Imagine Billie Holiday's vocals as they would sound "digitally corrected" of their pitch abnormalities. Or Muddy Waters' guitar lines "digi-corrected" of their atonal slides and intentionally off-key embellishments.
Imagine the Beatles Sgt.Peppers "corrected" of all off-pitch and rhythmic irregularities.
Imagine being fondled by a robotic arm, while a quartz-clock solenoid thrusts a cold steel tongue into your mouth at perfect three-second intervals.
Can you imagine that?

You don't have to!
This all happens in music production nowadays.

Don't you get the feeling when you listen to the music charts ( occasionally i do ) all sound the same?
That's not entertainment. That's pure alienation!

Did you guys know that digital studio music software production have "human error correction" ( a digital logarithm to induce human error) to HUMANISE all the "digital robotic perfect pitch drum-machine time kind of music"? …simply amazing….!

Sure, you can find the original artist intent, organic non-homogeneity and the wonderfully human characteristic of joyous imperfection, but not in the music charts anymore.
...and i use to like Top Of The Pops…

Music used to be made by musicians who played together in real time, who learned how to create emotionally stirring grooves by reacting to each other as they played. If the drummer pushed the beat ahead and you followed him, you created a feeling of impending excitement, like a rush of adrenalin.
If the guitar player was T-Bone Walker, he played around,, behind, and on top of the beat in a game of musical tag that drove audiences crazy with tension. He swung, as did for example early Ellington, Monk, Louis Jordan, Gene Vincent, and the Meters.

What's the common denominator?
They all played and recorded in REAL TIME, as in, all together, all at the same time in the same room in one take or maybe two.
Multitrack recording has its advantages, don't get me wrong; Electric Ladyland wouldn't have been possible without it, and it serves a very useful and creative purpose for certain types of sounds and recordings, but without REAL art, I don't know of any reason anyone would give a good god damn about music, life or anything else.
Don't you think?

I saw a program on PBS one night about the doo-wop/early rock & roll era, and one of the songs they highlighted (through interviews with the artists) was "Stay" by Maurice Williams & the Zodiacs. He INTENTIONALLY sang parts of the song off-key when it was recorded. As far as I'm concerned, that's one of the things that gives the song character. A couple million people agree.

part of the beauty of music are the human imperfections that go along with the emotion of the performance and the creative ability. remove any part of the human element and the music becomes sterile and heartless.

I concur, of course.
Imo, the dominance of finance and accounting concerns over creative and artist-development concerns, are the main issues behind all this situation. The way things are, i think that some of the great singers/musicians/ bands and songwriters of yesterday couldn't exist in today's music business.

Did you guys ever thought of today's world without the musical legacy of the great ones ?

What if there hadn't been ANY way to record music?

I think i know what you mean. "What if..."

I don't now why but this topic has become a little like that song from Lennon: Imagine.
Don't you think?

I have some hendrix stuff I'd like to fix. That guy would play so drunk / stoned he did not care. Some of it is almost unlistenable.

of course even the older musicians and well I think almost all musicians are perfectionists, and that may be what has driven this tweaking of the sound.


an example, I watched a show with chuck berry and keith richards of the rolling stones, and they were doing a collaboration or concert together and keith was supposed to play some of chucks stuff, well he couldnt do it. and chuck was pretty peeved, he couldnt get the right sound, well timing too, he was probably drunk, but you get what I mean. chucks way or the highway.

elroy

Buddy Holly and Jan and Dean were some of the beginings of overdubbing, which to me was the begining of the digital issue. Used properly it was fine but as stated look what it ihas become.

Neil Young 'Harvest'.... To me a very great Lp. All recorded at the same time, Neil feels it is the way to record. When you listen you hear the cymblas vibrate in the background just as if it were a live recording.

Jim

I have heard several times that the Beach Boys were one of the worst sounding live groups ever. All of their singing was made to sound good in the studio. I never cared for them anyway, so it didn't really matter to me.

Imo you're making a confusion about overdubbing.

Overdubbing as nothing to do with digital, not even with multitrack recording. I mean overdubbing is a technique - a way to add a supplementary recorded sound to a previously recorded performance - not a recording format.
You can make a lot of overdubbing even now with digital recordings.

For example the members of Queen overdubbed their voices numerous times, to create the chorus effect for "Bohemian Rhapsody", the same with the Beach Boys with that harmonic wall of voices.

Btw,the first digitally recorded album of popular music was made by Ry Cooder in '79 even before the first digital compact discs marketed in 1982.

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.

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.

I thought I was agreeing with you...

Sorry amigo. Sometimes my English...