|
||
Vinyl vs. iPod
A Studer 2-inch tape machine is a huge cumbersome beast that takes up a lot of space and might need pampering and attention when you make records. It requires that you use big, heavy rolls of 2-inch tape that need changing when you record two or three songs on them. And hardly anyone produces or manufactures vinyl records anymore. And nobody has a turntable. But it's making a trendy comeback.
Just because something is easier doesn't make it better. It certainly doesn't make it sound better. I had a digital recording rig in my home studio for a month or two and got so depressed. I quit writing songs, my guitar collected dust and I thought my creative life had ended. So I jerked it all out of the wall and threw it in the garage and that's where it will stay.
My new album, "Just A Little Lovin'" was made on a 2-inch tape machine. I demanded it. I like working with engineers and producers who love and appreciate tape. I love the sound, smell, and feel of tape. That's why I enlisted legendary record producer, Phil Ramone, and the brilliant recording engineer, Al Schmitt. They didn't mind my insistence. They put up with my hardheadedness. Hardly anyone uses tape anymore because they claim it's so expensive and it's just easier to use a computer. Most engineers can operate any computer rig in studios these days. But if you ask them to run a Studer and put on a reel of tape, they run down the hallway screaming for Mommy. I'm sorry, but I can't get turned on looking at a computer screen. First of all, it's not more expensive. By the time digital users spend the time and money to buy the software needed to put that "tape sound" on their digital record, they have spent more time and money than I have. While their downloading "tape sound" software, I'm kicking back on the houseboat drinking beer with a fishing pole in my hand listening to Django.
It's not for everybody. Tapes are not perfect like digital. If you want to sing the word "love" 40 different times and 40 different ways, then digital's for you. Tape requires attention. You can't just push the space bar and go to lunch. For example: When I put on my vinyl (yes vinyl) of Led Zeppelin's "Whole Lotta Love," my favorite part is towards the end when you hear the "print through" of Robert's vocals. You know the part when he sings "Yeah, Yeah, Yeah, Yeah"? For years, before I made records I thought that what I was hearing was on there on purpose, for effect. But while making my new record the same thing happened. There is no reason, it's just a tape thing. Sometimes that happens. It's not as noticeable or as cool as Zeppelin but if you listen to my first track, "Just A Little Lovin'," towards the end you will hear my voice. I made a record with print through. Wow. Everybody wanted to fix it but I insisted on keeping it. This is a true testament to using tape. The "real" comes through. It makes me proud to be such a hard head.
I was born in '68. Mama and Daddy had albums. I grew up listening to their vinyl. I have discovered that having a vinyl collection is so much cooler than having an iPod. Now, I have an iPod and I admit they are genius especially for travel and convenience. But they aren't really any fun. I don't call up my friends and say "Hey why don't y'all come over and bring your computers and let's have a party"? Hell no! I say bring pot, wine and vinyl. That's sexy. It's really a great excuse to get together and listen to music. Everybody takes a turn looking through the collection and it's interesting to see what each person plays. The vinyl way is just me. I think if if we all listen to more music together, it really doesn't matter how we do it. Music will save us all just like it always has. We feed our souls with it. Vinyl just creates a little more discussion for us. You get to look at the covers, the liner notes, sometimes the lyrics are included. Plus you can roll a doobie on it. That's hard on an Ipod.
Times are tough. Concert tickets are high and records are, too. Hell, everything is high and nobody has any dough. With our economy and the way it's headed, my guess is that we'll all be staying home drinking bottles of Two Buck Chuck listening to music, however we choose to do it. Cheers, music lovin' fools!
Keeping the dinosaur way alive y'all..........
Rockingly yours,
Shelby Lynne
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
I was a recording "Engineer" for a decade a decade back, hauling around a portable rig to [mostly] classical concerts. The recording device usually was DAT [digital audio tape, a semi-pro 44.1k/16 format with cassettes half the size of "cassettes"], and sound quality fell off a cliff when that got in the chain. Truth to tell, just as much damage was done by the microphones, the microphone pre amps, the mixer---it's endless folks. You want the absolute sound? Pick up a guitar.
By the way, glad you did.
The sound quality coming off my little flamenco guitar kicks the crap out of any sound system I've ever heard---A..E.S. conventions, Stereophile shows and John Curl's living room included. Just an hour ago, found my copy of ABBA's "Super Trouper" on the turntable. Lovely sound on both CD and LP, the LP offering just a smidgen of humanity to these insane and insanly dense productions.
"Our Last Summer" anyone?
However, Ms. Lynne, have you ever recorded in the DSD format?
http://www.dsdproaudio.com/html/dsd_sacd_explained.html
I've liked what I've heard from SACDs, it's like LPs without the surfaces, like the original promise of Digital recording. LPs are wonderful, but I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for their full revival. I get a lot of music from I-Pod Shuffles and lo-fi boomboxes as well. Some of our best communal listening happens at the Food Not Bombs kitchens, where the devil's rejects get to choose Adrian Belew, Tabla Beat Science or the Carter Family among other seemingly randomly selections. Maybe even more important than the carrier for the music is simply listening as a group.
HuffPost's Pick
I am not sure the actual 'sound quality' is an issue for 95 percent of music listeners out there. Many are more than willing to lose the pops and clicks of vinyl or the hiss and complexity of tape for convenience. After all, the concept of 'good enough' gets too short a shrift in our society.
But Ms. Lynne is right about the communal nature of listening to music. I have an old album from 1978, an all time favorite of mine -- okay, it's Billy Joel's "52nd Street" -- that I have re-purchased twice, once on cassette and then on CD, which I subsequently ripped to MP3. It now lives on my 4th Generation iPod. ("Good enough.") I listen to the album from time to time because it takes me back to a place and time in my life I like to revisit.
However, the other night we had a party and I put it on SPEAKERS -- the iPod dock was plugged into the amp, and I heard the album in a *room* for the first time in I don't know how long. For some reason, that gave it a sound that made it more fresh, more meaningful, move evocative. Not only that, but others in the room listened too, and it spawned a few enthusiastic conversations. When those conversations turned to other artists it was a snap to call them up and play *them* 'on the speakers' too. It ended up being far more satisfying than hearing the album in my earbuds while walking the dog in a bubble of isolation.
It's not the tech, it's the people that make music meaningful to us.
I think the problem people have with digital recording is when they try to treat it the same as analog. You can't peg the meters in digital like you do with tape. And it hasn't always been cheaper. In the early days of digital it was more expensive and more limited and some people still thought it sounded better. As for vinyl I think that's just nostalgia.
The problem with digital recording is that it has dulled the ear.
I have to admit that there is a certain warmth to Vinyl and tape. Sure, the hiss is there. maybe it's a nostalgia thing. I have a good quality turntable, an Otari r to r machine, a cassette deck, and a digital system. It's a blast when you have all media to work with. I also play vinyl on my radio show. Since our station simulcasts on FM and AM, I ask my listeners to tune in on the AM side because it's such a gas to hear Iggy Pop on AM. Am I the only one? I don't think so...
So anyone remember those pricey 'direct to disc' records they used to sell.
I bought one and the recordings are superior.
It's so refreshing to read a post like this. This artist (along with her current offering, "Just A Little Lovin" ) is truly amazing!
people are always being told that what they have isn't as good as what there was before. it never seems a very open or positive outlook to me. and that outlook never includes the full extent of the changes taking place in the whole culture of music . what needs to be discussed is the relationship between digital, portable music and music becoming a mainly individual experience- and less of a social one. is the atomizing of the popular music audience into myriad individual, private ipod experiences instead of mass audience experiences related to what is clearly, from the foregoing, a heirarchical division of the mass audience into audiophiles and mass consumers? the implication that my experience of digital portable music is a lesser experience cannot be contravened. but the root issue isn't how led zepplin sounds on vinyl- it is rather how led zepplin sounds on anything in 2008. without the digital revolution, modern pop, hip-hop, and trance would never have broken free of the ages of blues indenturment that imprisoned the rock band conceptually.
Vinyl always sucked- that's why I always carefully maintained a needle and turntable and as soon as I bought an album, I'd immediately record it to 7 1/2 ips audio tape and play it a million times on my Ampex or Sony home reel-to-reel tape recorder without fearing the inevitable progression of snaps, crackles, and pops you'd get from vinyl. Today, it's not just the technology, it's what you do with it. I try to listen to SACD's on my stereo or in the car- most music listening nowadays takes place in the car- crank it up and just take off.
Multitrack recording- well, tape hiss sucks, so does Dolby.
But, yes, nothing beats an LP cover for rolling, cutting, or doing lines! My Smoky Robinson Live LP (early 70's) still tastes good!
I'm a vinyl fan myself. Analog recordings sound warmer, roomier, and the packaging (photos, lyrics, credits) of records is far more appealing than their dinky CD counterparts (especially to we tactile sorts). I live in So. Cal. and spend WAY too much of my free time (and cash) at Amoeba Music (where Shelby graced us with a terrific free show last month - huge thanks!), browsing their wonderfully expansive and eclectic vinyl bins. My music collection (which runs from Robert Johnson to The Staples to The Clash) consists of about 90% vinyl, and I especially love the rich, full sound of the 180 gram virgin pressings (Shelby's latest, being among them).
Thanks Shelby for staying true to your roots, for your heartfelt tribute to Dusty Springfield, and for helping to keep vinyl alive. Now, onto more important matters. How do I get an invite to one of your parties? I'll bring the wine and records. We may have to invite Bill Maher for the other stuff.
another great thing about old vinyl is the value. i can get used records for a quarter that contain 10-20 times the information i'd get if i downloaded the mp3. and the quality difference is undeniable. i collect rare records and often get mp3's until i can track down the vinyl and it's amazing how much you don't hear on the digital file. if you love an album, find it on vinyl. it will be like hearing it again for the first time...
It certainly depends on what drives your ear.
Tape and vinyl are pretty mediocre for pitch stability.
I for one am pretty annoyed by concert pianos with machine induced vibrato and wow. All my life I kept a rat tail file next to my turn table to true-up the often-mispunched holes in records, and spent half a minute and more each time I loaded a record to tap the grooves into true circularity.
Unless you have an expensive turntable and stylus, and records pressed to virgin vinyl, 45 rpm on 12" for a six minute or less track, there's no way it sounds better than uncompressed digital. And that's before it hits the weakest link - the speakers or headphones. It's delusional to suggest otherwise. I understand the romance of the LP, the history, the lyrics in the fold. I lived through that era as well. But I can take my entire music collection with me anywhere, instantly play any song I own - I prefer the present, and I love my iPod.
As a musician who is not chained to the plantation of the big labels, I can record anytime I want on my MacBook using tools that are several orders of magnitude cheaper and easier to use than Studer 2". And Ms Lynne is crazy if she believes recording tracks on 2" tape isn't more expensive - that's retarded. My band's last CD cost less to produce than one blank reel of her tape. And it sounds better, too.
I know that some engineers prefer recording drums to tape, because they can hear a slight difference in the upper registers that sounds truer to the original to their ears. Fine. But spending countless thousands of dollars to get a result that maybe one person in ten thousand will hear and appreciate is ludicrous. Listening to audiophiles talk about these almost infinitesimal differences doesn't impress me in the least, it just pisses me off. The song is almost irrelevant to some of these geeks. I'd rather hear some garage band recorded on a mini-cassette playing something original and cool than hear any typical big label act croon their crappy cliches in glorious high fidelity.
"...Ms Lynne is crazy if she believes recording tracks on 2" tape isn't more expensive".
You make a good point, and let's not forget that with each re-recording on a single track with tape, the fidelity is diminished, while with digital, this is not so. It matters not how many times one records over a single track with digital, the fidelity remains unchanged.
Yeah, the imperfections are far more troublesome with tape, vinyl, and turntables. As these imperfections pile up, the less accurate is the playback of the original music. It is not MORE REAL, but rather LESS REAL.
There may be truth to the saying "All things are more beloved for their imperfections". However, the imperfections of the original presentation are lost through the imperfections of the playback with tape, vinyl, and turntables.
So, which imperfections are vinyl lovers in love with? The imperfections of vinyl, or the imperfections of the original that would make the make the original more beloved, but which are actually lost in the poor played back representation of those ORIGINAL imperfections that would give the music its true "character"?
I can relate to Ms. Lynne's views. Growing up in the '70's and 80's, I was always fascinated by covers of vinyl records and playing them. People think that anything and everything related to technology is 110% perfect and nothing could ever go wrong. Technology is not always dependable, and some folks want to be in some sort of denial and choose to believe otherwise.
BTW - Two Buck Chuck is passe. $2.99 Pinot Grigio is the hot seller at TJ's now.
Hi Shelby, we have mutual friends and similar opinions on the nostalgia of tape but we differ a bit on one point. Digital sounds pretty darn good when the right converters and processing is used and like any technology, it can be butchered by amatuers that have no "feel" for the artist or their music. It also is much cheaper and faster which leaves alot more time for sitting on the river and alot more money for wine, pot and crickets. :)) That said, I applaud your "stubborness" and keeping the old ways alive. I have survived both and I too love the feel and smell of tape ... and I really miss the liner notes and posters that come inside my vinyl records.
well, one thing i'll say for digital is: you don't have to worry about passing out before the needle gets to the end of the disc.
I've been listening to my vinyl since I was a kid. There's nothing trendy about it . It's cheaper (yard sale records average about a quarter) and they sound better, scratches and all. Go figure.
This is myth. Noise, distortion, and scratch "fry" noise of Lps sucks. Back in the day when your record started sounding scratchy, you bought ANOTHER one, you didn't enjoy the worn out sound. Professionally recorded CDs today beat the hell out of 20 year old worn vinyl all day long. I still have my thousands of vinyl LPs which I'll never part with, but noise, and pitch stability was always something to hate, and still is.
Well stated. I'm glad to see a little more objectivity finally responding to this post.
We all have our little "guilty pleasures", often based in nostalgiac memeories. At some point, though, objectivity deserves a little nod of respect. Anything RECORDED will necessarily lack something in terms of fidelity to the original sound. Digital undeniably renders the most true rendition of the original in terms of recorded quality.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
