Music becoming less realistic?

11811

Just a thought - Is music becoming more and more less realistic? In the way it represents a band? With the likes of auto-tune, beat detective etc and more and more production work are bands coming with records which sound nowhere what the band can recreate live?

mullen07

hmmmm true, they seem to be getting worst, and alot less original.

fitz

More importantly, does that matter?
That's the debate that'll really bake your noodle...

PaulBrewer

If you refer to 'pop' music that's probably true but had pop artists of the past had access to those tools I'm sure they'd have used them.

In an era when there's no studio time to do it right oft times one has to accept the computers version of right which IS often better than the raw material.

However I completely disagree with Mullen07 , now is a terrific time for music of all sorts -

2 examples of no autotune/beatdetective are Sons and Daughters

http://www.myspace.com/sonsanddaughters

another is the Menahan Street Band the guys from the Dap Kings who played on Amy Winehouse's record. Their instrumental music is brilliant I think.
Watch the Podcast , it really is fantastic, better that the actual record that I bought because of it!

http://www.spinner.com/2008/11/21/menahan-street-band-walk-through-the-interface/

jtsuited

this question/topic is about a decade old now.

11811

jtsuited wrote: »

this question/topic is about a decade old now.

well aware thats been brought up about a million times, was just looking for some thoughts from people working on the production side of things..

tweeky

Can't be any less realistic than the 80's with nearly everything Drum Machine, Fairlight sampler and Synths.

DamagedTrax

erm.. whats realistic?

say the rolling stones, are they more "realistic" than kraftwerk because they choose instruments that fit into your traditional view of what music should be played on?

an electric guitar doesnt sound too realistic when stood beside a kenyan tribesman beating the hell out of a hollowed and hand turned tree trunk.

isnt it relative really?

personally im not to concerned about a band recreating a song in a live situation exactly the way its recorded.. more often than not its the interesting interpretations that come about because of the restrictions of a live show that im more interested in.

Neurojazz

Wasn't the analog synth invented before the electric guitar?

11811

DamagedTrax wrote: »

erm.. whats realistic?

say the rolling stones, are they more "realistic" than kraftwerk because they choose instruments that fit into your traditional view of what music should be played on?

By realistic I mean a accurate portrayal of what the band sounds like, what ever the instruments or sounds used. for instance one could argue Kraftwerk 's live performance is pretty much how their records sound too.

personally im not to concerned about a band recreating a song in a live situation exactly the way its recorded.. more often than not its the interesting interpretations that come about because of the restrictions of a live show that im more interested in.

Great point, I totally agree,and indeed I've seen some great shows where bands do improvise to get the various sounds etc found on albums, altho the excessive use of backing tracks bugs me....

PaulBrewer

Speaking of real,did anyone see the Police with Elvis Costello on TV last night? Brutal!!

Should have been called 'When New Wavers turn bad' ... far too realistic for me.

Seziertisch

I think "unreal sounding" has always been part of pop music. The 60s was when this really came into its own with tape effects, splicing orchestras onto band performances etc.

PaulBrewer

Seziertisch wrote: »

I think "unreal sounding" has always been part of pop music. The 60s was when this really came into its own with tape effects, splicing orchestras onto band performances etc.

I believe that's a different Unreal than the OP intended.

fitz

Yeah, but it's all context Brewer...
Some of those things couldn't be replicated live at the time either. They may have been perceived back then in a similar way to our perceptions of what augmentation techniques/technologies are currently available to us.
'Tis all relative.

PaulBrewer

fitz wrote: »

Yeah, but it's all context Brewer...
Some of those things couldn't be replicated live at the time either. They may have been perceived back then in a similar way to our perceptions of what augmentation techniques/technologies are currently available to us.
'Tis all relative.

True

madtheory

Live and recorded are two different art forms. The best bands can do both, and often sound quite different in each context.

I think it's a fallacy to try to make a recording sound like a live performance, given that room acoustics and speaker performance are massively weak links in the chain.

There's nothing like seeing a band or an orchestra live. Even 7.1 surround in a treated room is an approximation. But it's well cool!

Helix

imo bands who sound carbon copies of their records when playing live are hideously boring

tweeky

I think it's a fallacy to try to make a recording sound like a live performance, given that room acoustics and speaker performance are massively weak links in the chain.

Er Lizzy's "Live and Dangerous"...(joke)

PaulBrewer

tweeky wrote: »

Er Lizzy's "Live and Dangerous"...

Drums and clapping I think were the only thing that made it to the mix?

thebookofbob

Did anyone read the interview with the guys in charge of Madonna's "Live" setup a while back.. It was in one of the Music mags like SOS or something..

Basically using Logic's plugins and Focusrite Liquid mix to Re-create "that" album sound..

It was a big risk.. lol.. can just imagine if the lot crashed mid vocal..
they pulled it off though!

PaulBrewer

There are now dedicated multi chan switchers in use that will automatically and silently switch between 2 systems that run simultaneously.

It's unlikely the whole show depended on one rig without back up.

I recall in 1991 or 92 doing Finsbury Park with Madness on their comeback gigs where Rob the keys tech pressed go on his trusty Atari 1040 to run samples for 'I've been driving in my car' and nothing happened.

Suggs made a big deal of it embarrassing the poor lad - the shows were being videoed for release .... and the whole non-event made the cut!

It didn't do his career any harm though, last I heard he was chief tech for Robbie Williams.

jtsuited

thebookofbob wrote: »

Did anyone read the interview with the guys in charge of Madonna's "Live" setup a while back.. It was in one of the Music mags like SOS or something..

Basically using Logic's plugins and Focusrite Liquid mix to Re-create "that" album sound..

It was a big risk.. lol.. can just imagine if the lot crashed mid vocal..
they pulled it off though!

yeah i read that alright. feckin crazy setup.
when he told the logic dudes at the show what he was doing they looked at him worried saying 'that's really not what logic is supposed to do'.