| QUOTE (Superfly @ October 08, 2008 01:16 am) |
| I have some hendrix stuff I'd like to fix. |
| QUOTE (clint e. @ October 08, 2008 03:30 pm) |
| I know what you mean, but i don't concur with you. Because the using and sometimes abusing of overdubbing is still the same technique using today in the digital age. Okey, nowadays there are harmonizers and a lot of other software similar to overdubbing... I'm not against using the studio as an "instrument" or a tool to create depth, echo or reverb - i'm a fan of the "Wall of Sound" of Phil Spector - what i do not like at all is using digital artifacts to homogenize/robotize as an excuse for the perfect pitch and forgetting all the human imperfections, emotions and soul. |
| QUOTE (Jim Eck @ October 09, 2008 12:01 pm) | ||
I think I know what you mean, used as an instrument, moog sythesizer and such could be ok, Pink Floyd, Kraftwerk, Emerson Lake and Palmer and Yes all excellent performers, but when the performers simply can't sing and or play any type of instrument and use technology to become a performer because they happen to fit the clothes some marketing person picked out it is unacceptable. Originally overdubbing was to get harmony's and other sounds (more instruments) without bringing in other performers. Jim |
| QUOTE (itlldue @ October 08, 2008 01:41 pm) | ||
Technically, you're right, but back in the old days, overdubbing was used to the same end result as digital modification, in some cases. Back to the Beach Boys. Their harmony sucked because no two of them could carry the same tune twice in a bucket. That's why (supposedly) they were so bad live. They would "tweak" their vocal recordings separately, then combine them to make the final. The Carpenters, on the other hand, sang well. The overdubbing, in their case, was just to give the appearance of a large group of singers. |
| QUOTE (clint e. @ October 08, 2008 11:13 am) |
| Btw,the first digitally recorded album of popular music was made by Rye Cooder in '79 even before the first digital compact discs marketed in 1982. |
| QUOTE (Elroy @ October 09, 2008 04:09 pm) | ||
So we can blame all this on rye cooter, right. he started the revolution into digital, so down with ry. elroy |
| QUOTE (clint e. @ October 10, 2008 11:28 am) |
| elroy [/QUOTE] Don't blame on Rye, mate. I'm not against digital, don't get me wrong. We can do amazing things with digital data. Try listen to a cd mastered and printed in the '80's or early '90's and compared it to another one of 2000.... Something changed for worth much much worth and not because of the digital format... As anyone tried it? |
| QUOTE (Elroy @ October 10, 2008 08:15 pm) |
| [QUOTE=clint e.,October 10, 2008 11:28 am] elroy [/QUOTE] Don't blame on Rye, mate. I'm not against digital, don't get me wrong. We can do amazing things with digital data. Try listen to a cd mastered and printed in the '80's or early '90's and compared it to another one of 2000.... Something changed for worth much much worth and not because of the digital format... As anyone tried it? [/QUOTE] I know, I was just kidding, that was one of those language nuances, but you are true, I do enjoy a mastered disc from the 80's and 90's. elroy |