This album was made with all real instruments performed by humans through real amplifiers on real drums, guitars...

>This album was made with all real instruments performed by humans through real amplifiers on real drums, guitars, basses and analog synthesizers. Recorded through real microphones, through real analog gear without copy and paste grids, samples, replacements or auto tuning. Even the fucking album cover was sculpted by hand and photographed for this album only. You are welcome.
What did they mean by this?

Other urls found in this thread:

twitter.com/90sTechnoQuotes
youtube.com/watch?v=ovKkkbFohUw
youtu.be/WDsraLhj-H4
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

They mean that they have big stupid egos and a very misguided idea of authenticity.

>real real real
>amplified equipment
>synthesizers
fucking posers

something about how uninterested and normal the guy on the left is compared to these edgy guys is hilarious to me

>drummers that can't keep time can be fixed with quantizing
>guitarists that can't play consistently can play one pass and copy paste it
>authentic
Come on, now. You can make good sounding music that way, but that's hardly the spirit of rock and roll.

>recording

if they're not performing live without the aid of electricity then it's overproduced fake pop bullshit

hell they probably multitracked it, used a click track and recorded multiple takes and everything, what kind of phony shithead does that?

As opposed to midi keys and VST plug ins, user. Laptop rock is the industry standard now.

Who cares about the "spirit of rock and roll"? If you were aware of the extent of "studio trickery" on your favorite recordings, would you think less of the artist? The point is to deliver a good final product (in a reasonable amount of time), not to show off and impress people like you're in a fucking circus.

>doesn't understand humor
classic dinorocker

where did this analog synth = authentic meme come from.

Synths weren't "real" either 30 years ago.

If you're going to be a proper curmudgeon you should at least be consistent. If your guitar wasn't made prior to 1968 and your amp doesn't use point to point wired tubes, GTFO, you're banished from the stupid rockist club.

I have no idea who "they" are

Poor guy on the left doesn't look like he wants any part of this

I think it's more about capturing music than "creating" it, if you get me. I get what you mean about synth not being real 30 years ago, but it still required musicianship to play one. Technology today has taken a lot of music out of music, so this is a step in a good direction imo.

that's shia labeouf, he's got other stuff on his mind

Sequencers and CV didn't exist 30 years ago?

I love the Beatles, and they used all kinds of "trickery" as you're referring to it, reversing tapes and so on. But they were still singing on those albums and still performing the music by hand. They could manipulate the sound of the audio, but somebody had to play it. You can create drums, guitars, and synth entirely on your computer now. There is a difference.

>If you were aware of the extent of "studio trickery" on your favorite recordings, would you think less of the artist?
Yes, I'd assume they're not talented at their instruments.
I'd still consider them creative though.

>I think it's more about capturing music than "creating" it, if you get me.
That's really only relevant to the people recording it. If you're more inspired by certain tools or a certain workflow, have at it, but don't pretend it's offering anything superior or more authentic. It's all artifice.

>I get what you mean about synth not being real 30 years ago, but it still required musicianship to play one.
Most shit was already sequenced by that point, so not really. You can still play a digital synth now. You can still record MIDI data using a DAW.

>Technology today has taken a lot of music out of music
No it hasn't, it's just introduced new tools.

>so this is a step in a good direction imo.
No it's not, it's just retarded.

They're not even saying they're not comping everything from 50 different takes. They're not even saying they're recording everything together in the same room with no click track and no overdubs.

>I love the Beatles, and they used all kinds of "trickery" as you're referring to it, reversing tapes and so on. But they were still singing on those albums and still performing the music by hand. They could manipulate the sound of the audio, but somebody had to play it.
Do you realize that this also includes slowing the tape down so that complicated stuff is easier to play or so you can sing stuff out of your range, and assembling the final product from the best parts of multiple takes?

>You can create drums, guitars, and synth entirely on your computer now. There is a difference.
And the also opens up worthwhile territory that isn't available to anyone who's fixated on performing everything.

>Yes, I'd assume they're not talented at their instruments.
That's a shit assumption though.

the latter is significantly more important, especially for recorded music

If you can't record an entire album in a single take, then you have no business making music

You can't possibly justify such a stupid assertion.

CV sequencers are radically different than midi ones desu.

Sophisticated digital sequencers, drum machines, etc. were already around circa 1980 so it's a non-argument either way.

How?
If they need to quantize and repeat takes, I'm just going to have to assume that they can't play an entire song in one take without fucking it up, unless of course they play it well live, or do it intentionally for effect (Remain in Light).

Agreed, but that doesn't make talent unimportant.

Real musicians know how to play their instruments. It's pretty simple, really

>If they need to quantize and repeat takes, I'm just going to have to assume that they can't play an entire song in one take without fucking it up
Or they just want to capture the best that they can possibly deliver.

>Agreed, but that doesn't make talent unimportant.
You have an overly narrow idea of "talent"

The Beatles used overdubs. Nobody is accusing them of being inauthentic. Actually, not to be that guy, but the quote doesn't use the word authentic anywhere.

>filename

You would be surprise. That's Jess Margera:
>That place is unbelievable, it’s in the middle of the desert and you just live and breathe music all day long. The equipment there has so much character I would go as far as to say that there are sounds there that can’t really be replicated. The desert sound was born there, and we have always been fans of that scene.

The goal is to make music, not to impress people with the tricks you can do.

The only tricks are in the studio

>Actually, not to be that guy, but the quote doesn't use the word authentic anywhere.
Yeah but that's obviously their point, otherwise there's no reason to say it. It's a stupid rockist attitude: we're "real" and not "manufactured", even though doesn't actually make a difference

Digital shit completely destroys the spontaneity of a sound and makes it predictable and boring

You have to record as much of it as you can with a microphone if you want a good sound this isn't even a question and they're completely right for saying it

In b4 some asshurt SoundCloud edm rejects get triggered

No, those are tools.

Do you realize that using multiple takes is on a different level from quantizing drum beats because you can't play in time?

>And the also opens up worthwhile territory that isn't available to anyone who's fixated on performing everything.
I'm not disagreeing with you, but that isn't rock. This is a rock band. You're equivocating. There's no reason why a three-piece outfit shouldn't be able to play everything on their album, so might as well record it that way.

>Digital shit completely destroys the spontaneity of a sound and makes it predictable and boring
See, the problem is that you're seeing this as the only valid or meaningful approach. Perhaps you should grow up and realize that there are multiple worthwhile ways to approach music.

Even if you can play an entire song without fucking it up, you still need to record multiple takes. That's how studio recording works. Gives more options for the engineers/producer to choose from, and allows you to vary the part slightly from take to take. That's also how you achieve stereo guitar sounds and such

>I'm not disagreeing with you, but that isn't rock.
Well sort of, it's a narrow definition of rock. It's not like it ceases to be rock the second you introduce sequencing or editing or whatever. Radiohead is still rock.

>There's no reason why a three-piece outfit shouldn't be able to play everything on their album, so might as well record it that way.
If you want to perform live as a garage rock power trio without anything extra, and keep the arrangements exactly the same as you would in a live performance, sure. But that rules out a lot of stuff.

>the best that they can possibly deliver.
>quantized because they literally can't deliver
:thinking:

Wrong this isn't objective. unless of course you make shit tier edm music. Even then you're gonna be better recording your synth with a mic

If it plugs into the computer it's shit. Literally a 10$ toy keyboard recorded with a mic will produce a million times more interesting a sound than any midi instrument ever could

Even guitar interfaces completely kill the spontaneity of a sound. Everything is better recorded with a mic, every single instrument

If you're smart you can incorporate some digital shit in but it's easier just to record if you have the gear

>final product from the best parts of multiple takes
Why the fuck wouldn't you do that?

christ the level of retardery in this thread

>Or they just want to capture the best that they can possibly deliver.
"They" are not delivering that sound, the quantizer bullshit thingy is.
In my opinion, the best a band can possibly deliver is an authentic sound while keeping the creative idea that the song revolves around.

To clarify, I'm talking exclusively about instrumental music, electronic is another thing entirely (and I think many electronic artists are extremely talented), I just don't see the point of turning music that supposed to be full of feeling into electronic music hidden under realistic sounds.

>You have an overly narrow idea of "talent"
Idk, probably.

But doing both is much cooler.

I'm talking more about quantizing, looping single bars over and over again and shit like that. Nothing wrong with recording multiple takes.

Well Glenn Gould was okay with it but it's a cardinal sin according to certain rockist attitudes.

Sorry *subjective

Honestly I think you're just flat out retarded and not worth talking to, sorry.

Not that I'm defending quantizing, since as a drummer that shit annoys me to no end, but keep in mind that most of the time when drums are quantized it's only very slightly to lock the part onto the grid. You can't use quantization to fix actual mistakes in a drum part. Also keep in mind that the drummer still played the part you're hearing, it's just been cleaned up a bit

T.stock instrument user

>one of the best interpreters of the greatest composer to ever live is fine with multiple takes
>bands that get piss drunk during live performances and can't keep the three chords they use for 45 minutes in a row talk shit about them
>an entire generation of idiots thinks multiple takes are cheating because of glorified homeless people who leave their van once a day to play shitty music
god western civilization is already in hell isnt it

Unless every single part was literally recorded live in one take, every album is made this way

I know that, but I personally think that very slight change makes it sound worse. It's no wonder people prefer original albums to digital remasters.

It means: ANALOG MUSIC BRUH
as opposed to digital music/
>It's like when you see "fair trade" on food products/

twitter.com/90sTechnoQuotes

Desu I don't give a shit if any part of the song is "real". Guitars, drums, even vocal chords are just tools you use to create the music you want. I don't really care if you swap one tool (a guitar) for another (a laptop). You still aren't losing the creativity thats required to create the melody, beat, lyrics, etc
That's not to say there is no merit to playing with traditionals instruments but we need to remember in the end they're just tools not some fountain of creativity.

>"They" are not delivering that sound, the quantizer bullshit thingy is.
I was actually referring to the repeated takes part.

>In my opinion, the best a band can possibly deliver is an authentic sound while keeping the creative idea that the song revolves around.
"Authentic sound" doesn't really mean anything substantive though. I mean you can write parts that can't practically be performed by anyone, or elaborate multitracked arrangements that couldn't be done live, process sounds in esoteric ways, etc. Embracing the studio as an instrument can take you a lot further.

>I just don't see the point of turning music that supposed to be full of feeling into electronic music hidden under realistic sounds.
I think the "full of feeling" thing is confused here. Something electronic isn't necessarily not "full of feeling". Whatever that's supposed to mean anyway...

>retarded assumption
thanks for proving my point

>assumption
>not fact

Kek btfo kid. Have fun in fl studio

Oh I completely agree there. I can't tell you how many times I've listened to a perfectly clean, quantized album and thought how much better it would be if it weren't that way. What's more frustrating is that a lot of the time the bands can play in time live, yet they still quantize their songs on record.

I feel exactly the same way about pitch correction. Even though most people's idea of autotune isn't anything like how it actually works (unless you're talking about T-Pain style autotune which is a different thing entirely)

>We make music just like people did 30 years ago. Please listen to our music instead of the better music that came out in the 80s and before. Also, please ignore more creative music coming out now that is experimenting with modern technology. Rock n roll baby!

tbf it's a criticism of their own past albums, not other people's.

>Chad: Well this new record is our most free. We spent a lot of time demoing and structuring the songs. The past couple of records we have made were kind of under forced conditions, assembled in the studio, and the records were a result of that, whereas this project was produced and mixed by the same guy, and I believe that’s why the songs are so consistent sonically. ‘Volume one’ and ‘Infiltrate.Destroy.Rebuild’ were both heavily inspired albums, we’d gotten where we wanted to be and we weren’t jaded at that point.

>Jess: We spent a lot of time on the first two records demoing and rehearsing the songs, but not so much on ‘An Answer Can Be Found’ and ‘Carver City’.

>Chad: We all kind of lost ourselves on those last two records. We thought we were wise and knew what we were doing, but we pretty much were taking advantage of what we had and ruining it and the records represent that.

>Jess: ‘Carver City’ for instance, they made Chad replace my live drums with samples. I’m not really into that, but at the time the label was pushing for it so I just kind of went a long with it.

>Chad: We were fine with slaving away in the studio, it didn’t matter too much as we enjoy the process and the result was something that was sonically cool, but then to perform these songs live, it didn’t translate well.

>Jess: We did most of that record in the studio without really testing it out.

>Matt: You can do incredible things in the studio and copy and paste samples, but when a musician goes to play it, and the audience try to feel it, it doesn’t always come together.

No not really, a lot of people make a point to record everyone performing "live" in the same room, or at least keep a single take of a single part intact without editing it (aside from removing extraneous sounds). If you're an inconsistent performer it can actually be harder to edit the parts together.

How many digital remasters actually quantize the drums when they weren't originally quantized?

Just because people use the same techniques and methodology as music from the 70s and earlier doesn't mean they're making the same music. Deafheaven records almost entirely live to tape and there was nothing like them back then.

I don't even use a DAW.

Yeah sure thing kid. Bet your SoundCloud buds are thoroughly impressed kid hahahaha faggot

That's fair, I was definitely making a generalization there. But even when bands record live together in a room, they still do multiple takes and choose the best take. And if they're playing with a metronome, or have consistent time, they'll often edit the best parts from each take together

>I can't tell you how many times I've listened to a perfectly clean, quantized album and thought how much better it would be if it weren't that way. What's more frustrating is that a lot of the time the bands can play in time live, yet they still quantize their songs on record.
It depends on the kind of music, really. Lots of stuff really benefits from super tight timing and rigid quantization. It can be extraordinarily difficult to play it that way.

Also, I never said every single part was edited, just that most records have editing on them

Tight timing and rigid quantization are two different things. The best example I can come up with is TesseracT. Their records are quantized to shit, but when you see them live, or watch any of their live in studio videos, they can still play incredibly tightly without quantization

>grasping at straws

>grasping at his midi keyboard

>rockist
You know, it's pretty fucking rich to see somebody on fucking Sup Forums of all places criticize somebody else for having an elitist attitude. Sit down.

>trying this hard to be sister ray
it's not real unless you build the fucking studio from the ground up, use an acoustic one string cigar box guitar, and record everything in one take while improvising lyrics with words and notes that have never been used before otherwise you're not a real rawker

Thread Recap: If you even record your music at all, your band is poseur.

Black Sabbath and Paranoid didn't involve grids period.

I was thinking of things like playing a bass or percussive part along to a drum machine. Even the tiniest errors are extremely audible and sound like shit, and it's generally better to just quantize it if possible. There's no beneficial "feel" at all.

I'm saying it's misplaced, unproductive elitism.

Wasn't their 1st album their live set played in 1 take?

Oh, well I mean that goes more in the direction of electronic music. Of course that's gonna be quantized, I have no problem with that

Kind of, it's not really that uncommon to combine a drum machine and real drums or whatever. It's not like it becomes electronic music the instant you add something like that.

You have to be drunk and high too. Shoot speedballs into your dick veins and die before you turn 30.

As opposed to your appropriate, productive elitism? Go fuck yourself. Only on Sup Forums do people bitch and moan about "elitism," and in the same breath talk shit about somebody expressing excitement about how they made their music. Go find a safe space where the big bad rockists can't hurt your fee fees.

you seem deeply confused

>80 replies
>18 posters (wew)
>zero (0) examples of the music in question
Lmao. So how does one perform music like in the outro of this song live and record it with a mic? Genuinely curious, as I'm only an amateur musician. youtube.com/watch?v=ovKkkbFohUw

>haha! that guy over there is such an elitist cunt, giving his opinion on what music is
>I am the one who knows what music is and has a reasonable opinion, and if you don't agree then you are confused ;^(
Pot: kettle.

I have synesthesian and digital shit triggers the fuck out of me. I can smell that dirty peasent shit from a mile away because digital has that bright unmissable putrid too much gain color. Even if you eq the filthy shot I can still smell it

Digital sounds are vile putrid rotten if you like that shot you have bad taste

Who gives a gun that sounds like a fart

>shot
Filthy phoneposter

>implying phone posters aren't best posters

Literally the shit posters pokedex, every meme comes from a phone poster on multiple ip, that's a fact

...

They're insecure about their music being shit that they have to make excuses for it's value.

If I had all that gear I could make the best album

Tfw have to incorporate digital into parts of my work because I'm poor as fuck

Any other digital cucks in this thread?

> muh vintage gearz
won´t even bother

Here user. I know that feel.

I'm willing to bet a lot of the snobbery in this thread is from people in our position, but they've gone full fox and the grapes mode. I use fake shit in my music of necessity because I'm broke, but given the opportunity I'd absolutely go the gear route. Who wouldn't?

>C'MERE YOU
yes, Chef
>why did you leave the party last night?
my feet hurt, Chef
>is any of this record digital?
no, Chef
>is any of this electronic?
no, Chef
>how did you record it then?
tinfoil Edison phonograph, Chef
>and this tinfoil is local?
yes, chef
>did you mine the bauxite?
no, chef
>did you even account for rotational velocidensity?
no, Chef

>fuckin' shit on a shingle, fuck me

what the fuck Bam Margera did a bunch of vocals for this band but he's not even credited as a band member. now it's just Bam Margera's brother in the band though. but yeah probably important to note that this super authentic band wouldn't have gotten anywhere without that show where people hurt their balls a lot.

This, but unironicly.

nice meme

Bam did vocals on an unused version of Shippensburg and some joke songs on Volume 2. That's it. He was never in the band.
>wouldn't have gotten anywhere without that show
Yeah, pshh, everybody knows real bands don't get discovered through shows, movies, or games. I've never heard a song in a movie and looked up the band afterward. Nope, never.

They authentically hurt their balls though. No CGI stunt double trick editing bullshit. So this makes it somehow respectable.

>there are underage millennials in this thread RIGHT NOW who didn't have fun watching this with their buddies
You missed out. It's a time we have lost.

youtu.be/WDsraLhj-H4