class bias and the debates about in the box recording

[UstadKhanAli]

I've also seen the opposite, with musicians I respect using analog because it gives them just what they want. I have a musician friend who brought me over to show me some analog gear he got a hold of. Sounds like the Tape Op type person and he's definitely not full of {censored}. He's more advanced in this stuff than I am, he uses digital as well as analog, and his analog "finds" do stuff for him nothing else does.

 

 

This seems to be where a lot of people in TapeOp are coming from, as they tend to use a lot of different kinds of gear - new, old, computer-based, hardware, cheap, expensive, all that.

 

We also have different needs, and so while vintage gear may work for some, it might not work for others.

 

And anyway, analog gear....uh, what's that anyway? That describes this enormous group of stuff that does a jillion different things!!!

[blue2blue]

I view Craig's aphoristic maxim about choruses as a sort of meta-comment, a kind of koan, if you will, presumably intended to jog one out of an entrenched and therefor self-limited way of viewing a given question.

 

 

I think a lot of us say the same things over and over again, whatever words we couch them in. I find the reactions and statements of many regulars here to be quite predictable. (And without any shadow of a doubt, that certainly includes me. The only thing unpredictable about me and my positions is how close to the edge of snapping I am at any particular time. )

[Anderton]

This seems to be where a lot of people in TapeOp are coming from, as they tend to use a lot of different kinds of gear - new, old, computer-based, hardware, cheap, expensive, all that.

 

 

Honestly, I don't know anyone who doesn't have a collection of different types of gear, unless they've just gotten started and went for something like a Zoom R24 or other all-in-one unit. Using different gear seems to be the norm rather than the exception for anyone who's been recording for more than a couple years.

[Anderton]

I view Craig's aphoristic maxim about choruses as a sort of meta-comment, a kind of koan, if you will, presumably intended to jog one out of an entrenched and therefor self-limited way of viewing a given question.

Yeah, that is the motivation, although I wouldn't have stated it quite that way

Besides, we all know the resolution to all these discussions is 42. We just have different ways of getting there.

[Goobers]

Of course that can be right, and of course that happens. But in the examples of TapeOp, the articles tend to be generally of the "Hey, scored this old piece of gear that was gonna be tossed out in the trash by a radio station" or "Look what I found at a swap meet". They're right next to tech articles about computers, plug-ins, new gear, DIY projects and everything else. Most of the people writing these articles or featured in the articles are not rich by any stretch. They're people who are trying to squeeze out every penny's worth and get the best audio. They're excited about audio, whether it's something new, a computer, something vintage, or whatever. So this class bias thing? I just don't see this at all. As I mentioned, if anything, it's often the opposite. People don't scrounge through lots of trash and go to swap meets because they're rich. They don't try and make their own binary heads or plate reverbs or broadband absorption because they're rich and exhibit a class bias. And not to denigrate a manufacturer, but if you had the choice of scoring a good-sounding vintage board from a radio station for next to nothing or buying a Mackie board, which would you get more excited about?

 

 

The vintage board (until I'm done playing with it, and then I have to store it).

 

Maybe it's more like it's a hobby, with a range of hobbyists, from people "of modest means" who put a great deal of time and effort and love into their passion, and wealthy dilettantes who throw their money around and maybe give it a bad rep (not that there's anything wrong with rich people buying things).

 

if this were model train sets, there'd be people who scrimp and save and create incredible models, and rich bastards who buy some fancy set and have their manservants assemble it in their model train room.

 

It's really impossible to generalize. People get into things for all different reasons. But even though I've never read Tape Op, I could see it being a lot like you describe.

[Hard Truth]

My intention wasn't so much criticize people who use vintage tools, it was targeted more at the magazines, and at how capitalism and classism work.

I remember in the eighties when I had to use my noisy, limited analog equipment because it was all I could afford. I would read about the people doing digital recording and wish I could afford to have unlimited tracks and quiet recording and think "if only that gear was affordable....." Twenty years later our dreams have been exceeded, we have quiet recording, unlimited tracks, amazing effect plug-ins, virtual instruments etc all affordable to almost anyone. But what do we read about in the magazines? (specifically Tape Op) The people who use boutique or vintage gear. Good old capitalism once has raised the bar for keeping up with the Joneses.

Aside from the snob appeal, it is also because an article about someone working mostly in the box just isn't as easy to make interesting as the story about the guy who scored the analog recorder from a legendary defunct studio. Its not a problem for me personally because my studio is mostly just for my own use, but I would be pissed if I had a commercial studio that spent big bucks on a ProTools HD system and potential customers wouldn't use it because they think you have to have vintage gear to be cool because that was what they read in a magazine.

Its interesting to contrast the audio world with video production (where I make most of my money) where there is absolutely no nostalgia or mojo associated with older gear except as historical curiosities. No one talks about the warm fuzzy distortion of older video cameras as a good thing.

(BTW-although I have no interest in dealing with analog recording again, I would love to get a nice vintage tube compressor someday..)

[blue2blue]

Yeah, that is the motivation, although I wouldn't have stated it quite that way Besides, we all know the resolution to all these discussions is 42. We just have different ways of getting there.

[blue2blue]

 

The vintage board (until I'm done playing with it, and then I have to store it). Maybe it's more like it's a hobby, with a range of hobbyists, from people "of modest means" who put a great deal of time and effort and love into their passion, and wealthy dilettantes who throw their money around and maybe give it a bad rep (not that there's anything wrong with rich people buying things). if this were model train sets, there'd be people who scrimp and save and create incredible models, and rich bastards who buy some fancy set and have their manservants assemble it in their model train room. It's really impossible to generalize. People get into things for all different reasons. But even though I've never read Tape Op, I could see it being a lot like you describe.

 

I always have my serving wenches install and assemble my latest acquisitions. They've done a fabulous job on the new wing of my manor house where I have a full scale-sized recreation of the Atlantic Seaboard rail system running 24/7 per established schedules. Sure, the wench staff is uniformly cute and perky and costumed in a fashion that would make a Hooters hostess blush -- but that doesn't keep them from keeping the trains running on time.

[blue2blue]

My intention wasn't so much criticize people who use vintage tools, it was targeted more at the magazines, and at how capitalism and classism work. I remember in the eighties when I had to use my noisy, limited analog equipment because it was all I could afford. I would read about the people doing digital recording and wish I could afford to have unlimited tracks and quiet recording and think "if only that gear was affordable....." Twenty years later our dreams have been exceeded, we have quiet recording, unlimited tracks, amazing effect plug-ins, virtual instruments etc all affordable to almost anyone. But what do we read about in the magazines? (specifically Tape Op) The people who use boutique or vintage gear. Good old capitalism once has raised the bar for keeping up with the Joneses. Aside from the snob appeal, it is also because an article about someone working mostly in the box just isn't as easy to make interesting as the story about the guy who scored the analog recorder from a legendary defunct studio. Its not a problem for me personally because my studio is mostly just for my own use, but I would be pissed if I had a commercial studio that spent big bucks on a ProTools HD system and potential customers wouldn't use it because they think you have to have vintage gear to be cool because that was what they read in a magazine. Its interesting to contrast the audio world with video production (where I make most of my money) where there is absolutely no nostalgia or mojo associated with older gear except as historical curiosities. No one talks about the warm fuzzy distortion of older video cameras as a good thing. (BTW-although I have no interest in dealing with analog recording again, I would love to get a nice vintage tube compressor someday..)

If you did have a commercial studio, you'd still need the HD rig because the seemingly overwhelming majority of today's clients (judging from my reading at a certain site dedicated by name to gear sluttery) will demand to have everything put on the time and pitch grids.

 

So, while many will want to track onto analog tape, the project is then frequently dumped to PT for editing and gridifying.

 

Hmmm... that may not be that reassuring after all. But at least the $20K for that HD system didn't go to waste.

 

No one talks about the warm fuzzy distortion of older video cameras as a good thing.

Maybe not but look at how many people have shot music vids to film -- and sometimes intentionally degraded or damaged film -- and how many home videographers use various plug in FX to try to make their vids look old and grainy.

[Hard Truth]

I'd also like to point out how much of a luxury vintage analog gear is. Its hard to find, bulky, costly, and expensive and/or time consuming to maintain. The bulkiness is a very big problem for us city dwellers. I find it hard to imagine how anyone with a day job can find time for actual playing and recording if they have a day job and also work primarily with vintage gear.

[blue2blue]

 

I'd also like to point out how much of a luxury vintage analog gear is. Its hard to find, bulky, costly, and expensive and/or time consuming to maintain. The bulkiness is a very big problem for us city dwellers. I find it hard to imagine how anyone with a day job can find time for actual playing and recording if they have a day job and also work primarily with vintage gear.

 

Hmmm... you could pick up a 16 or 24 channel 2" deck for as little as $5K-$8K for much of the last few years -- a deck that cost $50K or more in its prime... at a time when $50K would buy a house in many parts of the US. Now you can pick up the same deck used for the price of a well-used car.

 

Sure, that same money could buy a decent digital rig with around the same number of channels, but the point is that they're more or less in the same ballpark. (Keep in mind, I, myself, am more than happy using digital. I'm just sayin'.)

 

 

PS... it's fine to rail about the purported evils of capitalism but surely it hasn't escaped you that about the only 'pure' communist states left (not that I would hold them up as any sort of ideal, Marxist or otherwise) are Cuba and North Korea. Virtually the rest of the nations that had embraced communism have moved increasingly toward the sort of blend of capital driven enterprise and social safety nets that took root in the western democracies after the Great Depression and WWII.

[UstadKhanAli]

Aside from the snob appeal, it is also because an article about someone working mostly in the box just isn't as easy to make interesting as the story about the guy who scored the analog recorder from a legendary defunct studio. Its not a problem for me personally because my studio is mostly just for my own use, but I would be pissed if I had a commercial studio that spent big bucks on a ProTools HD system and potential customers wouldn't use it because they think you have to have vintage gear to be cool because that was what they read in a magazine.

A few of us have already stated that TapeOp has many different kinds of articles - stuff about old analog gear, new analog gear, old digital gear, new digital gear, old engineers, new engineers, rich engineers, poor engineers, home studio enthusiasts, laptop and M-Audio people, articles about Pro Tools, articles about computers and electronic devices, how people get stuff from swap meets and get old gear from radio stations, reviews about M-Audio and other inexpensive stuff, articles about laptops and plugins and DAWs and Reaper and such, articles about people making their own stuff, articles about everything - and you do realize that just about all the contributors to TapeOp, if not all, own Pro Tools rigs (how do I know that? Because they write about them!). They get excited when they found something that is really cheap that works well, such as the FMR stuff or the Fathead ribbon mics or the Avenson omnis or whatever.

In yet you still manage to sidestep this and continue beating the drum about "snob appeal". How it's luxurious, apparently the domain of the snobby elites despite the fact that they are scoring these used from radio stations and swap meets (how's THAT for capitalism!!! Hey, guys, it's hard to get and you have to scour the dusty confines of radio stations and swap meets for cheap stuff! That oughtta encourage the masses to run out and do the same!).

Like Craig said, most of us have a grab bag of stuff, some old, some new. That's more the norm. Sure, some people are snobby about their gear, whether it's the latest greatest computer or their ancient and obscure analog equipment. But painting everyone with the same brush when some people are genuinely into it or get analog stuff because they can't afford to get new stuff or whatever reason seems bizarre to me.

[claveslave]

I'm with you HT - I recently had to mix a couple of tracks that were recorded at a high quality studio (one I designed actually ) on ProTools 24/48 and I could tell the vocal was put through a vintage compressor - it sounded awful pumping away

In all honesty, John, that says more about the original tracking engineer than the gear.

[claveslave]

 

 

Great track. Very clever. Didn't know you worked on that. Love Ross and the boys.

[Hard Truth]

A few of us have already stated that TapeOp has many different kinds of articles - stuff about old analog gear, new analog gear, old digital gear, new digital gear, old engineers, new engineers, rich engineers, poor engineers, home studio enthusiasts, laptop and M-Audio people, articles about Pro Tools, articles about computers and electronic devices,............. But painting everyone with the same brush when some people are genuinely into it or get analog stuff because they can't afford to get new stuff or whatever reason seems bizarre to me.

 

 

You're correct that TapeOp has a wide variety of articles. I don't have a big issue with Tape Op, and they aren't the only ones with frequent articles about people using vintage analog gear (VAG). I do think their overall bias is towards those who use VAG.

 

I never said that everyone who uses VAG is a misguided snob or that it isn't useful for some purposes. I do think its importance is being exaggerated and there is an element of elitism at play.

 

There is no way a kid in the ghetto is going to be able to use a vintage 16 track deck in his home, yet today he can own a computer or standalone recording system. Is it a coincidence that this recent phenomena of affordable recording tools is accompanied by a resurgence of interest in VAG? I don't think so, I think there is a (usually unconscious) class driven motive involved in addition to the more legitimate reasons.

[Lee Flier]

My intention wasn't so much criticize people who use vintage tools, it was targeted more at the magazines, and at how capitalism and classism work.

Seriously dude - you picked the wrong target. I could even slightly understand your point if you'd been picking on Mix or something like that - but TapeOp? They're about as opposite of "class snobs" as you can get, and they embrace any and all methods of recording and getting cool sounds on a budget, whether vintage or cutting edge or whatever.

But what do we read about in the magazines? (specifically Tape Op) The people who use boutique or vintage gear. Good old capitalism once has raised the bar for keeping up with the Joneses.

How exactly does it advance capitalism to advocate buying a piece of used gear at a church sale?

Its not a problem for me personally because my studio is mostly just for my own use, but I would be pissed if I had a commercial studio that spent big bucks on a ProTools HD system and potential customers wouldn't use it because they think you have to have vintage gear to be cool because that was what they read in a magazine.

I work in quite a few studios that have both, and they let the artist choose whatever gear they want for whatever reason they want. I really don't think Pro Tools studios are in any danger of going extinct because too many kids have read about how cool analog is in a magazine. If anything, I'm very happy that some studios are keeping their analog gear in good working order so that I can still use analog stuff when I wish, without having to go out and buy and maintain a bunch of it myself.

If you ran a Pro Tools HD studio and you couldn't stay in business because a few analog aficionados didn't want to come to your studio, you probably have other problems besides that.

Its interesting to contrast the audio world with video production (where I make most of my money) where there is absolutely no nostalgia or mojo associated with older gear except as historical curiosities. No one talks about the warm fuzzy distortion of older video cameras as a good thing.

And you know why? Because most people in video production seem to agree that the new stuff is better - for video. They don't continue to see advantages in older equipment. The same is not true with audio. As long as some people continue to hear a noticable difference between analog and digital and think that analog sounds better, then there'll be people who continue using analog. You seem to be implying (just because you prefer digital, I guess) that anybody who uses analog gear does it out of nostalgia or thinking it has some kind of mojo or "cool factor" that they read about in a magazine - in other words they've made up their mind that they like the way it sounds before even hearing it. That simply isn't true - no one would bother using this stuff if they didn't genuinely feel that it sounded better, sometimes after years of trying to get the sound they wanted from digital.

In fact, I have a good friend that I play with who's a video editor by trade. He loves all the modern video production tools. He used to make homemade films on Super 8 when he was a kid, and would be the last person to wax nostalgic about it... he thinks the new stuff is awesome by comparison. But for music, he prefers vintage stuff. Not to say that he won't use the newer stuff because it's cheaper - but strictly based on sound, if he could record analog all the time, he would.

It's the same thing with tube guitar amps, really - there are some people that are happy with solid state amps, or software amp simulators. And certainly, SS amps and amp sims are more consistent, easier to maintain and cheaper than tube amps. But I and many other guitarists continue to to lug tube amps to gigs and studios because... well... we like the sound better. So hey, guess what? There are now plenty of new tube amps still being made, in all price ranges, as well as amp sims and solid state amps. Not to mention that great deal on a used amp that you might score from craigslist.

What exactly is wrong or "class snobbery" about any of this? People having lots of choices and using whatever they want, and finding creative ways to get what they want... yeah sounds like a real big problem to me.

[Lee Flier]

I'd also like to point out how much of a luxury vintage analog gear is. Its hard to find, bulky, costly, and expensive and/or time consuming to maintain. The bulkiness is a very big problem for us city dwellers. I find it hard to imagine how anyone with a day job can find time for actual playing and recording if they have a day job and also work primarily with vintage gear.

Depends what kind of vintage gear you're talking about. Some of it is really well built and doesn't have to be maintained much at all. My vintage guitars and tube amps, for instance, hardly ever need any work. In fact, one could make the argument that a high quality piece of gear is the better value because it will last a long time. Whereas a kid buying cheap gear that breaks in a year or two and can't be repaired at less than replacement cost - you could make the argument that this is "discriminating against the poor" much moreso than a piece of well built gear.

As for 2" tape decks and things like that... I don't own one. I go to commercial studios and let them maintain it. But I can get a very good rate at a commercial studio - since I know how to run analog gear and only need a second engineer, and most studios are happy to give me a heavily discounted rate if they have downtime.

In any case, people do figure out how to use vintage gear without breaking the bank. I still don't see where this makes them snobs, let alone any "class bias" - it's just people figuring out how to use what they want to use.

[Lee Flier]

In all honesty, John, that says more about the original tracking engineer than the gear.

Yup...

[Lee Flier]

Maybe it's more like it's a hobby, with a range of hobbyists, from people "of modest means" who put a great deal of time and effort and love into their passion, and wealthy dilettantes who throw their money around and maybe give it a bad rep (not that there's anything wrong with rich people buying things). if this were model train sets, there'd be people who scrimp and save and create incredible models, and rich bastards who buy some fancy set and have their manservants assemble it in their model train room. It's really impossible to generalize. People get into things for all different reasons.

 

 

Exactly. And I think no matter what you're talking about, there are going to be people who are into it just for the "status" value, because it's "cool," and lord it over everyone else.

 

As Craig said, we can safely ignore those people. They have nothing to do with anything, except to acknowledge that they exist and they suck. But there are people who use those people to generalize about everyone (or even a good percentage of everyone) who uses vintage gear or collects model train sets or whatever... and that's just 27 kinds of wrong.

[UstadKhanAli]

There is no way a kid in the ghetto is going to be able to use a vintage 16 track deck in his home, yet today he can own a computer or standalone recording system.

So someone in a ghetto has enough money to score a computer, but not an old mixing console in a radio station? Hmmmm...well, HT, that's the opposite of what people are doing in TapeOp.

Is it a coincidence that this recent phenomena of affordable recording tools is accompanied by a resurgence of interest in VAG?

You don't think the interest in analog gear has anything to do with the fact that people are recording on computers now but like the sound that analog gear imparts? And by the way, analog gear includes things like mic preamps, which is often a very necessary way of getting the sound microphones are picking up into the computer (unless someone has a USB microphone...hey, are those snobby and elitist?).

I don't think so, I think there is a (usually unconscious) class driven motive involved in addition to the more legitimate reasons.

I guess if your driving concern is class-driven motives...well, if you look hard enough for anything, you'll find some evidence for it somewhere. Even when someone is trying to look scrounge for old dusty unused gear at a swap meet.

Hey, maybe someday people will get super excited by looking through cobwebby old shelves to uncover some super cool VST plugins!!! Oh, wait....

[Ronan Murphy]

I use lots of analog tools because a 100% digital solution does not allow me to get the sounds that I go for. Believe me, if I could get the same results with an mbox and a laptop, my ass would be mixing, sitting on a beach with headphones drinking fruity rum drinks with little umbrellas in them.

I like TapeOp.

[UstadKhanAli]

Seriously dude - you picked the wrong target. I could even slightly understand your point if you'd been picking on Mix or something like that - but TapeOp? They're about as opposite of "class snobs" as you can get, and they embrace any and all methods of recording and getting cool sounds on a budget, whether vintage or cutting edge or whatever.

Exactly. It's the anti-snob magazine if there ever was one.

How exactly does it advance capitalism to advocate buying a piece of used gear at a church sale?

I think even the marketing wizards that write copy for Mackie might have a hard time with that.

[UstadKhanAli]

I use lots of analog tools because a 100% digital solution does not allow me to get the sounds that I go for. Believe me, if I could get the same results with an mbox and a laptop, my ass would be mixing, sitting on a beach with headphones drinking fruity rum drinks with little umbrellas in them. I like TapeOp.

[Goobers]

You seem to be implying (just because you prefer digital, I guess) that anybody who uses analog gear does it out of nostalgia or thinking it has some kind of mojo or "cool factor" that they read about in a magazine - in other words they've made up their mind that they like the way it sounds before even hearing it. That simply isn't true - no one would bother using this stuff if they didn't genuinely feel that it sounded better, sometimes after years of trying to get the sound they wanted from digital.

 

 

I believe you that you prefer analog because you feel it sounds better and so do many people.

 

But I know people who exactly fit the description of someone who has never used it but want to only because they think it has some "mojo" or "cool factor." Those people DO exist. I know some! I'm not dissing TapeOp in any way since I've never read it, but I still think both groups of people inhabit this Earth: those who prefer analog because it gives them the sound they want, and those who prefer analog because they think it's cool.

[Lee Flier]

I use lots of analog tools because a 100% digital solution does not allow me to get the sounds that I go for. Believe me, if I could get the same results with an mbox and a laptop, my ass would be mixing, sitting on a beach with headphones drinking fruity rum drinks with little umbrellas in them.

Exactly!

I actually AM going to attempt tracking an entire small project on my iPhone DAW. Not because I think the fidelity will be wonderful, but because there are a couple of ideas I have in mind that couldn't realistically be done without a (very) portable way of doing it.