song arrangement vs gear, format

[brian beattie]

Ok, let's assume a couple of things for this scenario. 2 bands are recording their best song at 2 different studios. One is Pro studio (2" 16 track, api, professionally designed rooms etc, etc), and one is subpar hole (blackface adats, mackie board, in a house with decent size rooms and wood walls) These 2 songs are of the EXACT same quality. (maybe they're the same damn song, and they wrote them simultaneously, like the million monkeys with a million guitars writing millions of songs for a million years experiment. Anyway, it's a great song) The bands are comprised of equally talented, wonderful musicians, who are equally comfortable in their respective studios. The engineers working at these 2 studios are equally and sufficiently gifted, and work well with the gear and spaces at hand. The outboard gear and microphones are world quality at Pro studio (sm57's, neumanns, neves, 1176's) and just fine at subpar hole (sm57's, AT 4030, drawmer 1960, etc.) The equipment that these two bands are playing through is identical, and perfectly maintained. The ONLY difference in the way these 2 bands operate is that the band recording at subpar hole is noticably better at arranging their song. Not phenomenally better, just a bit clearer or bolder during transitions, a bit less competing frequencies in instrumentation, a bit more spontaneously sensitive and reactive to passing musical moments, a hair more musical one-ness. The engineers are unable to offer their opinions, because they are wearing insta-death electrocution collars. I propose the the band at subpar hole will end up with the superior recording. It will sound larger, more dynamic, and more 3 dimensional. Golden ears might say "that's 16 bit digital", but they will also say "that is THE SHIT"
brian
arrangement snob

[joeysimms]

any questions ?

[penelec]

I agree, and I think maybe this is Steve Albini's point, too: the engineer needs to capture the sound nearly mathematically, but that's assuming that the people he's let into his room are musicians of the caliber you just mentioned.

If those frequencies are summing each other out, and if the musicians can't play to a room, you're going to make a great recording of some bad sound. But if the band know what they're doing, you'll have a pretty great recording of music that transcends the technology.

I think that's why some of my favorite recordings need to be listened to as a music fan, not a recording fan.

--chandler

[bobbydj]

I think that's why some of my favorite recordings need to be listened to as a music fan, not a recording fan.

Agreed.

[brian beattie]

oh, and to clarify a little.... The "equally talented wonderful musicians" can be wild eyed primitive maniacs, for all I care. I'm not necessarily using the words "talented, wonderful" to mean "sophisticated and adept" The only (theoretical) difference is in their arrangement abilities.
brian

[inverseroom]

Oh, God yes. Arrangement always, always trumps gear, right? I'll go a step further here--if subpar hole's song is arranged better (more interestingly, thoughtfully, whatever), THEN IT IS NOT ACTUALLY THE SAME SONG, and of course the better song is always better.

What's that GBV tune on Alien Lanes--something about a supermodel--which is basically a lo-fi recording of acoustic and voice, but in the background--actually the foreground, because it's incredibly fucking loud--there's the sound of somebody snoring. The snoring actually improves the song--it's basically an arrangement trick.

That said, if one band recorded the same parts at the same time (redundantly, I guess) through two separate signal paths, and one of them had all that kickass gear, we're probably all like the good gear better, because it would have captured more of the detail--or captured it in a more sonically satisfying way--of the excellent performance.

[EasyGo]

You can have the best delivery system in the world, but your song either lives or dies by the actual content of the music being heard.

"Putting the lion's share of your attention and investment out in front
of the microphones pays off every time." -- Bob Olhsson

[Rick Hunter]

I go with whatever the guy who recorded The Dead Milkmen says. I am sure he is onto something. But... What if its recorded in the HOLE, but then mixed in the nice place. Would it be similer to recording to tape and then archiving on DAT?

[perhapsthemoon]

inverseroom, thats one of my favorite tracks on alien lanes. brilliantly done too. the purity of the song really comes through and that's whats important.

[perhapsthemoon]

and I really like those Glass Eye records Brian.

[pharaoh0]

The engineers are unable to offer their opinions, because they are wearing insta-death electrocution collars.

do these things alo detect secretly engaged mute buttons?

U

[bobbydj]

Moreover, are these 'insta-death collars' available on the open market?

My new neighbours are pissing me right off.

[vvv]

"Subpar Hole"! That's it! My new band shall be called...

[AnalogElectric]

I can make the same analogy within a one-session context...

Why do I not keep a bad take if all the parts were played technically perfect? It didn't have energy. If the bands not in to it or are sheepish about something it comes through the recording, no matter how good the recording is.

When I was at AmRep there were plenty of demos and full albums that would come through the office looking to be signed. Every CD would be listened to and the CD's that stood out from the rest made it to everyone's desk. If you have band 'A' that's sloppy but the recording is good it wouldn't get well received, if band 'B' was tight and had better flow but the recording was crappy AmRep would consider them. Although a great recording with great performances and nice packaging usually tells an indie label ?what do they want from us, they?re already doing it themselves?.

You could also say that band 'A' and band 'B' are in fact the SAME band but at different stages. The 'band' forms, writes some songs, plays some gigs, and decide to go to a high priced 'pro' studio. They record several songs prematurely before they know exactly how to tweak their amps and drums for the band. They finish their recording, listen to it for a couple months, practice more, get tighter, tweak their sound to fit the band better, get to know one another better, play with more confidence, and decide to rerecord the songs they already did at a more affordable studio with a friend that just got some gear and is working out of his/her basement for a case of beer and a carton of smokes. All of a sudden the band sounds better because they've gotten better.

--Adam Lazlo

[jajjguy]

The scenario you propose is easy. I'll agree with everyone else.

Here's another easy, but less heartwarming scenario: same great band, same great song, same competent low-budget studio, same high-dollar super-pro studio, but let's also throw in a high-dollar top-gun producer and similar mix engineer with the pro studio. And we'll assume that the label is calling the shots, so the producer&mixer are both free to have their way with the song. Oh, and who cares about which recording is better, what we really want to know is who sells more copies?

Again, i think we all know the answer, based on the ridiculous sales that can be coaxed out of horrible material and horrible bands.