2. music
  3. 128451-93588

Recording quality...

A lot of time here is spent discussing equipment, which is to be expected.  But even the best gear will not mask a lousy recording.  Let's face it, some labels use better recording equipment, microphone placement, mixing and so on to create stunning sound.  Other labels just don't sound as good.  

Case in point...when I purchase a recording, I'm looking for a recording date within the last five years.  I realize that some classic recordings took place years ago recorded with analog equipment, but it will still sound old on anything modern you play it on.  I'm not a big fan of remastering either.  Look, I realize that we can't bring back Miles Davis or get Pink Floyd back together to do a modern recording, but imagine if we could.

Once, when I was a kid, I was lucky enough to witness a live recording session in a real studio.  This was in the late 60s, when real musicians played real instruments.  They used these gigantic Scully tape machines with inch-thick Ampex 456 tape running at fast speed and a mixing board, which was the most modern recording equipment of the time.  Today, that equipment belongs in a museum, considering the modern tools that recording engineers have now.  

My point here is that great equipment is nice, but paired with a recent recording using modern tools, the sound is so much better.  Just my humble opinion.  What say you to this?
128x128mikeydee

Showing 2 responses by mikeydee

mikeydee's avatar
mikeydee OP
46 posts
 
Thanks for your responses to this.  I greatly respect all of your opinions.  
mikeydee's avatar
mikeydee OP
46 posts
 
We could also take this discussion in a different direction...what is it about mixing, microphone placement, room acoustics, etc. that make for an amazing recording, regardless of time period?  

Those of us around in the late 70s remember Steely Dan's album "AJA" (recorded at Village Recorders in West LA).  It actually won a Grammy for best-engineered album.  The sound quality was amazing (I had it on vinyl).

 Also, different studios to the trained ear sound different.  Those of you who love jazz remember the Blue Note sessions that Rudy Van Gelder recorded in Englewood Cliffs NJ.  You could tell it was his studio by the sound...his piano also had a distinctive sound to it.

Fast forward to the 90s and listen to the Natalie Cole album "Unforgettable"...give it a listen just for the amazing recording, even if you don't like the music.  This was recorded at the Capitol Rotunda in Hollywood, where Sinatra made all of his famous recordings in the 50s.  

And then there's Motown Studio A (I went to see it...now a museum) and let's not forget Sigma Sound, run by Joe Tarsia in Philly (which is now an office building...should have been preserved as a museum as well).  David Bowie came all the way to Philadelphia to record "Young Americans" at Sigma  because he loved the studio's sound.   

So, I get what a lot of you are saying.  My five-year window is robbing me of all of these studios which had a distinctive sound.  You can't get that aspect using Pro Tools or whatever else they use today. 
More to discover