PHOTOS!!!!! Believe me. Want page after page of washed out flash photography, photos that run the size of a postage stamp at 300 dpi, grainy iPhone pix, or "retouched" atrocities? We can provide that. Luckily John likes the mag to look decent.

Good point.