Gearslutz

Gearslutz (https://www.gearslutz.com/board/)
-   Q+A with Alphajerk (https://www.gearslutz.com/board/q-a-with-alphajerk/)
-   -   sonics or soul (https://www.gearslutz.com/board/q-a-with-alphajerk/668-sonics-soul.html)

alphajerk 1st September 2002 06:27 AM

sonics or soul
 
if you could only pick one, which would you take.

Drumsound 1st September 2002 07:48 AM

I have always gone with "the take" even if ther was s sound problem. rollz

Steve Smith 1st September 2002 02:29 PM

Soul.. everytime.

mwagener 1st September 2002 02:47 PM

big fat soul for me kfhkh

Brad Blackwood 1st September 2002 04:05 PM

I know, I know... I'm a mastering engineer...

Soul.

jon 1st September 2002 10:34 PM

Duh. Soul.

There's no gear with a 'soul' dial on it.

alphajerk 1st September 2002 10:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by jon
Duh. Soul.

There's no gear with a 'soul' dial on it.

i hear a plugin is due out next quarter.

Ol' Betsey 1st September 2002 11:01 PM

Didn't Jeremiah almost use a little too much of the "soul" knob? Sorry, that was the "soar" knob!

e-cue 2nd September 2002 12:14 AM

I think Funk Logic might have a "Soul" unit.

Kendrix 2nd September 2002 01:41 AM

soul but...
 
Is this some kind of trick question? Seems too easy.
Sound without soul is of no use.
Soul is " on top".
However the sound has got to meet minimum thresholds.

C.Lambrechts 2nd September 2002 06:03 AM

Soul of course ......



here is another question though :


you have 2 great takes (guitar solo for example) with lots of soul in them .... say you would edit them anyhow because you like the first part of take one and take 2 has this incredible ending .... the result .... a beautifull musical edited guitar solo .... NO ONE can tell that is is put together from 2 different takes ....



Is that still soul or not in your books ????

alphajerk 2nd September 2002 07:43 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by posterchild
-- is this a trick question or something? Would anyone really admit they'd take a sonically pristine performance over a soulful one?
you'd have to ask steely dan on that one.

davemc 2nd September 2002 08:17 AM

You only buy gear so when a band does come in with soul you have your end covered to capture it big and large like it is.jkthtyrt

Jules 2nd September 2002 12:49 PM

Soul Blindness
 
The soul of the recordist needs to be in good condition as well. That includes a stress free studio one devoid of extreme cashflow wories or overwelming gear lust!

Simple, carefully picked recording gear and a great vibe are all you need to capture soul IMHO.

Once a recording is agreed to be embarked on, looking over your shoulder at a studio with better gear is not advantageous to you or your client.

Discussion on better gear becomes an instant dead issue once a project has begun because rarely will a session be halted and shifted to another studio purely because of better gear.

Examples of Soul Blindness

"It would be good to redo that 'properly' in a big studio"
"I would have got in all session musicians to do the bands parts"
"I would have retracked the song" (for a minor technical problem)

I had a friend who's mantra used to be "it would be good to do it 'properly' " (that always meant - redo stuff in a giant studio) He's kind of retired that expression now thank god.. It used to really chap my *ss. It was a prime example of Soul Blindness.

jkthtyrt

Jay Kahrs 2nd September 2002 10:36 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by C.Lambrechts

you have 2 great takes (guitar solo for example) with lots of soul in them .... say you would edit them anyhow because you like the first part of take one and take 2 has this incredible ending .... the result .... a beautifull musical edited guitar solo .... NO ONE can tell that is is put together from 2 different takes ....

Is that still soul or not in your books ????

In my book that would be soul. It's only two takes right? If was 15 takes or pieced together note by note then it's not soul, it's Steely Dan. grggt

chessparov 2nd September 2002 10:54 PM

Guess that leaves out Autotune!
Although they're coming out with the new AutoSOUL.
Command functions include "solid", "funky", and of course
"superbad".

Chris

Kendrix 5th September 2002 07:06 PM

Definition of soul?
 
OK alpha,

i understand where you are coming from wrt the S. Dan stuff. Some of it , despite absolutely pristene work by Mr. Nichols is a bit laid back - but this is a style thing. But no soul? hmmm

I beleive that some of their stuff has got allot of soul.
My gold teeth II
Rose darling
Dr. Wu
Black cow
Deacon Blues
Third world man
.....

I suppose I could go on for a bit.

You do seem really irritated by it though.

I think their lyrics , and arrangelments are generally super. yeah the laid back style is sometimes a drawback - but on balance I cant dislike that stuff at all.

This partly results form the fact that Fagen was never intending to be a singer- they just could not get any of their quirky songs coverd by other artists and did it themselves as a fallback.
I do think a more emotive singer would add something.

Care to better explain your feelings ?

What's the definition of soul??????

BrianT 6th September 2002 01:36 AM

My goal is never to put myself, or anyone else for that matter, in the position of having to choose one or the other.

It's my chosen craft to have my stuff sufficiently together that any time soul emerges, it's ushered onto the tape (or HD) happy and healthy.

I utterly hate knowing some musical magic just happened and that I was less than stellar at properly capturing it. So I try to avoid that like the plague.

Hey, the entire point of our job is to have both the cake and the eating, too.


Regards,
Brian T

alphajerk 6th September 2002 06:05 AM

well, i meant more as a listener rather than being responsible for it. i HOPE we are all after being "ready" with sonics when they are "ready" with soul.

listening to albums.

BrianT 6th September 2002 07:31 AM

Ahhhhhh.....as a guy listening to music. I see.

Well, doh! Soul.

I once had the one and only original 1" 8 track of Marvin Gaye "I Heard It Through The Grapevine" in my possession. Long story, but Berry Gordy wanted me to do a remix on it back in about '89.

I was juiced. One of the great records of all time, right here in my grubby little hands getting xfered over to my hotrodded MCI 24 track. I locked up my sequencer to the 2" tape copy, made a nailed tempo map since I didn't want to fly this cool music into a stiff, machine timing groove, and started carving on some newer sounding parts. Back then, I played most of my own stuff.

Anyway, about 3 hours later I was feeling pretty good about things, so I decided to get a reality check and A/B all my cool new sounds and vibes against the original.

I did that through the first half of the first chorus, then stopped the tape. I picked up the phone and called Berry G (aka The Chairman).

And I said, quote , "I'm sorry, but I will NOT be the white man that ruins this record. All I'll ever do is make it worse"

Bad move for biz, good move for the heart. Got to have some soul.


Regards
Brian T

e-cue 6th September 2002 08:05 AM

1 vote for sonics?! BLASPHEMY!!!

hjghfgg

BrianT 6th September 2002 08:31 AM

OMG, I just had a thought.

I wonder if I still have that 2" tape of "Grapevine'' laying around in a case or box somewhere? I've got about a hundred rolls of 2" from who knows where.

Wow. A search and rescue job for my assistant. Or did I give the 2" xfer back like a good boy? Man, I cannot remember.


Regards,
Brian T

Bob Olhsson 8th September 2002 05:35 PM

The released mix of Marvin's Grapevine was done by Cal Harris. We held the release up for MONTHS trying to make a better, less muddy mix and couldn't touch the feeling of that one. Cal and everybody else had attempted and failed to pull it off.

invisibl 27th September 2002 02:40 AM

you can clean up sound but you cant do the same for soul

lflier 27th September 2002 03:57 AM

Well of course I'd keep a soulful performance even if it had some sonic issues... but on the other hand, I think sound IS soul in a lot of cases... that is, good sonics give more opportunity for a great performance to have the maximum impact possible. I've definitely heard bad sound ruin some great performances too.

I suppose it depends in what way the sound sucks. We've all heard great performances that were done on Portastudios or whatever, but the idea there is that it's raw and lofi and crappy, which can be soulful in its own right. Whereas a lot of engineers and producers and gear these days, without mentioning any names, seem to be out to take soul AWAY from performances - and still sound ****ty to boot. hjghfgg

THEMIXFIX 28th September 2002 02:10 PM

SOUL!! kfhkh

BUT, you are allowed a FEW punches to make it happen!!wworried

Like Lou Grant told Mary Richards on the "Mary Tyler Moore Show" in the 1970s.

"You can be with a FEW guys, then you're a SLUT (or some similar 1970's acceptable word)".

How many is THAT?", she answered.

"Six", he repiled.

So, you can punch, let's say up to SIX times on a track before it loses SOUL!! grggt mezed dfegad hidz abduction

TinderArts 28th September 2002 07:56 PM

Soul - big time

There are plently of extremely well recorded albums that leave me cold. The perfection saps every bit of emotion out of them and make me feel like wearing some clean room white coat just to listen to it. Not what music means to me.

I'll gladly take some sonic warts in exchange for a product that moves me.

Fibes 30th September 2002 05:43 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by THEMIXFIX
SOUL!! kfhkh

BUT, you are allowed a FEW punches to make it happen!!wworried

I agree. If the artist isn't reaching out there to the edge, it ain't happening... You gotta screw the pooch a few times to get the beer that tastes like pussy.

alphajerk 30th September 2002 06:02 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Fibes
You gotta screw the pooch a few times to get the beer that tastes like pussy.
or just **** the pussy and forget about the pooch.

Fibes 30th September 2002 10:06 PM

I'm getting bored being your straight man;) TGTMO

dfegad hittt grudge hittt

The Superhorse show rocked, y'all missed it.