Has a new zine replaced the old TapeOp 4-track aesthetic?

[Brian Brock]

Since it seems like TapeOp usually features mostly people using lots of fancy stuff, and fewer 4 trackers and mic spinners than in the early issues, I wonder if another magazine exists out there to fill that space? Could TapeOp have a zine branch that just dealt with home recording nerds etc.?

[Bear]

Personally, I like both ends. It's nice to read about people in the same boat as me, but I like seeing the other end for the sake of perspective. If either were taken away, I think I'd miss out on something. Not sure if there's much of a point to this post.

[Brett Siler]

I used to record on this old Tascam MKII tape cassette 4-track. I recorded a whole album of experimental recordings/music with it. The 4-track stopped working and I upgrade to a DAW. I think though it is much more challenging to make quality sounding recordings with an old 4-track than a DAW.

[bobbydj]

Since it seems like TapeOp usually features mostly people using lots of fancy stuff, and fewer 4 trackers and mic spinners than in the early issues, I wonder if another magazine exists out there to fill that space? Could TapeOp have a zine branch that just dealt with home recording nerds etc.?

I reckon this is a v.good question. Very recently an ex-poster from this board sent me a package of old TapeOps (thanks Carl). Being in the UK I don't get th mag and have only the book from which to form an opinion of the TapeOp ethos. Can I just say here and now that the book presents a very different ethic? I was extremely surprised to see this ethic at the margins of the mag. I feel inhibited about saying anymore on the subject, for some reason. Normally I'll type any shit onto the board but not right now.

[todd]

i'd say that this messageboard takes the place of all the lo-fi DIY stuff that the magazine doesn't have to spend more money (and use more paper) to print more of. regardless of the system or format you're recording on, the articles in tapeop are relevant to your cause. just because someone's talking about grouping their compression groups on an ssl console doesn't mean you can't find a way to do something similar with a tascam 4 track cassette. it takes a little more planning, but...well you hopefully get my point.
i'm glad tapeop only comes out every other month...it means more time that we'll actually be recording (and not constantly reading articles trying to find out how other people achieve their "sound")

thanks,
todd

[TapeOpLarry]

Hey, If you got something to say just spit it out.

I sure wish someone would explain to me what my ethics are, how they apply to the mag and how they've changed over time. I can't say I know.

If another mag arrives that covers something we're totally missing out on let me know (I'll subscribe), but I think the bottom line is how many times can you write, "I plugged an SM57 into a 4-track cassette." Using whatever tools are laying in front of you is key, that's what I do every day - we'll always be about that. But as much as I appreciate what might be called "lo-fi home recording" or something, I would think that a majority of folks look to always make better sounding recordings. By talking to a variety of people we can provide many different answers and ways of working.

John and I work our asses off trying to put together issues that we enjoy. If our interests and focus have changed over time that would be expected. If we filled Tape Op with regurgitated press releases and photos of new gear, photos from our golf benefit, articles on hit movie sound design, gear reviews that only mention specs, self-presented gear awards, news of who the new CEO of CAD is, and only one interview with an engieer/producer per issue then you can call us on it. I don't think that is happening or ever will.

I imagine we're doing a bit better than that. Remember, Tape Op is the ONLY nationally (internationally to a point too) distributed music recording mag that isn't owned by a publishing company. It's owned by John and I. And we're at least the fourth largest magazine of this ilk in the world.

Okay, I'm off to bed.
Larry Crane, founder, editor, ranter of Tape Op

[bobbydj]

Hey, If you got something to say just spit it out.

I sure wish someone would explain to me what my ethics are, how they apply to the mag and how they've changed over time. I can't say I know.

If another mag arrives that covers something we're totally missing out on let me know (I'll subscribe), but I think the bottom line is how many times can you write, "I plugged an SM57 into a 4-track cassette." Using whatever tools are laying in front of you is key, that's what I do every day - we'll always be about that. But as much as I appreciate what might be called "lo-fi home recording" or something, I would think that a majority of folks look to always make better sounding recordings. By talking to a variety of people we can provide many different answers and ways of working.

John and I work our asses off trying to put together issues that we enjoy. If our interests and focus have changed over time that would be expected. If we filled Tape Op with regurgitated press releases and photos of new gear, photos from our golf benefit, articles on hit movie sound design, gear reviews that only mention specs, self-presented gear awards, news of who the new CEO of CAD is, and only one interview with an engieer/producer per issue then you can call us on it. I don't think that is happening or ever will.

I imagine we're doing a bit better than that. Remember, Tape Op is the ONLY nationally (internationally to a point too) distributed music recording mag that isn't owned by a publishing company. It's owned by John and I. And we're at least the fourth largest magazine of this ilk in the world.

Okay, I'm off to bed.
Larry Crane, founder, editor, ranter of Tape Op

Mostly, the reason why I wasn't more specific was cos when I raised a similar point previously I was told I was thinking about it too much. See here -

http://messageboard.tapeop.com/viewtopi ... p+book+mag

As for the 'ethic' I should've stressed that it was my interpretation of the book on the one hand and the mag, i.e. the differences I perceived in the contents within the 2 formats. So, please, place my use of the terms 'ethos', 'ethic' etc. in inverted commas. If I'd've been typing more carefully I would've done just that. Very simply put, to me the former feels more DIY, less 'pro' orientated. For better or worse. Almost certainly because, as you say,

our interests and focus have changed over time.

My intention wasn't to antagonise anyone in this thread. Seriously.

[JES]

bobby --

Have you read all the back issues? I *loved* Tape Op when I first discovered it, and I immediately ordered all the back issues while they were still available. But Larry's got a point about the "57 into a 4-track" thing. There is a sort of cumulative effect of reading all that stuff. That said, there are probably brilliant 4-trackers still out there waiting to be interviewed, and they probably have some techniques and ideas we haven't heard about yet. If you want to change the content of the 'zine, go ahead and interview them. Larry's always been cool about that sort of thing. This is also how we'd get more underground hip hop into Tape Op. I have definitely promised myself to write more for TapeOp when I get some more free time.

There's one other thing Larry should be proud of, that may not be clear outside the U.S. Tape Op is written for people who are literate. Some of the articles in Electronic Musician, Mix and EQ read like they are targeted at children -- not the content, but the prose.

To supplement my Tape Op fix, I've subbed to Sound on Sound, which is a great magazine and has some useful stuff on home recording. It's also written for adults.

--JES

[trash180]

I think that if the mag wasn't guided by what interested those who wrote it, then those of us who read it would lose interest quickly. It's the personal/anicdotal/humanimal qualities that really make TapeOp what it is. It's those same qualities that make this board great too.

Is it the economic thing that's troubling to some? I like how they handled it in the (afformentioned) bus compression article...the economy sidebar. Bobby, you might not have seen that...(recent article).

With a little effort I think you can apply what you learn in most tape op articles to any situation. Maybe part of what we learn from tape Op is that we should try anything...be creative with recording. Maybe it's up to the 4 trackers to push their own boundries and gear and report back to the rest of us with the results.

It's not in the box...it's out of the box.

[bobbydj]

bobby -- Have you read all the back issues?

I wish! Heh heh - all I have so far are 8 copies; some from 2001, some from 2002.

If you want to change the content of the 'zine, go ahead and interview them. Larry's always been cool about that sort of thing.

On that latter point, I'm glad to hear it. As for changing the content, I'd have a shot at it if time permitted. For one thing I've been intending to start something in Stoke. It'd be zine that concentrated on local stuff, and especially people who wrote and recorded themselves.

Incidentally, now that I come to think of it, that is precisely the difference I'm seeing between the book and the mag. The book seemed much more about DIY and - crucially for my interests - writer-recordists (thing East River Pipe, Linda Smith, Grandaddy et al). Or wricordists, as no one ever calls them. Now, remember I had only the book as a point of reference until I came to the board. When I got here (2 years ago??) I was very shocked to find that the majority of posters were engineers and were only writers secondarily. Well, this seemed a completely inverted "ethos" to the book. It also explains some of the reasons why I fell out with so many people when I first started posting. But as ever, I digress wildly.

There's one other thing Larry should be proud of, that may not be clear outside the U.S. Tape Op is written for people who are literate. Some of the articles in Electronic Musician, Mix and EQ read like they are targeted at children -- not the content, but the prose.

That's an interesting point.

To supplement my Tape Op fix, I've subbed to Sound on Sound, which is a great magazine and has some useful stuff on home recording. It's also written for adults.

I read this at the station . Oh - one thing I noticed is that SoS seems to be getting gradually more concerned with computers. I dunno. I'd have to check it more carefully before committing myself to that conclusion - but at the moment that's my feeling. Computers still scare me (hey - I'm 35, they didn't have them in my school til after I left). Ahem. So yeah - all that crap.

One last point - I've read the TO book at least 5 times cover to cover. It's my favourite journey reading and I've emailed LC a few times to communicate this and other blandishments.

Cheers ears!

[Bear's Gone Fission]

There have been varied and continued revolutions in home studio technology since Tape Op came out. Cassette 4 trackers are not the common denominator they once were, so go figure that what's written about has also moved on. There are a lot of pieces written about self recording musicians, and they are keeping up with the available tools for making music happen, like collaboration with online file exchanges, for example.

Since Tape Op started, there has been a huge downward trend in the price of 2" tape decks, so they have gotten into the hands of more indie oriented artists and studios. A lot of interviewees are talking about the process of acquiring, learning, and working with these tools. Classic old boards are being dropped by bigger studios because they don't have the channel counts or as many buses as are expected these days or they are being dropped for digital boards or control surfaces, so bargains have been found along with their attendant problems, like the need to recap or rechip for acceptable sound and noise performance, which we know all about do to TO coverage. The price of digital recording has come down so almost anyone can afford it, so now a lot of people are learning and working through the new technology. These options once weren't all so readily available, but now they are, and we have the exposure to see what avenues are opened up and whether they are compatible with our wants and needs. The revolution of the early Tape Op issues was that 4 tracking was a valid avenue. Anyone who read those issues as a manifesto that it was the only valid avenue ought to take a class to brush up on their reading comprehension.

Bear

[leigh]

With a little effort I think you can apply what you learn in most tape op articles to any situation. Maybe part of what we learn from tape Op is that we should try anything...be creative with recording. Maybe it's up to the 4 trackers to push their own boundries and gear and report back to the rest of us with the results.

Yeah, no shit. The official Tape Op slogan, as seen on every cover, is "The Creative Recording Magazine." I love 4 track "recipies" as much as anyone else, but if you're going to engage that creative right brain, you've got to connect your own dots from time to time...

DIY is not a style, it's a methodology. DIY is not a mantle that is granted or revoked by a community, it refers to the amount of time you spent figuring something out for yourself. And as such, it's a factual assessment. You either sweat out creative solutions to recording problems, or you just do what everybody else does and hope it's good enough. So to argue that the mag has shifted from a 'DIY' focus to a 'pro' focus is to set up a false dichotomy.

Take that Lanois article for example. Because he does major label records and has, by most of our standards, a mind-blowing gear budget, you could argue that he's 'pro' and not 'DIY'. However, there's thousands of other engineers out there working with the same gear as Lanois, but not making those kinds of records. He figured out his own style of working, his way with other musicians, his own balance between technical perfection and performance, and in some instances, his own gear (like the helmet with the built-in mic, which may or may not have been inspired by Bob Log III, but is nonethless a ballsy way to record keeper vocals for a major label release). So he's an example of someone who's both 'pro' and 'DIY'.

In the opposite corner of the grid is a home recordist with a 4 track, or more likely these days, an entry level Layla or MOTU or whatever. If that recordist only follows instructions to the letter, and is afraid to experiment or do something "wrong", what's DIY about that? The fact that they're pushing record? I don't think so.

I love Tape Op and I've been writing for the mag for over six years now. I want to hear feedback from readers, and if part of what people want from interviews is less gear talk and more talk about methods, then that's something that all the writers should take heed of. However, those who think that Tape Op should be, or ever was, a fetish mag about 4 tracks can kindly find their porn somewhere else.

Leigh

[NewYorkDave]

DIY is not a style, it's a methodology. DIY is not a mantle that is granted or revoked by a community, it refers to the amount of time you spent figuring something out for yourself. And as such, it's a factual assessment. You either sweat out creative solutions to recording problems, or you just do what everybody else does and hope it's good enough.

This is one of the most cogent statements ever written on this message board.

For my part, I will continue to enjoy reading about people employing creative recording techniques at both the high and the low ends of the budget spectrum. I'm interested in hearing how people go about the act of creating, whether it's with a Tascam 424 and an SM57 or with a 2" deck and the coolest analog console and outboard gear. In the end, songs, performances, arrangements, technique and, yes, such intangibles as "vibe" transcend the type of gear being used.

[rhythm ranch]

DIY is not a style, it's a methodology. DIY is not a mantle that is granted or revoked by a community, it refers to the amount of time you spent figuring something out for yourself. And as such, it's a factual assessment. You either sweat out creative solutions to recording problems, or you just do what everybody else does and hope it's good enough.

This is one of the most cogent statements ever written on this message board.

Ditto!

For my part, I will continue to enjoy reading about people employing creative recording techniques at both the high and the low ends of the budget spectrum. I'm interested in hearing how people go about the act of creating, whether it's with a Tascam 424 and an SM57 or with a 2" deck and the coolest analog console and outboard gear. In the end, songs, performances, arrangements, technique and, yes, such intangibles as "vibe" transcend the type of gear being used.

Amen.

[TapeOpLarry]

I think Leigh and Bear said it better than I could. Yes, things have changed along the way with technology and gear. We reflect this, that's our gig you know.

It's like the time someone cornered me at AES or NAMM and went on about how Tape Op needs to address audio quality and stop people from recording in digital. Like we could issue a statement "DIGITAL IS BAD, YOU CAN ONLY USE ANALOG GEAR" and people would:
#1, Take us seriously.
#2, Even think about changing their methods for a moment.
#3, Hopefully give us a ration of shit for being morons.

I've said it a million fucking times and I'll say it again, IF YOU DON'T LIKE WHAT WE'RE DOING WITH TAPE OP THEN DO AN INTERVIEW OR WRITE SOMETHING FOR US. IF IT'S COOL, WE'LL PRINT IT. IF I DON'T LIKE IT I'LL LET YOU KNOW AND YOU CAN START YOUR OWN MAGAZINE. AND GOOD LUCK.

Okay?

It's amazing how many times the people that bitch the most about Tape Op claim they are writing something for us that never materializes. Hmm....
I'm done with this thread.
Larry