Why do albums made in the 60s with shitty gear sound good?

why do albums made in the 60s with shitty gear sound good?

They don't sound great, kind of flat and muffled almost but they sound better some how than stuff today?


youtube.com/watch?v=i3CIhGXnntM

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loudness_war
youtube.com/watch?v=klTw94kTstg
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

YOU MAKE A GROWN MAN CRY

>1960s analog technology produces analog sound waves
>today digital technology produces 0s and 1s converted to sound waves
The answer goes deeper then this but pretty much pic related is why music is so abrasive on the ears these days

What leads you to believe the gear was shitty?

WILD, WILD HORSES COULDNT DRAG ME AWAY

Not a very good argument, OP linked a video in digital format, so that's obviously not his grief.
A lot of musicians still record, and electronically alter, their music and maintaining an analog wave.

One of the main guitars Keith Richards used the pickups were wired out of phase, which influences his sound frequently.

mu is over there asswholes

recently purchased prism convertors, least abrasive ive come across, radar seems the overall closest to tape, i think user is really talking about tape v digi, big fat valve amps are outselling all else here precisly to get that fat old sound, of course the goal is too get best of both worlds

BROWN SUGAR

because it wasn't shitty gear, you fucking idiot. another post wasted by a dumbshit (you)

Its still the digital instruments and sound processing of today that is at issue. As I stated the answer runs deeper then posted. It would require an essay to go deeper. Long story short was my above post.
> OP linked a video in digital format
What do you want him to link to? A record player? lol
The music recorded back then was made with analog equipment. Those sound waves when converted to digital will still have the old school sound as the wave once digitized is still closer to an analog wave then modern music that is digital sound mixed, processed, compressed and packaged digitally.

This is a crucial redpill concerning the modern music production:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loudness_war

Basically anything made after 2000 is a crap sound-wise.

I wonder if people just use cheaper gear today overall, or the companies who supply them are cheaper because they can be? The phenomenon is real. I noticed the grateful dead live recordings from the 70s sound just so great but the ones from the 80s and 90s, when I think they were a bigger act and had more money, just sound tinny and shitty.

this....they used state of the art gear. The state of the art in terms of recording technology and audio fidelity has not changed all that much. Those were very powerful, very expensive analog desks.

Hi-fi stereo back then sounded just as good as hi-fi stereo today....in fact, you can hardly even buy floor speakers anymore.

Therefore, if you listen to older (pre-90s) music, avoid various "remasters" and search for original versions instead. They usually sound better, albeit they're quieter.

Where were they playing?
How was it recorded?
Was there post production?
There is more to sound than just the shit that is used.

And every dirty hippy passes around greatful dead recordings that are absolute shit and sound like you are listening through a can connected to a string pulled tight. It is a right of passage.

Also, there are 99 dollar guitars that rival the sound of much more expensive ones.

Open up an old guitar and a new one.
Both have 4 dollars worth of electronics. It is amazing how simple they are and much like a pump shotgun it is a design that is hard to improve on.

Because if you grew up in the 60s you're deaf now.

tubes and tape

I've got a very early 1968 vinyl pressing of Sgt Peppers and a 1980s pressing of the same album. Earlier version pisses all overf the 80s pressing. The reason why is attributed to the equipment used in transferring the audio to the vinyl cutting lathe. Until the 70s, tube preamps were used, then in the 70s, it transitioned to transistor preamps.
Bask in the amazing awe of my autism, anons.

Rolling Stones music is degenerate as fuck. It was the era's equilavent of nigger music about drugs and white wimminz fucking niggers we have now. Just listen to the lyrics.

>Rolling Stones music is degenerate as fuck.
And loving it.

(((Their))) satanic majesties request.


What did they mean by that?

Stones?? Real early stuff was highly derivative of howling wolf/muddy waters. Got quite poppy after that when they wrote their own tunes to try and compete against the beatles. Their best stuff was the beggars banquet/let it bleed/exile on main st years. Marked a major musical transition for the band. What actually happened is that they brought Ry Cooder in to jam with them for 6 weeks. Ry says he was told they were recruiting him to replace Brian Jones and nicked all his riffs and alternate tunings, fucked him off, and used his knowledge to do these three albums.
Stones are a pretty jewy bunch of guys.

Back in the day, you were editing by cutting and splicing analog tape. Today you can easily assemble the "perfect" part from dozens or hundreds of different takes. Doing so loses the spontaneity of a truly good recording of a band playing live, all at the same time, in the studio. You can now easily edit out human error, with tape it was quite a process. The ease of digital audio processing has sacrificed humanity for perfection. "We can fix it in post" mentality has killed good musicianship.

Also A/D and D/A converters. If you spend a good chunk of change they do a good job, but most people skimp on this crucial part of the signal chain.

there are still 2" tape machines operating here in bongolia, but truth is most new recording artists want the convinience of digi, even when you explain how fat analogue works , some are now using fairlight "atmos" desk to try and emulate fat tape sound, which of course takes further from their goal, convinience wins at that level

A lot of it has to do with how compressed and "loud" music is today. There are no dynamics...everything is just loud as fuck. A Taylor Swift album now is 2 times louder than a Black Sabbath album from back in the day.

We Love (((You)))

youtube.com/watch?v=klTw94kTstg

The correct answer is that the whole band recorded at the same time, in the same room.
Todays bands (or moreso shitty modern producers) have each player record parts separately because of MUH MIXING, and so they can fix up rhythmic and pitch 'errors' easily.
So instead of the band 'mixing' themselves in the same room (like the Stones) you have some dopey control freak producer who thinks that they alone hold the key to the songs success.

just about every one i come across has a distressor compressor set on "brit mode 20 to 1" with a little auto tune for edge on vocals result is it all sounds samey, that organic stones sound has been sacrificed on the low alter of muh pro tools

This is a great point. Deadmau5 was talking about this in an interview. I believe it has something to do with squishing frequencies or something

A lot of people use a "brick wall limiter".