F@$K the F@$king Beatles!

Recording Techniques, People Skills, Gear, Recording Spaces, Computers, and DIY

Moderators: drumsound, tomb

Post Reply
brian beattie
steve albini likes it
Posts: 370
Joined: Wed May 07, 2003 6:37 am
Location: Austin, Texas

Post by brian beattie » Mon May 22, 2006 5:20 am

eb "gets it" right away.
he will end up as a good recording engineer.
b

User avatar
bannerj
re-cappin' neve
Posts: 625
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2004 3:40 pm
Location: Holland, MI
Contact:

Re: F@$K the F@$king Beatles!

Post by bannerj » Mon May 22, 2006 6:54 am

treble king wrote: You know, the Beatles totally said that you would feel that way.;P
For those of you who are courageous...you should go read T.S. Eliot's "Tradition and the Individual Talent." The tension here is a matter of how much do we rely on the tradition of our craft and how much do we rely on our own creative genius.

All that Eliot says is basically summed up in what Bob Dylan was trying to explain about why he started playing an electric guitar. The only way to honor your predecessors--your tradition--is to defy it. However, the only way for you to defy your tradition is to know it well. This is the basis for all of jazz and any kind of improv. You have to study and know your theory, your modes, so well that you can then be spontaneous.

Studying the Beatles might be considered by some engineers the basis of a good working knowledge of your fundamentals, and it is very clear and obvious that amishsixstringer is just like almost every young artist who is frustrated with the tedious process of learning the fundamentals.

justhitthebutton
gettin' sounds
Posts: 129
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2004 10:00 pm
Location: houston tx

Post by justhitthebutton » Mon May 22, 2006 9:29 am

wow, this has been a good read. depressing, funny, inspirational and yet depressing still. i just want to point out one thing that someone said on the second page i think. it was said that "those dozen records are basically the blueprint for ALMOST all rock/pop music of the last 35 years... that's why they're so important". this is pretty silly to me. maybe just to me. i mean, the tay bridge was a wonder and an engineering leap. the engineer/designer, thomas bouch, was knightted for his acheivement. it was a blueprint of what bridges would be like all over the world. but...as you all probably know...a gale of wind blew it down killing 75 people on the train. so we had to redesign the concept of bridges. its okay to look back at the past records but not use them as blueprints. we are smart enough, hell...smarter than they may have been...we can make our own music and new blueprints with a stern defiance to previous works. thats not a bad thing. like my dad says...you have to step out of the past to run into the future. but he might have meant that about broken hearts and not the beatles. ha
can it really look better than it sounds?

eb.
ass engineer
Posts: 44
Joined: Wed Apr 26, 2006 11:57 pm
Location: Sacramento
Contact:

Post by eb. » Mon May 22, 2006 12:02 pm

Art is good. It seems to me one of the basic themes in here is what is an engineer or a producer? Is she an artist? Multi-track recording is difficult, and there is a reason why some bands that I listened to on mp3.com back in 99 or listen to now on myspace.com sound pretty universally bad. It's the same reason why all instruments recorded with a U47 might sound like crap, because multi-track recording is hard. I refer to the comments relating to the physics of music and physics of recording. Not just the Beatles, but the whole group of producers working with them at Abbey Road, and other famous English studios defined CLEAR multi-track recording, just as Brain Wilson defined how use technology itself as music. The Beatles, and various producers were at the foreground of new technology which allowed them to do the stuff we take for granted now. I'm all for art, but there are certain limitations. If art in recording makes it so no one can hear the snare drum, then it serves no purpose. and as far as I'm concerned the engineer or producers main job is to create a mix in which the art and craft of the band really shows, or making a clear recording. This is the definition of professional recording: clear.
evan
"Tell me what we?re fighting for?
No progress ever came from war,
only a false sense of increase" G-Graffin

herodotus
pluggin' in mics
Posts: 30
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 9:56 am

Re: F@$K the F@$king Beatles!

Post by herodotus » Mon May 22, 2006 1:02 pm

hammertime wrote:I'm not all that crazy about the Beatles, but when you compare them to some of the other no-talent shit I read about in tapeop or this forum (e.g., Mike Patton in the current issue), they become alot more appealing.

So someone having a really powerful, note-perfect voice with a huge range is 'no talent shit' to you?

Is that all of the people with powerful, note-perfect voices or just the weird ones?

User avatar
KilledByAlbany
takin' a dinner break
Posts: 181
Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2006 2:10 pm
Location: Albany, NY
Contact:

Post by KilledByAlbany » Mon May 22, 2006 10:21 pm

toaster3000 wrote:good thing you're at a recording school. I'd hate for someone with your attitude to ever work in a studio.
While I refuse to read through this entire thread, since I legitimately began to get a headache halfway down the first page, I would like to say that the above quote totally made my night and scored an actual "lol". :D

hammertime
re-cappin' neve
Posts: 722
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2004 9:17 am

Re: F@$K the F@$king Beatles!

Post by hammertime » Mon May 22, 2006 11:19 pm

The Beatles couldn't sing all that great, but they wrote about a hundred timeless songs that people will probably be singing in a hundred years, although I don't like them that much. That Patton guy may have an okay voice, but I've never heard anything by him that I think will last all that long. The only thing I remember was that stupid song I saw him sing on Saturday night live, "You want it bad," or something like that. Ronny James Dio had a much better voice, but I think very few people remember Holy Diver. You can probably get it for 50 cents.
herodotus wrote:
hammertime wrote:I'm not all that crazy about the Beatles, but when you compare them to some of the other no-talent shit I read about in tapeop or this forum (e.g., Mike Patton in the current issue), they become alot more appealing.

So someone having a really powerful, note-perfect voice with a huge range is 'no talent shit' to you?

Is that all of the people with powerful, note-perfect voices or just the weird ones?

User avatar
soundguy
ghost haunting audio students
Posts: 3182
Joined: Wed May 07, 2003 12:50 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Post by soundguy » Tue May 23, 2006 10:10 am

I just opened this thread because hammertime posted on it.

I wish hammertime posted on every thread.

dave
http://www.glideonfade.com
one hundred percent discrete transistor recording with style and care.

herodotus
pluggin' in mics
Posts: 30
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 9:56 am

Re: F@$K the F@$king Beatles!

Post by herodotus » Tue May 23, 2006 3:03 pm

hammertime wrote:The Beatles couldn't sing all that great, but they wrote about a hundred timeless songs that people will probably be singing in a hundred years, although I don't like them that much. That Patton guy may have an okay voice, but I've never heard anything by him that I think will last all that long. The only thing I remember was that stupid song I saw him sing on Saturday night live, "You want it bad," or something like that. Ronny James Dio had a much better voice, but I think very few people remember Holy Diver. You can probably get it for 50 cents.
herodotus wrote:
hammertime wrote:I'm not all that crazy about the Beatles, but when you compare them to some of the other no-talent shit I read about in tapeop or this forum (e.g., Mike Patton in the current issue), they become alot more appealing.


So someone having a really powerful, note-perfect voice with a huge range is 'no talent shit' to you?

Is that all of the people with powerful, note-perfect voices or just the weird ones?
So how much Mike Patton have you heard?

If you think that Ronny James Dio had a better voice, perhaps you haven't heard enough, because to me that is like saying that Micky Dolenz was a better drummer than Bill Bruford.

User avatar
JGriffin
zen recordist
Posts: 6739
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2003 1:44 pm
Location: criticizing globally, offending locally
Contact:

Re: F@$K the F@$king Beatles!

Post by JGriffin » Tue May 23, 2006 3:13 pm

herodotus wrote:
hammertime wrote:The Beatles couldn't sing all that great, but they wrote about a hundred timeless songs that people will probably be singing in a hundred years, although I don't like them that much. That Patton guy may have an okay voice, but I've never heard anything by him that I think will last all that long. The only thing I remember was that stupid song I saw him sing on Saturday night live, "You want it bad," or something like that. Ronny James Dio had a much better voice, but I think very few people remember Holy Diver. You can probably get it for 50 cents.
herodotus wrote:
hammertime wrote:I'm not all that crazy about the Beatles, but when you compare them to some of the other no-talent shit I read about in tapeop or this forum (e.g., Mike Patton in the current issue), they become alot more appealing.


So someone having a really powerful, note-perfect voice with a huge range is 'no talent shit' to you?

Is that all of the people with powerful, note-perfect voices or just the weird ones?
So how much Mike Patton have you heard?

If you think that Ronny James Dio had a better voice, perhaps you haven't heard enough, because to me that is like saying that Micky Dolenz was a better drummer than Bill Bruford.
Well, that's hammertime for ya.
"Jeweller, you've failed. Jeweller."

"Lots of people are nostalgic for analog. I suspect they're people who never had to work with it." ? Brian Eno

All the DWLB music is at http://dwlb.bandcamp.com/

User avatar
Brett Siler
resurrected
Posts: 2496
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2003 12:16 pm
Location: Evansville, IN
Contact:

Re: F@$K the F@$king Beatles!

Post by Brett Siler » Tue May 23, 2006 3:14 pm

bannerj wrote:For those of you who are courageous...you should go read T.S. Eliot's "Tradition and the Individual Talent." The tension here is a matter of how much do we rely on the tradition of our craft and how much do we rely on our own creative genius.

All that Eliot says is basically summed up in what Bob Dylan was trying to explain about why he started playing an electric guitar. The only way to honor your predecessors--your tradition--is to defy it. However, the only way for you to defy your tradition is to know it well. This is the basis for all of jazz and any kind of improv. You have to study and know your theory, your modes, so well that you can then be spontaneous.
I have not read that book but I completely agree with this quote. I am gonna have to check out this book.

justhitthebutton
gettin' sounds
Posts: 129
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2004 10:00 pm
Location: houston tx

Post by justhitthebutton » Wed May 24, 2006 9:14 am

wait is this about the beatles, mike patton or ts eliot? damn i knew i shouldnt have double dosed nyquil.
can it really look better than it sounds?

User avatar
bannerj
re-cappin' neve
Posts: 625
Joined: Sat Apr 17, 2004 3:40 pm
Location: Holland, MI
Contact:

Post by bannerj » Wed May 24, 2006 11:31 am

justhitthebutton wrote:wait is this about the beatles, mike patton or ts eliot? damn i knew i shouldnt have double dosed nyquil.
sorry, I couldn't resist: http://www.bartleby.com/200/sw4.html

It is not a book, just an essay...just maybe one of the most important essays on art theory of the 20th century. And for the record: I do think engineering is an art form. It is a service, but if it is only a service with no craft...then I quit.

justhitthebutton
gettin' sounds
Posts: 129
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2004 10:00 pm
Location: houston tx

Post by justhitthebutton » Wed May 24, 2006 11:40 am

exactly! cashiering is a service. i dont see any art in that. this is a fine line of art vs. service.
can it really look better than it sounds?

thexbolex
audio school
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Apr 07, 2006 9:25 am
Location: Cleveland, OH
Contact:

Post by thexbolex » Wed May 24, 2006 12:41 pm

Hey Neil,
I lived in Athens for a few years and played in quite a few bands while I was there. Although I wasn't in school for audio, I new a bunch of audio production students who weren't musicians, didn't really go to shows, and based everything on theory instead of practice. So, yeah, I can understand your frustration. I just wanted to chime in and let you know that a couple friends of mine in Athens are putting together an online comp of White Album songs at www.aquabearlegion.com . There are still a few songs that need to be done if you'd want to contribute. I'm not being sarcastic either. Most of the covers are experimental in nature and it's a fun project. Maybe you could find some catharsis by recording a version of "Sexy Sadie" on washboard and bagpipes in an elevator. Who knows. I know it sounds like I'm being crass, but I'm totally sincere. If you listen to a few of the tracks, you'd know what I'm talking about. Anyway, I just wanted to throw that out there. Oh, and in your original posting, did you refer to OU as liberal? From what I remember, isn't the TCOM building on the same block as about 15 fucking fraternity and sorority houses?

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests