Forum Home Forum Home > Progressive Music Lounges > Prog Music Lounge
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - the importance of analog sound in prog
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic Closedthe importance of analog sound in prog
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 910111213 38>
Author
Message Reverse Sort Order
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Aquiring the Taste View Drop Down
Forum Groupie
Forum Groupie
Avatar

Joined: October 23 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 68 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 15 2012 at 21:04
Originally posted by progbethyname progbethyname wrote:

Originally posted by Aquiring the Taste Aquiring the Taste wrote:


Originally posted by Surrealist Surrealist wrote:

Computers are good for sending emails, chatrooms, commercial art, reading the news, crunching scientific equations and a couple other things.. Keep them out of our cars, stereo systems and recording studios.  The computer is a very over rated concept.  The best albums were done without computers.  Tape machines record sound much better even to this day.  If an artist can't get the track they should practice harder, not rely upon a computer program to fix it with quantization or pitch shifters. 
Especially the recording studios!


I guess we are ruling out great scientific efficiency set forth by human beings in general. Geez. Too far guys.
As for the recording studio, computers are wonderful tools to weed out a lot of trail and error, so your hero's of today can put together quality albums without the burden of more stress that is already in effect during the recording process.

You guys should be kissing computers asses right now. What? You think STEVENWILSON doesn't use computers heavily on order to churn out wonderful remastered editions of all your favourites from TULL, CRIMSON and ELP.

Agh wait a sec? That's digital. You guys as vinyl heads. Ah screw it. Have fun in your Amish paradise.   

Neo luddism is alive & wellClap
Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation.
    Oscar Wilde, De Profundis, 1905
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 15 2012 at 06:15

Am I the only one tuned in to Luxembourg tonight
Do they only programme music
to accompany my cough
Lousy words and drab percussion
Fading in and out of Russian
I haven't got the strength to turn it off


~ Godley & Creme ~ Get Well Soon
What?
Back to Top
Snow Dog View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: March 23 2005
Location: Caerdydd
Status: Offline
Points: 32995 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 15 2012 at 04:11
What is wrong with listening to music  on Youtube?  My children do it. We all used to listen to AM radio back in the seventies. Nearly everyone had them in the kitchen, bit of breakfast show  before school. Charts at lunchtime. Happy days...

Many of us listened to Luxembourg in bed. Terrible sound but I heard some good music for all  that.


Edited by Snow Dog - December 15 2012 at 05:03
Back to Top
Aquiring the Taste View Drop Down
Forum Groupie
Forum Groupie
Avatar

Joined: October 23 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 68 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 15 2012 at 02:57
Originally posted by Roxbrough Roxbrough wrote:

Hear hear.
You will never convince the 'kids' though, they would not recognise music even if they 'heard' it. Most of them do not. They think listening to the compressed mid rubbish on you tube is listening to music !!!!

I understand your point, yes we live in a world where the celebration of ignorence predominates, but this is not the fault of the young .
Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation.
    Oscar Wilde, De Profundis, 1905
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 13 2012 at 17:25
Originally posted by Gerinski Gerinski wrote:

Nitpicky as usual Wink
Of course. I'm an engineer. It's what I do. Geek
 
 
Originally posted by Gerinski Gerinski wrote:

In the context of the discussion it seemed clear that the defendants of analog sound referred to modern digital computer technology and that they would not have regarded analog synths (perhaps not even analog computers in general) as "computers" in this discussion.
Of course. That goes without saying. Wink
 
 
 
Along with all other things analogue and digital I have an interest in analogue computing - the first computer I ever worked on (in the early 70s) was an analogue computer constructed using thermionic valve chopper amplifiers. Analogue synthesisers for the home constructor were becoming popular at that time and the connection between the two was obvious to me since all functions of sound manipulation are mathematical - a high pass filter is an integrator etc. One of the first programs I wrote on getting a home computer in 1978/9 was an analogue computer simulator, and (after much refinement and several home computers later) one of the main uses I put that to was sound synthesis and manipulation. This is not a new science, even while Babbage's Analytical Engine was only a concept Ada Lovelace saw the obvious potential in computers and music:
Quote Supposing for instance that the fundamental relations of pitched sounds in the science of harmony and of musical composition were susceptible of such expression and adaptations the engine might compose elaborate and scientific pieces of music of any degree of complexity or extent
~ Ada Lovelace ~ 1843
Probably completely unrealisable using the Analytical Engine, but it would have made for a wonderful steam-punk image of Wendy Carlos at the controls of Babbage's machine, or Keith Emerson risking life and limb thrusting knives into its brass and steel gears.
 
But there goes the wonder and marvel of it all - that sound bursts forth from a cone of paper and wire suspended in a magnetic field is astonishing enough if we can be bothered to stop and consider what it is we are actually listening to.
What?
Back to Top
Snow Dog View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: March 23 2005
Location: Caerdydd
Status: Offline
Points: 32995 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 13 2012 at 15:58
oh God...
Back to Top
Roxbrough View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 02 2012
Location: Yorkshire
Status: Offline
Points: 100 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 13 2012 at 15:56
Hear hear.
You will never convince the 'kids' though, they would not recognise music even if they 'heard' it. Most of them do not. They think listening to the compressed mid rubbish on you tube is listening to music !!!!
Live Long and Prosper
Back to Top
Gerinski View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: February 10 2010
Location: Barcelona Spain
Status: Offline
Points: 5154 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 13 2012 at 13:44
Nitpicky as usual Wink
In the context of the discussion it seemed clear that the defendants of analog sound referred to modern digital computer technology and that they would not have regarded analog synths (perhaps not even analog computers in general) as "computers" in this discussion.
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 13 2012 at 12:25
Originally posted by Gerinski Gerinski wrote:

Originally posted by verslibre verslibre wrote:

I know what Surrealist is getting at, but I love synthesizers, and synths are computers
Analog synths were not
Erm... well, as artificial constructs for processing mathematical functions they qualify as analogue computing machines - a lot of the techology present in an analogue synthesiser is also found in an analogue computer:
 
 
 
What?
Back to Top
Gerinski View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: February 10 2010
Location: Barcelona Spain
Status: Offline
Points: 5154 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 13 2012 at 12:15
Originally posted by verslibre verslibre wrote:

I know what Surrealist is getting at, but I love synthesizers, and synths are computers
Analog synths were not
Back to Top
verslibre View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 01 2004
Location: CA
Status: Offline
Points: 17136 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 13 2012 at 11:54
I know what Surrealist is getting at, but I love synthesizers, and synths are computers, and if I could buy a synth that also sent emails, I'd be set. LOL
eBay
Back to Top
progbethyname View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 30 2012
Location: HiFi Headmania
Status: Offline
Points: 7849 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 13 2012 at 11:47
Originally posted by Aquiring the Taste Aquiring the Taste wrote:


Originally posted by Surrealist Surrealist wrote:

Computers are good for sending emails, chatrooms, commercial art, reading the news, crunching scientific equations and a couple other things.. Keep them out of our cars, stereo systems and recording studios.  The computer is a very over rated concept.  The best albums were done without computers.  Tape machines record sound much better even to this day.  If an artist can't get the track they should practice harder, not rely upon a computer program to fix it with quantization or pitch shifters. 
Especially the recording studios!


I guess we are ruling out great scientific efficiency set forth by human beings in general. Geez. Too far guys.
As for the recording studio, computers are wonderful tools to weed out a lot of trail and error, so your hero's of today can put together quality albums without the burden of more stress that is already in effect during the recording process.

You guys should be kissing computers asses right now. What? You think STEVENWILSON doesn't use computers heavily on order to churn out wonderful remastered editions of all your favourites from TULL, CRIMSON and ELP.

Agh wait a sec? That's digital. You guys as vinyl heads. Ah screw it. Have fun in your Amish paradise.   
Gimmie my headphones now!!! 🎧🤣
Back to Top
Aquiring the Taste View Drop Down
Forum Groupie
Forum Groupie
Avatar

Joined: October 23 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 68 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 13 2012 at 04:02
Originally posted by Surrealist Surrealist wrote:

Computers are good for sending emails, chatrooms, commercial art, reading the news, crunching scientific equations and a couple other things.. Keep them out of our cars, stereo systems and recording studios.  The computer is a very over rated concept. 

The best albums were done without computers.  Tape machines record sound much better even to this day.  If an artist can't get the track they should practice harder, not rely upon a computer program to fix it with quantization or pitch shifters. 



Especially the recording studios!
Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation.
    Oscar Wilde, De Profundis, 1905
Back to Top
awaken77 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: December 25 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 374 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 10 2012 at 02:38
most music is digital nowadays - doesn't matter was it recorded in analog in the first place.
we listen it with car audio systems, mobile phones, TV , smartphones, notebooks, whatever - its all digital devices

production of vinyl LPs still exists, but they are mostly collector's items

p.s. and it's all has nothing to do with prog
I believe that many modern prog bands don't exist in LP format at all, because they started to record music in digital era, on digital recording studios and equipment




Edited by awaken77 - December 10 2012 at 02:39
Back to Top
Neelus View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 19 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 346 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 10 2012 at 02:32
^ You don't have naked ladies in the top of your list???  What is happening to the world???
Back to Top
Surrealist View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 12 2012
Location: Squonk
Status: Offline
Points: 232 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 10 2012 at 01:35
Computers are good for sending emails, chatrooms, commercial art, reading the news, crunching scientific equations and a couple other things.. Keep them out of our cars, stereo systems and recording studios.  The computer is a very over rated concept. 

The best albums were done without computers.  Tape machines record sound much better even to this day.  If an artist can't get the track they should practice harder, not rely upon a computer program to fix it with quantization or pitch shifters. 


Back to Top
Neelus View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 19 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 346 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 09 2012 at 13:43
There is a trade off.  Recording live gives you the experience of the band members feeding off each others' emotions during the song that could be magical "under the right conditions".  Recording individually gives you more control, but the musicians dont feel each other quite the same during it.
It depends what works for a particular group I guess, but it will give different results either way. 
A good example of an album with live recording under the right conditions is OK Computer by Radiohead.  And that is considered by many music folks as the best ever.  It can be done.
Back to Top
moshkito View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 17511 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 09 2012 at 10:43
Originally posted by Anaon Anaon wrote:

 Well, as a home studio owner myself, I know what you mean. I can't really give you any real examples as you guess, I'd love to know how modern bands work today in recording studio. It's interesting to see that Steven Wilson records live in the studio his upcoming album, it's a new approach for him it seems and will certainly adds something to the overall sound. 
 
I always thought that PT, had a "live" sound to them, and you could see it very well in their DVD's ... which I don't think is new, or something that Steven was not familiar with ... at issue, would be the more difficult things to do on stage that you devised elsewhere ... and this is not big deal ... all the bands go through this ... the usual concern ... am I a different band live than what I am on the record. For the record, the most obvious part of it all ??? ... PT and Steven STARTED on a garage with cassette tapes ... so saying they are going to this new approach ... is nothing short of bizarre! He knows ... better than anyone else ... what that means!
 
I don't think that it will "add" to the sound ... but it might take away the subtleties a lot more, because you know that it will be rehearsed with the idea of getting it down in one shot ... and this is one of the worse things in music when it comes to the abilities of a band ... bring it down ... instead of getting better.
 
It might be different in spots ... I do not remember Pink Floyd having any issues with that "playing live" idea, and it is not knew, and their bootlegs show it ... a bit different here and there, and it might be what Roger once said, that it was how they cleaned up some stuff! But 15 to 20 different versions of Echoes, suggests something else ... they were bored in parts with the same thing! Or Atom Heart Mother, for that matter. When it got to DSOTM and TW, it was all so industrial and mechanically controlled, that they could not getaway from it ... and that took away the freedom they had before!
 
And, btw, there is a nice interview with Edgar Froese, where he really says it all about the digital/analog thing ... and if you ever want to hear a master at work, check out their Phaedra anniversary concert in London for an example of what digital can do to analog ... and it has nothing to do with the "analog sound" in prog ... it was the instrument that existed in those days ... !!! We don't go around saying silly things about the "sound" of the baroque era, with that absolutely horrible harpsichord, and how chimsy, bad and childish it sounds!
 
We have to get past that "idea" that analog is what made that music live ... WRONG ... it was the folks that created the music that made it LIVE ... to the point where we still notice it! The best artists in the history of the arts DO THAT! And an instrument (or sound) is not enough to make a difference in the history of the arts!
 
We have to get past that analog/digital bs ... it has a tendency to say that there was no person behind that instrument, and you know that's wrong! These same folks would have stoof out if they had lived 100 years ago, instead of 50!


Edited by moshkito - December 09 2012 at 10:45
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com
Back to Top
Anaon View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 01 2005
Location: Kobaļa
Status: Offline
Points: 849 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 09 2012 at 08:58
Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

[I'm fairly confident that was not the case that most prog albums were recorded live with a few overdubs, from archive footage of bands in the studio, and all those retrospective Classic Albums documentaries on Sky Arts, it is evident that each instrument track was recorded individually.

Any references of archive footage, Classic Albums you are mentionning?

Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

Stick noise, fret/string noise and breath/breathing noise are merely a matter of studio preference and technique
I'm not talking about just noises but more about what would be considered as a mistake like two drum sticks that touch themselves (sorry I don't know how explain it in english). You can hear some on Kim Crimson's Red for example.

Quote having analogue recording gear will not guarantee a natural sound.

I totally agree, I meant that most of the time in this digital/analog debate, analog seems to be more a combination of musicians playing live, instruments and arrangements more than anything else.

My opinion is it's not a matter of technology anyway, so I'm probably not in the good thread LOL


Edited by Anaon - December 09 2012 at 09:01
My music: http://spleenarcana.bandcamp.com/
My blog: http://groovesandmemories.com/
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 09 2012 at 08:42
Originally posted by Anaon Anaon wrote:

I thought they recorded every tracks like that, so maybe it's just "Luminol" as they already played it live... ?

Quote few Prog albums were ever recorded like that even in the heyday.

I think most of them were recorded live actually with added overdubs here and there. Or at least, the main instruments were recorded "on the fly", and they kept the best take even if it was not perfect. It's really a detail but for example, it's really rare to hear drum stick noises on recording today. It happens quite often on classic albums but they would never record the take again at that time if it was the good take and I love that!
I'm fairly confident that was not the case that most prog albums were recorded live with a few overdubs, from archive footage of bands in the studio, and all those retrospective Classic Albums documentaries on Sky Arts, it is evident that each instrument track was recorded individually. Stick noise, fret/string noise and breath/breathing noise are merely a matter of studio preference and technique, it is not an indication of how the track was recorded - modern recordings can have all those extraneous noises and some of them do, when miking-up an acoustic guitar I make a point of putting a mic near the fingerboard (12th fret works nicely) specifically to capture some of that.
Originally posted by Anaon Anaon wrote:


Anyway, it's just to say that in my opinion, analog sound is more about a natural sound played live by musicians in a room (together or not).
Then that is an opinion I do not share. I don't think that is what an analog sound is at all. I think the two things are seperate - a natural sound is a natural sound and musicians playing live in a room is the sound of musicians playing live in a room. The recording technology and medium is not the definining characteristic of that sound nor should it be - the art of capturing a natural sounding recording is understanding the instrument you are trying to record, this cannot be bolted-on after the event by technology, whether that is analogue or digital - having analogue recording gear will not guarantee a natural sound.
What?
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 910111213 38>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.227 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.