|
Post by sleepyhead on Nov 21, 2004 20:06:12 GMT -5
dude, you obviously don't know what you're talking about. they might layer a track twice or something just to give it more umph, but layering it doesn't take away the mistakes.
|
|
niko
Know-it-all
Posts: 957
|
Post by niko on Nov 21, 2004 20:06:23 GMT -5
Nic, I don't play the same thing on each track. Each track gets its own instrument (1-guitar, 2-bass, 3-drums, 4-vocals or whatever). That is a lot different than the sloppy assholes that have tracks 1-50 as guitar and 3 or 4 tracks of bass all playing the same thing on top of each other. And yeah, I have used a "real" mixer and computer recording software. I didn't like them. i still dont see your point though. you say people that use dont use analog are crappy becuase they use 50 tracks for each part. well, i dont do that, and i use digital. using analog is harder, period. it takes MORE time to get the same thign done. just becuase someone uses modern software and such, does not mean they arnt good. and who cares how good they are at guitar? chris, is not the best guitarist, no offence to him. but he knows that. and he makes great music. its not the 80s, people arnt looking for crazy solos and such. music has changed in the consumers eyes. so if you are talking about mass producing and how they suck or whatever, then sure, those lamer bands probably do suck at guitar. but we are kids, making music out of our houses, give us a break dude. you have nothing to prove to anyone.
|
|
Justin Leedy
Post Whore
This is my BOOM-stick!!
Posts: 2,675
|
Post by Justin Leedy on Nov 21, 2004 20:10:05 GMT -5
Nic, if the only reason you would have had to be good at your instrument is because it's the eighties and it's "in", then you have some problems. I couldn't give two shits what the public cares about, I'm just saying that when people on this thread advised Forrest against analog because it's crappy, they were wrong. Like I said before, if you have digital, use digital. Just don't rely on the recorder (and I'm not saying you do).
|
|
niko
Know-it-all
Posts: 957
|
Post by niko on Nov 21, 2004 20:12:16 GMT -5
thank you for refining your point. and to that i SAY, forrest, i would not advise using anolog becuase it takes longer and you are limited with tracks. and then you have to deal with putting it on the computer, converting to mp3, blah blah, its just less hassle to use digital.
|
|
|
Post by sleepyhead on Nov 21, 2004 20:13:17 GMT -5
Digital does NOT sound better and is generally a waste of money.
|
|
Justin Leedy
Post Whore
This is my BOOM-stick!!
Posts: 2,675
|
Post by Justin Leedy on Nov 21, 2004 20:14:34 GMT -5
I guess you're looking for different things in your recording. I like analog because everything that needs to be done is done physically, not electronically. It's laid out more logically and I think it sounds fuller.
|
|
niko
Know-it-all
Posts: 957
|
Post by niko on Nov 21, 2004 20:16:49 GMT -5
I guess you're looking for different things in your recording. I like analog because everything that needs to be done is done physically, not electronically. It's laid out more logically and I think it sounds fuller. this is most likely a result from lower end quality equipment. a good mic and sound card, does make it sound better.
|
|
|
Post by sleepyhead on Nov 21, 2004 20:19:10 GMT -5
yeah, i guess you're right. making music is just easier for me when all i have to do is press a button and not think about it.
|
|
Justin Leedy
Post Whore
This is my BOOM-stick!!
Posts: 2,675
|
Post by Justin Leedy on Nov 21, 2004 20:20:39 GMT -5
I want to think about all of it. I don't trust the guys that wrote the software, but I trust myself. With analog, I have all the control I want.
|
|
|
Post by sleepyhead on Nov 21, 2004 20:21:18 GMT -5
i won't reply anymore.
|
|
Justin Leedy
Post Whore
This is my BOOM-stick!!
Posts: 2,675
|
Post by Justin Leedy on Nov 21, 2004 20:22:21 GMT -5
I think this discussion has resolved itself. Thank you Messrs. Lechner and Nickerson for your assistance.
|
|
|
Post by Forrest on Nov 22, 2004 2:14:09 GMT -5
Well, I was about to clarify justinm's standpoint for everyone until i read that last post. But anyway, here's where I stand (no reason to post anymore, I have all the information I wanted ad infinitum). I don't have a lot of money right now, for now I am goign to purchase a 4-track. When I have more money and I KNOW that this is wher eI want to go with my life, I will sink more moeny into it and get a digital setup. Ande, you are one of the most accomplished musicians I know. It's only right, if you ask me, for you to have all the fancy-pants equip. But for me, I still don't know where I'm going, or even if i have a chance of going anywhere with music. You guys do, especially you Ande, so what you need and what I need are different. This thread might as well be locked because I don't think anymore can be accomplished with it.
|
|
|
Post by sleepyhead on Nov 22, 2004 2:19:17 GMT -5
ok, so i'll reply to forrest.
yeah i understand your deal and everything. i wasn't arguing about whether YOU should get digital over analog, just over justin's remarks about digital recording.
|
|
Justin Leedy
Post Whore
This is my BOOM-stick!!
Posts: 2,675
|
Post by Justin Leedy on Nov 22, 2004 18:44:10 GMT -5
I think this thread should be closed, it has brought us nothing but pain.
|
|
niko
Know-it-all
Posts: 957
|
Post by niko on Nov 22, 2004 22:44:19 GMT -5
i will not lock this thread. for one reason, and one reason only. becuase thats what you guys want me to do, what kinda of king would i be if i gave the people what they wanted, and not what they needed?
|
|
Justin Leedy
Post Whore
This is my BOOM-stick!!
Posts: 2,675
|
Post by Justin Leedy on Nov 23, 2004 0:54:22 GMT -5
You're a monster!! You've gone mad with power!! Someone has got to stop you before we have off-topic forums roaming in the streets raping children and stealing fried foods!!!! Oh the HORROR!!!!!!!!
|
|
cifirrekcuT
Post Whore
Thanks. You'll be missed.
Posts: 2,168
|
Post by cifirrekcuT on Nov 23, 2004 18:06:31 GMT -5
Justin, you need to admit that you don't know enough about either side of analog or digital recording to argue anything. Your pedantic remarks only made you look more and more ignorant. You were the only one in this forum without a valid arguement. Digital has it's advantages because of easier data transfer and signal and effects processing that every song you listen to other than yours has. There is little to no hiss or extra noise with digital. Analog has it's advantages because it tends to sound warmer and records real time rather than a smoothed wave formed from a sampling rate. But without a noise reducer, your mix becomes almost overwhelmed with hiss by the time you layer even just 4 tracks down. And I believe the beatles recorded on an analog 8 track.
|
|
RACHEL!
random
i imagine that the only living thing is yes.
Posts: 1,474
|
Post by RACHEL! on Nov 24, 2004 0:48:32 GMT -5
hee hee...
|
|
cifirrekcuT
Post Whore
Thanks. You'll be missed.
Posts: 2,168
|
Post by cifirrekcuT on Nov 24, 2004 3:27:25 GMT -5
Nic, if the only reason you would have had to be good at your instrument is because it's the eighties and it's "in", then you have some problems. I couldn't give two shits what the public cares about, I'm just saying that when people on this thread advised Forrest against analog because it's crappy, they were wrong. Like I said before, if you have digital, use digital. Just don't rely on the recorder (and I'm not saying you do). you're presumptuous and far too reliant on your intuition. try growing up before inducing a debate. no one said analog was crappy
|
|
cifirrekcuT
Post Whore
Thanks. You'll be missed.
Posts: 2,168
|
Post by cifirrekcuT on Nov 24, 2004 3:31:48 GMT -5
and what the hell are you laughing about, rachel?!
haha just kidding. laugh a lot and often
|
|