The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
It's about 3 things, performance, microphone and preamp.. Change my mind.
Old 22nd September 2019
  #151
Nooooo, it is not.
I've been in the industry since 1980.
Less than 10% of musicians and artists are truly visionary/unique. Many of that 10% also learned their craft by copying others.
It's absolutely ZERO about commercial success, it's about understanding norms to the extent that you actually get to play with other musicians, rather than sitting at home working on your own everyday.

I remember once on a session, the house engineer mic'ed my drums. The usual thing, 57 on snare, 421's on toms, U87 overheads etc...
The producer turned up a little late, and whether it was a case of just trying to be unique (for no good reason), or whether he was annoyed the engineer had mic'ed the kit without his say so?....but he insisted on changing every mic, and to mics I had not seen often used around my drums.
Long story short - the resultant drum sound was weird, and at the end of the day the final album flopped.
I have worked with other people who have weird ideas. they have them for a reason, and they understand what they are doing. If the project isn't commercially successful that's fine, at least it is a creative success - but those instances are very rare. I mean instances where people are acting left field for a genuine reason, rather than just attempting to be 'different'.
Old 22nd September 2019
  #152
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samc View Post
but what you describe is really about going after commercial success.
Well it's pointless me making dance music that no one wants to dance to.
There's really no money in it anyway. It's like I say - do you want to fit the norms enough to actually achieve something, or do you just want to break every rule and spend a life alone?
Miles Davis, John Bonham, Brian Wilson - they all worked outside the accepted norm. BUT they are few and far between in every generation, and those three artists worked within the rules to begin with, nailed the rules, then understood how to successfully break the rules.
Old 22nd September 2019
  #153
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
Neither?
I think most often it is a necessary 'evil'.
So an artist just wants to break out of the chains of traditional recording - studio time, recording engineers, budgets, record labels, A&R etc....
In my experience, 90% of DIY produced and recorded artists are doing it because it affords them the ultimate freedom to express themselves without other elements (as stated above) getting in the way.
Most artists know creative success is more about the material and the performance, so they prioritise that over trying to be the next Bob Clearmountain or Arif Mardin. There is no shame in releasing a slightly badly engineered/produced record, as long as the material is top notch and the performances resonate with the listener.
Artists KNOW THAT.
You shouldn’t confuse creative success with commercial success, they are not mutually exclusive and sometimes they are not even compatible. Creative success does not depend on commercial success, and I think the idea that most artists know what will be successful is wishful thinking....if they did they would all be turning out hit records daily. Often times success comes because of things that happen outside the studio.
Old 22nd September 2019
  #154
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
Well it's pointless me making dance music that no one wants to dance to.
There's really no money in it anyway. It's like I say - do you want to fit the norms enough to actually achieve something, or do you just want to break every rule and spend a life alone?
Miles Davis, John Bonham, Brian Wilson - they all worked outside the accepted norm. BUT they are few and far between in every generation, and those three artists worked within the rules to begin with, nailed the rules, then understood how to successfully break the rules.
It’s the premise that we have to follow “the norms” to find success that I have a problem with...obviously nothing is done in a vacuum, but where does this follow the norm process start and end? At what point do you get the courage to just do what you want to do, and who decided that not following the norm meant sure failure? What norm were the original rappers and dance music creators following when they created these genres?
Old 22nd September 2019
  #155
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
Nooooo, it is not.
I've been in the industry since 1980.
Less than 10% of musicians and artists are truly visionary/unique. Many of that 10% also learned their craft by copying others.
It's absolutely ZERO about commercial success, it's about understanding norms to the extent that you actually get to play with other musicians, rather than sitting at home working on your own everyday.
Come on Chris, there is a huge difference between knowing and understanding norms and doing what everybody else is doing for fear of not fitting in, or the fear of not being in with everyone else.

Every reason you have given is based on the fear of being on the outside, while trying to be on the inside is no guarantee that you will be...on the inside.
Old 22nd September 2019
  #156
I have NEVER mentioned 'commercial success'....you did.
I am solely talking about following norms JUST so you can fit in enough to work with other people.
I think it's very creatively rewarding and enriching to work in ensembles. Genres tend to have rules or norms. One or two people in a million can ignore those norms and still effectively work with other people.
Too much focus in the amateur or beginner arena is around being different, not copying others. In fact, ALL successful* musicians copy others.
*Successful as in they play or make music as their main life routine. That's what people aim to do isn't it? Play most weeks, for years. Not sitting alone at home working in a completely unique way that doesn't mesh with anyone else?

Any way....odd that you keep posting about 'commercial success' then seek to lecture me about it. I am ABSOLUTELY NOT talking about 'commercial success'.... you are.
Old 22nd September 2019
  #157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samc View Post
Every reason you have given is based on the fear of being on the outside, while trying to be on the inside is no guarantee that you will be...on the inside.
No, not at all.
It's about mastering the genre. It takes years.
The Beatles spent years playing cover songs. And even when they were 'out there' innovating, their constant touchstones were Buddy Holly and Elvis. They just couldn't help themselves but do it differently.
Take Miles Davis. He played thousands of club gigs, playing standards and soloing like many other people. Gradually he needed to break out and innovate.
The important part was the years and years both The Beatles and Miles Davis played in front of people, in an ensemble setting.
It's not about 'fear', it's about understanding that almost no one is an innovator from day one. Most people need to conform at the beginning, then they understand why they need to innovate, and what that innovation needs to be.
Old 22nd September 2019
  #158
Gear Guru
 
Brent Hahn's Avatar
 

At first I thought, hm, might be interesting to watch these two bang heads.
Old 22nd September 2019
  #159
Then I remembered why I wasn't posting at Gearslutz any more.
Old 22nd September 2019
  #160
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent Hahn View Post
At first I thought, hm, might be interesting to watch these two bang heads.
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
Then I remembered why I wasn't posting at Gearslutz any more.
Seriously...?
Old 22nd September 2019
  #161
Gear Guru
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Funny Cat View Post
You are an experienced engineer. Haven’t you ever had a session where you place the mics and the client moves them or the stands droop and you don’t catch it until after the session, yet the recording sounds phenomenal (because the players performance and the song were spectacular) despite the less than perfect placement?
yes, I am an engineer. Which means my job is to put the microphones in the right place. I have had the experience where they "drooped" down enough to change the sound but not so far as to fail to pick up the musician. If they drooped past this magical point, somebody's 'spectacular' performance would not get recorded at all.

It would be ruined.

I don't get this. Should I never bother correctly placing mics again because if the performance is spectacular enough it will always 'make up for it'? Or are you suggesting Murphy's Law kicks in and they play better because the mic drooped?

Quote:
You then realize, “that couldn’t have been better no matter how hard I tried.”
Of course it could have been better! I could have tightened up the stand and then gotten great sound and the inspired performance. Or are you endorsing the Good Song Fallacy? Are you literally saying the great gear and an inspired performance are mutually exclusive?

That would be the most "extreme" position of them all.

Quote:
all you need is “basic” “average” engineering skills to capture an idea when the performance and songs are great.
that may be all you need, but some of us have clients who expect better than "average". And why not? Are you implying that better than average engineering skill "scares away" the Great Performances? And as the person who often has to mix these songs, I can tell you a mix comes together faster when the mics have not "drooped".

Quote:
Life just doesn’t work that way.
here is one way in which life "just does not work" for me: Putting in a half-assed effort on my contribution to the project because I know that a "great performance will shine through" the bad recording. And of course a mediocre performance is not worth recording at all, right?

"Get out of my studio, you posers."

If a self-recording musician wants to take this attitude, fine - it's his music. In my case, it is someone else's music. What arrogance it would be for me to say which music deserves care and which music does not.

Truly inspired performances are like lightning. The engineer's job is to always be ready when the lightning strikes. If you are your own engineer, you can brush this off if you like, but then you have to admit you have a mediocre engineer who doesn't care very much about his "job".
Old 22nd September 2019
  #162
One of the reasons I don't post as much as I once did is that I've taken to putting hastily written forum comments 'on hold' for indefinite periods (while I think about the issues, do more research, or simply cool down ). I save them in a text file and leave them on my desktop, occasionally sweeping unfinished posts into a folder (that I'll probably seldom if ever look at again). Anyhow, yesterday, I was pondering a number of posts in this thread and started writing this... today I dug it back out...


Good engineering is a thing unto itself. It's hard to get right and it's hard to keep getting it right going forward as styles and clients change. It IS what binds most of our interests together here.

But, as important as it is, as cherished as those skills are, I always come back around to the fact that a lot of the music I really love is less than ideal in some/many sonic aspects. That doesn't mean we should not strive for better sound, better realization of the artists vision -- at all.

But it's just a fact of life (at least for me) that I've heard a whole lot of 'flawless' studio recordings that, though I marveled at the technical skill, I had no desire to hear a second time; yet other songs I will listen to through scratchy acoustic era recordings (1920s), bad mastering, bad pressing, bad tape machines (yes even wow and flutter), off-center vinyl pressings, even the modern sins of bad / inept mastering or crappy data-compression... because the music moves me.

Loving care and masterful technical skill often greatly enhances the sonic impact of a great record -- but, in my experience, it can't save mediocre content.
Old 22nd September 2019
  #163
Gear Maniac
 

Here's my unpopular take:

The room doesn't matter as much as you think. I've spent the last 8 or so years recording bands in just about any environment you can think of. Abandoned warehouse, tiny apartments, my own bedroom, basements, studios, the shed out back (not really, but you get my point)....

If the players are comfortable, the performances are good... it's all good. I think gear matters, but as others have said, you could record an amazing band with 57s and a presonus or something, and you'll be fine.
Old 22nd September 2019
  #164
Gear Guru
 
Drumsound's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samc View Post
Come on Chris, there is a huge difference between knowing and understanding norms and doing what everybody else is doing for fear of not fitting in, or the fear of not being in with everyone else.

Every reason you have given is based on the fear of being on the outside, while trying to be on the inside is no guarantee that you will be...on the inside.
Do you come here just to be a contrarian?

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
No, not at all.
It's about mastering the genre. It takes years.
The Beatles spent years playing cover songs. And even when they were 'out there' innovating, their constant touchstones were Buddy Holly and Elvis. They just couldn't help themselves but do it differently.
Take Miles Davis. He played thousands of club gigs, playing standards and soloing like many other people. Gradually he needed to break out and innovate.
The important part was the years and years both The Beatles and Miles Davis played in front of people, in an ensemble setting.
It's not about 'fear', it's about understanding that almost no one is an innovator from day one. Most people need to conform at the beginning, then they understand why they need to innovate, and what that innovation needs to be.
This is a great post. I'm so sick of people who think that starting with solid foundational skills, learning the correct way of doing things, is a bad idea.

I just rewatched Sound City. There's a great section with Trent Reznor where he talks about piano lessons, and how he doesn't not conscientiously think, This chord leads to that, but that, because of his training, it is there. He's proud of the years of study. He sees the value of knowledge of classical music, and theory, to allow him to stretch.
Old 22nd September 2019
  #165
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drumsound View Post
Do you come here just to be a contrarian?

This is a great post. I'm so sick of people who think that starting with solid foundational skills, learning the correct way of doing things, is a bad idea.
I think you REALLY misunderstood what was being discussed...I can assure you, it had nothing to do with learning "solid foundational skills".
Old 22nd September 2019
  #166
Gear Guru
 
Drumsound's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samc View Post
I think you REALLY misunderstood what was being discussed...I can assure you, it had nothing to do with learning "solid foundational skills".
Chris didn't use the phrase, but that's EXACTLY what he was referring to.
Old 22nd September 2019
  #167
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drumsound View Post
This is a great post. I'm so sick of people who think that starting with solid foundational skills, learning the correct way of doing things, is a bad idea.

I just rewatched Sound City. There's a great section with Trent Reznor where he talks about piano lessons, and how he doesn't not conscientiously think, This chord leads to that, but that, because of his training, it is there. He's proud of the years of study. He sees the value of knowledge of classical music, and theory, to allow him to stretch.
Back this 100%. I went to music school with a big chip on my shoulder. "I'm f***in' metal man, I don't need to know how to read music. Jazz? Classical!? GTFOutta here."

I couldn't possibly be more grateful for my guitar teacher setting me straight on that and pushing me HARD to better my chops through constant practice of standards, Bach's inventions, violin concertos, chord melodies, etc. I also felt the same about the 4 semesters of ear training and solfege singing and rudimentary piano I had to do. It's been completely invaluable. I play with musicians that were right there beside me. We all speak the same language. It makes every song better. I can't sell short how much it plays into my engineering too.

In line with Reznor's insight, I remember calling my brother (at the time, an intensely dedicated jazz pianist), basically on the verge of smashing my guitar and he said "you learn this stuff, then you 'forget' it, but it never really leaves your subconscious." Boy was he right. I value those parts of my education far more than the recording classes I took.
Old 22nd September 2019
  #168
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by DomiBabi View Post
7. Following The advice you got at Guitar Center.
This!
Old 22nd September 2019
  #169
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brent Hahn View Post
I wonder how often these no-fi records are the result of deliberately trying to make a no-fi record, versus making a throwaway work tape that somehow manages to not entirely suck?
Lo-fi is a movement of sorts, so I think that a lot of that sound is done intentionally. Some, I'm sure, is definitely a result of people just using what they have on hand though.

If you're interested, check out this podcast:

https://starburns.audio/podcasts/emi...ters-sympathy/

Specifically the episodes "The Dawn of Home Recording" and "The Renaissance of Home Recording". Emil is an insightful dude, and a good example, under his performing name Holy Sons, of someone who bridges the gap between lo-fi and more "professional" sounding recordings.
Old 22nd September 2019
  #170
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drumsound View Post
Chris didn't use the phrase, but that's EXACTLY what he was referring to.
And you know this how?!? Because, not once during our exchanges was that ever apparent to me...

This is where it started:
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
I get my tracks mastered so they don't sound odd next to other similar genre tracks. I leave it up to the mastering engineer to a certain degree, but I suspect my tracks are mastered very loud and punchy, because that's what is the norm in my genre. It really has very little to do with other music I listen to.
I'm wasting my time writing and recording the music for weeks beforehand, if the mastering then sounds weak or just odd next to other people's releases in the genre.
Old 22nd September 2019
  #171
Gear Guru
 
Drumsound's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maggot Brain View Post
Back this 100%. I went to music school with a big chip on my shoulder. "I'm f***in' metal man, I don't need to know how to read music. Jazz? Classical!? GTFOutta here."

I couldn't possibly be more grateful for my guitar teacher setting me straight on that and pushing me HARD to better my chops through constant practice of standards, Bach's inventions, violin concertos, chord melodies, etc. I also felt the same about the 4 semesters of ear training and solfege singing and rudimentary piano I had to do. It's been completely invaluable. I play with musicians that were right there beside me. We all speak the same language. It makes every song better. I can't sell short how much it plays into my engineering too.

In line with Reznor's insight, I remember calling my brother (at the time, an intensely dedicated jazz pianist), basically on the verge of smashing my guitar and he said "you learn this stuff, then you 'forget' it, but it never really leaves your subconscious." Boy was he right. I value those parts of my education far more than the recording classes I took.
I had very similar experience, in that I never really planned to be a professional orchestra or jazz player, but learning those things added so much to my musicality. It still does, and out of music school for 27 years.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samc View Post
And you know this how?!? Because, not once during our exchanges was that ever apparent to me...

This is where it started:
Because he wrote this to clarify:
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
No, not at all.
It's about mastering the genre. It takes years.
The Beatles spent years playing cover songs. And even when they were 'out there' innovating, their constant touchstones were Buddy Holly and Elvis. They just couldn't help themselves but do it differently.
Take Miles Davis. He played thousands of club gigs, playing standards and soloing like many other people. Gradually he needed to break out and innovate.
The important part was the years and years both The Beatles and Miles Davis played in front of people, in an ensemble setting.
It's not about 'fear', it's about understanding that almost no one is an innovator from day one. Most people need to conform at the beginning, then they understand why they need to innovate, and what that innovation needs to be.
Old 22nd September 2019
  #172
Lives for gear
 
Funny Cat's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by joeq View Post
yes, I am an engineer. Which means my job is to put the microphones in the right place. I have had the experience where they "drooped" down enough to change the sound but not so far as to fail to pick up the musician. If they drooped past this magical point, somebody's 'spectacular' performance would not get recorded at all.

It would be ruined.

I don't get this. Should I never bother correctly placing mics again because if the performance is spectacular enough it will always 'make up for it'? Or are you suggesting Murphy's Law kicks in and they play better because the mic drooped?



Of course it could have been better! I could have tightened up the stand and then gotten great sound and the inspired performance. Or are you endorsing the Good Song Fallacy? Are you literally saying the great gear and an inspired performance are mutually exclusive?

That would be the most "extreme" position of them all.


that may be all you need, but some of us have clients who expect better than "average". And why not? Are you implying that better than average engineering skill "scares away" the Great Performances? And as the person who often has to mix these songs, I can tell you a mix comes together faster when the mics have not "drooped".


here is one way in which life "just does not work" for me: Putting in a half-assed effort on my contribution to the project because I know that a "great performance will shine through" the bad recording. And of course a mediocre performance is not worth recording at all, right?

"Get out of my studio, you posers."

If a self-recording musician wants to take this attitude, fine - it's his music. In my case, it is someone else's music. What arrogance it would be for me to say which music deserves care and which music does not.

Truly inspired performances are like lightning. The engineer's job is to always be ready when the lightning strikes. If you are your own engineer, you can brush this off if you like, but then you have to admit you have a mediocre engineer who doesn't care very much about his "job".


Hmmm, I don't think I ever said nor insinuated any of what you posted above. I certainly did not say anything about letting a mic droop to the point where you "fail to pick up the musician". I absolutely did not insinuate that one should "never bother correctly placing mics" and I 100% for sure did not say any engineer should be "Putting in a half-assed effort" as a result of a great performance.

I used the example of mic droop or a musician adjusting your mic placement because I know that is something every experienced engineer out in the field has experienced starting from Al Schmidtt to Joe-Schmoe engineer.

I think there are two approaches to engineering. One is the First do no harm = Keep it simple approach. This tends to work to great result with more talented and experienced artists and bands e.g. I can put 3-4 mics on a drummer who has good internal balance and control instead of 10-12 mics.

Then there is the This artist needs a little help approach. One example of that would be patching in a compressor for a vocalist who doesn't have dynamic control and belts into your mics on the loud passages overloading the capsule.

Another example would be a drummer who hits the snare in ten different spots during one bar. You might need to patch in a compressor AND lay samples underneath to get a consistent tone. In this case you've done 3 steps instead of the 1 simple step (just placing the mic correctly) for a really good drummer.

Anyway, these are just philosophies I've learned over the years for recording which no one is obliged to follow of course. Perhaps I shouldn't provide real world examples for fear they might be taken to the extreme and misconstrued?
Old 22nd September 2019
  #173
Lives for gear
 


Chris
Old 23rd September 2019
  #174
Quote:
Originally Posted by theblue1 View Post
One of the reasons I don't post as much as I once did is that I've taken to putting hastily written forum comments 'on hold' for indefinite periods (while I think about the issues, do more research, or simply cool down ). I save them in a text file and leave them on my desktop, occasionally sweeping unfinished posts into a folder (that I'll probably seldom if ever look at again). Anyhow, yesterday, I was pondering a number of posts in this thread and started writing this... today I dug it back out...


Good engineering is a thing unto itself. It's hard to get right and it's hard to keep getting it right going forward as styles and clients change. It IS what binds most of our interests together here.

But, as important as it is, as cherished as those skills are, I always come back around to the fact that a lot of the music I really love is less than ideal in some/many sonic aspects. That doesn't mean we should not strive for better sound, better realization of the artists vision -- at all.

But it's just a fact of life (at least for me) that I've heard a whole lot of 'flawless' studio recordings that, though I marveled at the technical skill, I had no desire to hear a second time; yet other songs I will listen to through scratchy acoustic era recordings (1920s), bad mastering, bad pressing, bad tape machines (yes even wow and flutter), off-center vinyl pressings, even the modern sins of bad / inept mastering or crappy data-compression... because the music moves me.

Loving care and masterful technical skill often greatly enhances the sonic impact of a great record -- but, in my experience, it can't save mediocre content.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maggot Brain View Post
Here's my unpopular take:

The room doesn't matter as much as you think. I've spent the last 8 or so years recording bands in just about any environment you can think of. Abandoned warehouse, tiny apartments, my own bedroom, basements, studios, the shed out back (not really, but you get my point)....

If the players are comfortable, the performances are good... it's all good. I think gear matters, but as others have said, you could record an amazing band with 57s and a presonus or something, and you'll be fine.
I think both these posts come back to the idea you can’t know how much BETTER a given recording or performance might sound or how much people might love it more if some of those flaws weren’t there - of course it might be ruined! You’ll just never know..it might make no difference, or it might enhance the beauty in the song.

I know for me, if Jeff buckley’s “Hallelujah” clipped out on the climax in the vocal, it’d spoil the recording somewhat. If some of those old soul records that get all crunchy at the climax didn’t do that...I’m not sure it would spoil the recording, since it doesn’t spoil it when it’s NOT crunchy in other parts of the song.

And it also comes back to - as engineers, our sole job is to capture what’s put in front of us in the most appropriate way. We really don’t have any say if the song or performance is “good”, so talking about production or performance or writing when discussing recording is in a way irrelevant. Of course the roles (both people and the job) overlap, but in its purest form they’re disconnected. No one ever hired an engineer purely for engineering who tended to be lax with levels and clip stuff or make hissy low level recordings, even if this happened as a by product at times!
Old 23rd September 2019
  #175
Lives for gear
Song helps
Old 23rd September 2019
  #176
Lives for gear
 
Funny Cat's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by psycho_monkey View Post
We really don’t have any say if the song or performance is “good”, so talking about production or performance or writing when discussing recording is in a way irrelevant. Of course the roles (both people and the job) overlap, but in its purest form they’re disconnected. No one ever hired an engineer purely for engineering who tended to be lax with levels and clip stuff or make hissy low level recordings, even if this happened as a by product at times!

I agree that we don't have any say in the song but I don't agree that talking about its effect on a recording is irrelevant, especially given the thread title and the extremely mixed emotions we have about current music.

Once someone gets to the point where they realize that the song/arrangement/performance can drastically change the outcome of a recording [all things being equal] one starts to realize that the gear isn't the end-all-be-all and there will be less worship of the sword rather than the one who yields it. Sometimes a little perspective is just what we all need to curb our gear-lust!
Old 23rd September 2019
  #177
Lives for gear
 

Sorry, but "curbing Gearlust" constitutes immediate Gearslutz dismissal.
Chris
Old 23rd September 2019
  #178
Quote:
Originally Posted by Funny Cat View Post
I agree that we don't have any say in the song but I don't agree that talking about its effect on a recording is irrelevant, especially given the thread title and the extremely mixed emotions we have about current music.

Once someone gets to the point where they realize that the song/arrangement/performance can drastically change the outcome of a recording [all things being equal] one starts to realize that the gear isn't the end-all-be-all and there will be less worship of the sword rather than the one who yields it. Sometimes a little perspective is just what we all need to curb our gear-lust!
I wasn't so much referring to that as the attitude "if the song is good then who cares about the recording" or "the recording doesn't matter unless the song is good".

We shouldn't really be thinking like that as engineers; we should be thinking "how can I best represent what I've got to work with". That might be an all round the mic bluegrass recording, or it might be a slightly raw punk recording, or it might be a programmed backing track, or it might be a one element at a time Def Leppard esque production.

I just get a bit fatigued by (and not meaning you!) the one poster who relentlessly crops up on every discussion of recording with "it doesn't matter unless the song is great". We get that. But for the non-self-recordist (where it's a valid point), and certainly for the engineer working with a producer or self producing artist, it's actually a lot of the time irrelevant.
Old 23rd September 2019
  #179
Lives for gear
 

But PM, it doesn't matter, unless the song is great.

Chris
Old 23rd September 2019
  #180
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drumsound View Post
Because he wrote this to clarify:
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso
No, not at all.
It's about mastering the genre. It takes years.
The Beatles spent years playing cover songs. And even when they were 'out there' innovating, their constant touchstones were Buddy Holly and Elvis. They just couldn't help themselves but do it differently.
Take Miles Davis. He played thousands of club gigs, playing standards and soloing like many other people. Gradually he needed to break out and innovate.
The important part was the years and years both The Beatles and Miles Davis played in front of people, in an ensemble setting.
It's not about 'fear', it's about understanding that almost no one is an innovator from day one. Most people need to conform at the beginning, then they understand why they need to innovate, and what that innovation needs to be.
This is one heck of a reach and I'm sure you've made up your mind that you're right, I don't agree but I don't see the point of guessing what someone may have in his mind when he posted, especially when that person can say what he means himself.

I will say unequivocally though, that I was not arguing against people learning anything, hope this helps...
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump